The Beginning Of The Hax0r Antichrist

Thansal · January 2003

ok, a few things that were left out:

1) Yes Catholics believe that Homosexuality is evil (smae goes for muslims). However MANY sects of protestants (and there are alot) believe that there is nothing wrong with being homosexual.
Basicaly what I am trying to say is that you have been areound 1 out of 3 (catholics) and 1 out of MANY (your protestant relatives are a very small group inside of a large one). Just don't generalize all religions (or all parts of a religion) together, simply b/c you will be wrong on many accounts.

2) you again generalize when you bring up calvinsim, This early sect of Protestants is nearly dead now. Most christians think that the idea of predestination is sorta silly (after all how can there be predestination if we all have free will, which the bible states many times)

3) Legionnaired gave a very good response to your slavery issue. I had also given the same basic response BEFORE you wrote your argument, I know christianity has been used to oppress, then again so has athiesm (WWII), so by your argument athiesm is wrong also <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'>, and Slavery is no longer inpractice by any GOOD christian.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>In this case, the talk is as good as the act</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
No it is not, Yes there are those that wnat to combine religion and schools, and there are also many religious individuals who feel that this is foolish and oppose the matter, many of the religions/parts of religions believe in tollerance of others and thus believe that you should not force your views on others.
Again, just don't generalize, if you can say that "Catholics are against Homosexuality" I will listen and agree, but if you say that Protestants are against homosexuality I will show you that you are wrong by siting specific examples. And if you say that christians are against homosexuality, I will again tell you you are wrong and show you those that are not.

oh well, meh

Fam · January 2003

If I live my life in a totally moral way, conforming to all the practices laid down in the various scriptures, and yet I do not believe in a higher being or higher power, what happens to me?

Do I go to hell just because I do not hold a very small portion of religious practice? Is there even a thing called hell (for me) if I do not believe in it?

Every day people kid themselves and try to explain mysteries using religion, making themselves content through lies. But then again, people do the same with science, and every other aspect of their life.

xioutlawix · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sirus @ Jan 26 2003, 02:21 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> It may be a joke to you, but i dont think anything anti-christ is funny,  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
I think anything involving religion warrants hysterical laughter <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'>

Killymagee · January 2003

OH MY GOD!!! I type one little joke, that involved religion and it goes like this!! ahhhhh! <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wow.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wow.gif'>

Thansal · January 2003

/me points at out law as a perfect example of people that I think are compleat idiots. More than likely does not know jack squat about any of the 3 wester religions, and even less about any others. Probably also bashes on religion b/c he is an angsty teen who thinks it is cool.

please note, every thing I just said used to describe me very very well. However I have grown out of that (I still do not hold with organized religion but that is simply b/c it does not fit with who I am, thus I do not hold it againts others)

Sirus:
</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>supposed to forgive you before you even do anything wrong because your offense is laughable when held up against Jesus' sacrifice</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I however, do not have to forgive em (go non christian power ;D). I still find it offensive, not personaly offensive b/c I am not christian (I am religious in thaT I believe in a higher power, however I don't know much about it). I find it offensive b/c you are insulting some of my VERY good friends with every idiocy that falls out of someones mouth. I have good friends that are Jewish, Christian, muslim, and a few of the non western religions and I have seen them all hurt by silly people who act holyer then thou either b/c the think all religion is silly or think that all other religions are simply there for them to mock (cmon, lets see you name the 3 main different sects of christianity, a few sub sects and wtf they actualy stand for).

and now @AllUrHiveRBelong2Us seeing how as you have not actualy read any of my posts yet (or atleast have not gotten the main point),
Religion is some thing sacred (yes even I hold a few things sacred, religion, despite my compleate lack of it, is one of em). See, when I say Sacred I am not talking about anything holy, I am simply saying there are some lines that should not be crossed, and when you do you make oyur self look like a bigot/racist/intolerant tool. Personaly I think that slaming on a country is also rather whack (I am offen on the recieving end of this b/c I am a White, middleclass, male, American). Having an argument/discussion where you are willing to listen to some one else (not just spew mindless gibber) is generaly accepted.

Getting the "Christianity is the tool of the opressers, down with the power", or "Americans are all idiots and fat slobs" is just obnoxious and imature.
On the other hand if some one was to bring up a discuasion about how Christianity has been used as a tool to controll people (and it has in the past) and then atempt to show modern corelations as well as acepting rebutles and such, that would be an interesting discusion. Same goes for if some one started a discussion on the state of Americas school system or some such.

Basicaly what I am trying to say is that a discusion os acceptable, flaming is note. And
</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I think anything involving religion warrants hysterical laughter </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
is an immature flame (and not a very good one)

Legionnaired · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sirus @ Jan 27 2003, 03:58 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Also, I have never thought myself as better than anyone else, most of the time I see myself as worse, most of the time I have no self-control and I can't even shut up because I'm angry, there's lots of junk in everybody's life that they wish they could just get rid of and it's like the world is crashing down on you and you just break down because theres nothing you can do about anything, you have no control, and life seems like theres no end and it only gets worse and worse. But I have to honestly say that I don't think I'd ever be ok unless there was any hope. Since I do believe the sacrifice I never have to worry about anything. Life is much easier because God will never give you more than you can handle (Believe it or not) Single incidents change one person's life, and that person changes more peoples lives, and on and on.  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
Romans 5:1 Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
2 through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we rejoice in the hope of the glory of God.
3 Not only so, but we also rejoice in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance;
4 perseverance, character; and character, hope.
5 And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us.

Good Passage. It's good to see a thread on religion finally take something resembling a pro-christian stace. People like outlaw are all too rampant on these boards.

Sirus, I'd just like to say that you have my respect, whatever good it is. It's rare that you come across a person that has the wisdom and knowledge to formulate an elequent argument for something they believe in, as well as the "people skills" required to deliver that message in a way that is understandable and non-offensive to other people. From the handfull of posts here, It's clear you have both.

