Hey all, if you haven't seen "Religulous" yet, would you do me a favor and go this weekend? I swear not for me, I am honestly not interested in ever making a movie again - I'm like Danny Glover in Lethal Weapon, "I'm too old for this shit." But this one I would like to do well so America gets it that there's a lot of people who at least would like this to be a subject we can talk about and debate. And, its a hoot! I've gotten so many e mails and texts from people who say "I just saw your movie, and at the end everyone applauded. " Something must be going on here, how many times do you see that in movies these days?
Thank you!
1,747 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 1001 – 1200 of 1747 Newer› Newest»This may be another long post but I'm worried about some things, the oil tankers the Somalians pirated and oil spilling everywhere. Also in an article 2 Pakistani women dropped off their 8 kids at an orphanage because they could not feed them anymore. Their husbands beat them brutally and they went back to get the children. The orphanage gave them about 1200 each and the government promised their husbands jobs. How many more are in their situation? Now GM, Ford & Chrysler want to get blood out of a turnip. Bret I appreciate the concerns you mentioned as well. I'm going to make a donation to the orphanage at edhifoundation.com/contact.asp. One judge on tv always says 'this world is going to hell in a handbasket!' (smile) I say we need a Savior from all this soon and it's not Barack Obama. Nevertheless, I think perhaps not to far into the distant future everyone will be able to be married or have civil unions.
Though several thoughts keep running through my mind, one is: Whose idea was it in the first place for a man and a woman to get married? I mean, it wasn't until the Jews left Egypt that God gave the Israelites the Mosaic Law. Before that law was revealed, men on earth did not marry men and women did not marry women. Therefore why did society or their consciences forbid them to marry? Where did the law of marriage get its start from the standpoint of evolution? Did the ape-man find out he could only have children from the woman and forbade same sex marriage?
One guy said 'Tom is my husband.' How do they decide who is going to be the husband or the wife. Is it according to who is more masculine or feminine? This lady on tv took testosterone to be manly because in her mind she was a man but yet just had a baby. Maybe she was lacking in female hormones?
The last time I looked at my money it said in God We Trust. The court demanded swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but So Help Me God. Didn't they add under God in the pledge of allegiance? Children recite this everyday in the government/state funded schools. Or did they take that part out? Do they still start each session of Congress everyday with prayer? National Day of Prayer? Did not Prayer began the recent political conventions? Separation of God and State is perhaps a good ideal but in reality it's impossible. The worship of God or gods have been ingrained into every fabric of our life and society. The Soviet Union, Poland and others tried to remove any idea of God from the thoughts and minds of people and they failed. I perceive any nation or government that prohibits freedom of religion will eventually fail.
We are all being tried and tested in this world. No one is free from freedom. We are 'being drawn out and enticed by our desires. Then the desire, when it has become fertile, gives birth to sin.' (James 1:14,15) 'From what source are there wars and from what source are there fights? Are they not from this source, [desire] namely, from cravings for sensual pleasure'. How true are these statements? James 4:1-3
God gave them up to disgraceful sexual appetites, for both their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; and likewise even the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene". Rom 1:26, 27
The Bible says a parent that holds back from disciplining a child or teaching them what's right is actually hating the child. "True, no discipline seems for the present to be joyous, but grievous" The Bible admonishes "Do not belittle the discipline from God, neither give out when being corrected by him; for whom God loves he disciplines;" Heb 12:6
When providing counsel from God, maybe we should remove the boulder from our own eye and not pick at the straw in the eye of others; 'put away wrath, anger, badness, abusive speech, and obscene talk.' Col 3:8
'Probably we may be concealed in the day of God's anger.' Zep 2:3
To be honest, I've seen your movie twice. I'll be honest, the first time I watched it, I nearly laughed my ass off non-stop. During the second time, I was familiar with your film, so it was easier for me to be critical of your film that time and I can recall one criticism (I probably have more, but I'd have to think about it more.)
In regards to the interview with you and the person who you identified as being 'ex-gay', there was a scene within that interview that cuts off to you speaking with a scientist whose testimony you took to be confirming that there is a 'gay gene'. Now, I concede that some people can be homosexual by nature, but I'm not sure if discovering that there is a 'gay gene' rules out the possibility that a person can be homosexual by experience. For example, some people don't have the same preferences for food that their parents like eating. My parents may love to eat broccoli and maybe I liked it too until I was 12, but then while they maintained their favoritism for broccoli, I said, "I'm sick of this vegetable. I'd rather eat cauliflower instead."
I'm not sure if you have heard of this dichotomy before, but just in case, psychology refers to it as 'nature vs. nurture'.
Anyway, good movie Bill. Take it easy.
I will have to wait for the DVD also. I live in KY. and it's not playing anywhere near me. Our theater is playing some crap about Billy Graham and Fireproof.
Wow I have received some crazy feedback from some religious nuts!! People don't get it I am not going to change and there is no such thing as Jesus. These people seem to have a mental illness- and it is most of America! Scary!!!!!!!!!!!!!How can they believe it -I don't get it! Maybe they need more of an education focused on science! I am thankful there is someone out there with a voice like Bill Maher.
lisa
AN OPEN LETTER TO BILL MAHER
You are going to hell, Bill. You are funny, clever and insightful, but you’re still going to hell. You’ve been working at getting people to laugh for the better part of your life (except some of the lame stuff you wrote for Roseanne and those two guest appearances on Murder She Wrote – awkward!) It has been that sound of laughter that has made you haughty, that has fed your self-willed hunger, that has allowed you to live deliciously, that has validated and fueled your rebellion against God, and in an ironic stroke of Divine justice, it will be the sound of laughter that will haunt and plague you for all eternity. Check it out, now: But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof: I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh. (Pr. 1:25-26) You get it, Bill. You’re wit is razor sharp. So you know who the ‘I’ is here, don’t you Bill? And you know how long your calamity will last, don’t you Bill? So you know how long God will be laughing, don’t you Bill? Bill? Eternity is a long time, Bill. Real Time. You are going to hell. Not some cartoonish, benign backdrop used for countless jokes. We’re talking about hell. Into the fire that never shall be quenched: where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. (Mk. 9:42) And the Lord you mock is precisely the One who will put you there, and it won’t be long now. Knowest thou not this of old, since man was placed upon earth, that the triumphing of the wicked is short, and the joy of the hypocrite but for a moment? Though his excellency mount up to the heavens, and his head reach unto the clouds; Yet he shall perish for ever like his own dung: they which have seen him shall say, Where is he? (Job 20:4-7) The LORD killeth, and maketh alive: he bringeth down to the grave, and bringeth up. The LORD maketh poor, and maketh rich: he bringeth low, and lifteth up. (1Sam. 2:6-7)
Here’s why you are going to hell, Bill. There is only one group more responsible for the outpouring of God’s wrath against this evil world than the mass media, and that is the lying false preachers. Your most recent ‘work,’ Religulous, shows the camel’s nose under the tent of the most unholy of unions – the mass media and false religion, together belching forth a putrid, bellicose, unified voice aimed at perverting the Word of God. Here’s the verse that applies:
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness. (Rom. 1:18)
That word ‘hold’ there, Bill, means ‘to choke out or suppress,’ but of course you knew that, didn’t you Bill? Because no one possesses a mental capacity that you don’t have – isn’t that about how you said it on camera, Bill? Now I know that your god and friend, Barack Obama, considers this to be an ‘obscure passage of the Bible,’ but bear with me, Bill. It describes you to a T.
You might complain, ‘How on earth can you say that I tried to choke out or suppress the truth? I was on a quest for truth, and I let every viewpoint be heard! My interviewees hung themselves!’ Bill. Your mockumentary parlour trick might have worked for the hell-bound, teeming masses, but it will never get past the eagle-eye saints of the Most High God. Here’s what you did. You set up a bunch of straw men as ‘the truth,’ and then knocked them all down. And boy, were they straw men. You didn’t refute one syllable of the blessed Word of God with your globe-trotting rants, nor can you. What you did is put in front of the camera a bunch of light and treacherous men – the basest of men – men whom God did not send – men who have polluted the sanctuary – men who have done violence to the law – men who teach what they ought not for filthy lucre’s sake – men who privily bring in damnable heresies – men whose ways are pernicious – men who have a form of godliness, but who deny the power thereof ( Zeph. 3:4, Jer. 23:21, 2Pet. 2:1-3, 2Tim 3:5). Once the camera rolled, you put these fools for ‘the truth’ and knocked down all the straw men, slicker than snot. You did that, Bill. Fish in a barrel. (The bald priest out in front of the Assrapery, I mean, Vatican, was just too much )
But you knew that these men don’t have the truth of God. Your director, Larry Charles, knew that these men didn’t have the truth of God. And both of you know who does. Larry Charles was here in Topeka not long ago, with Sacha Baron Cohen, dealing with our people and shooting a scene for another one of their base comedies. You’ve known about the true Church of the Lord Jesus Christ (aka Westboro Baptist Church) for a long time, Bill. We’ve heard you. And you have a little bit of knowledge of the scripture – precious little, but it’s there – you let it slip out when you were recounting the story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. You mocked the story, but you knew it! And you knew that you could not possibly put the truth of God out there, as believed on and preached by people who have it written upon their hearts, and who have been blessed of God to be AS HIS MOUTH on this earth and be able to knock it down as the other straw men! So you stayed away from the one source of light available on this earth, opting to briefly show our signs so as not to seem to exclude the ONLY voice in this waste howling wilderness. And with all your avoidance and absolute DISHONESTY on the subject, the Lord your God STILL caused you and your filthy partner in slime Larry Charles to GET ONE THING RIGHT! And that one thing – a blessed synecdoche (a small part of something put for the whole) - stands for the WHOLE truth of God – from Gen. 1:1 to Revelation 22:21, to wit: GOD HATES FAGS! Cha-friggin-ching! You can duck and dodge and shuck and jive all you want to try and choke out and suppress the truth of God, shamelessly working iniquity with both hands while your mouth belches forth great swelling words (Jude 1:16), but if God wants His message to be preached, then preached it will be. So, when our humble pastor uttered those three little words amidst your utter orgy of lies, it was put for the WHOLE TRUTH of the Scriptures – from cover to blessed cover. GOD HATES FAGS! God hates those who live in proud, blatant defiance of His Word! If you obey God, He will bless you, but if you disobey God, He will curse you! Those three words were a beacon of light shining in a dark place – and the darker you made it, the brighter the light shined!
We ultimately know why you shucked and jived and did not DARE to interview our people. We know that you, like all the rest of the mass media and all the false prophets, absolutely bank on the Bible illiteracy of your audiences. Don’t worry – it’s a safe bet. The Lord has chosen their delusions, and sends them (and you) strong delusions, that they would believe a lie (Isa. 66:4, 2Thes. 2:11) But you know that the truth of God, by His grace, resides at this humble place – and you know that, even from a humanistic perspective, there is no one who has a more thoroughgoing working knowledge of the Bible than our pastor, Fred Phelps (a humble servant of God who you regularly vilify, demonize and marginalize to kiss fag ass on your TV show), and you avoided him like the plague. That being said, any shred of honesty or integrity in your God-hating soul would compel you to invite our pastor, or some of our people onto your show to openly and honestly discuss matters of scripture. We know you won’t do it, because you’re a coward – a fraud. You’re not about enlightening people, you’re about validating and teaching sin to other men. You’re not about seeking truth (gag me out the door with using The Who’s ‘Seeker’ in your film’s open), you’re about choking out, or suppressing, or holding the truth in unrighteousness. This brings us back to Pope Obama’s obscure passage of the Bible, Romans 1 – a beautiful little chunk of the scriptures that I already mentioned describes you, both Popes (Obama and the Boy Rapist) and all fags plus their enablers to a T:
Rom. 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19 ¶ Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
Your film ultimately shows the core meaning of the reprobate mind spoken of above. The meaning here, is not an inability to think, or to reason about worldly things. Instead, a reprobate mind renders a person unable to think clearly about anything of a serious, moral nature. You are plenty smart, Bill. But you know that you have been given over to a reprobate mind at the hand of your God. This doesn’t mean that you don’t espouse positions on ‘moral’ subjects – we see you doing that all over the place. What it means is that you can’t think clearly about them – you have no wisdom regarding them. Remember, the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. As for the reprobate minds of all the false religionists and their believers depicted in your film, this verse hits the nail on the head:
Jer. 5:31 The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love to have it so: and what will ye do in the end thereof? (What, indeed?)
I must admit, for one brief moment, I almost felt sorry for you, Bill. When you put your doddering, old, Jew mom up there, I thought, “This was the voice of morality and truth in Bill’s formative years – YIKES! And the only other direction he had to turn was to a pedophile-worshipping Catholic!” They F-ed you up bad, Bill – they raised you for the devil, and I’m sorry you were lied to. But I’m not going to lie to you, Bill – I love you that much. I love you enough, by God’s grace, to tell you the truth. You are going to hell, Bill.
Steve Drain,
of Westboro Baptist Church -
Your only real friends in the whole world
P.S – Be sure to check out our websites:
www.godhatesfags.com
www.godhatestheworld.com
www.priestsrapeboys.com
www.signmovies.net
www.americaisdoomed.com
My goodness Steve! I don't think you're going to win him over with that tone.
And Christians aren't suppose to use slang words to describe people. i.e. referring to your website but won't post it here, and God does not hate the world . . . he loves the world. He just hates the wickedness of people in the world.
I would like to post a comment concerning Bills depiction of where Armageddon will take place:
In Bill's movie he several times can be seen in a place in Israel called Megiddo.
Bill stated that alot of Christian's feel like the literal sight of Megiddo in Israel would be THE place where Armageddon takes place.
He states that a lot of people feel that way, but then leaves it at that.
He does not consider what others may think at all. He does this in order to discredit the Bible's warning of the reckoning to come, and may have to some extent succeeded.
So for all those who had the "priveledge" of viewing Bill's movie, hear a clarification!!
The Battle Field of Megiddo also known as the "valley plain of Megiddo" easily controlled the major trade and military routes that intersected there in Israel.
Both Biblical history and secular records tell how the armies of many nations fought decisive battles around Megiddo because of its commanding position.
Instead of the conventional Hebrew spelling Meghid‧doh′, it is Meghid‧dohn′, a prolonged form similar to that found at
Revelation 16:16--"And they gathered them together to the PLACE that is called in Hebrew Har–Ma‧ged′on."
Actually, the ancient Hebrew word for “Megiddo” is said to mean “rendezvous, or, assembly of troops.”
So Armageddon is a "place" instead of an event.
The Great Day of Jehovah is the event that will take place at Armageddon!
Foolishly claiming that God's war against all unrightousness will culminate in a single place located on a map is simply religulous!! Tee Hee
What, then, is “Har–Magedon”? It is obviously figurative. Drawing on Megiddo’s history as the site of decisive battles, Revelation uses it to picture the approaching situation when hatred for God’s people by “all the nations” will reach a climax. (Matthew 24:9, 14)
“Then people will deliver you up to tribulation and will kill you, and you will be objects of hatred by all the nations on account of my name."
and 14: "And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come."
This global battle will be decisive, just like those fought at Megiddo. All earthly foes will “perish,” even as the victory song of Deborah and Barak prophesied!
However, this battle will not have human soldiers! God has appointed Jesus Christ as King and Lord, and he will be the one to mete out justice with the "long sword of his mouth" spoken of in Revelation.
Only heavenly creatures will take part in the mass slaughter of those who will be pronounced guilty.
God has a bone to pick with the entire inhabited earth! And could not in any conceivable way fulfill his prophesied day of Reckoning in a single place on Earth!
So just a little insight would not have lead us to this conclusion, right?
But no, Bill assumes that everyone is stupid and so left his version of what he thinks the significance of Megiddo is in order to further mislead people into thinking that the Great Day will never come.
This is a clarification of that misinformation.
And also I would like to say WOW Steve!!
That was one heck of a ranting post!
I can almost smell the hatred reeking from it!
I am one who loves the Word of God, but man! you are one person hating unrightousness to its core!
But, to properly illustrate the unprofitableness of this world's collective mind, one must not only look to the obvious: the unparelleled emergence of those who are homosexual and proud of it.
No, to better assess the debauchery of the world, look at all the heterosexuals!
Many of them lost their virginity while they were in highschool, or even earlier!
Such behavior is not condemned, but encouraged! And considered healthy by many who are concerned about the progress of procreation.
The larger part of all the world population are heterosexual and quite guilty of fornication and adultery!
So, you can't just call homosexuality unseemly and obscene. I say to you: "the whole world has lost its collective mind!"
It's been gone for years!
You can't just zero in on one little minor part of it and come away with an accurate depiction, oh no!
Look at all the records of legalized prostitution and sex rings!
Look at all the rapings! Some of which were even sanctioned by some worldly Governments! Namely in Africa.
Homosexuals catch the brunt of the denunciations of promiscuity because they can't just get married and call themselves "swingers".
Such unnatural conduct is taking place on a grand scale, an unprecidented scale!
And don't just think that I am being judgmental or harsh because I have taken up celibacy. That is far from it!
Nobody is moved to speak out about the obvious moral decay of society until they reach the "gay courts" of San Fransisco or start talking about the gay rights movements in states like Massachusetts.
Quite to the contrary, everybody must repent from their sins! Everybody is guilty!
Not just "fags".
I often find it humoring to consider the way Man likes to make up words of hate such as this one in order to describe that which he does not understand.
What is a fag really?
To me it sounds kind of funny.
I'm black and so I think the racial slur "nigger" sounds kind of funny too.
How did they come up with these words?
And what word must we invent to properly describe all the "normals" out there who practically stick themselves into whatever they can find moving!?!?
I welcome people like Binky, MJ So Cal, Saveyourselves, and all the rest to come up with a word to properly describe and depict them!
It will be a hoot to read their responses.
I will just have to wait and see...
I agree the Bible uses many symbolic meanings and it's quite challenging to get the true sense of them. Armageddon is a world war of the nations against Christ's rulership. The kings of the earth and their armies are destroyed and those destroyed by God are from one end of the earth to the other. It would be hard for all the armies of the earth t fit in one small area or place on earth.
Many Christians also think the New Jerusalem will be on earth, but the Bible actually points out it is a heavenly kingdom which benefits extend down to earth. Also the the temple described in Revelation is so high it would reach 5 miles into outer space. So the temple is symbolic of the high standards of the new government to meet the needs of people on earth and education of God's righteous standards for everlasting life.
I finally saw the movie and enjoyed it immensely. It is empowering for us nonbelievers. The only problem I see is that the people who need to see this might stay away and that you would be preaching to the converted, excuse the expression. I happen to post on the blog of a famous Indian movie star who is otherwise highly intelligent but his religiosity is so annoying.Then everyone else mostly in India posts comments containing God this and God that, both Muslim and Hindu. They view atheism as some disease! At the beginning of the film there was a delay because of some technical difficulty and we were making comments such as it is an act of God and God is doing this because of this blasphemous movie.
Thanks for making this important and funny film!!
Ah symbolism...The elusive literary tool. Yes, Janice, what you say is precisely so.
Also I would like to input:
Somewhere in this blog I think somebody said something like, "Jesus died for everybody, even You Bill Maher!"
I can't remember who said it, but this is not true.
The benefits gained from Jesus' sacrifice are only applied to all those who believe in him and exercise faith in him.
This means that they, who would be blessed, are to in every way imitate Jesus Christ as much as is possible to do so.
No longer do they consider this world's riches as truly rich, or this world's wisdom as truly wise.
Neither do they hold on to the false impression that anything truly beneficial can come from its corrupt and woefully inadequate World Governments.
Jesus Christ several times is quoted as having said that His Kingdom is NO PART of this world!
When they tried to put him on their worldly throne, Jesus withdrew, and would not take part in this world's shoddy efforts to rule itself.
He knew that God's Kingdom would be a Kingdom truly glorified and truly sanctified. A Government set up by Jehovah God himself!
But, to return to the point, NO, Jesus DID NOT DIE for Everyone everyone (not a typo).
This idea is widely excepted and taught!
Under such misguidance people are moved to think that unreformed murderers, and unrepentant sinners will somehow be pardoned and included in God's Kingdom.
This is fallacious.
It is just another tool that the Devil is using today in order to mislead people into thinking that they can get away with whatever they want to and keep living.
Unless the person in question repents, really turns around, really gives up his unrighteous works, there is no more forgiveness left for him/her.
No longer are there continuous sacrifices and sin offerings made.
There is only one Offering valid enough to do away with all sin completely, and that is Jesus Christ's.
If, by your actions and attitude, you "trample on" Christ's sacrifice and desecrate Christ's sacrifice, how else will you be pardoned?
Can you stab someone in the back and, at the same time tell him you are sorry for it?
That's religulous!
I have just been to the priestsrapeboys website.
I've got to say that this website is pretty shocking.
People like Steve who might read this post, please don't think that I am being judgmental of you or your cause.
You have plenty of cause to be speaking out about the evil things that do take place within the churches in America.
Only this I must say:
Jesus said that by love his apostles would be recognized.
After viewing some of the content in these websites, I must say that I don't feel loved.
Sure, the truth is spoken openly and candidly; God does hold evildoers in contempt in our day.
But...You can't sound so radical.
Nobody is perfect. And nobody can assume that anyone is going to be lost forever in the fires of Gehenna, the second death.
The truth can be spoken openly and candidly, but also with an air of love and forgiveness in mind.
I admit that I had mighty a chuckle after viewing the video that pretty much damned Bill O'Reilly forever and ever Amen.
But...Remember Jesus' counsel about plucking out the straw in your brother's eye!
I know, a lot of people can try and say that I am doing the exact same thing.
But, while I do try and expose the misunderstandings of God's word, I never just come right out and say that "so and so is going to Die in Armageddon!"
While there is a real need for change in America and around the world,
the people who are responsible for this website need to try and season their sayings with salt, so that it might be a little tasty to those who might receive their message.