AllUrHiveRblong2us · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Person #2 treats what #1 believes in as a joke. He neither cares about religion because person #2 would rather do whatever he/she wanted to do because religion "drags you down, and isn't fun". Person #2 has never read scripture, knows nothing about it yet feels compelled to treat it like a joke.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
If this "person two" was meant to be me(or anyone like me) you have been making far to many assumptions. If this "person two" was meant to be me, he would have gone to church for his entire life(though not willingly, forced to by overbearing family) and does not not dislike christianity because it "drags you down"(although it does), he dislikes christianity becuase it is built on a very simple false premise, that there is a god, and that even though this god loves you, he will still send you to hell if you don't like him(this was, in fact, what the sermon at my church this week was about, the pastor said that god doesn't send people to hell, they send themselves, and if god just got rid of hell, we would all be like robots, without the capability of sin, and that having a hell gives us free choice. I immediately thought of "1984", because, although everyone in that book has "free choice", if they make the wrong one, they die. Doesn't seem like much of a choice to me). I treat christianity as a joke becuase everything is worthy of being treated as such. It's a simple as that.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I don't understand your theory about the protestant church being a tool of capitalism, especially since church's are non-profit, your welcome to give me your theory, I wouldn't mind hearing it.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
The prodestant church is a capitalist tool in the same way the Catholic church is a tool of the Fuedalism. It enforces capitalist doctrine on the masses that believe in it. I refer specifically to the Calivinists in the audience, and the idea of pre-destination. This school of thought teaches the worker that the reason he is poor and his boss is rich is because it is MEANT to happen, and the worker is powerless to stop it, and a heretic if he tries.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I however, do not have to forgive em (go non christian power ;D). I still find it offensive, not personaly offensive b/c I am not christian (I am religious in thaT I believe in a higher power, however I don't know much about it). I find it offensive b/c you are insulting some of my VERY good friends with every idiocy that falls out of someones mouth. I have good friends that are Jewish, Christian, muslim, and a few of the non western religions and I have seen them all hurt by silly people who act holyer then thou either b/c the think all religion is silly or think that all other religions are simply there for them to mock (cmon, lets see you name the 3 main different sects of christianity, a few sub sects and wtf they actualy stand for).</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
So I am insulting your freinds, so what? I probably have insulted them before with jokes of other things, and probably will again. Nearly every joke insulsts someone. I mean, just look at maddox. He is offensive as all get out and no one seems to care. The fact that a particular insult has to do with religion should make no difference.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>On the other hand if some one was to bring up a discuasion about how Christianity has been used as a tool to controll people (and it has in the past) and then atempt to show modern corelations as well as acepting rebutles and such, that would be an interesting discusion. Same goes for if some one started a discussion on the state of Americas school system or some such.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I really don't see where a discussion is needed to determine whether religion is oppresive or not, I see religious oppresion everywhere. From the 10 commandments in schools(christians believe it will help our schoolchildren be more moral when it obvioslly didn't help many catholic prests) to slavery used on a religious basis, to the outlawing of homosexuality in many states(happily not mine or the state bordering mine, GO VERMONT AN NH!) it's all forcing the religious morals on the masses that do not neccasarily want to follow these morals, or believe those morals to be correct.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Romans 5:1 Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
2 through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we rejoice in the hope of the glory of God.
3 Not only so, but we also rejoice in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance;
4 perseverance, character; and character, hope.
5 And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Whenever people whip out the scripture, it strikes me as funny becuase I remeber the time that a JW freind of mine, adam, and a Predestant(not exactly sure what sect) freind of mine, DJ, got in a religious fight. DJ sited one passage in an attempt to disprove the JW concept that only the select few will get into heaven(or something like that, the beliefs of the JWs always confused me whenever someone tried to explain them to me, for some reason). What followed was an almost 10 minute non-stop scripture-off by Adam. By the end, I was in hysterics, and DJ was just gaping. It was one the funniest things I had ever seen! I doesn't really have anything to do with anything, but it's funny nonetheless.

Legionnaired · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Killymagee @ Jan 27 2003, 01:16 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> OH MY GOD!!! I type one little joke, that involved religion and it goes like this!! ahhhhh! <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wow.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wow.gif'> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
An intellegent discussion about religion, spouted off with an equation and a bong emoticon. <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'>

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Is there even a thing called hell (for me) if I do not believe in it?</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Is there gravity, if I don't believe in it? Does my lack of acknowledgment of a fact make it any less true? If I will away the sun, will it cease to rise the next morning?

MedHead · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Fam @ Jan 27 2003, 09:13 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> If I live my life in a totally moral way, conforming to all the practices laid down in the various scriptures, and yet I do not believe in a higher being or higher power, what happens to me?

Do I go to hell just because I do not hold a very small portion of religious practice? Is there even a thing called hell (for me) if I do not believe in it?

Every day people kid themselves and try to explain mysteries using religion, making themselves content through lies. But then again, people do the same with science, and every other aspect of their life.  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
Actually, the Bible does adress this in many passages. Until you accept salvation, and admit that you are hopeless without Jesus Christ as your Savior, nothing you do will get you to heaven. You could be the nicest, friendliest, 'most good' person in the world, but you are still doomed to hell if you don't repent, and turn to God. Works will not get you into heaven.

AllUrHiveRblong2us · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>There are about 40 parts required for a bacterial flagellum to work. The theory behind evolution is that small changes result in different species being formed, and the better of those different species are selected to carry on to the next generation. You can never be perfectly fit, or you;d live forever, so the whole fitness progresses as a logrithmic equation, never hitting the asymptote. The problem with evolution comes when it claims that gradual changes resulted in anything, when if one of those 40 parts were removed, then the thing wouldn't work, and the organism would be selected against. All of them had to come into effect at once, something that works against the gradual changes specified by Darwin's theory.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Last time I checked, no where in darwins theory(or anyone's theory as far as I know) is it said that a creature as complex as a flaggelum would be the first life form. It is generally excepted that the first organisms were not really alive at all, and were just strings of self-replicating DNA, making them actually less complex than the average virus. That only needs one thing to work.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I don't think there is any dispute here. A lot of people want them in, a lot of peple don't, that's a fact. Personally, I'd rather it be more personal, and not imposed by law. I believe God shold be involved in your heart and mind, and ramming the bible down someone's throat isn't going to do anything. There's no harm in using it to fall back on in a time of need, or to use it to backup it's own argument, in fact, it's a very good book to use, because of it's solidity. Feel free to cite possible contradiction's, I'll do my best to defend it.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I got one for ya. It is my understanding that the old testament prophets prophecied that the messiah would be related to David, correct? Well, it is also my understanding that the geneology of christ never traces David to Marie in any way except by marraige, and it is also my understanding that Marie had Jesus when she was a virgin, so how could Jesus have ever been related to David? And also, since when do the Jews trace lineage by the father's side? As far as I know, the jews only traced lineage by the mother's side, becuase you could always tell who a persons mother is. Thanks to Carl Sagen on that one.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>As to your reference to 1984, I can see how unfair it sounds, either going to hell or going God's way, but you have to ask yourself, was it fair to God to die on the cross for you? For me? He diddn't do anything wrong, and now he's taking up the slack for you.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
No, it's not fair for Jesus to have died for no reason, but if God hadn't made the whole system unfair in the first place, Jesus would not have been neccesary.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>If you couldn't go to hell, then that would mean that God would be turning a blind eye to things we've all done. People that have a problem with a God that judges are saying that, quite frankly, the parent that brought me into this world has no right to not give me dessert. It's usually backed up with, "If God loves me, then how can he condemn me?"</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
When your parent doesn't give you dessert, you have a chance to earn your dessert back every day for the rest of your childhood, but if you go to hell, it's for eternity. Do you know how long that is? It's pretty long.
O, and by the way, one thing I always wondered, and I wan't to write it down here before I forget, when we go to heaven, are we suddenly strikken unable to sin? Or can we sin and God doesn't care? Or can we sin and get sent to hell for it?

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Genesis 3:14 So the LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all the livestock and all the wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.
15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel."

Hmm, a decendant of Eve, destroying Satan? *cough*Christ*cough*</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Since when did Jesus destroy Satan? And in this case I find the order to be very intersting. In a book of the bible where the order in which things occur is considered extremely important, why would it be said that the messiah(if indeed this passage does refer to the massiah) would destroy satan, then get bit?

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>And, even though God kicked them out of the garden, he still provided for them by giving them clothes. That's love, right there. After someone stabs you in the back, you give them a gift and just plain love 'em up.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
If that's love, then just kill me now! Since when does providing clothes to someone after you just cursed them to death, and until then nothing but toil, simply because they had wanted the knowledge from the tree of knowledge(not to mention the fact that god didn't just give them a temptation in the form of the tree itslelf, he let Satan in the garden to pester them, all the time knowing full well the consequences.) constitute love?

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>1) Yes Catholics believe that Homosexuality is evil (smae goes for muslims). However MANY sects of protestants (and there are alot) believe that there is nothing wrong with being homosexual.
Basicaly what I am trying to say is that you have been areound 1 out of 3 (catholics) and 1 out of MANY (your protestant relatives are a very small group inside of a large one). Just don't generalize all religions (or all parts of a religion) together, simply b/c you will be wrong on many accounts.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Wait, lemme get this straight. You are saying that most christians don't believe it's wrong to be ****? Excuse me whilest I laugh heartily. If what you are saying is true, then most christians don't believe in the bible. Because, last time I checked, it said very simpy, in very simple language to STONE THE GAYS! Like I said, Dueteronomy: it's one helluva loving book.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>2) you again generalize when you bring up calvinsim, This early sect of Protestants is nearly dead now. Most christians think that the idea of predestination is sorta silly (after all how can there be predestination if we all have free will, which the bible states many times)</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
The idea of calvinism and the idea of predestination go hand-in-hand. Anyone who tells you that you can be a calvinist whithout believing in predestination is kidding themselves. Becuase if God knows the future, and what you will do, then he also knows what decisions he will make to get you there. So, unless the almighty's hands are tied(therefore making him less than almighty), he does, in fact, almost go out of his way to make sure that he makes the decisions that make your future occur, thus making him responsible for evything you are to do. Predestination, anyone?

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>3) Legionnaired gave a very good response to your slavery issue. I had also given the same basic response BEFORE you wrote your argument, I know christianity has been used to oppress, then again so has athiesm (WWII), so by your argument athiesm is wrong also , and Slavery is no longer inpractice by any GOOD christian.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
First off, atheism cannot be used to do anything, becuase it is not anything. It is a LACK of something. You can't oppress with that. And secondly, who are you refering to as being atheist in WW2? I certainly hope that you aren't refering to the Nazis, who had some very deep ties to the christian religion. In fact, in the later years of the war, Hitler did start a rather large archeological undertaking to find the holy grail. It was a last ditch attemot, it was misguided, and it never worked, but it was still driven by christianity.

Another thought has just struck me, logically, if one was to consider religion, one would think that the first one would be the correct one, considering that according to all holy books, humanity was created by their god, and therefore must have worshipped him first. But, Judaism is not the oldest religion. It is pre-dated by hinduism by a good thousand years or so. And even if that weren't true, it is obvious that the first forms of religion were simple nature-worship. Makes you think.

AllUrHiveRblong2us · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MedHead @ Jan 27 2003, 03:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> </span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Fam @ Jan 27 2003, 09:13 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> If I live my life in a totally moral way, conforming to all the practices laid down in the various scriptures, and yet I do not believe in a higher being or higher power, what happens to me?

Do I go to hell just because I do not hold a very small portion of religious practice? Is there even a thing called hell (for me) if I do not believe in it?

Every day people kid themselves and try to explain mysteries using religion, making themselves content through lies. But then again, people do the same with science, and every other aspect of their life. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Actually, the Bible does adress this in many passages. Until you accept salvation, and admit that you are hopeless without Jesus Christ as your Savior, nothing you do will get you to heaven. You could be the nicest, friendliest, 'most good' person in the world, but you are still doomed to hell if you don't repent, and turn to God. Works will not get you into heaven.  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
Go tell that to the Catholics, bucko.

Delarosa · January 2003

i admit, i havent' read all the posts yet, and i dont' want to, it's a little too heavy for me....

what i take it as: the devil is the 1337 gamer we all want to be, just give the guy a year, and then we can much him down to size qwith our super skuls next year!!!!

it made me half-laugh, whatever that is

mojojojo · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Actually, the Bible does adress this in many passages. Until you accept salvation, and admit that you are hopeless without Jesus Christ as your Savior, nothing you do will get you to heaven. You could be the nicest, friendliest, 'most good' person in the world, but you are still doomed to hell if you don't repent, and turn to God. Works will not get you into heaven.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Mark, Mathew and Luke - salvation through good deeds or moral choices
John - belief of Jesus as Son of God
St. Paul - belief of the resurrection of Christ.

This is from www.religioustolerance.org, which is fairly accurate AFAIK. I've never had the inclination to read through the bible with the respect it deserves.