You can't feed anybody red hot chilly peppers alone, and expect a favorable hearing!
Tee Hee, man oh man...
Hey Bill,
Like you I am a nonbeliever (agnostic) and also like you, I am often frustrated by the many people around me who feel the need to save me from my supposed self inflicted and tragic ignorance. However, I have been at peace lately because I started thinking about the fundamental difference between myself and the many people who claim that a space god is watching over them.
You see Bill, people like you, me, and most atheists and agnostics BELIEVE that everything in the universe is rational, while people who are religious BELIEVE that the universe can be divided into two tiers; a rational level on which all observable phenomena occur and a mystical level that is beyond our direct observation.
I am telling you this because I am a big fan of you and your show and I see that you try your best to make religious people see that religion does not make sense. I think that you are destined to fail most of the time with this approach because religious people don't expect religion to make sense. In fact if you listen to most religious people you will realize that deep down inside they know that religion does not make sense. However, religion is still real to them because they believe in a SUPER REALITY which does not conform to our notions of rationality.
Having realized this, I don't really argue with religious people anymore, all I want from them is to respect my opinion (something which by the nature of their doctrine is difficult to do). When I do have religious discussions, its more on the level of explaining what I believe as apposed to trying to get them to identify with my views. I feel that I get a better response this way. But at the end of the day I think that people like us who don't divide the universe into the scientific and the mystical but who expect the world to observe one rule will remain in the minority.Human beings seem to insist on creating supermen,superwomen, or super-animals who watch over them and protect them from the unknowns of this life and after.
I am gonna to see the movie this weekend. I am from China and glad that our government banned religion long time ago so that 95% of our citizens are atheists-- "thank God " !!!! Can you imagine America being a religion-free country? OMG !!!! I can't stand seeing those megachurches coming in town to feed the craziness of the mentally-disabled--and make quick bucks off them. Even stupid igorant people like Sarah Palin and George Bush don't believe it--they are faking it ---just to put on a big show to get elected...This is so disgusting...To prevent future laughable debacles like electing a president like bush, I would suggest all voters need to pass IQ test then make a good and intelligent choice !
Brett-
In answer to your question, "And what word must we invent to properly describe all the "normals" out there who practically stick themselves into whatever they can find moving!?!?"
Why wouldn't we just call them "chameleons". For they try and take the shape that best allows them to fit in and continue on.
I find your question odd because each part of the world has there own idea as to what is "normal". When in truth there is no "normal", we are all products of part nurture, another part environment, and one that we make ourselves, but these things affect the heart and mind of people differently. There is no "normal" the thought that we should all be the same is fast changing and if we were all the same the world would be a boring place, though less eventful would be nice.
I have a few random thoughts of my own at times . . .
Most politicians will blurt out "God Bless America!", but I don't consider them to be irrational persons. If they are than certainly they should not be running the country.
The writers of the Declaration of Independence were not irrational to write all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.
Where did the desire to worship God or gods begin in the minds of humans or their desire to live more than 70+ years; to never get sick, grow old or die; to live in a great paradise beyond the sky?
This seems to be an inherit desire among people of every culture and stories related to a paradise that was lost from the beginning of the world, a global flood and mythical gods and goddesses; ancient legends of strong-men, Hercules, Zeus, Apollo. Many of which 'mated with humans to produce superhuman heroes and fearful demigods having god-man characteristics.'
It all seems a bit like far-fetched rumors or old wives tales handed down throughout the ages. Hard to believe except could there possibly be some truth among the myths? (Keeping in mind these beliefs existed before the Bible was ever written.)
One account in the Bible records spirit creatures that came to earth and had relations with women. Their children were called Nephilum, giants or "mighty ones who were of old, men of fame" Gen 6:9; 8:15, 16
From other accounts, we know that secular history records Jesus as having actually lived on the earth and the Bible calculates the exact year he would appear and began his ministry. The Bible clearly explains this man would become Savior to the world and one day restore peace and paradise to earth. God's kingdom 'government would rest upon his shoulders' Isa 9:6 KJV
Another account, Jesus foretold the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem. At least 20,000 Christians left because of the warning of this prophecy before the Romans attacked. The Bible foretold the conquest of Alexander the Great and his fall and that 4 generals would stand up after him. There are many Bible prophecies that have come true. Concerning our day and time everyone seems to be looking for a Savior maybe in the president-elect, Barack Obama. However, they overlook the one savior that the Bible says will bring "True Peace and Security" forever. 1 Thes 5:2, 3
To conclude, I don't think it's irrational at all to have the desire to live in peace and paradise or live forever. I just think we all need to keep searching for truth among the myths.
Couple of questions for Vivian: Why do you say OMG or Thank God? For someone that doesn't believe in God, you certainly don't hesitate to say his name.
This comment is regarding the comment from janice to Vivian...She wanted to know why she said thank god and OMG....Well when I refer to it I am not referring to your "god" it is just another word like shit or tree....You really dont' want to know when I am yelling "Oh My God." ( I am in bed with my husband and I say it repeatedly) I just say it as a common phrase so try not to get your panties in a wad about it.
Whoever sdrain is - I feel for you. Your posting seems very judgemental-I thought you weren't supposed to do that. It seems so hypocritical.(Oh wait, Christians are very hypocritical.) I find it humorous that you think Bill is going to hell. I hate to tell you but there is no such place. Now you just go on and live in your imaginary land of the lord...It is sad that people are that weak they have to have such a fictitious thing to help get them through life. I know, I know, I will be prayed for! Crazy......
1. If something has been believed for thousands of years, it does not automatically make that something true.
It was believed that the world was flat and that people lived on the moon, and that when you sneeze your soul is escaping your body..All of these things and others have been believed for a long time but now we have more information that allows us to feel comfortable that theses things are not true.
2. Human beings may be inclined to believe certain things because of socialization or nature but that does not mean that those things are necessarily true.
Example;Human beings are predisposed to be scared of the dark because the dark was indeed something dangerous in our early history. But being scared of the dark is not rational because there is nothing in the dark to get us...even though we know this we still have a fear of the dark.
Religion may be hardwired into our brains for similar reasons but this does not mean that the claims that religion makes are true....just like the dark is nothing to be afraid of.
3. Because a myth may be based on a real historical figure does not mean that the myth is true.
Human beings have a history of creating larger than life figures out of fallible human beings. Throughout history we have examples of people who after they died have been elevated to a mythical status.
However this does not mean that the myth surrounding that person is true.
4. My main point is that as an agnostic, I would rather rely on scientific evidence for things rather than faith. Because scientific evidence has a very good track record for being consistent and at least gives me a glimpse of the truth....If we relied on faith then we would be still living in the primitive world that Jesus lived in.
Science and Reason has revealed itself to be a very powerful way for human beings to discover the truth. Religion simply asserts that it is true
Thank you runner girl for your thoughts on the subject matter. I don't know if Vivian was having sexual relations at the time she was posting but it leads me to wonder why do people say Oh My God, why not say Oh My Tree? Since it's just an expression. And who thought of saying Oh My God while havng sexual relations? Was this something passed on from one person to another. Why does this form of pleasure bring people to say God? Are they thanking God for the superlative experience? Very stange indeed. But I suppose you could also say a bad word and be just as thankful. I think perhaps God or the word God is ingrained into our very being.
I had some other thought but perhaps I'll save them for another time.
Thank you random for your thoughts.
I don't know how many people are afraid of the dark these days but I do see a lot of them out late at night. I just don't like driving in the dark or afraid I'll fall, that's why I turn on the light.
Today there are many scientists that believe in God as well as those that don't believe in God. Charles Darwin believed in the Creator, and whereas many persons have attempted to discredit the Bible, archaeology has verified many portions of it. It's interesting that while people thought the earth was flat, the Bible written hundreds of years earlier clearly says the earth was a circle and hangs upon nothing. I think that is a true statement in that the earth is round like a circle.
And of course I don't believe all religious myths are true but pointing out the main teachings of cultures concerning a once paradisaical beginning of the world and a global flood seem to encompass the thoughts of most civilizations as well as the belief in God or gods today.
Hellfire also seems to be a myth of people burning forever in an underground while an overlord tortures them with some sort of pitchfork. However, there is no concept of a burning hell in the Old Testament of the Bible and God never told the man Adam he would burn in hell or float away to eternal bliss. So it appears immortality of the human soul is also in reality a myth and we do well to search fact over fiction.
It's hard to believe in something you can't see. But I believe in the wind and I can't see it either. I guess science verifies the wind. So the next question would be, can science prove the world was designed by evolution. The evidence is still out.
"Faith is not a possession of all people." So that is perhaps why people make images or idols to bow down to or worship; pictures or crosses, etc. Anything they can see to worship or believe in. But as the Bible says we are 'walking by faith, not by sight.'
Ok, I have some work to do. I'll try and be back later.
Binky
I thank you for your attempt to cover my question concerning what kind of name we should make up for those considered as "normal".
Whether or not they are normal depends on their personal track record.
I'll leave it up to anybody who wants to post and let us know whether or not they think they are normal so we can better have some idea of what name would properly fit them.
Nah, just kidding.
But, I do get your point on the fact that our behaviors are so wildly different from one another that it would be difficult to put a label like that on groups of people.
But...
Would you call the incredible amount of sexual transmitted diseases that are currently flooding our world normal?
I certainly don't think that you would.
I think that people way back in the day did proliferate STDs to a certain extent. But in our day the word STD has become...well...normal.
Any rational mind...(and you atheists should listen up because you all do like to go on about how rational you are)...any rational mind can easily judge for his or herself that the world as a whole has checked all traces of "normalcy" at the door.
Besides just patting ourselves on the back because of the technological boom that so recently has gained all this praise, what really counts is being left to steadily decline.
And speaking of technology. In terms of overall benefit, humans do not even rank up there with some of the smallest and seemingly insignificant creatures on this planet.
If it were not for our superior intellect, we would have long ago bowed down to the lowly ant!
Ants are fascinating creatures to watch. They all work together. I mean all of them!
They build, hunt, gather, farm, cultivate, they even keep their own animals!
Any quick observance of them reveals a real organization and order.
Now, I like to watch programs like "Planet Earth" and things like that.
Have you ever noticed how they seem to ascribe all the brilliant designs and awesome things that creatures like ants are capable of to the creatures themselves?
As if they (animals) are somehow aware of some of these amazing feats they pull off insuring their survival?
I mean...how in the world do creatures learn how to hunt and gather and build and conduct themselves agriculturally?
According to the Evolutionists, we didn't aquire this skill until a rather recent 10,000 years ago or so.
To me, and I am just a humble layman, all of these natural abilities that animals have seem to be programed into them!
And you can also observe many other forms of life on the planet...
Whether in the seas, in the sky, or on dry land, you will find that animals thrive.
This is some of the best evidence there is that proves the existence of a Creator.
You can't rationally tell me that these animals understand some of these amazing things that they do!
I mean come on.
For us, we have to study, observe, catalog, analyze, hypothesize, experiment and so on in order to gain just a little knowledge or wisdom.
But, animals. Plain old "dumb" animals conduct themselves in such a way that it can be called wise compared to their human "betters".
So, how come we, the supposed superior beings on the planet are so visibly struggling all the time?
As it is now, if humans never even showed their faces on the Earth the situation all its other creatures are in would only be much much better!
Ok, Bret . . . Those were GREAT posts! (LOL)
How long until I can buy this on DVD or iTunes? I saw it in the theaters and now I can't wait to watch it again!!
Please release to iTunes or DVD soon! I even found myself searching the torrent world for an illegal copy just to hold me over until I could buy one, and you can't even find it there!!! :(
Well dang Joel,
If you can't even watch it illegally?
What does that tell you?
Nobody cares!
Just livening things up a little more!
RandomThoughts,
You made it sound like you think it's pointless to argue with the religious...
I beg to differ, keep screaming into the madness trying to show it just how mad it is... people will be reached, not all but many and the effect will ripple out until rationality can finally take it's place as the height of human virtue.
At 26 years old I just recently de-converted from Christianity, it was a long process to get me to where I finally looked up from what I was reading and said "I'm an Atheist". Talk about a paradigm shift, I was raised by a pastor and finally broke through the superstition of my youth and realized that faith is not a valid reason to believe something, faith is believing despite a lack of valid reasons and often in spite of valid reasons to not believe.
If it weren't for things like Bill's film (and watching it was one of the last steps on the path to my psychological freedom from the tyranny of faith) I'd probably still be a christian, I'd probably still think that I was inherently bad and could only be saved by god.
It also amazes me looking at these comments and seeing how much the religious on here have to stretch logic to attempt to justify their irrationality, and it saddens me to think of the times that I had done it myself.
It baffles me how irritated they seem to get over our not believing in their imaginary friend...
I also beg to differ . . .
Speaking on behalf of most of the religious people on board, we're not irritated at all, and I'm rather enjoying myself. The discussions have been invigorating to say the least. Some things I've noticed is Belief in God carries a more positive mindset. Whereas, disbelief borders on negativity. I have seen far more negative comments, unseemly words, immoral rantings, lack of consideration, criticism, rude, short snide remarks from the ungodly. These are not admirable traits to win anyone over.
On the other hand, it takes self- control not to lash out and retaliate against such immoral and unrighteous rhetoric and still be able to express your point of view in defense of your faith along with research, Biblical and non-Bliblical. That takes patience, not irritation and builds strength, courage and endurance.
It appears to me at least, it takes more of a deep thinker, an open mind to believe in God or at least leave that possibility open while at the same time examining the possiblity of evolution. It clearly takes deep thought and meditation to reason with the logic expressed in behalf of the lowly ant. That was truly compassionate and amazing. Not irritating. It takes appreciation of life and how conditions were created just right to enable us all to live here on this earth.
While there will always be nah sayers, to fellow advocates of faith, remain positive, remain steadfast, remain loyal with love in the spirit of the "happy God" 1 Tim 1:11
prayforbillmaher.com Some of you all need to check out the blog I'm trying to get going as a discussion point on Bill Maher and his life as a public intellectual, and his views on Christian faith. I'm a fan, and I think we who are believers ought to pray for him. A lot of his guests charge right back at him on his remarks. P. Diddy told him "You will believe" when Bill was grilling him on whether he "owes it all to Jesus." This was on the Nov. 14 show.
Joel
It is rather easy to forget about a friend you weren't all that close to in the first place too.
A lot of the newly converted "athiests" always sound like they are putting off a tremendous weight.
But I can understand turning away from a spiritual table that isn't filling or satisfying.
But, just like I told Bill, just because you've found certain versions of "Christianity" wanting, doesn't mean that the Bible has no true author.
God is real, he is One, and he only has One people!
Sure it my be difficult to find them, but they are out looking for You!
Jesus said that he kept wishing he could bless the children of Jerusalem, "but you people did not want it."
Think about it.
Joel--I'm the woman in West Virginia with the site prayforbillmaher.com. I was probably what most people would call an atheist for years. But somehow the seed took root, and it returned. I'm not that great, and certainly not a nasty-nice church lady, but still.
I watched a movie called "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" (Great Movie)
and Ben Stein interviewed a scientist/philosopher who was trying very hard to explain to Ben Stein
how you go from non-living matter to living and the best thing that
this man (and he made it sound like it was the easiest thing in the world to understand) could
come up with was that molecules jumped "off the backs of crystals", he said that was at least one RESPECTED theory!
Now if that isn't stretching logic I don't know what is.
So, I'm going to see just how much I can cover with one post...
Janice, if you find yourself wondering why we can get a bit snippy at times, just remember that we've become accustomed to your side telling us that we're going to hell. The religious far surpass the non-religious in terms of condemnation and judgment, if that's your idea of a 'positive mindset' then so be it, but don't expect that argument to carry any weight with someone who watches the comments from your side.
As you believe in defending your faith with biblical research let me toss a few thoughts your way. You mentioned immoral and unrighteous rhetoric... Have you read the bible? I mean really read it, take off the rose tinted glasses and truly delve into it and the god of the bible is as bloodthirsty as they come, homicidal, infanticidal, genocidal, condoning of human sacrifice, devaluing to women, and encouraging rape.
Off the top of my head... When lot hosted two angles at his house and a mob gathered, instead of the angles just stopping them (they're supposed to be powerful right?) lot has to send out his two daughters to be gang raped by a mob to protect the angles (seems kinda backwards to me) and this is the man that god considered righteous in that city? At the battle of Jericho every man, woman, child, and animal was put to death. Or how about Psalm 137 which reads "Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones", just remember, we don't approve of abortion, but throwing babies and children against rocks is fine... WHAT!?!?!?! And how about exodus 22 where you're supposed to sacrifice your firstborn son to god? If you honestly want to use abraham and isaac to argue that god doesn't really want child sacrifice, just read about jepitath(spelling?) in judges, in order to secure victory in battle he tells the lord that he will sacrifice the first thing to come from his house to greet him after the battle, it just so happens to be his daughter and there is no indication whatsoever that god stopped that human sacrifice. And just remember after all those battles where the young women who hadn't known a man were taken as part of the plunder for the Israelite men that typically part of them were 'set aside' for god (if you're not familiar with it that language typically precedes the sacrifice of the thing in question) and then the one's who weren't lucky enough to be killed for god were a reward for the troops... young women (based on cultural values at the time we're talking likely younger than 15) who had just seen their families massacred were taken to be with these men, i guarantee you there was no consent or love there, those poor girls were raped by men who were told that god was giving the thumbs up.
But now you'll say that's the old testament, and now we have jesus and he's all about love! but in matthew 5:17 jesus clearly said that he was here to fulfill the law and the prophets (exactly what I was just quoting from). Then in matthew 10 he is quoted as saying that he didn't come to bring peace, but a sword (prince of peace my ass) and that he would set families against each other (hurray for good old fashioned christian family values right?).
I could go on for pages on the cruelty and violence of the bible alone but I'll just leave it with that core sample, although if you want a decent breakdown of how verses line up I'd recommend http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/ It really does a great job of organizing the quotes for you.
As to the argument that it takes a deeper thought process to believe in god you couldn't be more wrong, and it sounds like you're arguing from the God of the Gaps tactic. Where science can't prove something yet, it must be god! Which 1, leaves god with an ever decreasing space of missing knowledge to reside in and 2, is nothing more than an admission to ignorance on the part of the one using the argument. Just because someone can't understand a natural principle (natural selection for instance) or can't think of a valid way to explain something else (where did life come from for instance) does not make "God did it" a valid argument. If you ask a scientist something that we don't have an answer for yet the response you'll get is that 'I don't know, we should work up a theory and test it', that is truly the deeper thought process. The desire to find an genuine and natural answer to a question is always a deeper process than just admitting ignorance and saying it must be god. You'd do well to remember that it wasn't that long ago historically when it was believed that it rained because god caused it, the sun rose and set because god was moving it across the sky, that lightning came from zeus, and a myriad of other supernatural explanations for purely natural phenomena.
And yes, there will always be naysayers, for there will always be those who rely on reason and evidence to be convinced and the religious viewpoints lack both.
Brett, you make it sound like you have some idea of my experience with/dedication to christianity and my reasons for leaving. I followed christianity for 26 years before i ever stopped to really look at it's premises, it wasn't a 'certain version' of christianity that i found wanting, it was the entire belief structure underlying every version of christianity. It's also pretty easy to find a 'spiritual table' unsatisfying when there is no food to be had. My rejection of religion came from a rational evaluation of the premises behind it and ultimately i found every argument i could find for christianity (and trust me when I tell you that i was LOOKING for a reason to believe) to be wanting, and faith is not a valid argument, rather the lack of one. Using faith to defend your belief is equivalent to saying that you have no valid proof, but you're going to believe anyway.
Also, I too watched Expelled, and the scientists on the evolution side of the debate weren't given anything that even approaches a fair platform, their views were taken out of context and the science behind them were left out of the movie. FYI, scientifically speaking the crystal theory isn't in the least unsound and still just a theory, but due to the lattice structure of crystals it's very feasible for the initial chemical chains that led to self replicating life to have come together through interaction with a crystalline substrate. Regardless, how is that 'stretching logic' more than to jump to an intelligent creator? The theory of an intelligent creator is fraught with problems. Where did it come from? wouldn't it have to be at least as complex as it's creation? the list goes on but I'm tired and need to get to bed about an hour ago :p
Even if you were to allow for the existence of a creator you still have the issue of which one. there are several religions, all claiming to worship the one true god, but all saying that the others are wrong. The worst part is that none of them have any genuine evidence to back up their claims.
Bottom line, choosing superstition over logic, rationality, and evidence, is never a winnable position. The sad thing is I know even as I finish typing this that nothing I say could ever get through to most of you, and it genuinely does sadden me knowing that you'll spend your life in service to a non-existent being, giving money and time to churches (mosques, temples, whatever the case may be), never really getting just how beautiful nature is without having to attribute it to a creator... and at the end of it all there's just nothing afterward, you'll have spent so much of your time on worthless pursuits, time you could have spent laughing with family or friends, time you could have spent making love to someone you care about, or even just reading a good book or developing a hobby or learning a musical instrument... You say you worry about what will happen to me in the afterlife (an afterlife with no evidence to show it's existence), I say I worry about you missing the only life you get!
If i can be vehement at times, it's because I know how hard it is to break free of the superstitions you were raised with, and I hope that I can get through to even one person and show them that there's light at the end of the tunnel. It's plain natural sunlight, but the air is fresh and the sun is shining, and there's a whole life to live!
Joel
Your proposal that the God the Bible teaches about is blood thirsty is just simply wrong.
How convenient of you to leave the context out of Psalms 137!
What about the Babylonians (The Killers of Israel's children and raper of its women!) who were making fun of the Israelites by requesting of them a song to be sung while they were in captivity?
The Psalm was relating the depth of anguish God's people felt when He decided to punish them by allowing the Babylonians to throw them down.