Legionnaired · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>There are about 40 parts required for a bacterial flagellum to work. The theory behind evolution is that small changes result in different species being formed, and the better of those different species are selected to carry on to the next generation. You can never be perfectly fit, or you;d live forever, so the whole fitness progresses as a logrithmic equation, never hitting the asymptote. The problem with evolution comes when it claims that gradual changes resulted in anything, when if one of those 40 parts were removed, then the thing wouldn't work, and the organism would be selected against. All of them had to come into effect at once, something that works against the gradual changes specified by Darwin's theory.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Last time I checked, no where in darwins theory(or anyone's theory as far as I know) is it said that a creature as complex as a flaggelum would be the first life form. It is generally excepted that the first organisms were not really alive at all, and were just strings of self-replicating DNA, making them actually less complex than the average virus. That only needs one thing to work.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

I'm not saying it was the first. If you believe in macro-evolution, then you have to belive that such organisms came into effect gradually. This is impossible, because if one part is gone, it doesn't work. It had to all come into effect at once, which makes the jump from non-flagella-ed organism to flaggela-ed organism dobtfun, at best.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I don't think there is any dispute here. A lot of people want them in, a lot of peple don't, that's a fact. Personally, I'd rather it be more personal, and not imposed by law. I believe God shold be involved in your heart and mind, and ramming the bible down someone's throat isn't going to do anything. There's no harm in using it to fall back on in a time of need, or to use it to backup it's own argument, in fact, it's a very good book to use, because of it's solidity. Feel free to cite possible contradiction's, I'll do my best to defend it.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I got one for ya. It is my understanding that the old testament prophets prophecied that the messiah would be related to David, correct? Well, it is also my understanding that the geneology of christ never traces David to Marie in any way except by marraige, and it is also my understanding that Marie had Jesus when she was a virgin, so how could Jesus have ever been related to David? And also, since when do the Jews trace lineage by the father's side? As far as I know, the jews only traced lineage by the mother's side, becuase you could always tell who a persons mother is. Thanks to Carl Sagen on that one.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Ahh yes, SagAn. (With an A).

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> (God @ ~30 AD)

Matthew 1:1 A record of the genealogy of Jesus Christ the son of David, the son of Abraham:
2 Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob, Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers,
3 Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar, Perez the father of Hezron, Hezron the father of Ram,
4 Ram the father of Amminadab, Amminadab the father of Nahshon, Nahshon the father of Salmon,
5 Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab, Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth, Obed the father of Jesse,
6 and Jesse the father of King David. David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah's wife,
7 Solomon the father of Rehoboam, Rehoboam the father of Abijah, Abijah the father of Asa,
8 Asa the father of Jehoshaphat, Jehoshaphat the father of Jehoram, Jehoram the father of Uzziah,
9 Uzziah the father of Jotham, Jotham the father of Ahaz, Ahaz the father of Hezekiah,
10 Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, Manasseh the father of Amon, Amon the father of Josiah,
11 and Josiah the father of Jeconiah and his brothers at the time of the exile to Babylon.
12 After the exile to Babylon: Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel, Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,
13 Zerubbabel the father of Abiud, Abiud the father of Eliakim, Eliakim the father of Azor,
14 Azor the father of Zadok, Zadok the father of Akim, Akim the father of Eliud,
15 Eliud the father of Eleazar, Eleazar the father of Matthan, Matthan the father of Jacob,
16 and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Joseph and Mary were engaged, as it says in verse 18 of the same book and chapter.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>18 This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

In those times, an engagement was more of a legally binding agreement then it is today. Note the use of "Pledged." Joseph is a decendant of King David, so Joseph is related to David. And Mary, through a legally binding contract to Joseph, was related to David as well.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>As to your reference to 1984, I can see how unfair it sounds, either going to hell or going God's way, but you have to ask yourself, was it fair to God to die on the cross for you? For me? He diddn't do anything wrong, and now he's taking up the slack for you.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
No, it's not fair for Jesus to have died for no reason, but if God hadn't made the whole system unfair in the first place, Jesus would not have been neccesary.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Don't get started with If/ Thans. If Adam and Eve hadn't eaten the fruit, then the system of needing to pay for your sins would never have needed to be anyway.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>If you couldn't go to hell, then that would mean that God would be turning a blind eye to things we've all done. People that have a problem with a God that judges are saying that, quite frankly, the parent that brought me into this world has no right to not give me dessert. It's usually backed up with, "If God loves me, then how can he condemn me?"</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
When your parent doesn't give you dessert, you have a chance to earn your dessert back every day for the rest of your childhood, but if you go to hell, it's for eternity. Do you know how long that is? It's pretty long.
O, and by the way, one thing I always wondered, and I wan't to write it down here before I forget, when we go to heaven, are we suddenly strikken unable to sin? Or can we sin and God doesn't care? Or can we sin and get sent to hell for it?
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

NO, once in heaven, you don't sin, because yous sinful body dies. I could look up the scripture, but check out Romans 6-8. The thing is, you will be judged by how you lived your life. If you sinned, if you disobeyed God, then you're going to need to pay for that. Jesus is simply a means of tacking whatever sin that you have commited onto the cross with him, and allowing his grace to be something to fill in your spiritual gaps, and make you perfect in the eyes of god.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Genesis 3:14 So the LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all the livestock and all the wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.
15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel."

Hmm, a decendant of Eve, destroying Satan? *cough*Christ*cough*</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Since when did Jesus destroy Satan? And in this case I find the order to be very intersting. In a book of the bible where the order in which things occur is considered extremely important, why would it be said that the messiah(if indeed this passage does refer to the massiah) would destroy satan, then get bit?</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

After Christ's death on the cross, death, and Satan, never held any more power over those people that accept his gift. Hence, crushing his head. The striking his heel could simply be saying that what suffering Jesus went through is merely a scratch on the foot compared to what Christ does to Satan. Cue in Revelations 20 to see Satan condemed, and cast into the lake of fire.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>And, even though God kicked them out of the garden, he still provided for them by giving them clothes. That's love, right there. After someone stabs you in the back, you give them a gift and just plain love 'em up.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
If that's love, then just kill me now! Since when does providing clothes to someone after you just cursed them to death, and until then nothing but toil, simply because they had wanted the knowledge from the tree of knowledge(not to mention the fact that god didn't just give them a temptation in the form of the tree itslelf, he let Satan in the garden to pester them, all the time knowing full well the consequences.) constitute love?

</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
The clothing is sybolic. If someone stabs you in the back, does the one thing that you told him not to, then you will be angry, and being kicked out of the garden is the penalty for such an action. However, even when God had the right to sweep man away outright, he was still loving enough to provide. That's the point.

As has been stated earlyer in these posts, that God wants humans to have free will, if he didn't it would be impossible to sin because God'd be there stopping you when you tried. Tempting people is not a bad thing, and holding true to God through temptation only increases your relationship with him. Love can be letting someone act things out on their own, as well.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>1) Yes Catholics believe that Homosexuality is evil (smae goes for muslims). However MANY sects of protestants (and there are alot) believe that there is nothing wrong with being homosexual.
Basicaly what I am trying to say is that you have been areound 1 out of 3 (catholics) and 1 out of MANY (your protestant relatives are a very small group inside of a large one). Just don't generalize all religions (or all parts of a religion) together, simply b/c you will be wrong on many accounts.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Wait, lemme get this straight. You are saying that most christians don't believe it's wrong to be ****? Excuse me whilest I laugh heartily. If what you are saying is true, then most christians don't believe in the bible. Because, last time I checked, it said very simpy, in very simple language to STONE THE GAYS! Like I said, Dueteronomy: it's one helluva loving book.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

You're generalizing again. Most think it's wrong. So do I. What I said was that no matter what a person's sexual preference, the soul inside is a human soul. If that wasn't clear, then it's what I meant. Sorry.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>[</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>2) you again generalize when you bring up calvinsim, This early sect of Protestants is nearly dead now. Most christians think that the idea of predestination is sorta silly (after all how can there be predestination if we all have free will, which the bible states many times)</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
The idea of calvinism and the idea of predestination go hand-in-hand. Anyone who tells you that you can be a calvinist whithout believing in predestination is kidding themselves. Becuase if God knows the future, and what you will do, then he also knows what decisions he will make to get you there. So, unless the almighty's hands are tied(therefore making him less than almighty), he does, in fact, almost go out of his way to make sure that he makes the decisions that make your future occur, thus making him responsible for everything you are to do. Predestination, anyone?

</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Knowing and forcing a path are two different things entirely. If you know a horse is thirsty, and you see him going to water, you know he will drink. By watching, you are not requiring them to do so, however. Although the idea of an omnipotent being going out of it's way is a joke in itself, by the very definition of omnipotent, I'll counter the point anyway. First of all, I would hate to have to diagram your second to last sentence, but I think what you're saying is, that just because he can, he does steer you toward your destination, thus, he is responsable. Predestination is not about God having a plan for you, it is about God choosing who will and will not go to heaven after they die. He knows who will and who will not, simply because of the "God factor," but it doesn't mean that he is dragging you by the hand towards his plan. People reject God all the time, as you no doubt have. Does this mean that God made you do it? Forced you to? By no means. People have free will.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Another thought has just struck me, logically, if one was to consider religion, one would think that the first one would be the correct one, considering that according to all holy books, humanity was created by their god, and therefore must have worshipped him first. But, Judaism is not the oldest religion. It is pre-dated by hinduism by a good thousand years or so. And even if that weren't true, it is obvious that the first forms of religion were simple nature-worship. Makes you think.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Hinduism is one of the oldest religions of the world. It is definitely the oldest among the living religions. The European historians of early 20th Century grudgingly accepted the period around 2500 B.C. as the earliest available evidence of the origin of the Vedic religion, which is a precursor to Hinduism. But many present day scholars, especially from India, do not agree with this opinion. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> -http://hinduwebsite.com/hinduintrod1.htm Look around for another source.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>5500–3000 B.C.
Predynastic Egyptian cultures develop (5500–3100 B.C.); begin using agriculture (c. 5000 B.C.). Earliest known civilization arises in Sumer (4500–4000 B.C.). Earliest recorded date in Egyptian calendar (4241 B.C.). <b><span style='color:red'>First year of Jewish calendar (3760 B.C.)</span></b>. First phonetic writing appears (c. 3500 B.C.). Sumerians develop a city-state civilization (c. 3000 B.C.). Copper used by Egyptians and Sumerians. Western Europe is neolithic, without metals or written records.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>-http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0772314.html

From what I gather, Judaism trumps Hinduism by a good thousand years.

Legionnaired · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (AllUrHiveRBelong2Us @ Jan 27 2003, 04:16 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> </span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MedHead @ Jan 27 2003, 03:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> </span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Fam @ Jan 27 2003, 09:13 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> If I live my life in a totally moral way, conforming to all the practices laid down in the various scriptures, and yet I do not believe in a higher being or higher power, what happens to me?

Do I go to hell just because I do not hold a very small portion of religious practice? Is there even a thing called hell (for me) if I do not believe in it?

Every day people kid themselves and try to explain mysteries using religion, making themselves content through lies. But then again, people do the same with science, and every other aspect of their life. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Actually, the Bible does adress this in many passages. Until you accept salvation, and admit that you are hopeless without Jesus Christ as your Savior, nothing you do will get you to heaven. You could be the nicest, friendliest, 'most good' person in the world, but you are still doomed to hell if you don't repent, and turn to God. Works will not get you into heaven. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Go tell that to the Catholics, bucko.  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
I do. It's kind of fun, but you can't generalize by saying that the Catholics are the right opinion on this issue. Personally, I don't think they are.

Dubers · January 2003

Pleeeeeeeeeeeeese kill this thread now!!!!! It's really pointless due to the fact nobody will ever agree on religion and this thread will keep on going forever (as religious arguments have done for 1000's years).

Please take this one outside guys as it kinda got old real fast!

<img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'> <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'> <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'>

AllUrHiveRblong2us · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>From what I gather, Judaism trumps Hinduism by a good thousand years.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I really wasn't sure of that, btw, which is why I put in my fall-back argument of nature worshipers.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Knowing and forcing a path are two different things entirely. If you know a horse is thirsty, and you see him going to water, you know he will drink. By watching, you are not requiring them to do so, however. Although the idea of an omnipotent being going out of it's way is a joke in itself, by the very definition of omnipotent, I'll counter the point anyway. First of all, I would hate to have to diagram your second to last sentence, but I think what you're saying is, that just because he can, he does steer you toward your destination, thus, he is responsable. Predestination is not about God having a plan for you, it is about God choosing who will and will not go to heaven after they die. He knows who will and who will not, simply because of the "God factor," but it doesn't mean that he is dragging you by the hand towards his plan. People reject God all the time, as you no doubt have. Does this mean that God made you do it? Forced you to? By no means. People have free will.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
This argument works very well, until you consider the fact that humans are not self-shaping creatures. They are formed by their experiances, and their environment. And part of being omnipotent is shaping that environment. Even if God doesn't force the future, he is the direct cause of the future. He is, in some way, responsible for eveything you do. With every decision he makes, he effects you. And what other way can he effect you except to the future that he has already foreseen?