The Assyrians, the Egyptians, the Babylonians, the Philistines, etc were all remarkably cruel people and enemies of God's people Israel. God saw fit to punish each according to their actions and attitudes.
Also, God never had Abraham sacrifice his son Isaac. If you remember he stopped Abraham's hand by sending him and Angel and a Ram for sacrifice!
The significance of Abrahams willingness to sacrifice his son pictures Jehovah God's willingness to sacrifice His own Son, Jesus Christ, in behalf of all those who would be spared eternal death and be granted as a gift everlasting life!
Also your claim that God condones human sacrifice is quite fellatious!
God hated when people would "let their children pass through the fire" (in sacrifice) and condemned people who practiced such disgusting things.
Jephthah (the man whose name you mispelled) did thoughtlessly vow (and the Bible warns agains making vows to God thoughtlessly) to sacrifice whoever was next to enter the gate.
His daughter was the one who showed up. But this doesn't mean he killed her!
She became "something dedicated to God" and she no longer could live for herself, but for the rest of her life her only concern would be serving God in love. She did this to faithfully hold to her fathers thoughtless vow.
She would not be allowed to marry; this is why her companions sat with her for weeks I think and mourned with her because of her having to remain unmarried. She was not literally sacrificed!
What you are doing highly resembles the actions of those who are called Apostates! Be careful!
Do not be in a hurry to Slander God because this is something He detests!
Satan the Devil did this and has been sentence to eternal death and humiliation! His very name means Slanderer (Satan) and Adversary (Devil).
As to your comments about there being no proof that God exists and that if there was an Superior Intelligence alive, we would have to choose which god was the true God...
Intelligent Design is superior to Evolution in every way!
Those Scientist featured in Ben Stein's Expelled movie were given EVERY opportunity to properly explain how non-life become life.
Their answers and the impatience/irratation they showed reveal the fact: THEY DON'T KNOW.
Whenever all the evidence that Intelligent Design is at work in the Universe is openly displayed, Evolutionist dismiss it because they say there is no "evidence".
I've said it before. There is a long list of factors that make life on Earth possible.
Scientists themselves admit that the idea that all of the Cosmos and it's Order coming about by mere chance is hard to believe.
But enough of that, because you will just make some half-baked rebuttle of it anyway...
Watch yourself! Jesus replied to the insensible hearts of the Pharisees by saying:
"You neither know the Scriptures or God."
He was able to answer all of their questions without contradictions and they were left standing there without a response.
Jesus Christ is alive today and he is overseeing a massive preaching work being done on the Eath today.
This work has yielded real and positive results, restoring order and balance and love to individuals with open minds who rejoice in their hearts everyday; thanking God because they have found the Truth.
All of the hateful and misguided things that you say reveal a heart that is disturbed and confused.
I suggest you continue to research the Bible and confirm whether or not what it says is true.
Of course you think my rebuttals are half baked, they don't agree with your views and they show your book to be in large percentage absolute filth.
Jephthah...
1, His vow is nowhere in the bible said to be 'thoughtlessly' made, and the vow comes only 2 sentences after saying that "The Spirit of the Lord came upon Jephthah"
2, the idea that she went into god's service is a ludicrous attempt to rationalize away what the Bible clearly states happened.
What follows is a direct quote from the NIV.
"And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord: "If you give the ammonites into my hands, whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites will be the Lord's, and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering."
after the battle...
"When Jephthah returned to his home in Mizpah, who should come out to meet him but his daughter, dancing to the sound of tambourines! She was an only child. Except for her he had neither son nor daughter. When he saw her he tore his clothes and cried, "Oh! My daughter! You have made me miserable and wretched, because I have made a vow tot eh Lord that I cannot break."
""My father," she replied, "you have given your word to the Lord. Do to me JUST AS (emphasis mine) you promised, now that the Lord has avenged you of your enemies, the Ammonites. But grant me this one request," she said. "Give me two months to roam the hills and weep with my friends, because I will never marry."
Now, if you stop there I can see the possibility for getting your misinterpretation, however that's not where the story ends...
""You may go," he said. And he let her go for two months. She and the girls went into the hills and wept because she would never marry. After the two months, she returned to her father and he did to her AS HE HAD VOWED (Emphasis again mine). And she was a virgin.
His vow was for a burnt offering, if he did as he had vowed as the bible says he did, then his daughter did not go off into the joyous service of the lord, she had her throat slit and was then set on fire.
That unabridged and in it's entirety is the text of Judges 11:30,31 and 11:34-39. It states implicitly that that poor girl was offered as a burnt sacrifice.
And your argument's about the violence and cruelty of the Babylonians, Assyrians, etc. still doesn't negate the cruelty and violence of the Israelites. Is the context of that Psalm about the Babylonian captivity? Yes, does that change the fact that at the end it says whoever get's revenge on them by should happily kill babies? No, that's still a cold hard fact that you're not addressing. "Happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us- he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks". No matter how you justify it that is absolutely barbaric.
It also in now way justifies the Israelite practice of taking the virgin women for themselves after a battle, these girls were raped (after a portion was 'consecrated for god' a term that when applied to war plunder always means sacrifice) by their captors, forced to become unwilling brides. Yet god never condemns it (even encourages it) but if you even THINK about making a graven image you are SO screwed!
You should also be VERY careful about teasing a prophet...
2 Kings 2:23-24
From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some youths came out of the town and jeered at him. "Go on up, you bald head!" they said. "Go on up you bald head!" He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the youths.
That's not bloodthirsty at all! The kids were calling him bald, they deserved it! Just remember, a curse in the name of the Lord, wouldn't work unless the Lord went along with it.
And modern movies get railed at for 'senseless violence'...
You're apt to see what you want to see in the bible, but the twisted and debased occurs with far greater regularity than the good and noble. And remember, even the wicked things that happened to the Israelites during their captivities were of God's causing, because supposedly he delivered them into that fate.
I'm sure this will be followed by another insubstantial rebuttal where your arguments are poorly defended and I'm called half-baked, hateful, and misguided.
as a side note, if we're on spelling it's not fellatious, it's fallacious.
btw, I'll get to intelligent design later, I've got to get ready for work ;) don't think I've forgotten about your little pet in the pseudoscience community.
Tracy - seriously the only way you will get Bill Maher to go to your pray for Bill Baher website is to show some naket black chicks praying for him. He really likes black chicks...so naked ones with big boobs praying for his redeption would be the best com'mon for your site.
Also, spice up your postings, nothing there was really interesting to read, maybe if you punched it up with Voodom that you guys practice in the Caribbean which is a cross between Voodoo and Catholicism you might get his attention, with a few swings of the chicken over your head.
Good that you went to the touble to set up the site, but it is BORING.
Oops Tracy...sorry I thought you were from Jamaca.
Joel
I welcome you to rationally explain what the Evolutionists so obviously cannot...how you get non-life to become life (something from nothing).
I'm sure it will be interesting.
As regards your half-baked response to what happened to Jephthah's daughter...
Never does Judges say that she was burnt to death as a burnt offering. It does not say that.
It says "as a burnt offering" AS
Remember what the definition of a simile is: blah blah like or AS
It might be hard to believe, but God knows how to use literary devices too! (imagine that)
You want to believe what you want, but it just isn't accurate.
You can call, all of God's rightous decisions bloodthirsty if you want to.
But God's thoughts are higher than your thoughts so the Bible says.
You can call God's actions unjust, but then condone the actions of your own Government who decides who lives and who dies without discrimination (be they man, woman, or child), if you want to.
Cause that's what your going to do, what you want.
The fact of the matter is that God is Holy and you are not. God is perfect and you are not. If God created all life, I think he should be the Judge about who lives and who dies, whatever his reasons may be.
If you want to find bloodthirsty murderers to blame then look around, you won't have to try very hard.
To a large portion of people, life on this Earth is just as cheap as an old pair of worn out sandals.
People don't give a hoot about God until they need him real bad. That's why they cry out "God help me!" when something grave is in their midst.
People treat God like he is some kind of personal gennie who was created for the express purpose of making all your wishes come true.
But when God asks something, something very small, of them! Then they want nothing to do with him. Just like one of those "friends" who only come around when they need something.
I am not saying that you are one of those people Joel, I'm only saying that you sound like one of them.
I posted something like this before, but for your benefit I will say it once more:
You can't take a panoramic picture, cut it into a billion little pieces, piece together what parts you think look pretty, and then act shocked at how ugly the image is that you came up with.
How dare you call God unrightous!
Job, a character far more humble and obedient than anyone living today, was corrected by a person he probably considered to be a young man.
Job considered himself to be more righteous than God because he was distressed (he had lost everything!) and unable to think clearly at the time.
Job humbly made a retraction of his statements when God himself corrected him asking him where exactly where he was when the Earth was created.
Where were you?
You were not even thought of until a couple of decades ago! And yet you sit in the Judgement seat against God himself?
Give me a break. That is why this world is so close to destruction, because it is filled with boasters and posers. People who would not be thankful to a person who took a bullet for him! People who find little petty reasons to unjustly convict those who are in the right. People who simply want to get away with whatever they want to without feeling guilty.
I am thankful to God for the promise He has given to erradicate such a place as this is. A world that makes any reasonable person's skin crawl.
But go on rationalizing and begging off and making excuses. God will let himself be found for but a little while longer. Very soon all of those who paint God as someone wicked and low like ourselves will be silenced for all time.
Regarding Jephthah's daughter:
The Bible says in the latter verses of the account: "From year to year the daughters of Israel would go to give commendation to the daughter of Jeph′thah the Gileadite, four days in the year."
I guess they were giving encouragement to and commending a pile of ash Joel.
Such nonsense.
Words of Encouragement to Tracy and Thanks Bret for covering some of those issues. I will be happy to call you brother, although I feel you already are . . . I am proud of you.
Mr. Joel . . . Really didn’t mean to irritate you. Christians have lives, they work and have families and friends they spend time with, we read books and have hobbies, activities and play musical instruments. We do not make love with whomever for it is a source of STD and against God’s moral standards. So there are some limits and we do not resort to cursing in case we have disagreements. We also don’t feel rushed to ‘live for today for tomorrow we shall all die.’ That’s a sign of hopelessness among those with no hope. Whereas we know and have confidence that we have forever to learn or do whatever we want in life in this world . . . on earth that is.
I don’t know any scientists personally, but I continue to read scientific works some pro and con. I’ve read Sir Isaac Newton’s writings who was a Christian. Charles Darwin also believed in God. In his attempt to explain how the Creator created, his theory of evolution became a reasonable explanation to exclude God . . . Among the nay sayers that is.
Newton and Darwin were considered extraordinary men of their time and their works are still known among us today. They certainly did not argue from a “God of Gaps” theory.
I’ve read the Bible over several times and continue but I’ll try not to make this exceedingly long.:
“From year to year the daughters of Israel would go to give commendation to the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite, four days in the year.” (Judges 11:40 you failed to quote) She was not burned as a sacrifice.
Jesus did not come with a literal sword so the sword meant division between people that would hear the truth and respond to it’s message and those that wouldn’t. Even family members would persecute his true followers delivering them up to be killed by the authorities or government(s). These events did happen to his followers in ancient times where many were killed and the same happens today in many parts of the world. Considering hostilities it may happen on a worldwide scale in the near future before Jesus returns.
Concerning Lot - to be truthful, we don’t really know if he really meant to give over his daughters. Being that the mob was pressing in on him and due to the stressful situation he may have misspoke. It’s not like we have never said things we didn’t really mean to say. Or it may have been a diversion to stall the mob long enough to get back inside for protection. We do know the angels came to his aid and blinded the mob. When Lot comes back in the resurrection we can be sure he is going to get a lot of questions.
God not only has the right as Creator and Supreme Sovereign of the universe, but he is also obligated by justice to execute or authorize execution of the lawless, to war against all obstinate ones who refuse to obey his righteous laws. God was therefore just in wiping out the wicked (and their children) at the time of the Flood, in destroying Sodom and Gomorrah, and in bringing destruction upon Pharaoh’s forces.
The Israelites were appointed the sacred duty of serving as God’s executioners in the Promised Land to which he brought them. God also allowed and directed other nations to war and take into exile the Israelites when they failed to abide by his laws and standards of worship which they had agreed to. This doesn’t mean that all the wars or battles the Israelites fought were sanctioned by God or that everything the Israelites did was right. However, they were allowed to take virgins among some nations as wives or concubines. Any children resulting from them were considered legitimate heirs. The Bible does not hide the good, the bad or the ugly. Whatever feelings, emotions or Psalms (songs) people had including a song wishing for God’s vengeance upon their enemies or children, these were also not hidden.
“O daughter of Babylon, who are to be despoiled, Happy will he be that rewards you With your own treatment with which you treated us. Happy will he be that grabs ahold and does dash to pieces Your children against the crag.” Psalm 137:8, 9
That doesn’t mean the people that died in these ancient battles or wars will never live again. Jesus said there would be a resurrection of the righteous and the unrighteous. Perhaps millions of people from former times and the recent past will be resurrected.
Questions Though: War was a result of man’s sin in an attempt to rule himself and the world. It is in man’s nature therefore to war whereas God it’s not? Is the anger at God whom one doesn’t believe in more than toward government or nation(s) that kill numerous populations during our modern time? God has no right to kill for man sets God to higher standards . . . (?)
Should God just stay out of earth’s affairs and let men nuclear holocaust themselves into oblivion? In the final war God promises to “bring to ruin those ruining the earth.” Rev. 11:18
None of us as imperfect creatures have a right to live, that’s why we die. God allows us to live for a short period of time. We are to uphold the standards and principles of law given to the Israelites as a guide. Today, God does not direct any nation or government to serve as executioners of his divine will and neither do we offer animals sacrifices as the Mosaic Law was set aside. Jesus fulfilled the laws therein whereby imperfect humans could not. There will be no war in God’s new world. To show that we are good candidates Jesus was also sent as an example for us to follow as peaceful persons.
I didn’t want this to be long but what the yeck . . .
It’s not only logical but rational to question the existence of God. That’s why God gave us brains, to think, wonder, ponder, meditate on the meaning of life, why we are here and why we live such a short time, get sick, grow old and die. If you ask anyone if they would like to stay young and healthy enjoy a good life I’m sure there aren’t many to say that’s not so.
Faith comes easy for some people but for many it doesn't. Every child grows up to distinguish between fact and fiction. A rabbit lays eggs and a fat jolly man in a red suit brings you toys you didn’t ask for, God put people and animals in a boat and flooded the whole world. A paradise lost and a man named Jesus cured people, made them walk, eyes once blinded see and raised people from the dead. You’re going to burn in hell and give me your money, that will relieve your conscience.
There are so many lies planted in the world, it’s hard to accept any truth. The truth that Jesus did die to restore everlasting life to imperfect humans, peace and paradise by means of a new administration or government. The choice is between continuing to search for truth and giving up on that truth. Truth leads to everlasting life. Lies lead to despair, hopelessness and eternal death. God doesn’t stop anyone from believing a lie if that’s what they want to do.
One last Blog here tonight.
Being people of faith we have to think positive of ourselves without thinking we're so bad we can't do anything right. God calls his people precious jewels.
We have to take a healthy view of ourselves and look at the humble servants of God from the past and see they were declared perfect by God. Not because they were perfect at all but because of their love for God in doing his will.
We don't have to think we're bad people, but be remindful we are sinful in nature. Sin means missing the mark or imperfect. We don't deserve life but because of God's love we are here.
We must try not to becomehaughty or arrogrant in speaking with people or say things to hurt them. As the Bible says to think of everyone as superior to you and follow Jesus example in helping others. That way we don't have to think so much about ourselves or not measuring up.
Lilith, HAHHAHAHAHA. That is so true. prayforbillmaher.com is SOOO totally boring. I'm looking for all the action up yonder. I will have to think about that. And I think I can edit your ideas into some fun stuff. Thanks for the tip.
Bill Maher’s "RELIGULOUS"
Reviewed by
Craig J. Hazen, Ph.D.
Biola University
Comedy tastes change over time. I'm sure a water-squirting daisy on a jacket lapel was a riot in its day. Knock-knock jokes kept me and my friends pretty entertained in second grade. And I'm sure Henny Youngman would not get the same laughs today if he were still alive doing stand up.
The new film Religulous starring comedian Bill Maher (HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher) and directed by Larry Charles (Borat, Curb Your Enthusiasm) seemed to fall pretty flat in the laughs department—like it was appealing to an audience that may have been amused by it twenty years ago. I was struck by how little laughter there was among those in the opening-weekend crowd. (In terms of magnitude, I use the word "crowd" here in the sense of the "crowd" that might attend a Joe Biden campaign rally.) Religulous was showing in the smallest theater in the multiplex (not much bigger than the "truck-driver's chapel" that appeared in the film) and even then it was only about a third full.
It was pretty clear that the few folks attracted to the movie were already fans of Bill Maher and his open hostility to all things religious. Why, then, so little laughter from them? I think it's obvious. Anyone who fits that strange "I'm smarter than Blaise Pascal, John Milton, C.S. Lewis, Maimonidies, and Averroes put together" mold has already had his laughs. After all, anyone who is able to work a TV remote control has immediate and never-ending access to some of the strangest displays of human religiosity imaginable on global network broadcasts. Those who get affirmed in their irreligion by watching such things have already tuned into the craziness many times to reassure themselves that believers are some fully evolved species of super kook. They do not need Bill Maher to replay it with a new soundtrack. The movie audience seemed pretty bored—and rightly so. They'd seen it all before on their own living room TVs.
Well, if it's not very funny, then what does it have to offer? Nothing, really, except a chance for Maher and Charles to make a fast buck (glad I got my ticket for free). Maher is pitching this film as mavericky—telling the truth about religion that everyone else is afraid to address. But Religulous is nothing more than filthy, nudie, druggie, and obtusey. There is little to laugh at and nothing to learn (except maybe that if you quit being religulous you get to act like Caligulous).
Christianity gets more than two thirds of the attention in the film. Were there any thoughtful and penetrating objections to Christianity in the film? No. Did they interview any thoughtful and accomplished Christian scholars. No. The closest they came to this was an interview with renowned scientist Dr. Francis Collins whose segment in the film made almost no sense indicating that they had butchered it down to nubs in the editing room.
Maher does bring up two points that are argued on occasion by knowledgeable opponents of Christianity. These are 1) that the New Testament was produced generations after the events they record, and 2) that the basic story of Jesus is simply a retelling of myths that predated him, myths that came out of Mitharism and Egyptian religion.
The latter argument is itself a retelling of the myth re-popularlized by Dan Brown in the The Da Vinci Code. Bill Maher and Dan Brown made the inexcusable error of never actually consulting experts in these ancient religions—or even doing a brief Google search. For instance, Prof. Gunter Wagner has set forth the conclusion of the evidence attempting to link Christianity with Mithraism. Writes Wagner, "Mithras does not belong to the dying and rising gods, and no death and resurrection ritual has ever been associated with this cult. Moreover, on account of the lateness of its spread, there is no evidence of the Mithras cult influencing primitive Christianity."
As for the idea that the New Testament was written much later than Christians have traditionally believed, again, even a cursory study of the facts of the case would be helpful to people like Maher who claim to have objections based on evidence. It has been for many years the consensus of most modern scholars—believers and skeptics alike—that the Gospels were written in the latter half of the First Century AD The most common date ranges for the authorship of these documents are 70-80 AD for Matthew, 60-70 for Mark, 70-80 for Luke, and 80-90 for John. Since Jesus departed earth around 30 AD, these dates of authorship all fall into the generation that had first-hand contact with the events recorded. Maher simply seems to buy the popular mythologies and unquestioned assumptions that often pass for knowledge about early Christian history.
If a careful examination of the evidence did not drive Bill Maher to his conclusions about Christianity, then what did? Maher is wide open in the movie about the religious environment of his childhood. He was raised in a religiously schizophrenic home with a Roman Catholic mother and a Jewish mother. He attended mass and Catholic school until he was thirteen when his family suddenly stopped. His mother said it was because she and her husband were tired of feeling guilty about using birth control. It wouldn't be a stretch to propose a causal relationship between the way Maher's family treated Christianity like a semi-useful fiction and Bill's adult conclusion that Christianity is bunk. It reminds me of the great atheist of last century, Bertrand Russell. We really don't get much in the way of substance when we read Russell's famous book, Why I Am Not a Christian. But we seem to get far greater insight about Russell's rejection of Christianity when we read his less famous autobiography. Like Maher, Russell's dysfunctional religious upbringing seems to be far weightier than any rational argument in moving him to godlessness.
If there is one important lesson for Christians of all sorts to learn from this movie it is this: we have got to start talking differently about "faith." Unfortunately, we have let the secular world and antagonists like Bill Maher define the term for us. What they mean by "faith" is blind leaping. That is what they think our commitment to Christ and the Christian view of the world is all about. They think we have simply disengaged our minds and lept blindly into the religious abyss.
The biblical view of saving Christian faith has never had anything to do with blind leaping. Jesus himself was fixed on the idea that we can know the truth—and not just in some spiritual or mystical way. Rather, he taught that we can know the truth about God, humans, and salvation objectively. That is, the very best forms of investigation, evidence, and careful reasoning will inevitably point to God and His great plans for us. The early church learned well from the Master because they too were fixed on the idea that they knew that Jesus was raised from the dead and that we could know it too. The Apostles never made any room for interpreting their experiences of the risen Christ in some mystical or fictional fashion. As the Apostle Peter put it, "We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty" (2 Peter 1:16).
What we mean by "faith" is not blind leaping that is oblivious to the evidence, especially evidence to the contrary. Rather faith in it's biblical context is trust grounded in objective knowledge. Faith is trusting that which we can know to be objectively true. I run a graduate program in Christian Apologetics at Biola University in which we train students at the highest levels to give compelling reasons for their faith. Maher did not knock on our door. But unfortunately, I think many of the Christians he interviewed would be surprised to learn that there is a robust knowledge tradition in Christianity. I long for the day when a guy like Maher would never consider making a film like this because it would be so difficult to find Christians that he could hound and hoodwink.