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>You're generalizing again. Most think it's wrong. So do I. What I said was that no matter what a person's sexual preference, the soul inside is a human soul. If that wasn't clear, then it's what I meant. Sorry. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
And your bible advocates sending that human soul to an early damnation for all eternity. Sorry.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>The clothing is sybolic. If someone stabs you in the back, does the one thing that you told him not to, then you will be angry, and being kicked out of the garden is the penalty for such an action. However, even when God had the right to sweep man away outright, he was still loving enough to provide. That's the point.

As has been stated earlyer in these posts, that God wants humans to have free will, if he didn't it would be impossible to sin because God'd be there stopping you when you tried. Tempting people is not a bad thing, and holding true to God through temptation only increases your relationship with him. Love can be letting someone act things out on their own, as well.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I don't think you're getting me here. I was questioning nothing short of God's justification in that post. Is God justified to doom his two most precious creations to death and toil, and not only doom the rest of mankind as well, and not to mention his own son, simply becausehe allowed to satan to tempt them(and this is the most important part) with knowledge. And secondly, what reason had God to keep this knowledge from Adam and Eve?

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>After Christ's death on the cross, death, and Satan, never held any more power over those people that accept his gift. Hence, crushing his head. The striking his heel could simply be saying that what suffering Jesus went through is merely a scratch on the foot compared to what Christ does to Satan. Cue in Revelations 20 to see Satan condemed, and cast into the lake of fire.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I'm sorry, but I simply cannot see the metaphor without stretching myself into anything-metaphor zone. Frankly, all I see is more of a genreal doom-and-gloom prediction. I mean, he didn't give Adam and Eve anything but pain at this point anyway, why would this passage be any different.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>NO, once in heaven, you don't sin, because yous sinful body dies. I could look up the scripture, but check out Romans 6-8. The thing is, you will be judged by how you lived your life. If you sinned, if you disobeyed God, then you're going to need to pay for that. Jesus is simply a means of tacking whatever sin that you have commited onto the cross with him, and allowing his grace to be something to fill in your spiritual gaps, and make you perfect in the eyes of god.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Alright so, when we die, the "greatest gift" that God ever gave us(you know, the one that we must never use or we'll be damned for all eternity) is immediately stripped from us. THEN WHY THE HELL DOES 70 YEARS OF HAVING THIS "GIFT" MATTER IF WE'RE JUST GONNA GET IT TAKEN AWAY AFTER THAT, AND NEVER GET IT BACK, EVER?!?!

Before I forget, I must missed this last time.
</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>There's no harm in using it to fall back on in a time of need, or to use it to backup it's own argument</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Nothing can be used to prove itself, something can be consistent with itself, but that is a far sry from proof. If something could be completely self-contained, what would be to stop me from writting my own holy book, and it being as true as the Bible?

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
(God @ ~30 AD)
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I've yet to hear of god put pen to paper once. The fact is, the entire bible was written by men(note the gender bias). Specifically men that were deemed unworthy to do almost anything else regarding God without the help of God's immediate family. These "sinners" were so unworthy, and by New-Testament standards most people who wrote the Bible wouldn't even be in heaven right now, but yet the could be expected to spread his holy word, unnabridged, and with no bias. Weird.

The rest of your post did not come anywhere near close to proveing that Jesus was related to Joseph, and therefore to David, so I won't bother going into it.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I'm not saying it was the first. If you believe in macro-evolution, then you have to belive that such organisms came into effect gradually. This is impossible, because if one part is gone, it doesn't work. It had to all come into effect at once, which makes the jump from non-flagella-ed organism to flaggela-ed organism dobtfun, at best.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
It never has occured to you that another organism could be very similar to another, but still eb slightly different, and still be alive? And as for 40 things that Flagellum need, they may need them now, but in the primordial Earth, I can name more than a few things that no organism would need, and yet they are needed in modern organisms.
1)this is a pretty big one: PROTEINS!!! In the environment where life first spawned there were no predators, no shortage of food, nothing in teh environment to kill them, and therefore, nothing was needed outside of the almighty self replicating DNA. No cell wall was required, becuase there were no organneles to put in it. No Nucleus was need becuase the need to separate DNA from teh rest of teh cell was not yet an issue. Mitochondria were not neede because the spare materials and energy needed to replicate were simply absorbed from the surrounding soup. These cell parts evolved over time, and once the basic cell structure was established, nature could go on from there to make an infinite variation.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Pleeeeeeeeeeeeese kill this thread now!!!!! It's really pointless due to the fact nobody will ever agree on religion and this thread will keep on going forever (as religious arguments have done for 1000's years).

Please take this one outside guys as it kinda got old real fast!</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I will respond to that in teh same way I responded to Chopper Dave when he made a similar remark in the Abortion Thread. "Not argueing something simply becuase it won't the opinions of those who argue against you breeds political apathy, and keeps those withought well-formed and set opinions from getting both sides of an issue." and I think I'll also add a SUYF to grow on.

AllUrHiveRblong2us · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Legionnaired @ Jan 27 2003, 05:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> </span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (AllUrHiveRBelong2Us @ Jan 27 2003, 04:16 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> </span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MedHead @ Jan 27 2003, 03:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> </span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Fam @ Jan 27 2003, 09:13 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> If I live my life in a totally moral way, conforming to all the practices laid down in the various scriptures, and yet I do not believe in a higher being or higher power, what happens to me?

Do I go to hell just because I do not hold a very small portion of religious practice? Is there even a thing called hell (for me) if I do not believe in it?

Every day people kid themselves and try to explain mysteries using religion, making themselves content through lies. But then again, people do the same with science, and every other aspect of their life. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Actually, the Bible does adress this in many passages. Until you accept salvation, and admit that you are hopeless without Jesus Christ as your Savior, nothing you do will get you to heaven. You could be the nicest, friendliest, 'most good' person in the world, but you are still doomed to hell if you don't repent, and turn to God. Works will not get you into heaven. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Go tell that to the Catholics, bucko. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I do. It's kind of fun, but you can't generalize by saying that the Catholics are the right opinion on this issue. Personally, I don't think they are.  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
In-fighting Christians: it's a beautifull thing.