Maher and Charles successfully put some of the goofiest strands of the Christian movement on public display for cinematic ridicule. Great skill, intellect, or cleverness, that did not require. The greater feat would be for the two documentarians to jump out of their own shallow presuppositions and prejudices to get a fresh look at what has made Christianity attractive to some of the greatest minds in human history. But I think it's a good bet that they don't have a sequel like that on the drawing board.
This may sound harsh but have you two ever heard of a concordance?? And bret, even if god did write the bible he sure as hell didn't do it in NIV English!
Honestly, reading your critiques (and i'm using the word generously here) of my arguments leaves me with the conclusion that there's no point in my continuing arguing with the irrational, you will come up with any straw to grasp at justifying your irrational belief in a god with no evidence in his favor.
Just so you know why your views on Jephthah are so foolish...
1, using an English simile...
First off you mean metaphor, second off, as I stated above, the bible was not written in English and the word 'as' doesn't appear in the Hebrew (or the KJV for that matter. In the Hebrew the actual phrase that we translate to "it shall be the lords and I shall offer it up as a burnt offering" comes from the 3 words "Yehova 'alah 'olah". Direct translation is Lord as the noun, 'alah as the verb of offer up, and 'olah meaning burnt offering (note that in the old testament this word is used for burnt offering 264 times and burnt sacrifice 21 times). THERE IS NO AS IN THE HEBREW THERE IS NO LITERARY DEVICE, honestly that's probably the worst argument I've ever heard to justify a bible verse.
2, the notion that the other women went out to 'commend' her is again ludicrous, and I'm really curious what version of the bible you're referencing... honestly... The Hebrew for what you're viewing as 'commend' is the word tanah in the infinitive peil tense. directly translated it comes out to lament. do you lament someone who's alive??
I'm not going to waste my time with someone who calls me half baked while arguing their interpretation based on the idea that the word 'as' in the English version of the bible qualifies for a metaphor (you can't even get your English terminology right, why should i expect you to understand the Hebrew). Buy a freaking concordance and learn what you're talking about. I honestly might as well be arguing with a wall, if you want to waste your life in the service of your imaginary friend go right ahead, but don't be surprised when your half-assed arguments get mocked.
Janice, you seem like a nice enough person, know that my venom is directed at bret, his condescension, arrogance, inability to even check his own facts, and lack of understanding that English metaphors don't apply to a Hebrew text have... irritated... me. As far as the making love issue, I would passionately argue that making love is something that you simply CAN'T do with 'just anyone, by the very nature of the term it's an action that can only be done with someone you truly care about. I am by no means celibate, but I am careful who I sleep with, I have to have a genuine emotional connection with the woman and care about her a great deal, I don't waste my time with one night stands or friends with benefits, but if I'm in a relationship with someone I care for I see no reason not to enjoy that aspect of the relationship in a responsible way.
By definition 'fucking' is something you can do with just anyone. 'Making love' has the prerequisite of love being there.
Also, living for today is not hopelessness, there's nothing at all hopeless in seeking to get as much as you can from every moment in life. After all, life is a string of moments, some good, some bad... Draw joy from the good, and learn from the bad..
Oh and by the way, Darwin was in no way shape or form a Theist. The deathbed confession is a ridiculous myth and completely unsubstantiated.
Thank you Johnathan . . . I can only say that was a brillant and excellent, a good intelligent read and very pleasurable to the mind and senses. We God people certainly can use your level-headedness and calm demeanor.
Some but not all of the atheist, agnostics that have left God and Christianity entirely. Therefore God has left them and they are angry, hostile, mean spirited and rude. It's our parents responsiblity and the church to teach us about God however, what they know and learned was handed down to them and may not have been correct either. But as adults we have the responsibility to learn and search for truth ourselves. We are no longer children and should not act like little brats whinning about what our parents said and did or that God is mean. There's a reason for everything under the sun. And God is not far off from anyone. Thanks for that suberb commentary. Let me get back to some other posts before work.
One other thing Johnathan . . . I had posted recently some quotes from Sir Isaac Newton and Charles Darwin. Sir Isaac being Christian and Darwin was attempting to construct how God created and his theory was developed without God by atheists. Sir Isaac wrote concerning the 1000 year administration of God's kingdom whereby the earth shall be inhabited by humans ever forever.
These men were certainly more intelligent and wise than any of the disbelivers including Maher himself. I don't think he or others here have an interest in really researching or reading beyond what they intend to believe.
I'm speaking of these quotes below:
There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved." (1859) Charles Darwin Lived 1809 - 1882
This comment he made long before he died. Also this comment he made:
“To suppose that the eye could have been formed by natural selection seems, I freely confess, absurd.”
These quotes and many of his writings can be found on the web. What I want to know if you could see through the eyes of the Father of Evolution that he had a big problem with it himself.
The existence of God was never doubted until our modern era.
Sir Isaac Newton's quote again for any that missed it earlier. "the earth shall continue to be inhabited by mortal [humans] after the day of judgment and that not only for 1000 years, but even forever." Sir Isaac Newton was an avid scholar of the Bible and he came to understand through research and study that Jesus would return to institute a new world through God's kingdom.
These men were far from being crazy idiots or daydreamers. So with your power of reason go back to what you know and what you don't know concerning the things Jesus said and did in Matthew, Mark, Luke . . . The message of God's kingdom was his main teaching and from the beginning of Genesis to the climax of Revelation, that message is still there. Please
Thank you Janice for you commendation. Thank you Jonathon for you rational critique of the biased views of Bill Maher and the unfair way he portrayed God's Word.
I was quite irrate when I last posted to Joel, and I must ammend my statements.
I cannot assume that he is an evil person, but he surely is misguided.
He and people like Bill Maher have been wronged in the strongest possible way.
Because of this worlds disgusting lust for money and greedy ambitions, even some of those who would be God's representatives have fallen into Satan's hands.
They have preached only for a profit, and have butchered the Word of God for their own interests.
I have posted several times that Bill Maher did portray a large portion of "Christianity" in America as it truly is.
There is a large amount of hypocrisy out there, and the result of their unrighteous works are people like Bill and Joel.
They are victims of circumstance.
But people like Bill go too far in assuming that there is NO God whatsoever!
Any real study of God's word lets you know that the world would be filled with false information of the Christ and God's purposes in the Lord's Day.
Even when the Bible was being completed, either Paul or Peter said that the world had already seen MANY anti-christs!
And Jesus illustration about the Wheat and the Weeds aptly pictures the troubled world we live in today.
Many false Christs have been planted in among God's true representatives.
The false has become so prodigious that it is hard to distinguish between true and false!
But Jesus explained his illustration to his apostles and he let them know that the ones who would be doing the reaping would be ones with a keen eye (namely angels) and they would easily be able to distinguish between a Weed (False Christian) and the Wheat (True Christian).
After they have grown to maturity they would be gathered, all the wheat and all the unproductive weeds.
The Wheat would be placed into the Storehouse and the Weeds would be pitched into the fire!
Such will be the case when Christ comes to inspect the Earth and put things right on the Earth.
All those who are misleading billions of people, getting to think that either God will let them behave however they see fit, or to conclude like Maher that there is no God,
all of those "blind guides" will answer for their error. And God will Judge.
However, for the time being God is being patient with all those who are really searching for the truth.
All those who have to claw themselves away from the imitation Christians who make it so hard to find God.
In a sea of darkness it is hard to get around. But keep searching for the light! And there is no light burning brighter in our time than all those who have truly given themselves into God's service, the Jehovah's Witnesses.
They are making efforts and leaps and bounds that are altogether incomparable to all the rich and obnoxious spiritual leaders who are leading their flocks to the slaughter.
Just as Jesus preached: in modest clothing, without straying from the Scriptures, not by himself, and armed with love
So are they doing today.
If you walk into a Kingdom Hall you will be greeted by a portrait of smiling faces: black, white, brown, yellow, squinted eyed, tall, short, fat, skinny, you name it!
There will always be substantial discussion of the Scriptures and their meanings.
And if you do not understand something, they offer you a FREE Bible study, and will come with you to your house or anywhere you feel comfortable. And they expound upon all the wonders of God's Word so that in time you will get to understand.
They go about the task of explaining God's word in a way that always gives God his due respect and Holy portrayal.
All of their explainations make sense when you have an open mind and are really searching for answers that don't go contrary to the Bible.
They do not beg for your money!
You can choose to give a donation voluntarily and discreetly if you wish by putting it in one of the small boxes they have for donations.
And the way they use the money is by either sending it for disaster relief efforts (many of them travel far to help rebuild some of their fellow christians houses and recently they spent the money to buy large amounts of supplies for flood victims--I thought was just AWSOME!),
they use the money to enhance the production of their literature, they use it to build Kingdom Halls
(their own preachers voluntarily get together and build places of worship BY THEMSELVES! sometimes completing it within a day or two),
they use it to send help to those of their Brothers who might be struggling because of low monetary conditions in their nation.
What I found to be the icing on the cake was that none of their high-quality preachers (and I mean these guys are experts!) are paid!
All of their efforts are completely voluntary!
If you read the Gospel you will see that Jesus commanded his disciples not to expect to be paid for their preaching efforts! He said "you recieved free so give free".
These people are the only ones I know of to practice this commandment in all honesty!
I was and am so impressed by them.
If it were not for them I would probably be in jail or dead right now.
And I definetly would not be on God's good side.
I feel like if someone like myself can be given the depth of hope that I have now, anyone can benefit from these people.
They truly are God's people.
And one last thing about them before I have to go:
They are truly United!
No matter what state or city you are in in America or even if you are in a completely different country, if you enter a Kingdom Hall you will recieve the exact same teachings and worship!
They even sing the exact same songs on Sunday all around the World!
Even it is your first time their they greet you as if you were long lost brothers!
I am making NO EXAGGERATIONS!
"To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of Spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei ["the voice of the people = the voice of God "], as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certain the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case; and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, should not be considered as subversive of the theory."
GET YOUR QUOTES RIGHT!
This passage from Darwin in "On The Origin of The Species" is frequently misquoted by creationists (and their counterparts in intelligent design) to cast doubt on Darwin's certainty of his theory. However when what you quoted is taken in context of the entire passage, and the following several pages describing a gradual evolution of the eye, it clearly shows that the part about absurdity was a literary device used to draw the audience in before showing them how it really works with his theory. He even makes the case of how it once seemed absurd that the earth revolved around the sun!
With regard to the closing lines in Origin, among scientists it's not uncommon to find deistic references, however confusing Darwins words with a view in theism is ridiculous. Darwin was a self admitted Agnostic in his later years and while he maintained membership in the church of his youth he clearly asserted that he did not have a Theistic belief.
"Science has nothing to do with Christ, except insofar as the habit of scientific research makes a man cautious in admitting evidence. For myself, I do not believe that there ever has been any revelation. As for a future life, every man must judge for himself between conflicting vague probabilities." Darwin
For further reference...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin's_views_on_religion
The Father of Evolution did not have a 'big problem with it himself' and to assert that he did is to take an interpretation of his quotes (out of context and abridged) which completely lacks any justification.
As far as Isaac Newton is concerned I have no problem conceding that a brilliant person born in the mid 1600's would very likely have believed wholeheartedly in a Monotheistic God. That was the culture of the time and to believe otherwise would quite frankly have been dangerous.
The reason the existence of god is being so greatly doubted in our modern era is due to the prevalence of scientific explanations for the previously unexplainable. In the full scope of history it's only been recently that we realized that the earth wasn't flat, that the stars were actually massive balls of super heated gasses (simplistic explanation, I know...), and that the earth revolved around the sun. With a literal biblical view of the universe the picture is laid out as thus... The surface of the earth is in the center, above that is the firmament (believed to be a physical substrate) through which the sun, moon, and stars move, and when it rain's it's because the windows of the firmament are opened by God. Above the firmament is Heaven and below the surface of the earth is hell. This is the sum of the literal biblical text's on cosmology. Up until recently in history it was thought that EVERYTHING happened because of god, if it rained it was because of god, if it didn't rain it was because of god, if you were sick it was because of god, if you were healthy it was because of god, if lightning fell or if the wind blew it was because of god. The world of the bible is incredibly superstitious and it has only been with the enlightenment where science has become a method for explaining the way the world far better than a simple 'god did it'. This is why the modern age is leaving behind the childish superstitions of our forefathers and seeking natural explanations for a natural universe.
As an aside, I've personally always found that a deeper understanding of the sciences of cosmology, biology, chemistry, evolution, physics, and astronomy have only served to deepen my appreciation of the beauty all around me, knowing how it works makes it that much more amazing to me... I look at a tree and I can picture it's cellular network delivering water and nutrients from the soil to the leaves and understand how it could have evolved to be that way and it's a wondrous and beautiful thing!
Bret,
I didn't realize you were a Jehovah's Witness... that would explain a great deal of my frustrations in discussing scripture with you.
Joel, I like your posts. Are you in the media? An academic? Very smart and fun to read, and with two kids under two under foot, I am trying to do other things and I keep checking on you. The others are spouting off what we all tend to hear in church, and I wish someone could appear who could talk to atheism in a meaningful, smarter way. (It isn't me.) Did you know that the most famous atheist alive converted at the end of his life. Do you know his name? prayforbillmaher.com
Believe me Tracy, the things posted here are not discussed in Church and never will. They don't explain scripture in details. But they can teach you how bad you are and how bad you'll burn.
I'm beginning to wonder if you are praying for Bill or want to join him.
Tracy, No not in the media, and I have yet to finish a degree, but I read voraciously and make a habit of challenging my assumptions. I am also active in the Freethought community and am becoming more outspoken all the time.
As far as the end of life conversion thing is concerned, based on the popular legends I've heard and the recent posts here I'm guessing you're thinking of Darwin. If that's the case it's a common misconception spread among religious groups and there is no substantiating evidence behind it. Furthermore Darwin wasn't an Atheist in the strictest sense but preferred to view himself as an Agnostic, as far as to what degree his Agnosticism was (there's a wide range of Agnosticism with the key difference being the probability you assign to the existence of a theistic god) I do not know. I do however know that the large majority of those who consider themselves to be agnostic consider the probability of a theistic god to be quite low.
I myself, while preferring the term Atheist due to the less vague nature of it, am in the strict sense an Agnostic in practice. However this is in the same sense that I'm an Agnostic about Santa Clause, Unicorns, and the Tooth Fairy. Neither they nor a Theistic god can be completely disproved to exist but I consider the probabilities for their respective existences to be in the same realm.
The key difference between my view and the religious view is that I truly am open to being proven wrong, and there are numerous things that I can think of off the top of my head that would do so unequivocally.
Off the top of my head...
1. Fossilized specimens of modern animals in the Precambrian geological period (the realm of the trilobites).
2. Watching an amputee healed to the extent where I see an appendage grow back where there was none.
There are numerous similar occurrences that could convince me utterly that I was wrong. However none of these things are happening and don't seem at all likely to happen.
However if you ask a large percentage of Christians, "Theoretically speaking, if we had a time machine available and could travel back and see the crucifixion, and none of the miraculous events around it occurred (the tearing of the curtain in the temple, massive earthquake, unnatural darkness, corpses rising from their graves), then sit outside the tomb where Jesus was buried and wait, and wait, and wait, and see that there was no resurrection. Would that change your mind about your beliefs?" That large percentage would say that it would not change their beliefs, and that comes from the very nature of faith which is choosing to accept something as fact in spite of a lack of evidence or evidence to the contrary.
You know that God exists because the Bible says so. You know the Bible is true because it's the word of God. You know it's the word of God because the Bible say's it's the word of God. The word of the God you believe in because the Bible says he exists.
The entire foundation of Christian faith is circular reasoning.
"Believe me Tracy, the things posted here are not discussed in Church and never will. They don't explain scripture in details. But they can teach you how bad you are and how bad you'll burn.
I'm beginning to wonder if you are praying for Bill or want to join him."
They won't explain the scriptures in detail because many people couldn't accept the entire bible as anything even approaching moral or righteous. It amazes me how much fear of punishment and shame are used to keep people sitting in the pews and paying their dues, while God owns the cattle on a thousand hills and lives in a city paved with gold 'He' (note the sexism inherent in that simple pronoun... I've always wandered, does God have a penis??) still needs 10% of your income! Where do you think all that gold came from anyway!?!?
After all, no matter how much you preach about love, "But they can teach you how bad you are and how bad you'll burn." is at the true heart of Christianity. The belief that by our very birth and existence we are worthy of damnation. The view that no one can be good on their own.
The twisted sense of justice that required the death of an innocent man to atone for our sins (I could never in good conscience allow someone innocent to pay for a crime I committed, but what could I know about justice, I'm just a worthless sinful human after all). This arrogant view that anything we could do could be offensive to a being as far above us as God supposedly is.
Add in that we know know through science that the majority of our choices (read, sins) come from a combination of our biology and the circumstances of our environment, these are factors that an all knowing God should be able to see, so how is it that we are punished for being what he made us?
Where is there justice in someone being punished for the circumstances of their birth? If you take a literal reading of the bible then you are left with the inexorable conclusion that Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, and Taoists are all going to hell, but sociology has shown that religious beliefs are largely a product of geography and family lineage. How can there be any justice in that? I already know the counter argument that will invariably come up about how we mere mortals can't possibly comprehend the mind of God. Even then I would challenge that, for how can it be that our 'limited' sense of justice and righteousness can find so many things in the bible offensive? Shouldn't God's view of these things be Higher than ours? Not just more mysterious? So why in so many places does the morality of the god of the bible stand in such stark contrast with the morality accepted by all but the most debased and degenerate of modern people? You'll fall back on bromides to argue against this point, but you'll never find a way to counter it outside of the argument that we can't question god, which truly isn't an argument but the complete lack thereof.
"I'm beginning to wonder if you are praying for Bill or want to join him."
I rather hope she want's to join us. It's a rarefied air above the smog of faith and dogma. Join the realm of enlightenment, FreeThought, and honest inquiry, where every question is answered and explained to the best of our ability, where the lack of an argument is never accepted as an argument. Anytime I see someone break free of the shackles of faith I rejoice, celebrating another liberated mind stepping into the light of day, often for the very first time!
Come join us! We have cookies and punch!
;)
"It was just recently we found out the World wasn't flat"
If the proponents of this idea had only read their Bible thoroughly then they would have come to the right conclusion hundreds of years ago.
Isaiah 40: 21-23 says...
Do you people not know? Do you not hear? Has it not been told to you from the outset? Have you not applied understanding from the foundations of the earth?
There is One who is dwelling above the circle of the earth, the dwellers in which are as grasshoppers, the One who is stretching out the heavens just as a fine gauze, who spreads them out like a tent in which to dwell,
the One who is reducing high officials to nothing, who has made the very judges of the earth as a mere unreality.
Isaiah was a prophet of God who truly did know that the Earth was not flat!
He even knew what people would look like if you could see them from above referring to them as grasshoppers!
Joel
If you were not in such a rush to prove the God is a liar then you would be drawn to Jehovah's people.
I may not be perfect and I may sound pompous to you, but if you do an in depth study of these people and come away with anything negative at all, then you are simply on a quest to spread lies.
You have a hard time talking to me about the Bible because you don't have the right attitude about it.
Like I have stated before I am not a Jehovah's Witness,
I do attend their gatherings and I have observed a lot of things that I am impressed with, and I do have a desire to become one of them.
I have learned so much while I have been in their company that I have come to the conclusion that these people are alright.
If you go to one of their meetings with an open mind and heart you will see what so many other people find to be impressive about them.
They have been so unjustly portrayed in movies, tv shows, in the media and in other churches.
But Joel, how can you critique a people that you don't even know and have no desire to get to understand?
You didn't give me any feed back on the wonderful things I told you they practice as far a not having paid preachers and using their donations for righteous causes, and their unity.
And as regards the Bible that I am quoting from:
It is called the New World Translation and Jeopardy says that it is the most accurate translation of the Bible!
The only objective of most Atheists is to convert people to the same unhappy state of mind that they have adopted.
In Ben Steins movie Expelled: the man who was in the glasses and Texan attire sounded as if he was ready to kill himself saying something like:
"Once I began to believe in evolution, I came to the conclusion that there was no real meaning to life"
"You are here and then you are gone."
He sounded soooo depressed!
Also they brought out in the movie how MOST people once they start to believe in Evolution become Athiests!
So is the theory of Evolution's real purpose to proliferate Atheism?
It seems that way to me.
Brand names like this Dawkins fellow have stopped fighting against their arch enemies the Intelligent Design people, and have started a wholesale fight against God himself!
In regards to the excuse used that the "Bible wasn't written in English"
Extensive research has been done and Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek portions of the Bible have been translated accurately.
The New World Translation has been converted to a long list of languages to better accomodate all those seeking the truth about God.
Namely:
The complete translation the Holy Scriptures is available in Afrikaans, Albanian, Arabic, Cebuano, Chinese (Standard, Simplified, Pinyin), Cibemba, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English (also Braille), Finnish, French, Georgian, German, Greek, Hungarian, Igbo, Iloko, Indonesian, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Macedonian, Malagasy, Maltese, Norwegian, Polish, Portuguese (also Braille), Romanian, Russian, Serbian (Cyrillic and Latin scripts), Sesotho, Shona, Slovakian, Spanish (also Braille), Swahili, Swedish, Tagalog, Tsonga, Tswana, Turkish, Xhosa, Yoruba, and Zulu.
The Christian Greek Scriptures (commonly known as the New Testament) is available in American Sign Language, Brazilian Sign Language, Armenian, Bulgarian, Chichewa, Efik, Ewe, Hiligaynon, Italian Braille, Kinyarwanda, Kirghiz, Kirundi, Lingala, Ossetic, Samoan, Sepedi, Sinhala, Slovenian, Sranantongo, Thai, Twi, and Ukrainian.