Sancho · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Killymagee @ Jan 25 2003, 10:22 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Oh and people who say "y0ur a NewBie" is a NERD. <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'>  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
Hey, thats my line! <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'>

Zergling · January 2003

religion is backwards, give up your faith, live in reality. <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif'>

Legionnaired · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Knowing and forcing a path are two different things entirely. If you know a horse is thirsty, and you see him going to water, you know he will drink. By watching, you are not requiring them to do so, however. Although the idea of an omnipotent being going out of it's way is a joke in itself, by the very definition of omnipotent, I'll counter the point anyway. First of all, I would hate to have to diagram your second to last sentence, but I think what you're saying is, that just because he can, he does steer you toward your destination, thus, he is responsable. Predestination is not about God having a plan for you, it is about God choosing who will and will not go to heaven after they die. He knows who will and who will not, simply because of the "God factor," but it doesn't mean that he is dragging you by the hand towards his plan. People reject God all the time, as you no doubt have. Does this mean that God made you do it? Forced you to? By no means. People have free will.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
This argument works very well, until you consider the fact that humans are not self-shaping creatures. They are formed by their experiances, and their environment. And part of being omnipotent is shaping that environment. Even if God doesn't force the future, he is the direct cause of the future. He is, in some way, responsible for eveything you do. With every decision he makes, he effects you. And what other way can he effect you except to the future that he has already foreseen?
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

If humans are not self-sharpening, then the serial rapist that has destroyed 25 lives around the Ohio State Campus, just had a "rough" childhood. I refuse to believe that. People make their own choices, wether it's accepting Christ, or raping women, it's your choice.

I'm not sure where in Deut it gives the law to kill all the Homosexuals, but keep in mind that the purpose of the law was to keep Israil a holy nation, ready to delivier God's message someday. Such strict laws were put in place to make Israiel a place where wrongdoing was legally wrong, to keep the nation holy. I'm not sure I agree with it, but it's there.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I was questioning nothing short of God's justification in that post. Is God justified to doom his two most precious creations to death and toil, and not only doom the rest of mankind as well, and not to mention his own son, simply becausehe allowed to satan to tempt them(and this is the most important part) with knowledge. And secondly, what reason had God to keep this knowledge from Adam and Eve?
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

What reason does God have to give it to them?

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>The rest of your post did not come anywhere near close to proveing that Jesus was related to Joseph, and therefore to David, so I won't bother going into it.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Jesus was the son of Mary. Mary was the wife of Joseph. Halleujah! (sp)

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>There's no harm in using it to fall back on in a time of need, or to use it to backup it's own argument</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Nothing can be used to prove itself, something can be consistent with itself, but that is a far sry from proof. If something could be completely self-contained, what would be to stop me from writting my own holy book, and it being as true as the Bible?</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Because not only is it consistant throughout, it is consistant with other events in history. Not only that, but thousands of years before events happen, they are predicted in the bible. Reformation of Israel? In Daniel 9, the history of who will rule the world for the next millenia is layed out. Check it out.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
(God @ ~30 AD)
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Was making a joke, but even so, the Bible is inspired by God. It has to be, to get the kind of accuracy that some of those prophesies entail.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I'm not saying it was the first. If you believe in macro-evolution, then you have to belive that such organisms came into effect gradually. This is impossible, because if one part is gone, it doesn't work. It had to all come into effect at once, which makes the jump from non-flagella-ed organism to flaggela-ed organism dobtfun, at best.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
It never has occured to you that another organism could be very similar to another, but still eb slightly different, and still be alive? And as for 40 things that Flagellum need, they may need them now, but in the primordial Earth, I can name more than a few things that no organism would need, and yet they are needed in modern organisms.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

I don't think you understand. If you are missing one of those parts, <i><b>the flagellum DOESN'T WORK!</b></i> It becomes deadweight, and the organism dies, because it spends a large ammout of time and energy growing a useless apendage. It's not fit for it's environment, and it gets selected against.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Alright so, when we die, the "greatest gift" that God ever gave us(you know, the one that we must never use or we'll be damned for all eternity) is immediately stripped from us. THEN WHY THE HELL DOES 70 YEARS OF HAVING THIS "GIFT" MATTER IF WE'RE JUST GONNA GET IT TAKEN AWAY AFTER THAT, AND NEVER GET IT BACK, EVER?!?!</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Who says we can never use your life? I spend mine relating with people, and I get a kick out of it. I can do whatever I want with my life, that's why it's MY LIFE! You could be victem to a sudden monitor explosion as you read this, and die. According to the Bible, for disobeying God, for breaking his commandments, by hating people, by ripping them apart with your words, this is what you deserve. BUt you don't have to be dead and gone forever.

That's why Christ is there as your savior, to give you eternal life, something meaningful in the span of the universe.

Dubers · January 2003

OMG you guys jus couldn't leave it could you!!!! ffs go and flame each other in irc or somthing.

Jus stop posting! Its such a waste of time cos neither of you will back down will you?

Legionnaired · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (DuBERS @ Jan 27 2003, 09:06 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> OMG you guys jus couldn't leave it could you!!!! ffs go and flame each other in irc or somthing.

Jus stop posting! Its such a waste of time cos neither of you will back down will you?  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
Nope. But by going to scripture to back up my arguments, I learn more about God anyway.

Who knows? I may be making Allyourhive think as well.

AllUrHiveRblong2us · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>If humans are not self-sharpening, then the serial rapist that has destroyed 25 lives around the Ohio State Campus, just had a "rough" childhood. I refuse to believe that. People make their own choices, wether it's accepting Christ, or raping women, it's your choice.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Only the mentally disturbed make choices without first considering what one is given, and what one has experienced before. And in the case of God, who could more of an affect on you than him? I am not saying that you are completely a slave to your past, but I am saying it affects you more than you think.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I'm not sure where in Deut it gives the law to kill all the Homosexuals, but keep in mind that the purpose of the law was to keep Israil a holy nation, ready to delivier God's message someday. Such strict laws were put in place to make Israiel a place where wrongdoing was legally wrong, to keep the nation holy. I'm not sure I agree with it, but it's there.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
It's not in Dueteronomy. It's in Leviticus. Leviticus 20:13 in fact. It does not decree stoning, however, it just decrees death. I had gotten that one mixed up with Dueteronomy 31:21, which decrees that any woman who gets married, and is found to have no proof of here viginity(that is, has a broken hymen) she is to be stoned on the doorstep of her parents house. Interestingly enough, while looking up that passage, I happened upon a little gem that I had almost forgoten about Leviticus 20:18, which commands that any couple that have sex during the women's period are to be separated from the tribe(AKA left in teh desert to die) now, I understand that this is merely a rule for health, but should we really be taking our messianic prophecies from a culture that is so ignorant as to need to decree death for having sex during a woman's period?

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>What reason does God have to give it to them? </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I don't know about you, but keeping someone ignorant is not exactly a sign of a loving God, and God is supposed to be loving, right?

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Jesus was the son of Mary. Mary was the wife of Joseph. Halleujah! (sp)</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
But, Jesus was not related by blood to Joseph, correct? Therefore(say it with me) he was not related by blood to David(not to mention the fact that the rest of that lineage list in teh beginning of Matthew is not exactly always true, but I won't get into that.)

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Because not only is it consistant throughout, it is consistant with other events in history. Not only that, but thousands of years before events happen, they are predicted in the bible. Reformation of Israel? In Daniel 9, the history of who will rule the world for the next millenia is layed out. Check it out.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
According to your logic, Nostradamus is god.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Was making a joke, but even so, the Bible is inspired by God. It has to be, to get the kind of accuracy that some of those prophesies entail.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Take a book as thick as the Bible, and give it several thousand years to play out. Garunteed most of it's gonna happen. That's probability.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I don't think you understand. If you are missing one of those parts, the flagellum DOESN'T WORK! It becomes deadweight, and the organism dies, because it spends a large ammout of time and energy growing a useless apendage. It's not fit for it's environment, and it gets selected against.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I do realise that we have been having two different conversations. You have been talking about the Flagglum itself, and I have been talking about the entire organism. In an effort to get on teh same wavelength as you, here we go. A Flaggellum is a rather complex structure, true, but it's not as if it just appeared one day, complete with working parts and all. Lets start at the beginning: We have an extremely simple organism, it's complex enough to have developed ways of storing and converting energy, and it has long ago developed a cell wall. It is, however, immobile except for psuedopods, which are inneficient for smaller organisms, and are not exactly speedy.It is virtually at the will of the currents. Lets say, over a long period of time, the simple cell is instead of inheriting the trait of psuedopods, is instead having a cell wall that is able to pulse, pushing the water that is around it to get along. Now, this is not very fast, or very efficient, but, it is better than psuedopods, so the organism thrives. Now, let's say, that, eventually, the organism grows hairs to make this movement more efficient. Once again, an improvement. This organism thrives. Over time, instead of moving it's whole body to get a waving motion it moves only the hairs. Once again, a big improvement. Now, over time, some of these creatures had one of their cilia grow out. It became very big, and now, instead of moving many hundreds of hairs, now it's only one. TA-DA! Flagellum! And without any big jumps.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Who says we can never use your life? I spend mine relating with people, and I get a kick out of it. I can do whatever I want with my life, that's why it's MY LIFE! You could be victem to a sudden monitor explosion as you read this, and die. According to the Bible, for disobeying God, for breaking his commandments, by hating people, by ripping them apart with your words, this is what you deserve. BUt you don't have to be dead and gone forever.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I was not refering to your life as the "great gift that we must never use" I was refering to our free choice. If we use it, we go to hell. And if we don't we just get it taken away in heaven.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>OMG you guys jus couldn't leave it could you!!!! ffs go and flame each other in irc or somthing.

Jus stop posting! Its such a waste of time cos neither of you will back down will you? </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Must I repeat myself? Arguements are never waged to change the other person's mind, because anyone who has the conviction to argue won't be backing down any time soon. Arguements are here to influence those without convictions, and get them involved in a free exchange of ideas.

Zergling · January 2003

this is disgusting *nuke*

Grendel · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (DuBERS @ Jan 28 2003, 02:06 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> OMG you guys jus couldn't leave it could you!!!! ffs go and flame each other in irc or somthing.

Jus stop posting! Its such a waste of time cos neither of you will back down will you?  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
Hey, an attempt at an intelligent discussion via the off-topic forums.

Well, that settles it. There MUST be a god. <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'>

Seriously though, I find reading this kinda thing interesting, so don't be put off by all the people moaning at you to stop. It's the off-topic forum. So, be off-topic.

Burr · January 2003

I believe that there is only one one higher power, and that you don't need to be a part of a relgion to worship it. Religion is a tool.

xioutlawix · January 2003

Heh, the point I was originally making, in saying religion in general is laughable, is the entire state of affairs of the matter. People all over the world believe in one religion or another, or they believe in nothing, or they believe in themselves.

I happen to be the latter. I don't need to go on the hearsay of what a localized institution tells me has to be the correct belief, and thankfully I wasn't born to parents who impressed upon me a certain religion since birth, allowing me the ability to make my own decisions.

I happen to feel that the process of blind faith, in something a person has obviously never seen, felt, or can really confirm (don't give me anything along the lines of the bible/testament/whatever being proof, all you have in front of you is words on paper, and publishers publish similar items daily) is the most unnatural thing. I could never find myself at this stage in the game, having someone come up to me and say "there is a god, we've never seen him, nor has he spoken to us, but um, we feel him! He works in mysterious ways we cannot possibly comprehend but its always for our betterment, even when the bad things happen to us!...and this book contains his words!", and being convinced that this is proper reasoning to convert.

I find the whole idea of just letting whatever happens, happen, and then calling it the will of god laziness, or apathy, the desire not to try for something better but just assume that whatever's going to happen is going to happen regardless.

I'm doubtless not going to convince anyone to think otherwise, most religions try to stifle free thought, with such messages as "don't give in to reasoning, god has it all under control!". Everyone needs something to believe in. A lot of people, at least I feel, attach themselves to religion when they're lacking in other aspects of their life. I don't need a god to validate my existence here, I don't need to feel that there's someone watching over me all the time. I'm fine on my own, I'm happy, and know that if I'm a good person and try my best, I'll better my chances of leading a prosperous life.

Once again, this isn't trying to convert anyone to atheism (nor would I be very successful in the attempt, I know the odds of turning someone raised into religion from it <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'> ), but rather just my 2 cents.

[Edit] as a side note, isn't it interesting how the convenience level of religious practice has turned more and more lax throughout the centuries? Heh, more a direct result of man than of god in my opinion. Something interesting.

AllUrHiveRblong2us · January 2003

I have never liked this argument(although I believe it to be absolutely true), because it is to easily counterable. The other side can just say "But I know there's a god. You can say what you want, but I know it." Then we get started on a doomed argument becuase you can't prove a negative. Getting back to my origional argument in thread(whoa! That's going way back), we once again see how the religious individual has taken himself to seriously, and when this argument is used, he is so full of himself and the "holyness" of the idea of god, that, to him, no argument is neccesary.
I always find it better to attack the religion from inside itself, systematically disproving the beliefs at the core of the religion, and pointing out any contradiction within the religion itself. In the idealic situation, this would continue until the only thing left standing within the argument of the religious person is the idea of God, and without anything to hold it up, it would collapse on it's own.

Nighpher · January 2003

whoa too deep! too unshallow! must... eat... FOOD!

The Beginning Of The Hax0r Antichrist

Comments