Joel . . . Tracy is free to join you in your frame of thought if that's what she really wants to do. God does not force anyone to worship him.
It takes more than praying for someone on a forum to be a Christian. It requires taking in knowledge and being prepared to defend your faith. Not being shy, laughing, running into a corner, hypocritical and denouncing people that are trying to support you while others mock you. As we say, 'you don't want to cut off your nose to smite your face.' That doesn't make sense.
Of course God wants us to ask questions or he would not have written a book to give us answers.
It is difficut to say the least to understand sin or the difinition of sin. I've heard some say 'Nobody had to die for MY Sins!' Or maybe it's hard to believe we are so bad that someone had to die for us. Yes that is hard to understand . . .
We all die because we inherited from the first man a sinful or imperfect condition. Adam died and paased on this condition to his children. He could not get everlasting life back for himself or his children. He had become imperfect and it would take another perfect man like Jesus to restore life. Jesus had the right to live forever on the earth but he gave up that right. His one perfect life bought back everlasting life for humans in the future during the 1000 year government ruled by Christ.
The Bible also tells us we did not sin as Adam did but his condition spread to all of us:
"Death ruled as king from Adam down to Moses, even over those who had not sinned after the likeness of the transgression by Adam . . . by the trespass of the one [man] death ruled as king through that one" . . . "That is why, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men becase they had all sinned." Romans 5:12-17
Sin was something that was spread or inherited or ingrained into the human race from the first man. God could have destroyed this man, however, we would never have been born. Sin = imperfection It doesn't mean what Adam did deliberately we are also guility of.
We cannot attribute to God what our first father did wrong. God did not create an imperfect world, Adam did. He had within his ability as a free moral agent to create an evil imperfect world. There are some very good Rabbinical writings concerning this issue on the web. Perhaps Tracy can add her thoughts on this as well.
There is also no reason to think God will destroy a whole world of people without givng them due warning. Noah preached for years before the flood and people mocked him going on about daily life eating and drinking, marrying and such. As Jesus proclaimed: "This good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come." Matt 24:14
Everyone whether Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Christian, will be given the opportunity to choose between the government of man or the rulership of Christ. There is a worldwide preaching work going on concerning that kingdom now that will climax.
So it is this kingdom that I am publishing to you and to everyone that is willing to hear it and receives it.
Bret your posts are so refreshing, it's like coming up for fresh air.
Yes, Joel, I did post from a website away from the original quote I had. The problem is with these particulars:
"Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certain the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case; and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, should not be considered as subversive of the theory."
If you notice there are a bunch of can's and if's for these conditions to fit Darwin's theory. That's why he called it theory. It's not fact like the law of gravity. In other words, he has no proof. In his attempt to show how God created, he stated:
"There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved." (1859)
The Bulletin of Chicago's Field Museum of Natural History commented: "Darwin's theory of [evolution] has always been closely linked to evidence from fossils, and probably most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument that is made in favor of darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true." Darwin "was embarrassed by the fossil record because it didn't look the way he predicted it would . . . the geologic record did not then and still does not yield a finely graduated chain of slow and progressive evolution."
In The New Evolutionary Timetable, Steven Stanley spoke of "the general failure of the record to display gradual transitions from one major group to another." "The known fossil record is not, and never has been, in accord with [slow evolution]." Niles Eldredge: "The pattern that we were told to find for the last 120 years does not exist."
Darwin theorized "that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certain the case"
has not been shown to be the case. There is no proof the world mutated into being. A fly mutates in variation, but is still a fly. There is no proof a fish mutated into an ape and then mutated into a human being. We still have apes, we have human beings and we still have fish.
So as Darwin said: "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of Spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree"
I guess the next issue is: Would you like to discuss the fossil records or what proof of scientists can be included as exact proof?
Thanx Janice
Joel
Myself, I am still waiting on that in depth explaination of how you get something from nothing, er non-life to life...
It promises to be interesting and I wish you would shed light on the subject. Please reply
Janice, thank you--remarkably insightful. What I don't want is to associate with the Christians I know and have known, in general but not specifically, and I hasten to add that in my own way I may be worse than any of them. My husband and I, both believers in terms of the five doctrinal fundamentals, non-denominational--keep to ourselves even in the church we attend. Unlike my associates, I don't think it's a sin to see or support this movie. I think it's a necessity. And that doesn't make nice conversation at coffee and desert at Bible study.
Bret, I'm disinclined to do the scientific research for you when you would be unwilling to listen to listen to or accept any result that didn't completely concur with your assumptions. I will however point you in the right direction.
First, you need to understand the process by which fossils are formed and the fact that an incredibly small number of the insects, plants, and animals which have inhabited this planet ever became fossils.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossils
http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/evolution/blfaq_evolution_evidence15.htm
http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/fossil.html
http://www.carnegiemuseums.org/cmag/bk_issue/2000/marapr/feat7.html
http://www.agiweb.org/news/evolution/
It's honestly not worth my time to present a well researched thesis here when the only other people commenting are disinclined to hear anything that argues with their holy book. I also already know the superstitious arguments you would invariably use to mock every scientific attempt I made to evaluate the fossil record and the data about the age and composition of the earth. My personal favorite has always been "God made the fossil record showing stages when he created the earth because his glory is in 'confounding the wise'".
FYI, I've known some very nice Jehovah's Witnesses, they tend to be pretty decent people and my comments about it weren't about them as people rather about their religious views which even as religious views go are pretty far out there. In honest comparison they fall right behind Scientology and the Mormonism... You really can't argue the historical bible with a group that has their own personal version of it which is divergent from the historical texts.
Your critique of my "the bible wasn't written in English" argument never addressed the fact that it was brought up to point out that you're application of an English literary device was completely ridiculous when there is nothing in the original text to imply that the issue was at all metaphorical.
Your arguments are weak, your rationalizations are fallacious, and you expect a far higher degree of evidence from the natural world than you do from your supernatural religion, even in light of the fact that there is NO credible evidence for the supernatural.
You claim a supernatural world exists. You claim there is a theistic deity which is beyond the realm of the natural world to evaluate. Your very premises are set up in a way to be unfalsifiable in any way shape or form, and this does not mean that they are not false, just that you semantically remove them from the realm of study. Whereas science has the natural world and experimentation to back up it's claims, and we don't know everything yet as science is still a new study but anytime we admit ignorance on a subject and propose to study it you jump in and say it's God. The onus is on you to prove the existence of god and in that debate the scripture due to its unverifiable and contradictory nature is excluded as a proof.
Consider this, there is no more evidence for the deification of Jesus than there is for Jehova, Allah, Brahman, Vishnu, the deification of Buddha (he was definitely a very wise man though and said some brilliant things as did Jesus), Zeus, Apollo, Aphrodite, or any other god or goddess who has been assumed to exist by it's followers.
I was looking into Wikepedia about the New World Translation and while looking at the Critical Review I did come across people who find the translation to be "intellectually dishonest".
I considered such statements to be biased, because earlier it was brought out that the translation uses startling colloquial and vernacular. I looked these words up and they mean:
"Characteristic of or appropriate to the spoken language or to writing that seeks the effect of speech; informal."
This shows that the translators of the NWT did their best to convey the meaning of the Greek, Aramaic, or Hebrew text!
Further along in the Critical Review of the NWT in Wikepedia said this:
"In his review of 9 bible translations, Dr. Jason BeDuhn states that the NWT is a ‘remarkably good translation’. He also states, “While it is difficult to quantify this sort of analysis, it can be said the NWT emerges as the most accurate of the translations ... judging by the passages we have looked at"
!!
Oh and
Nice Cop Out Joel
cop out, right... i could say the same every time you resort to the bible instead of forming a rational argument against my premises.
Tell ya what, i have to go to work now and I've got a date tomorrow night, so I'll be busy until then... seeing as how i work 3rd shift and have the rest of the week off after tonight, after I get home from my date I will present a rational explanation and evaluation of the main arguments I have seen today including the discussion of initial life. This will likely comprise several pages in MS word and will be broken down into numerous posts. Also, in all likelihood you will disagree with everything I say on principle and have nothing resembling a rational argument to bring against me, relying solely on the bible and the argument that you're right and I'm wrong. If you can defeat my premises philosophically and scientifically I will be quite frankly amazed.
Janice
Babe, you need to go to Wikepedia in you spare time and read the Critical Review of the New World Translation Bible!!
It is so faith strengthing!
*snickers*
Joel
If you can do a better job of the "Grand" scientist did in Ben Steins movie be my guest.
By you last post it seems like you are already starting to make excuses.
Do a better job and I will eat my hat
Thanks Tracy, I apologize if I was out of line. Remain firm in your resolve to serve God. Although I wouldn't waste good money, I've mostly responded to Mr. Maher's appearance on the Huckabee show.
Oh Bret . . . (lol) You're making me laugh. I'll check it out. Send me a link here or in my private email.
I am sorry Janice
I don't have your email, but all you have to do is go to Google, type in New World Translation and click the response by Wikepedia on the search.
That's the best I can do. But it really is worth it.
I may need to take a rest but a few other thngs in my head this morning.
I'm almost afraid to say Muslim in here for fear I'll offend someone. But I'm reminded whenever I ask certain ones questions about the Quran or hadiths they can't answer I'm told go to a website or speak to a real scholar. If that doesn't work, come to the chat room - Islamic that is where you can convert online and arrograntly proclaim 'No one had to die for my Sins!'
Jesus never said he should be worshipped, only God.
A referemce work the Historians' History of the World observed: "The historical result of [Jesus'] activities was more momentous even from a strictly secular standpoint, than the deeds of any other character of history. A new era, recognised by the chief civilisations of the world, dates from his birth."
"Even calendars today are based on the year that Jesus was thought to have been born. "dates before that year are listed as B.C., or before Christ", explains the World Book Encyclopedia. "Dates after that year are listed as A.D., or anno Domini (in the year of our Lord)."
Zeus, Buddha, Vinu couldn't even accomplish that feat.
I know that Mormons like Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe God is a trinity just as the Jews believe Yahweh was One Person and God only. They may also share the teaching of Jesus crucification and ultimately Savior of the world. However for the most part I think Mormons and Scientologists follow the traditions of most religious celebrations such as Easter, Christmas, Halloween, etc . . . and Jehovah's Witnesses do not as these celebrations were not a part of early Christianity but Paganism.
I'm looking forward to reading about those fossil collections.
I've never argued that Jesus didn't have a large impact. Although how the use of his (inaccurately stated) birth year in the calendar in any way correlates to the validity or lack there of for your religion I have no idea.
Try not to get impatient as I will be seeking to address a great many arguments with my following post and it will likely be a day or two from now before I finish it. See, while you are apt to rely on just one book for the bulk of your arguments I have to draw my sources from many of the scientific fields and have a great deal of information to condense into my arguments. I intend to address scientific, philosophical, and moral arguments as well as show exactly why Intelligent Design in no way qualifies as a part of science, philosophy maybe but hardly science. I'll also delve into the origins of ID as well as it's predecessors in the attempts to bring creationism into the classroom.
Honestly, I should go so far as to thank you for pushing me to the point where I felt this was justified as it gives me a good excuse to gather up my thoughts on these matters into a concise document.
Should you have any particular arguments that you'd like to see addressed feel free to list them and I will endeavor to cover them.
The reason it will take some time is because this basically qualifies as a research paper for which I will need to draw from all of the fields I have sought knowledge and understanding of.
Hummm . . . ok I understand Joel. (LOL) Yea I guess we only need one book and decent research of archaelogical finds and historical records.
Basically, what I would like is 2 or 3 pieces of evidence acceptable by all scientists that evolution is a fact.
And could you post what evidence you have that Jesus year of birth is inaccurately stated. I think everyone knows that December 25th is actually the Sun god's birthday. Also the year of Jesus birth does not in itself lend validity to my faith. The prophecies foretold hundreds of years in advance the exact year Jesus become Messiah the Leader and began his ministry. Coupled with other prophecies that came true such as in immediate succession, Cyrus the Great in conjunction with Persia overthrew Babylon and was foretold never to be rebuilt. The king of Greece immediately next! I believe the first form of democracy . . . These many prohecies and those surrounding Jesus confirmed by historians does indeed lend validity to my "religion" or faith.
Joel
You don't have to write a research paper!
All you have to do is explain to me in what way and process gets life to begin out of nothing.
It stands to reason that if life exists now it always existed in some form!
Focus your research on that.
Also remember to bring into context the way that all things just happen to work a certain way.
What exactly is the true nature of instinct?
Are scientist going to argue that the animals really understand all complex mechanisms that perform in order to insure their survival.
For example: When baby turtles are born, why do they know to make a B-line for the ocean before they are all eaten?
Also, the surviving turtles, having been at sea all their lives, how do they know how to get back to the precise location of their birth in order to give birth?
Does it not stand to reason that such things have been programed into these creatures in order for them to survive?
I think these assertions are perfectly reasonable and within the standards of rationality that serious proponants of evolution seem to need to shrug off!
If machine works, and fulfills some substancial task, does it make since to assume that the formation of the machine is a result of random occurances not at all influenced by an outside intermediary?
Oh, I'm sorry . . . that was 66 books actually combined into 1.
I was going to post he exact same comment.
It isn't like the research of the Bible itself isn't a great deal of work too!
Oh Joel, I forgot one thing. The scientists just in the last few years concluded we all descended from one Black women in Africa. I'm going to look it up again, but I would like to know if you heard anything about this.
Scientist that take up the thickheaded view that "Evolution is a fact" are skirting around all the deep holes and gaps its theory in no way attempts to bridge!
In my opinion they are all more than a little full of themselves.
As Solomon says: "the wise with the stupid"
Then they say: "oh, their simply is no evidence that legitimizes Intelligent Design. We theorize on what can be observed!"
Well, in all observable cases life always begets life.
No matter if the said organism is sexual or asexual. It already possesses life and so can bestow life upon another of its own kind!
Also observable is that the things that are inanimate remain so.
So all evolutionists who use this twisted logic are being disingenuous!
They are simply running away as fast as they can from all the issues that poke so many holes in their trusted theory that it may even prove fatal to it!
Another thing I have been meaning to get to is the lifeforms that largely get ignored by all these overqualified guessers:
Plants
Plants eat(sunlight and some actually trap small insects), drink, breath, and reproduce sexually
Of what benefit was evolution to say apples? for instance
Today I think there are something like 150 different kinds of apples.
Going from the common descent and natural selection theory, in what way and at what point did say an apple tree need to evolve into a banana tree? Or a banana tree into an apple tree?
And also like animals, if all forms of plants all have a common anscestor why do we have such an astonishing array of different plants and different types of the same kind of plant?
Also, doesn't it seem extremely coincidental that the two forms of life, sentient and stationary, relate symbiotically through the exchange of oxygen for carbon dioxide?
Spin your wheels on that one!
http://intheparish.blogspot.com/
You guys are too smart for me. I do the prayforbillmaher.com website. But the above link will take you to a Lutheran theologian's review of the movie. Pardon me for thinking it's a great review, as I am sure you will pick it apart, but it was fair, and being fair matters in life. Cheers! Tracy
I just saw this: sdrain "an Open Letter to Bill Maher" You make me SICK. You are dumb as a hog, really. You are right, he will go to hell. But after that you stop being right, you become an agent of the evil you denounce. Those websites? Please. I used to be a Baptist and the preacher made me break up all my Leif Garrett 45s, and made me into an atheist for years (the message, not the Leif Garrett stuff). Being like you is not unlike going through an Ayn Rand phase in your life. You go through it and then you get over it. Also unlike immature Ayn Rand adherents, you need therapy. Psychotherapy. prayforbillmaher.com
Don't post on my blog. I will not approve it.
Bret I understand now why you haven't been getting my emails as well as others in the forum. Under properties your email address is: Bret noreply-comment@blogger.com (LOL)
I thought everyone was afraid to answer me. Anyway you can send me a mail at janice_am@bellsouth.net. I guess Joel on his date . . . I forgot to ask him who is he dating.
Ok Tracy I'll check it out as soon as I can perhaps tomorrow.
Bret, I have lot of questions for Joel but I'll save them for later. It's been awhile since I was in biology science and such. You got me to thinking though. Can you tell me please when did the cell become a plant? And did the plant become a fish? Did the fish become the ape? And when did the ape become a man? Where's the proof of this?
Janice
I believe you are addressing me.
I am not sure when evolutionists claim that the primordial soup or crystals or whatever produce plant cells!
That's what I am drawing attention to.
In the evolutionists endeavor to explain the Origins of Life, they tend to leave out our "stationary cousins" in favor for delving into the eventual formation of animal cells.
As you might remember from biology class, plant cells and animals cells are quite different.
Plant cells have a cell wall vs. animals cells cell membrane.
In either case it is a flying leap to go from crystals, prebiotic soup, or any other theoretical device to things as complex as cells.
One thing I am sure the evolutionist do think though is that plants and animals remain separate.
I think...
But, sticking with life beginning in the seas concept:
Things like algae and sea plants would have to have formed first, otherwise what nutrients do the first animals have to feed on?
Ok, this my last post tonight, it's after 12:00 . . .
So Bret if you are up and not too tired, you seem to explain things more in lay terms . . . , are they saying that plants evolved separately from the animals? I thought they said all life came from one cell, mutations yadda yadda yadda.
And where does the big bang theory fit into all this?
As per Joel's previous backing of the crystal structure thingy:
Yes, crystals and things do reveal a remarkable organization such as lattice patterns due to the way different molecules combine together.
One of my favorite experiments to perform when I was a child was to leave a little suger water on a saucer and come back in the morning.
If you take a magnifying glass to your results, you will be amazed at the patterns made from the crystalization that takes place as a result of evaporation.
That is one thing.
But the structures found within each living things cells, DNA and RNA (plant or animal) go well beyond crystalization in complexity.
Take for instance blood cells:
Dr. Michael J. Behe explains in his book, "The Edge of Evolution" about the specific orders of amino acid in blood.
Hemoglobin, constisting of Alpha chains and Beta Chains of Amino Acids can be radically altered by ONE change in the sequence.
In Beta Chains if at position number 6 out of 146 amino acids, a single change occurs,
this causes the blood cell to take on a "sickled" appearance, affecting all the blood cells with this change(mutation) ability to stick to one another (sickle cell disease)!
All the characteristics of the way our body's cells and plant cells opperate are dependent on different ways in which amino acids are sequenced.
What the formation of amino acid chains has to do with crystalization is beyond me.
Each cells nucleus is stocked with bundles of DNA encoded with information that tells the cell what it should do.
But where do you get information from?
Janice
I really don't know if they are saying that plant life and animal life do evolve on separate lines
But all of the info that I have seen seems to imply this.
The problem is that in getting so caught up in their lengthy explainations, they fail to be specific!
And all of this evolution stuff is supposed to be after all the conditions in the Universe formulate just right so that evolution can blossom
If it sounds far fetched, it usually is!
If you were looking from the outside in, it would sound like the Big Bang Theory and Evolution are unrelated.
I don't have that much problem with the Big Bang mechanism.
Astronomers have proven through their study of light waves that the universe is expanding implying a beginning.
I like to think of the Big Bang as a tool God used in order to construct the Universe.
But because evolutionists are such respected Scientific figures, often times their beliefs spill over into all areas of Scientific research: Astronomy, Chemistry, Biology, Physics, etc.
Take for instance the way they come up with such large figures when they estimate the age of humankind.
It is assumed that our anscestors were less than human, and so can be traced back farther in time than can be reasonably proven.
I often times turn down the volume on or turn off an otherwise quite interesting program because they start saying things like:
(In a Hushed Voice) "At this point in history, our anscestors gained an edge because they began to stand erect and vision became the main sense instead of smell."
I have to sigh in disgust. And wait for a different segment of the program.
This is wholesale propoganda!
If the idea that man evolved from apes has not in all respects been proven, then Scientists should not be allowed to get away with tacitly ingraining the concept into every area of serious research.
They state it as if the debate has long been concluded and this isolates a large and growing number of people in the audience who have to sigh and listen to what they consider to be garbage.
Huh! . . . (smile) I'm better off believing in the tooth fairy. At least there have been sightings of UFOs.
Yea, I know what you mean about those shows. I tend to turn the channel as well. Funny how we are alike. Lies hurt my ears.
OK, now I'm really off to bed.
Oh P.S. I guess you're considered my favorite pet, but really the truth flows much more smoothly and is wise and intelligent.
Saw the movie and laughed at the Jesus "checklist" with Osiris and Horus and other gods but was surprised to learn that most of those facts come from a book by A. Acharya and are poorly supported. Many of the references stem from poor knowledge of original languages or the use of vague texts which are not corroborated by specific texts. If you're going to "market doubt" then the least you could do is find credible sources rather than make sources up. Propaganda has no place in historical accounts. Otherwise we might as well call ourselves playwrights who reflect the opinions of a person and not their actions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLLNZ2Vnt7U&eurl=http://freethoughtfortwayne.org/&feature=player_embedded
OMG, that's just too damn funny!
Honestly this last round of comments from you two shows how much of a waste of my time it'd be to try to educate you, I'd literally have to start with the basics of the theory of evolution and work my way from there, and from what you've said even then you wouldn't listen to a word of it as you're already convinced that your book is more accurate than anything science can show.
I could show examples of where we have a great deal of the fossil record, one of the best developed records is in the Equine (horses) branch as is well covered here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equine_evolution. However from your comments you won't accept anything short of a complete fossil record showing every stage for every species and to expect to find that is just ludicrous. Fossils are a rare occurrence relative to the number of life forms on this planet, and we can't exactly unearth every square foot of this planet looking for them, but new ones are found fairly often and a great many of the gaps getting us to where we are now have been filled. The fossil record is not inaccurate, simply incomplete.
The notion that scientists should have to prove every aspect of a principle before it can be taught in a classroom is ridiculous, especially coming from someone who wants to throw the supernatural into the science classroom. None of science has been 'proven' even Newton's laws are being found to conflict in places with what we know of Quantum Mechanics, but the very foundation of science is to find natural explanations for the phenomena of the universe, and to present theories in such a way that they are falsifiable. There are things that would be considered evidence enough for falsification of Evolutionary Theory, but none of them have been found and there is a plethora of evidence in favor of Evolution.
Intelligent Design by its very definition is not a scientific principle because it is not falsifiable. Before you misunderstand me, that's not a statement of truth, ID could be wrong in every aspect and it would never be provable due to the fact that in light of further evidence discrediting it (and there is plenty) the argument would invariably come back that "the creator just made it that way". We could have a fully complete fossil record and that still wouldn't be enough for ID proponents to concede because at the heart of it ID is biblical creationism in a fancy dress. Several of its key principles have already been discredited such as the concept of Irreducible Complexity, whereby the argument is made that a feature of an organism would be unable to function if any part of that were removed. However through the gradual stages of natural selection the 'scaffolding' used to get it to where it is gets removed. I'll explain the scaffolding analogy in a moment. Once such example of a (now) completely useless remainder of evolution that once served a valuable purpose is the Human Appendix, postulated to once have been vital in the digestion of a primarily leafy diet it has since shrunk to nearly nothing and is only important when it goes wrong and kills you.
Vestigiality is one of the biggest holes in ID, where is the design in the closed over eyes of the blind mole rat? Where is the design in the Appendix? Where is the design in the wings of an Emu? How about the vestigial legs and unused pelvic bones of whales? There are species of cavefish and salamanders that have eyes with no sight, is that designed? Boa's and Pythons have vestigial pelvis remnants, Crab's have small tails that serve no purpose, female Gypsy Moth's are incapable of flight yet still have small wings. To top it off fruit flies can be bred in experiment to have useless vestigial wings. It seems like a pretty un-economical design when vast sections of our DNA are non-coding and serve no purpose, referred to as 'Junk DNA'. All of this is consistent with Natural Selection and an embarrassment to Intelligent Design.
If you want vestigiality in Humans specifically here's a few examples beyond the appendix. The Tailbone is the remnant of an actual tail, during roughly 4 weeks of embryonic development fetus's actually have a clear tail which is later absorbed back into the body, and the tailbone itself is formed of 4 fused vertebrae. There are also cases of Humans being born with a remnant tail, some of these are just soft tissue, but others contain cartilage and even vertebrae, the most documented was 5 vertebrae and the longest tail on record was 9 inches. How is that design? The continued presence of 'wisdom teeth' even though they are often rather problematic is another look at the evolutionary process as our jaw's have decreased in size from our earlier ancestors. There's more than just that too, and similar factors are present throughout the animal kingdom.
Some references before I get back to the 'scaffolding'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vestigial_structure
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junk_DNA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigiality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tail#Human_tails
Now, the 'scaffolding' argument... It's often difficult for some people to comprehend how a very complex organism or organ could get to where it is now without help. This is where the principle of irreducible complexity arises, stating that some organs, organisms, etc (the term organ will be used to cover all these for brevity's sake) are so complex that if you removed any one part of it the organ would fail to function. It is true that the current result of some organs is such that it requires all of its constituent parts to function, but that's only an argument for its current form. By way of analogy, consider an arch in architecture. For visual reference I'll refer you to the top right image on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arch. If any one of the stones in a completed arch were removed the arch would fall. So how did the arch get there? Could it be that IF a deity existed it could just snap its fingers and 'poof' the arch appears? Sure, why not, if you want to settle with an supernatural unscientific explanation.
However it's much more logical when you understand that the arch is built using wooden scaffolding to support the stones until the Keystone is set in place, at which time the scaffolding is removed and the arch holds. For the sake of analogy, the scaffolding here is the incremental steps of natural selection, whereby one variant of an organism is better able to survive and reproduce leading it's genetic sequence to dominate the species. Once it reaches the point where the 'scaffolding' genes and structures are no longer required for it to function properly, those genes and structures begin to disappear as they are no longer providing an advantage in the breeding pool (just like our appendix which USED to be a necessary part of our body). So after Natural Selection (the scaffolding) has gotten to the functioning Organism (the arch), the 'scaffolding' is no longer required and removed by the same process of natural selection. And honestly, if you can't grasp that then I really don't know how to simplify it further.
If you want references go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity#Response_of_the_scientific_community some of the sources there are the scientific critique of Behe's arguments, I noticed you referenced him earlier. In case you think it's just the atheists out to get the theists, you should know that one of Behe's and ID's most vehement critics is a professing Christian theist, Ken Miller. Speaking of whom, if you want ways to reconcile the truths of science with your desire to believe in a theistic god, I'd highly recommend his books, he's an excellent scientist and is able to reconcile scientific evidences with his beliefs without having to grasp at straws and claim that every gap in scientific theory is 'god'.
For some good information from the scientific side I'd recommend the book "Intelligent Thought".
A brief outline of the history of ID... ID is and always has been an effort by the religious right (with the discovery institute playing a key role) to get biblical creationism back into the science classrooms. This started with the attempt to get pure biblical creationism accepted, when that failed they moved onto 'Scientific Creationism' which again was seen for what it was (religion) and excluded from the schools. After that The Wedge Document was written.
http://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_strategy
The Wedge Document was the initial proposition for the Intelligent Design theory. Again, religion attempting to get into the science classrooms. Honestly, I'd have no problem with ID being discussed in a philosophical course or a course on religion, because that's what it is, religion and philosophy. There is no 'science' to ID at all and to propose that supernatural claims count as science is downright preposterous, we might as well allow teaching on psychics, astrology, and transcendental meditation into the science classroom. Superstition and the supernatural have no place in science by the very definition of what science is.
I already know you won't be convinced that there wasn't a creator, by simple virtue of the fact that faith by definition is an absence of evidence. Hopefully you'll at least give up the faulty notion that the fact that evolution is still an incomplete theory (all scientific theories are by definition incomplete and evolution is no worse off than most of what's commonly accepted as fact) means that it's an inaccurate theory, because it is very accurate and with the exception of a very small number of scientists the scientific community is in agreement that this theory is sound. There are still some of the finer points to be hammered out, the same can be said for pretty much all of astrophysics, quantum mechanics, and medical science, but the theory of evolution is just as sound as the others.
For a critique of Expelled including refutations of the allegations that the scientists in his film were treated unfairly visit http://www.expelledexposed.com/
I’d also highly recommend the podcast ‘Point of Inquiry’ which is available on iTunes. While it does cover religious and evolutionary issues they also have other great programs on skeptic thought. One that I listened to the other day which I enjoyed very much was an interview with Alan Dershowitz, who goes around the world evaluating and testing the claims of miraculous icons (crying statues etc.). My understanding is that he too is a religious man and wrote a book ‘Blasphemy’ about how there’s a fine line between icons and idols.
For further research on evolution I’d recommend Jerry Coyne, Massimo Pigliucci, Richard Dawkins book ‘The Ancestors Tale’ (regardless of what you think of his religious views, the man is an excellent writer), and Barbara Forrest.
P.S. I didn't even cover all the arguments I had originally intended and MS Word has this at 3 and 1/4 pages single spaced... All in all a fun exercise for me :D
A great quote I just came across on humanism and the freedom from religion.
A HUMANIST THANKSGIVING PROCLAMATION
by Robert Green Ingersoll
When I became convinced that the universe is natural–that all the ghosts and gods are myths, there entered into my brain, into my soul, into every drop of my blood, the sense, the feeling, the joy of freedom.
The walls of my prison crumbled and fell, the dungeon was flooded with light and all the bolts and bars and manacles became dust. I was no longer a servant, a serf or a slave. There was for me no master in all the world–not even infinite space.
I was free–free to think, to express my thoughts–free to live my own ideal–free to live for myself and those I loved–free to use all my faculties, all my senses, free to spread imagination’s wings–free to investigate, to guess and dream and hope–free to judge and determine for myself–free to reject all ignorant and cruel creeds, all the “inspired” books that savages have produced, and all the barbarous legends of the past–free from popes and priests, free from all the “called” and “set apart”–free from sanctified mistakes and “holy” lies–free from the winged monsters of the night–free from devils, ghosts and gods.
For the first time I was free. There were no prohibited places in all the realms of thought–no air, no space, where fancy could not spread her painted wings–no claims for my limbs–no lashes for my back–no fires for my flesh–no following another’s steps–no need to bow, or cringe, or crawl, or utter lying words. I was free. I stood erect and fearlessly, joyously, faced all worlds.
And then my heart was filled with gratitude, with thankfulness, and went out in love to all the heroes, the thinkers, who gave their lives for the liberty of hand and brain–for the freedom of labor and thought–to those who fell on the fierce fields of war, to those who died in dungeons bound with chains–to those who proudly mounted scaffold’s stairs–to those by fire consumed–to all the wise, the good, the brave of every land, whose thoughts and deeds have given freedom to the sons [and daughters] of men [and women]. And then I vowed to grasp the torch that they have held, and hold it high, that light may conquer darkness still.
While I'm at it, another great quote on humanist ethics in the absence of a belief in god by one of the great philosophers, Bertrand Russel, FYI, I highly recommend his book 'The Conquest of Happiness' for everyone, no real religious undertones but really does an amazing job with the topic of happiness.
"United with his fellow men by the strongest of all ties, the tie of a common doom, the free man finds that a new vision is with him always, shedding over every daily task the light of love. The life of man is a long march through the night, surrounded by invisible foes, tortured by weariness and pain, toward a goal that few can hope to reach, and where none may tarry. One by one, as they march, our comrades vanish from our sight, seized by the silent orders of omnipotent death. Very brief is the time in which we can help them, in which their happiness or misery is decided. Be it our to shed sunshine on their path, to lighten their sorrows by the balm of sympathy, to give them the pure joy of never-tiring affection, to strengthen failing courage, to instill faith in hours of despair... let us remember that they are fellow sufferers in the same darkness, actors in the same tragedy with ourselves. And so when their day is over... be it ours to feel that, where they suffered, where they failed, no deed of ours was the cause."
^always gives me goosebumps...
The Bertrand Russel quote was titled "A Free Man's Worship" from the book 'Why I Am Not a Christian'
Thank you Joel for those posts, also Vicar Mike. I enjoyed your writings/poems a bit. I'm still trying to decipher your analogies. So before I respond I'll keep reading over them carefully. I'll get back maybe by tomorrow.
I've gotta say Joel
Your answers were very in depth, but also very political.
Whenever politicians don't like the way commentary is headed they quickly throw sand in the eyes of whoever they're up against and obviously change the subject.
All of your answers sound exactly like all those evolutionists who don't have a good answer pertaining to the subject of spontaneous generation.
I noticed that you commented on Behe but failed to refute any of the rational conclusions that he came up with regarding the near infinite indications of design when breaking down the workings of the cell.
Instead of answering the valid question of whether evolutionists say plants and animals supposedly evolve on different lines,
you first try to reduce Janice and my credibility by saying how little we know, but then don't even attempt to exploit our "faulty" info.
So I'll come right out and ask YOU.
Do evolutionist say that plant and animal cells "evolved" separately from eachother?
or do they say that all life, including plants, evolved from a single cell.
Your answer please...
Also regarding the information I posted about the huge differences it makes if you try and reorganize amino acid chains.
This arguement is fullproof!
I think for evolutionists, especially those like Richard Dawkins, it is a daggar waiting to be driven in completely.
Now, I know you will just say that I did not attempt to refute any of the info that you posted,
but if you will remember YOU were the one who suggested that we give you some kind of idea of what kind of answers we are looking for SO THAT WE CAN BE CONVINCED!
You talk about how ID is dressed up creationism.
How come it seems like I've heard this before?
It is the only real arguement that evolutionists like to use over and over again against the idea of Intelligent Design.
But, here, listen to this reasonable (and quite Scientific) info that is devoid of any "religious nonsense":
British astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle has spent decades studying the universe and life in it, even espousing that life on earth arrived from outer space. Lecturing at the California Institute of Technology, he discussed the order of amino acids in proteins.
“The big problem in biology,” Hoyle said, “isn’t so much the rather crude fact that a protein consists of a chain of amino acids linked together in a certain way, but that the explicit ordering of the amino acids endows the chain with remarkable properties . . . If amino acids were linked at random, there would be a vast number of arrangements that would be useless in serving the purposes of a living cell. When you consider that a typical enzyme has a chain of perhaps 200 links and that there are 20 possibilities for each link, it’s easy to see that the number of useless arrangements is enormous, more than the number of atoms in all the galaxies visible in the largest telescopes. This is for one enzyme, and there are upwards of 2000 of them, mainly serving very different purposes. So how did the situation get to where we find it to be?”
We know that there are right-handed and left-handed gloves. This is also true of amino acid molecules. Of some 100 known amino acids, only 20 are used in proteins, and all are left-handed ones. When scientists make amino acids in laboratories, in imitation of what they feel possibly occurred in a prebiotic soup, they find an equal number of right-handed and left-handed molecules. “This kind of 50-50 distribution,” reports The New York Times, is “not characteristic of life, which depends on left-handed amino acids alone.” Why living organisms are made up of only left-handed amino acids is “a great mystery.” Even amino acids found in meteorites “showed excesses of left-handed forms.” Dr. Jeffrey L. Bada, who studies problems involving the origin of life, said that “some influence outside the earth might have played some role in determining the handedness of biological amino acids.”
“These experiments . . . claim abiotic synthesis for what has in fact been produced and designed by highly intelligent and very much biotic man in an attempt to confirm ideas to which he was largely committed.” —Origin and Development of Living Systems.
Joel
All of this info is very sound,
and in constructing an argument against it,
please refrain from simply stamping your foot and pulling out your hair.
CONVINCE me that I'm wrong
YOU GO MIKE VICAR. More please.
prayforbillmaher.com
Tracy Herz
If the mathematical probabily that amino acids spontaneously organized themselves (magically)
is represented by a number so large that it exceeds the estimated number of atoms in the entire known Universe,
Then the idea that the amino acids have been organized and sequenced by an outside influence (namely a Creator) is altogether a more rational arguement!
How come evolutionists are allowed to get away with overlooking something in their own theory that is mathematically impossible?
Those were very good reasonings Bret . . . I just love it when your write. (hehe)
I have quite a few thoughts and questions to throw back at hum and his clever idolizing poets but I'll wait first until he answers you.
I saw Religulous and thought it was great ... right on , and I am a Christian ..... and thanks Bill for ridiculing the entity that deserves it - HUMANS .... and even though you did make a few wisecracks at Jesus ( He is NOT the problem ) , over-all you did a great job .... and fair .... in my opinion , there is definately a God and a Jesus .... no doubt whatsoever in my mind .... and they deserve respect and honor as our creator .... but man's idea of "religion" is hogwash 90% of the time , and nothing more than a power and money grab in the name of God ...... I recommend the movie to ANYONE , and Bill , I KNOW you simply seek the truth , and want some answers .... You won't find truth in most churches .... especially the big wealthy religions ..... they have fallen from truth because of greed ...." Sow a seed of faith and we will get you out of debt " balogney ..... " Send us your money , and we will pray over it " C'mon people , WAKE UP !!!!! You are being "had"
To Joel
First I want to thank Janice for some of her very good comments.
To Joel, if you go back one page you can read about how I got saved. I will not repeat that again, but I will tell you I wasn’t raised in a Christian home. I’ve been saved for 23 years now, and my parents still haven’t accepted Christ. To be honest I haven’t read through everything you have written, because some are just so dark and negative. I read your quotes from the atheists. One thing that is very important to remember is that true Christianity is NOT a religion. It’s NOT a set of rules and regulations to live by. If that’s where you come from, I understand why it didn’t satisfy you. Legalism and religion is contrary to what Jesus came to give us. He came to give us life and true freedom. You are 26 and I was 30 when I got saved. There were no limits to what I was allowed to do. Nothing was sin as long as it was good for me and I didn’t hurt anybody. But what I discovered in my 20’ was that I felt like I was dead inside. And I knew I wasn’t free. I really longed for freedom more than anything else, more than love even. And I mean freedom within. In my teenage years and in my 20’ I was “free” to drink, smoke, to have sex with anybody I would feel attracted to without limitations. I was “free” to express my opinions. I was raised in a country where you are encouraged to have a critical mind and not except authorities. But let me tell you, I was NOT free. The more I lived this lifestyle the more depressed, the more darkness I started to feel inside of me. And I started to seek the truth. Christianity was not my first choice. I looked into writings from so called wise men from India for example. My life began to really change when I started to read the Bible.
The way you refer to the Bible tells me that you don’t read with an open heart to the truth. You seem to be trying to find fault with God and faith. That’s not how I read the Bible. I was desperate for help. I was tired of my life, of all the shallowness in the bars and the circles of people where I was living. I just knew there’s got to be more to life than this. If you read what I wrote before, you will also see that I was a teenage star in my country. I was touring, recording doing TV etc. I was making a lot of money to begin with too. But I always felt like, there’s got to be something MORE. This can’t be it. I had done everything already when I was 25. You know the Bible is not like any other book. The words in it are alive, it’s a living word. Do you know what that means? Have you ever experienced the word coming alive in you? If you haven’t, I have to say, you have totally missed the point. You may have grown up in a “Christian” environment, but if you have never received the truth in your own heart, you don’t know what you are talking about. I think that sometimes being in that kind of an upbringing can actually make you “immune” to the real thing. If all you see are hypocritical behavior and not the real joy and love through people, that can be very devastating.
God led me to a church after I got saved that was full of God’s revelation, life and love. I mean I could truly see Jesus Christ in people. AND I could truly feel Him working through me. I felt His love through me to people that I in the natural would never, ever even care for. And I was delivered from so many things. At the moment I was born again, which happened at a beach where the Holy Spirit came over me, I was delivered from my fear of death and my anguish that would cause panic attacks. That was the first thing I just knew was gone from me. It was truly miraculous. Something I had been struggling with for years just vanished. God is a supernatural God. It saddens me that such a large part of Christianity doesn’t live in the super natural. If we did, I think that a lot of people like your self would see things differently. We are called to walk in the power of The Holy Spirit and Jesus said that we are to do greater miracles than He did. In my first church at that time the worship was so strong and the presence of God so tangible that any nonbeliever that walked in would be convicted. Jesus loves you Joel. You are young and you still have to discover how could and lonely the life of an atheist is.
I saw that there were some writings about God and science before.
I have a friend who is a scientist. He was an atheist and he didn't get saved till he was 37. This is way over my brain, but he was convinced there is a God when he saw how precise everything in the universe is set up mathematically. He has written books about it and it’s very interesting.
Just think about the sun, how it’s positioned exactly in the right spot to make life on earth possible. Just a little off course and we would either freeze to death or burn up. And the infinity of the universe; doesn’t that make you wonder why and what?
Or take another universe which is or bodies. Study any of our organs and tell me it came about by chance. A kidney for example is a very intricate little machine. Nothing can replace a kidney like somebody else’s kidney.
The Bible says that Satan blinds people to creation so they can’t see that there is a God behind it all.
Romans 1:20; “For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.”
Go Lena, Go. The word of God is more powerful than a two-edged sword to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, doesn't it say? It is so. There is authority in your writing, which I presume comes from the facts of your life, and I am enjoying it. prayforbillmaher.com
To Tracy
Thank you!
I love to write about what really matters in life. No matter how smart or intelligent some people may be; if they don't allow wisdom to come into their lives, it has no value. Wisdom transcends intelligence.
And I’m sure you know that;
- “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline.” Proverbs 1:7
Some translations use the word wisdom instead of knowledge.
I was born with an innate open-mindedness in a close-minded Christian family. I want to thank you for dethroning the arrogant elitism that Christianity tends to breed. Christians are becoming more and more aware of the anthropomorphic ideologies plugged into the Bible begetting hate and intolerance. My mother tonight acknowledged a paradigm in her life that kept her from fellowship with none Christians. I am a Christian and a fan of yours. I love anything that promotes conversation and compassion, even if it’s an inadvertent byproduct.
Bill is never going to know the true meaning of Having Faith and the Love of Jesus.
I don't know what needs to happen to him to make him realize that all around him just didn't appear one day!
Someone or something had to create a beginning, if not God, then who? This all had to start from somewhere or something, but where? If not from a higher being other than ourselves or monkeys (which you can ask where did the monkey came from)where did all of this wonder evolve?
Oh, some nut case will have a microbe answer to all of this but, my question is, where did the microbe come from?
Wake up Bill!
I liked everything about the movie EXCEPT the comment to the effect that, after spending 3 days inside a tuna, Jonah emerged smelling like pussy. That unnecessary, offensive slam really put a damper on my enjoyment of the movie. Did any other women notice that?
Rita, I haven't heard anyone in the forum mention this. They simply say how much they enjoyed the movie and others have minor if not major problems with it. I haven't seen it myself and don't care to.
There's no way a tuna could swallow a man so it had to have been a much larger water creature. The derogatory comment was totally unneccesary and shows how much disrepect Bill has for God and people to use such language.
I'm noticing a trend with many not all, a common denominator that is of the godless. They have no self control or limits to know it's wrong to say offensive inappropriate comments like that, outright cursing, negativity, filty dirtiness.
And thanks you independent for your comments this mornings.
Something else . . . Bill would never make a movie criticizing Islam or Muslims in similar fashion for fear his life would be in danger. So he cowardly picks on Christianity and Christians for there is freedom to speak against it as well as Jesus, God or even the holy spirit in many instances.
Bill has no empathy or compassion for what people hold dear to their hearts. The way to reach a person is to reason with them, not criticize and mock them mercilessly.
"I haven't seen it myself and don't care to.
Something else . . . Bill would never make a movie criticizing Islam or Muslims in similar fashion for fear his life would be in danger. So he cowardly picks on Christianity and Christians for there is freedom to speak against it as well as Jesus, God or even the holy spirit in many instances."
Janice, 2 things...
1. If you haven't seen it why did you even come to this discussion? How can you critique something of which you have no firsthand knowledge? Arguing from a position of ignorance is never beneficial to anyone.
2. He did criticize Islam just as badly as Christianity, Christianity did receive a higher percentage of the time in the film probably due to the fact that it makes up a higher percentage of the population here. He criticized Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Mormonism... Basically all the major Monotheistic religions.
He's an equal opportunity offender! ;)
Well, well...
Look who shows up to save the day!
Defender of all truth and justice and the American way...
SUPERJOEL
Now is the best time to come out of hiding.
I was wondering if you had a chance to read my post?
Perhaps not.
I didn't think you would find anything convincing when I challenged you in the first place.
At any rate, maybe its time to close the arguement on evolution.
It is a belief...I'll just leave it at that.
Janice did have a point though.
I DID see the movie and it did have its moments of vulgarity.
Ofcourse such things appeal to its entertainment value, if you're into that sort of thing.
But to mister Maher and all those would be thrower down of all faith and belief I leave you this scripture:
And I began to hear the voice of Jehovah saying:
“Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?”
And I proceeded to say: “Here I am! Send me.”
And he went on to say: “Go, and you must say to this people, ‘Hear again and again, O men, but do not understand; and see again and again, but do not get any knowledge.’
Make the heart of this people unreceptive, and make their very ears unresponsive, and paste their very eyes together, that they may not see with their eyes and with their ears they may not hear, and that their own heart may not understand and that they may not actually turn back and get healing for themselves.”
Isaiah 6: 8-10
So Maher, you are free to hear, again and again...But aren't you choosing to not understand?
Joel . . . are you implying I'm ignorant? And I can't imagine cowardly Maher making sexually explicit connotations about Islam lest he have the whole Islamic world in uproar.
There's no need to waste money and put in Bill Maher's pocket. From the comments here I'm glad I didn't.
Lena . . . I forgot to tell you I enjoyed your refreshing comments yesterday very much. People would have us believe that all scientists agree on evolution and that's simply not the case. And this method they used back dating is totally off.
To any of the atheist or agnostic, evolutionist, could we please have your input. I would like to know if plants evolved from the single cell or the animals or both.
Also is there any evidence that man is over 200,000 years old. The last bones they found recently were the oldest I believe about 4.5 thousand years ago. From what I can gather records of man date from 5 to 11,000 years depending on who you want to believe.
lol, it's a holiday weekend, I've had better things to devote my time to than rebutting the arguments of someone who won't even answer the charges against his own views. Tell ya what, when you can answer the argument from vestigiality I'll present more evidence refuting your views. Until then do your own research, for a good reference point, Dawkins does an excellent job of explaining the path of Evolution in 'The Ancestors Tale'. Full explanations of what you're asking for would take hundreds if not thousands of pages and it's all out there for the finding if you were willing to view more than just one side of the argument. True wisdom comes from properly evaluating an issue from all angles.
Your choice of verses couldn't be more appropriate... Again and again explanations are offered but you are unwilling to listen, convinced that you couldn't possibly be wrong, and no matter how thorough the evidence presented to you you just close your eyes and refuse to expand knowledge. That's fine, keep your world small and close like a blanket, I'm perfectly happy here with my eyes wide open admiring the grand scope of this universe, from the minute quark to the length and breadth of time and space as we know it. Your arguments come from a lack of ability to comprehend that scope.
Janice, Ignorance is simply part of the human condition, it's what you choose to do with it that defines you. My Grandmother was fond of the saying that 'it's human to be ignorant, it's stupid to stay that way'.
Bill was very scathing of his indictments of Islam's history of cruelty toward women, violence in the name of god, and he delved into the issue of the cartoons of Muhammad that came up a while ago as well. He went after issues that others have been killed for bringing up so don't think he was hiding from the militants.
While it's true that recorded human history only goes back roughly 10k years or so, the fossil record goes far further back than that. The Sumerian kingdom is considered the dawn of human civilization because that's the first instance we know of where people actually came together in large groups instead of more of a small tribal life. With regard to the fossil record however, I simply did a google search for 'oldest human fossil' and this was the first item on the list http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/02/0216_050216_omo.html
I'm also curious to know why you think the dating methods are 'way off'? As far as the agreement of the scientific community, with the exception of an incredibly small minority there is a consensus among scientists that Evolution is the process by which life on this planet came to it's current state. As with all science there is still debate over specific parts of the theory (punctuated equilibrium etc...) but the consensus is that the theory is sound.
As per the question of plants, all life on this planet shared a common ancestor. Again I would recommend 'The Ancestor's Tale' as Dawkins explains the regress of the species starting with humanity and tracing back along the path of convergence to a single form of life. The split of plant life and animal life occurred somewhere between 1.2 and 1.3 billion years ago if I'm recalling my facts right. This part of the evolutionary timetable is arrived at roughly 500 pages into the book. So if it takes one of the worlds premier evolutionary scientists almost 700 pages to lay out the information, I'm sure you can understand why I don't feel able to truly do it justice in a post online.
Lena, drinking, smoking and having sex with whomever seems nice will never bring anyone meaning. These activities and their correlated mindsets are in their essence an escape from meaning and reality. I have never sought meaning in meaningless things, meaning is found in accomplishment, love and camaraderie of family and friends, genuine romantic love, beautiful music and art, a good book, looking up at the stars in amazement of the vastness of it all. Just because you couldn't be happy unless you felt you had 'eternal' meaning or meaning beyond this life doesn't mean that others can't. Your posts make it sound like you lacked sound philosophical premises for your life, this will lead to unhappiness, interestingly enough religion can also lead to unhappiness. And why is it that everyone who argues with me is so convinced that I don't understand Christianity? Jesus did bring a message that in many ways was beautiful, but I'm not the one who isn't evaluating the entire picture. The good things that Jesus taught have to be considered along with the bad things he taught, they also have to be considered with the scope of the Old Testament because it is supposedly the basis for ascribing authority to him. I've studied Christianity, the scriptures, and the arguments in favor of Christianity better than most 'true believers', coming from my background (before I arrived at atheism) I had truly wanted to find something that could put my doubts to rest, but it's just not there. The good doesn't outweigh the bad, the ends don't justify the means, and the idea of who god is supposed to be is riddled with philosophical holes. For instance, the problems of evil and pain are ones that Christian apologists have yet to find decently convincing arguments for. Even the apologists themselves acknowledge that it's a serious problem to belief in the biblical god.
Independent_thinker
"Someone or something had to create a beginning, if not God, then who? This all had to start from somewhere or something, but where? If not from a higher being other than ourselves or monkeys (which you can ask where did the monkey came from)where did all of this wonder evolve?
Oh, some nut case will have a microbe answer to all of this but, my question is, where did the microbe come from?"
You seem to not grasp that the logical conclusion of your argument is to ask where did god come from.
I'm getting bored with feeding the trolls...
Ah Joel
Thank you for replying...
It is so refreshing to hear from you.
I am glad that you finally stated your opinions, I was getting tired of waiting. >:D
Here is a little food for thought:
For the past couple of days, I have been unable to find my wallet. I have a history of misplacing things, and I really can't stand looking for them!
Have you ever lost something and been unable to find it?
George Carlin did a stand up routine that was hilarious about the stupid places that we will check, dismissing all logic.
Sometimes, like when I'm looking for my keys, I will illogically lift up items that are lying flat and obviously not the place where you would look to find keys.
Sometimes we stupidly will search the same rooms over and over again, convinced that what we seek will be there if we just search hard enough; even though as yet there is not even a trace...
Such is the case with the question that we all desire to have answered:
Where do we come from?
Whether you are a religious zealot or a science buff, the same question nags at all of us.
Where is it?
But the funny thing about us is that we have the knowledge inside of us! When I last had my wallet...
But that's it I had it once! I am the source of the missing information.
This morning, without even trying, I woke up, grabbed the last suit that I remembered wearing...And, what do you know? I found it!
The same goes for our faith in God!
Evolutionists and all the respected scientists and all of the majority are content to keep searching, keep searching, but never really finding.
But deep down inside of you lies the key, the answer.
Faith is the assured expectation of things HOPED for.
We hope, we wish, we desire, we long for God. All of us. Not just those who have resigned to wait on him, and to build up our faith.
Even you...Deep down.
You know it's true.
Me, I can't except the idea that humans have all the answers. Was it not man who invented science?
And even though it is a very good tool for unearthing buried information, don't humans tend to produce errors? Isn't it possible that YOU could be wrong too, even if you are in the majority?
But, right now, you are ignoring that voice crying out within you.
It says: "WHAT YOU SEEK IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU!!!"
But no, you silence that voice, and you doubt in it's knowledge, so instead of waking up in the morning and going to the place where you will find it...You will keep searching...endlessly searching...
Until it is too late.
To Joel
I have one question for you; are you born again? It sounds to me that you have tried to understand scripture without being born again, without letting Jesus into your heart so He can reveal the truth to you. You try to figure out scripture with your intellect. You can’t. Only The Holy Spirit can show you how it all fits together. “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.” 2 Tim 3:16-17.
I have studied philosophy; I was a seeker before I found the truth. I was seeking everywhere. None of the famous philosophers found the truth. Some spent their whole life trying to prove that God does not exist. Seems like a pretty futile mission. I had a teacher in philosophy that was the most confused unhappy person. That alone told me it was not for me.
I mentioned how I lived before I got saved, a very common lifestyle among people who do not believe. A lot of people in “the world”, meaning non Christians, couldn’t make it without a “fix” every week which could be alcohol, legal or prescription drugs. That’s the truth behind the facade in many people’s life. Just check out how many legal drugs are used in this country. And they all claim to be just FINE, right?
And it’s not about “understanding” Christianity, it’s about letting the Holy Spirit transform you. And again if you really did “understand” what it’s all about, you would be a fool to renounce it.
So do you think that you in your own power can defeat Satan and his demons, or have you in your “understanding” come to the conclusion that the spiritual world doesn’t exist?
Maybe you can live without Jesus, but can you die without Him? I think I was a teenager when I realized that I actually will have to be present at my own death. That’s a realization most people don’t want to take in. The Bible says it’s good to think about those things when we are young.
I have peace in my heart, a peace that’s out of this world. I wake up with a song in my heart and I have joy for no apparent reason. That’s priceless.
I can't wait to see it but I'm currently living in Japan. By the way, I watched an interview between you and Mike Huckabee and there is a question I wish you would have asked. He said something along the lines of God giving us a choice, that forcing people to love him would be equivalent to rape and the like. The question that is rarely asked is: Doesn't God know who will "choose" him and who won't? If God knows everything, then God knows the future. Free will is just an illusion. If God doesn't know the future, then there is something that God doesn't know...and we can't have that.
I don't mean to propose a "gotcha" question, but I would have loved to have seen the response.
Thank you so much for being a voice in the media I can relate to. I'm a devoted fan.
"That's fine, keep your world small and close like a blanket, I'm perfectly happy here with my eyes wide open admiring the grand scope of this universe, from the minute quark to the length and breadth of time and space as we know it. Your arguments come from a lack of ability to comprehend that scope."
Joel
I am not inferior to you.
When I look up at the stars I am filled with the same awe you speak of.
Except I am also filled with awe because of the obvious power of God!
Who is this who can create all of this? The infinite Universe! The Earth with all its beauty and its creatures!?!?
Also, your statement that the Bible quote that I used was fitting because of my hearing again and agin...
Who wrote Isaiah? What was it's context?
Did not God inspire Isaiah to frame those words? Can you not hear God pleading with his people? Trying to get their hearts to return to Him? Trying to get them to see sense?
Joel,
You and I are the same age.
We might not have experienced the same things and we might not have the same background, but I want you to be honest:
What really turned you away from faith in God?
Why have you become convinced that the God of the Bible doesn't exist?
Don't you know that the same God who condemns to death, excuses error? The same God that kills without mercy, extends his mercy?
Can he not be selective?
When He condemned and entire world to death by flood, did He not choose to save Noah and seven others?
These comments about Jesus and taking into account the good things he said, but also the bad things...
What bad things? Please tell me and be specific.
Everything Jesus is recorded to say was filled with wisdom, courage, authority, respect, and love.
When I read the Gospel, I am filled with love for this man. A man who was willing to give up everything, so that he might save everything worth saving.
Jesus was flawless and word and deed, so, honestly, whats your beef with him?
And even if you do take up issue with something he said, what about his predictions?
Did he not warn the people of Israel that when they were surrounded by incamped armies, they should flee to the mountains?
That "not a stone upon a stone would be left in her and not be thrown down?"
Doesn't history tell us that there was such a destruction of Jerusalem? That over a million of her inhabitants died by the sword and famine, and not a stone left unturned?
Can you bring me reasonable evidence that the people who wrote the Gospel accounts wrote what they did AFTER Jerusalem was destroyed?
Because if prophesy is fulfilled, do we not have our sign? Do we not have reason to believe?
In the words of Kramer:
"Crazy, am I; or am I so sane that it just BLOWS your mind!"
To Lisa
You have free will AND God already knows what you’re going to choose. It sounds like a paradox but that's the spiritual truth. It’s still your choice and nobody else is to blame. When you stand before God one day the blame game is over and the truth will be obvious. God also loves you with the kind of love that never gives up. He’s got high hopes for you. God knows you through and through and He still loves you so much He let His own beloved son die for you.
Hi Lisa . . . it's early in the morning but I'm going to try this:
You asked a very interesting question. I have just slight variation of things.
God knows our make-up even from even in the womb and what kind of persons we are and may be in the future. He can even cause to be born persons to fulfill his prophecies and enable or allow situations to make those things happen. Such as in the case of Jesus or Alexander the Great.
However, God does not look at indidivuals future to see if they are going to do good or bad because anyone at anytime can decide themselves to either be righteousness or not.
Case is point would be Adam. God did not look into the future and say 'oh Adam is going to ruin my paradise so I'm not going to create him', or Satan to say 'I'm not going to create him for he will run amuch and destroy my beautiful world.' God chose Saul as King over Israel but later Saul turned out to not be a very good choice and a king of another nation was allowed to kill him and his sons.
God was so hurt at the badness in the time of the flood that he regretted he had ever made man. So it would be logical to reason that if God knew all these events would happen, he would not have felt hurt for he would have known they were destined to happen. God would also not send prophets or messengers to the world to tell people to turn back from their wicked ways because what would be the point if God knew they were going to reject his pleadings anyway.
So this is my summation of things. However I'm sure there are those that disagree with me.
Joel, I realize you’re outnumbered here by the god people and I commend you for being a strong advocate standing up for what you believe. I think more of your comrades here should be just as diligent in making a defense.
In your recent post you said Bill indicts Islam's cruelty to women . . . however but out of the corner of his mouth he makes derogatory remarks concerning women's female body parts. According to your grandmother I may be ignorant but I'm not so stupid I can't recognize when a man is being disrespectful to women and a hypocrite.
You mentioned you have studied Christianity, scriptures, arguments and such. But have you really? I ask because you seem to ask a lot of questions that a serious Bible scholar should have answers to. Good and Evil has to exist in order for persons to have free will. Free Will is dependant upon our ability to choose between good and bad. Evil is also not always synonymous with wrongdoing. In Biblical terms a calamity can also be considered an evil. God's enforcing the penalty of sin and death has proved to be an evil or calamity for mankind.
Even in a perfect world a precious pet dies and we would still experience some pain and sadness. Although evil as we see it today will no longer exist.
The reason I say the methods of dating fossils and/or artifacts are way off . . .
For example, radiocarbon "clock." This method of radiocarbon dating was developed over a period of two decades by scientists all over the world. It was widely acclaimed for accurate dating of artifacts from man's ancient history. But then a conference of the world's experts, including radiochemists, archaeologists and geologists, was held in Uppsala, Sweden, to compare notes. The report of their conference showed that the fundamental assumptions on which the measurements were based had been found untrustworthy to a greater or less degree. For example, it found that the rate of radioactive carbon formation in the atmosphere has not been consistent in the past and that this method is not reliable in dating object from 2,000 B.C.E or before."
I also noticed this article on sciencemag.org:
Ambiguities in Direct Dating of Rock Surfaces Using Radiocarbon Measurements
In samples where these type I and type II materials were separated and AMS-radiocarbon dated, they were found to have widely differing radiocarbon ages. In these cases, the measurement of the radiocarbon age of the entire sample would yield results that are, at best, ambiguous.
Potassium Argon:
"The [potassium-argon] dating method is increasingly inaccurate for dates of less than one million years. Consequently, there is a period during Early and Middle Pleistocene times when dating human remains is difficult and uncertain." *Natural History, February 1967, p. 58.
"In conventional interpretation of K-Ar age data, ft is common to discard ages which are substantially too high or too low compared with the rest of the group or with other available data such as the geological time scale. The discrepancies between the rejected and the accepted are arbitrarily attributed to excess or loss of argon." *A. Hayatsu, "K-Ar Isochron Age of the North Mountain Basalt in Nova Scotia, " in the Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, Vol. 16, 1979, p. 974.
"In general, dates in the 'correct ball park' are assumed to be correct and are published, but those in disagreement with other data are seldom published nor are discrepancies fully explained." *R. L Meager, "K-Ar Ages of Biotite from Tuffs in Eocene Rocks of Green Ricer, Washakie and Uinta Basins," in Contributions to Geology, Vol. 15,(1), 1977, p. 37.
"Thus, if one believes that it derived ages in particular instances are in gross disagreement with established facts of held geology, he must conjure up geological processes that could cause anomalous or altered argon contents of the minerals." *J. P. Evsmden and V. R. Richards, "Potassium-Argon Ages in Eastern Australia," in the Journal of the Geological Society of Australia, Vol. 9, No. 1, 1962, p.3
“Since 40K/40Ar and 40Ar/39Ar dating are most commonly used to "prove" the ancient age of many life forms, . . . along with the other common methods of isotope dating, are to be highly questioned.”
“Contrary to the popular notion that geological processes are extremely slow and gradual, the geology of the Earth shows clear evidence of being dominated by relatively shortly spaced massive watery catastrophes. The idea that millions of years can be accommodated in the gaps between sedimentary layers does not stand up to critical scientific examination. These facts are consistent with the view that our planet has had a short but dynamic history.32"
Sean D. Pitman M.D.
Being that these methods are called highly into question, just how much should we trust them?
Ok, so it has been cleared up that evolutionists theorize that some billions of years ago the plant and the animal split and went their separate ways.
Somehow the stationary decided it might be fun to become sentient and so in its wisdom created all by itself the abundance of animals we have today through a simple processes of elimination via natural selection.
What a joke.
You are telling me that not only did humans come from all kinds of animals like apes and lizards and fish and mosquitoes and amoeba, but now we are supposed to believe that we came from plants as well?
Don't these geniuses know how far fetched this stuff sounds?
Rich the Airhead says:
"You know when I come back I want to be seaweed, yeah I think that would best fit my personality"
You see, after you break down the evolutionary theory into its most basic parts it loses much of it credibility.
Scientists who are advocates of evolution avoid this by only talking about all observable wonders that are characteristics of existing animal life.
I think we would have to strain pretty hard to hear any of them talk about this "split" from plant life and animal life because the very idea is just...poop.
Also
I read up on the fascinating teamwork need by the three most basic components of life; DNA, RNA, and Protein.
Listen to some of this stuff:
Work starts in the cell’s nucleus, where a section of the DNA ladder unzips. This allows RNA letters to link to the exposed DNA letters of one of the DNA strands. An enzyme moves along the RNA letters to join them into a strand. Thus DNA letters are transcribed into RNA letters, forming what you might call a DNA dialect. The newly formed chain of RNA peels away, and the DNA ladder zips up again.
After further modification, this particular type of message-carrying RNA is ready. It moves out of the nucleus and heads for the protein-production site, where the RNA letters are decoded. Each set of three RNA letters forms a “word” that calls for one specific amino acid. Another form of RNA looks for that amino acid, grabs it with the help of an enzyme, and tows it to the “construction site.”
As the RNA sentence is being read and translated, a growing chain of amino acids is produced. This chain curls and folds into a unique shape, leading to one kind of protein. And there may well be over 50,000 kinds in our body.
Even this process of protein folding is significant. In 1996, scientists around the world, “armed with their best computer programs, competed to solve one of the most complex problems in biology: how a single protein, made from a long string of amino acids, folds itself into the intricate shape that determines the role it plays in life. . . .
The result, succinctly put, was this: the computers lost and the proteins won. . . . Scientists have estimated that for an average-sized protein, made from 100 amino acids, solving the folding problem by trying every possibility would take 1027 (a billion billion billion) years.”—The New York Times.
Have you an idea of how long it takes for a chain of 20 amino acids to form? About one second!
Without these three components of life working together there is no life.
Is it reasonable that each of those three molecular team players arose spontaneously at the same time, in the same place, and so precisely tuned that they could combine to work their wonders?
1027
I meant 10 to the 27th power number of years!
Another thought I had Joel . . . you asked independent where did god come from . . .
I guess we all ask that in our minds from time to time. Most of the evidence reveals the universe had a beginning and so did the earth and man.
It's hard for humans to understand how something can have no beginning and no end such as God. That no God was formed before him and there continues to be none after him.
So we accept that is the reason he's God because to be the only one that is Almighty, God would have had no beginning or end. To sustain the universe continuously one would have to be infinite and not susceptable to destuction or cease to exist. Which is not totally an impossible idea in many aspects.
dear bill
minister francis mcnab says "the ten commandments is the most negative document ever written". he paid for a billboard over a freeway to announce this. he is a psychotherapist who is also a minister of st michaels church on collins street in melbourne, australia. The Age Melbourne magazine issue # 50 has a story on him - december 08. could be someone you want to interview for real time.
Brett,
"Ok, so it has been cleared up that evolutionists theorize that some billions of years ago the plant and the animal split and went their separate ways.
Somehow the stationary decided it might be fun to become sentient and so in its wisdom created all by itself the abundance of animals we have today through a simple processes of elimination via natural selection.
What a joke.
You are telling me that not only did humans come from all kinds of animals like apes and lizards and fish and mosquitoes and amoeba, but now we are supposed to believe that we came from plants as well?
Don't these geniuses know how far fetched this stuff sounds?"
We didn't split off from plants, but we share a common ancestor far down the evolutionary trail. You think that's far fetched but think a better answer lies in an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, ineffable, infallible, supernatural being with no evidence for it's existence, who happens to be male and possess a body (early old testament clearly describe him as physical), who also exists outside time and has neither beginning nor end, who can bypass the laws of nature whenever he feels like it and did so frequently in antiquity yet deigns not to do so in the present time. Who is just, righteous, jealous, and Love incarnate, yet commands genocide, rape, and arranges for 42 children to be eaten by bears. Who sentences all those who don't believe in his existence to eternal punishment, even though he has provided no evidence for his existence and in no was does the punishment fit the crime. His supposedly divinely inspired book is wrought with contradictions, fallacies, and the approval of violence. Yet he loves us all and wants us all to be saved even though Jesus stated that he spoke in parables SO THAT some wouldn't believe. He also created all of the universe in a 7 day period, enabled a man to survive for 3 days in the stomach of a "great fish", raises the dead, enabled a man to outrun chariots, who acknowledges the existence of 'lesser' gods, kills those who don't follow him, wipes out the entire population of the earth save for one mans family who somehow manages to fit 2 (or more depending on which part of the story you're going by) of every animal onto a BOAT, and keep them from killing each other!
To you believing in THAT is the pinnacle of rationality?
"I think we would have to strain pretty hard to hear any of them talk about this "split" from plant life and animal life because the very idea is just...poop."
They do address it, and the evolutionary theory only 'breaks down' for those who lack either the ability or the inclination to understand it. You are inclined to think it's a load of crap so you're not going to give any evidence a fair hearing. If you want to turn the argument around and say that I'm inclined to think the bible is a load of crap (as I'm sure someone will accuse me of) know that before leaving the church I was inclined to believe, I wanted it to be true but found the evidence to be overwhelmingly against it. I gave both sides a fair hearing and arrived at the conclusion that there is NO reason to believe in the supernatural.
Bret, Since you harp so much on the lack of probability for developing complex metabolic processes through evolution...
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14094-bacteria-make-major-evolutionary-shift-in-the-lab.html?DCMP=ILC-hmts&nsref=news2_head_dn14094
Proof from the lab that an organism (E-Coli) can, over a process of generations, develop the ability to metabolize a compound that was previously useless to it (citrate). Through a series of successive generations the bacteria came across a metabolic sequence that was capable of processing the citrate present in their food substrate. Those bacteria developed an immediate advantage over their competitors in the environment and flourished due to an increased food source. Over subsequent generations the process was further refined due to those bacteria with the greatest ability to utilize the citrate having the greatest reproductive potential.
Natural Selection hard at work developing new metabolic practices, and all this over a period of roughly 20 years. Do you still think the development of the Krebs cycle and other metabolic functions over a period of billions of years is so far fetched? In light of the hard evidence that such evolutionary shifts DO occur, will you reconsider your use of the argument from amino acids, protein folding, and genetic transcription? or do you think that God altered the bacteria so as to trick the scientists? After all, the bible does say he likes to confuse us...
Oh yeah, since 'tis the season and all that, I highly recommend Yo-Yo Ma's Christmas album. More religiously oriented than I'd like but the music is brilliantly performed with excellent choices of vocal talent. The performance of The Wexford Carol with Alison Krauss is hauntingly beautiful.
Regardless of my religious views, I am first and foremost a music lover. I'll always be a fan of groups like Jars of Clay, Caedmons Call, and Newsboys for their artistic talent. The just so happen to sit alongside groups like Jimmy Eat World, Korn, Disturbed, Bad Religion, and others with no religious leaning (or even an anti-religious message such as Marlyn Manson)
While reading an interesting take on the argument of protein folding came to mind.
You're probably familiar with Mad Cow Disease, the bovine version of Spongiform Encephalopathy. Most people aren't familiar with what the disease actually is however. A Prion (essentially a folded protein shape) becomes 'malformed'. This malformed prion is of the same chemical composition as the properly formed prions, yet when this one comes into contact with a 'healthy' prion it causes that one to become malformed and so on down the line. So if a malformed prion can be observed now to affect the folding of other prions, is it so much of a stretch to think that a similar process very early in our evolutionary development (think single celled organism early) eventually led to the protein folding we see today?
As to whether folded proteins preceded DNA, or the other way around I really don't know. In all likelihood there was a predecessor process which led to both. My previous post showed how in a mere 20 years a bacteria can 'learn' to process a previously useless 'nutrient' through successive mutations. Given the billion or so years of dominance by single celled and other simple organisms (and likely the earliest 'organisms' were akin to the prions mentioned above, simple protein strands with the ability to reproduce themselves, gradually gaining in complexity through the process of natural selection developing into cells etc.) and the evidence that drastic metabolic changes can occur in a mere 20 years, it's nowhere near far fetched to view this same process as bringing about DNA as we know it in the 4.6 billion years since the formation of the earth.
Hey Maher, will you visit us for the UK release? Come to Bristol. London is full of Americans.
Ok Joel
The fact of the matter is that I want to believe in God and you want to believe in evolution. Fine. We both can find little holes in each others beliefs, although to me it does seem that you keep calling everything related to the Bible irrational and immoral without truly considering what it really means.
The idea of spontaneous generation was disproved by scientists centuries ago, only to show up again in modern times under a different guise.
Just because bacteria can do whatever you said they can do doesn't mean that you can get something out of nothing.
Bacteria are here already!
All of the studies done by scientists are on cells and and DNA and RNA and proteins that ONLY came about through some pre-existing agent!
When the scientists of the now distant past thought that mice and maggots were produced simply by leaving out rotten food, they assumed that they were correct and that anyone who thought differently was an idiot.
They did not yet posess the knowledge that later soundly disproved their trusted theory.
If the theory spontaneous generation was disproved then by deeper thinking, then it is not impossible that we simply don't yet posess the depth of knowledge to disprove its modern offspring.
The fact is that you can try and explain away all the holes and premature assumptions you want to, but there is still plenty of room left for more complete and satisfying answers.
I have a question. Do evolutionist celebrate Christmas? And if so . . . are they celebrating Jesus birth or the Santa Claus part of it? Or just the fun of the holiday, music religious, non-religious?
The same holds true for your belief or disbelief in God.
Instead of just hearing what you want to hear in order to justify yourself in disregarding belief, really consider that YOU might be wrong!
Give God the benefit of the doubt, instead of just pronouncing him irrelevant because you chose to hear what you wanted to hear.
But the fact is that you simply DON'T WANT TO!
If one man calls trash what another man calls treasure, they can't both be right can they?
Are we so different? Am I not educated? Are you ignorant of the Bibles teachings?
NO!
We both have a little understanding of eachothers ways of thinking.
But where the questions I introduce are genuine challenges to man's "knowledge", you are calling what is up down and what is left right!
The Bible gives good advice on all aspects of life. Someone supporting Maher in this post said themselves that people who believe and who have faith have less stress in their lives and may even live longer. And I might add that they have peace as well.
If a teaching can produce such good results in people, can it really be inhumane as you claim?
The rate at which the worlds unrest rises or falls is directly related to their belief systems!
The areas where we see more and more abandonment of God are the very same areas where more and more degraded behavior occurs.
And just because many people are trapped in false religion's grip and many people are believing a lie doesn't mean that the truth isn't there!
Where there are crooked and misguided religions, you will find that the people are beginning to withdraw their support!
More people aren't showing up to mass, going to temple, gathering to their shrines and holy places and supporting their longheld beliefs anymore!
They can tell that they are being lied to. They can tell that their money is being extorted.
There IS much untruth out there!
But, where people are being spiritually fed and satisfied; where people are finding convincing answers to all of life's important questions, you will find nothing but a steady increase and abundant support.
You will find more complete families(with moms AND dads!), more scholastic and professional honesty, more selflessness and fellow feeling, more happiness and soundness of mind, more love.
But, in a world engineered by Bill Maher and his ilk you would not find much but more of the same. You would find many people who claim to be happy, but are really empty inside.
Bill reveals himself to be one of these people, that's why he needs to toke up as often as he does (He smoked that joint with an obvious familiarity in Religulous).
The Bible is a mirror of our world. It shows that regardless of the technological boom, nothing has really changed. It gives plenty of examples of people who did not believe in and would not put faith in God.
It speaks of people who put their own teachings and their own philosophies ahead of the real insights found in the Holy Scriptures.
It records many who preferred the false, and hated what was true.
In the account in Genesis of Adam and Eve, it is said that Eve was thoroughly deceived, but she was stilled condemned!
Why?
Because, when the lie was spoken in her ears, she heard what she wanted to hear. She liked the idea living independently and without God telling her what to do.
Our world is revealed to truly be her offspring. Because when the truth is spoken in their ears they do not give it a fair hearing. And when the lie is spoken they allow themselves to be thoroughly deceived.
God has not changed, and he will judge all those who let themselves be swayed by the Devil, even if they are deceived.
Because all the Devil does is tell you what you already want to hear. And if you did prefer truth, you would not so easily be gulled into acceptance of words that slander our God!
Joel . . . a few things
God is a Spirit . . . also angels. A spirit is neither male nor female but are generally expressed in the masculine sense.
God used angels to represent him either in spirit or for the most part they materialized into human form. The new testament tells us those were angels that spoke to Moses in the mountain and to the prophets. Jesus also represented God when he was on earth. That is why Jesus said if you have seen me you have seen the father. Acts 7:35-38
Again . . . death is thrown into fire and hades/hell is thrown into fire meaning death is destroyed forever and there will no longer be grave sites to mar the earth. Death cannot literally burn forever in a lake of fire and hades/hell is also thrown into fire(?) . . . These are symbolic terms and therefore no reason to believe humans burn forever. Even a rock burns up . . . well . . . I’m sure I’ll have to repeat this one again. Rev 20:13, 14
As humans as we know a day to mean 24 hours. In the Bible a day to God is as a thousand years and a thousand years as a day. To create the earth would have taken millenniums of time during the creative process. In this case we do not know what timetable of 7 days God used in creating the world but understand it to be more than a 7 day 24 hour period. 2 Pet 3:8
Noah collected animals some by twos and some (group) animals in sevens according to the Biblical account. There is no contradiction there. Gen 7:1-4
Jesus spoke in parables or illustrations to discern the hearts of rightly disposed ones. The ones that heard the parables and cast Jesus as foolish walked away were not eager to learn about God and did not have the right heart condition. Those puzzled by what Jesus said would think deeply being hungry for food/nourishment (truth) and truly interested questioned Jesus and he of course took them aside to teach them and explain what the illustrations meant. A good teacher always uses illustrations to compare and help students understand a subject matter.
In the Bible God is spoken of as confusing those “in a hurry, because of the badness of [their] practices.” This would include false prophets as well. God also confused the languages of people in the time of Nimrod. However God always imparts truth, not confusion to those earnestly seeking his worship. Deu 28:20; Gen 11:1-9
Living among the Israelites after they left Egypt were Egyptians and other alien residents of all backgrounds. They did not have to worship God, but they were not to worship idols or other gods in the land. Being that God was their Creator and provider he had every right to expect them to obey his commandments against false worship and they agreed to those laws. Deu 10:17, 18
God no longer uses the nation of Israel or any government on earth as instruments in carrying out his Divine Will or Judgments, and he allows the nations to rule themselves undisturbed by him. God did however send Jesus to represent him at a certain point to announce a time in the future when the present day governments would be dismantled and Jesus would thereby institute his kingdom over the world. These revelations are not generally accepted but yet we just want God to show himself.
God created a paradise. War and violence was brought into the world by man’s sin - not God. Children suffer the effects of their parent’s actions, namely, the children of Adam have suffered, experienced the most unspeakable evil and painful conditions brought about because of him.
War and suffering is will always be a part of this world. A parent will allow their children to suffer the consequences of their actions or allow them to temporarily undergo painful surgery, rehabilitation in order to get better, which is in effect what God did. Man rebelled deciding to rule himself and for the most part God allowed him to go his separate way although this meant disaster for the earth and its inhabitants. The blame is always placed on God but not the first man (or evolution) that brought these evils into the world in the first place.
God in keeping promises to Abraham used war to rid the earth of ungodly immoral people that sacrificed their children to gods in fire, etc. That fact does not mean those people and their children will never live again on the face of this earth. God has appointed an administration to bring persons and children back in the resurrection and give them the opportunity to live a righteous life. I see no disgust for the wars of man whom can kill the body and not the soul(self) that is. What I hear is: God is set to a higher standard by man and labeled a criminal. Man and his evolutionary ancestors war but God has no right. If that’s the case in point, then blame evolution for putting in the minds of men a God whom they desire to worship and writing a book about him.
The appointed time has been set and we can not make God hurry it up. It’s his decision and right as Supreme Ruler of the Universe. The signs of Jesus presence are clearly mentioned and we are living in that time period.
To take a page of out Bret’s book, if an ant/insects, animals and such can miraculously perform things we can only try to duplicate and they do a much better job without thinking about it. I don’t feel it unusual for God to be able to perform a miracle of a fish keeping alive a human in the pit of its stomach.
If you could please post the exact scriptures, fallacies, contradictions, genocide, bears eating children, 2 or 3 at a time. I would like to address these issues.
I had some other thoughts searching the web, and I almost came to the assumption that man is stupid with all his education, knowledge, degrees, etc.
Most scientists say the universe had a beginning, some others might say the universe has always been here. So I wonder how they can ever agree on anything.
A man says look at that bird in the sky . . . I want to fly like that and . . . several years down the road through trials and errors, he’s flying . . . made himself an airplane that is.
The man says I’m hot, burning up! But wait . . . look at those termites. It’s 120 degrees out here and they’re as cool as a cucumber. Maybe I can make me some vents like that . . . Aaah yes! That’s much better sitting here under this air conditioner.
So I wonder how come evolution made these tiny little creatures so much smarter instead of us superior human beings with such big brains and all.
It’s like someone is challenging us making us wonder in amazement, copy this, duplicate that. ‘Now figure this one out!’ So I suppose that’s what this Charles Darwin guy was doing when he created this evolutionary theory.
But man has barely scratched the surface of this marvelous earth, discovering secrets of the insect and animal world. It would take forever to actually figure out the workings of the universe and how it came to exist. I guess we’ll always have plenty of things to think, wonder, figure out even forever.
YOU ARE NOT YOUR JOB, OR HOW MUCH MONEY YOU MAKE!!!
--Tyler Durden, Psychopath
...Just thought I would throw this in there. Couldn't hurt...Might help a little bit.
Joel said he like listening to music:
Check out the Dust Brothers!
Man can they jam!!
One thing that neither of you seem to realize is that I already know pretty much every aspect of theology that you do. I was raised in the church (my father was a pastor) prayed for salvation at a young age, was baptized as a public display of my faith, went to a Christian high school, rededicated my life to Christ and was baptized again by one of my high school teachers on a trip we took. I went on numerous youth retreats and mission trips. I was what many would refer to as 'on fire' for God. I went to a Christian college, I have studied the Bible, Theological doctrine, and Apologetics both for classes and personal understanding. I have probably delved more deeply into Christianity than either of you and that is what led me to eventually reject it. You think I never opened up myself to the possibility that I was wrong, but I did. When I finally stopped and gave both sides an honest hearing I found faith to be the weaker argument, because at the end of the day there is no EVIDENCE for the existence of god, there is however EVIDENCE for the naturalistic universe.
As to spontaneous generation, it was the belief that an animal as we know them could sprout into existence from inanimate objects, fly's coming from old meat etc. However the Miller-Urey experiment (reference to follow) has shown that in conditions like what evidence shows were likely to be present in the earliest ages of this planets existence, amino acids can form from inorganic materials with electrical stimulation. It is the interaction of these different amino acids which eventually would have led to the first primitive form of life. It would have been incredibly basic (probably not anything we would even consider a cell by today's standards) and it also would have been an incredibly rare occurrence. But when the sheer number of interactions that would have been taking place over hundreds of millions of years are taken into account, the improbability of it decreases greatly. The thing about the origin of life through naturalistic causes is that it only had to happen once, after that natural selection would have taken over and brought us down the long road to the speciation that we see today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey_experiment
Janice, we celebrate the Winter Solstice, which predates Christmas by several thousand years. If the beginning of the end of winter isn't a reason to party than I don't know what is ;) FYI, Christmas celebrations are full of pagan references, decorating a tree predates Christianity, the descriptions of Santa Claus were taking from pagan gods and applied to the mythologized version of Saint Nicholas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_nicholas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Claus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_solstice
Bret, even if the bible were the most humane book ever written, that still wouldn't necessitate that it were true. Honestly Buddhism is far more humane as a religion... And your argument that you are capable of true happiness but we are not is nothing short of egocentric arrogance. You aren't in my head, so you have no idea the depth of happiness and joy i feel, the peace that I feel in the face of the knowledge that when I die I cease to exist. A large part of that is because of the fact that I understand that Happiness is by and large a choice, something that I can influence. In that regard I'd highly recommend 'The Conquest of Happiness' by Bertrand Russell.
"God created a paradise. War and violence was brought into the world by man’s sin - not God. Children suffer the effects of their parent’s actions, namely, the children of Adam have suffered, experienced the most unspeakable evil and painful conditions brought about because of him." I take issue with the assertion that I am evil simply because I was born. This, being one of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity is the reason that I say it is a religion based on guilt and shame. I refuse to feel undeserved guilt and there is noting in my life that I am ashamed of.
Janice, here's a list of contradictions http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html
the second one is more comprehensive. Seeing as how it lists 407 contradictions I'm sure you can forgive me for not going into detail here.
The accounts of genocide are many, the city of Jericho, the Canaanites, many of the conquered nations in the old testament were to be completely destroyed. When the Israelites defeated a nation they were either to kill every many, woman, child and beast (often told to run the pregnant women through the stomach); to spare the animals and take them for their own possession (after a portion was set aside for offering to god); other times they were to take both the animals and the young virgins for their own possession (ownership and devaluation of women is a recurring theme in the bible).
Speaking of women... http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/women/long.html
As far as the children being mauled by bears... 2 Kings 2:23-24... "And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them." A curse from a prophet is carried out by god right? Nothing but quality morality there! and remember, if your kid talks back to you you're supposed to stone them if the old testament is the inspired word of god...
Tyler Durden had a point, you are neither your job nor how much you make. You are a complex interaction of thoughts, emotions and interpersonal relationships. These are the things that define us.
I'll have to check out the Dust Brothers.
So if you like the fight club soundtrack you should check out the soundtrack for Queen of the Damned. Similar dark, semi-electronic feel to it. The entire soundtrack was produced by Jonathan Davis the lead singer of Korn, so top notch talent all around.
I saw your movie the 1st day that it came out and i loved it.
It was amazing .
And BTW i couldn't stop laughing when you were in Amsterdam and you though that guys hair caught on fire lolz.
Anyway I just wanted to say that I am buying it when it comes out on DVD and Bush is a retard.( you have to make another movie Bill you are amazing)
Joel
All of the following information is taken out of the "Is there a Creator that Cares for You?" book published by Jehovah's Witnesses:
Actually, the value of Miller’s experiment is seriously questioned today. Nevertheless, its apparent success led to other tests that even produced components found in nucleic acids (DNA or RNA).
Specialists in the field (sometimes called origin-of-life scientists) felt optimistic, for they had seemingly replicated the first act of the molecular drama. And it seemed as though laboratory versions of the remaining two acts would follow.
One chemistry professor claimed: “The explanation of the origin of a primitive living system by evolutionary mechanisms is well within sight.” And a science writer observed: “Pundits speculated that scientists, like Mary Shelley’s Dr. Frankenstein, would shortly conjure up living organisms in their laboratories and thereby demonstrate in detail how genesis unfolded.” The mystery of the spontaneous origin of life, many thought, was solved
In the years since, however, that optimism has evaporated. Decades have passed, and life’s secrets remain elusive. Some 40 years after his experiment, Professor Miller told Scientific American:
“The problem of the origin of life has turned out to be much more difficult than I, and most other people, envisioned.” Other scientists share this change of mood.
For example, back in 1969, Professor of Biology Dean H. Kenyon coauthored Biochemical Predestination. But more recently he concluded that it is “fundamentally implausible that unassisted matter and energy organized themselves into living systems.”
Indeed, laboratory work bears out Kenyon’s assessment that there is “a fundamental flaw in all current theories of the chemical origins of life.”
After Miller and others had synthesized amino acids, scientists set out to make proteins and DNA, both of which are necessary for life on earth.
After thousands of experiments with so-called prebiotic conditions, what was the outcome?
The Mystery of Life’s Origin: Reassessing Current Theories notes: “There is an impressive contrast between the considerable success in synthesizing amino acids and the consistent failure to synthesize protein and DNA.” The latter efforts are characterized by “uniform failure.”
Joel
I really appreciate your honesty in relating your experiences with Christianity and going to a Christian School and things like that.
It deeply saddens me to hear that you have lost the interests that you once had, but that is your choice.
I only wish that this life were more straight forward and there weren't so many twists and turns and potholes on the road to life and happiness.
I honestly don't really know you, but I have a feeling that you are a really nice and intelligent person.
I apologize for maybe sounding harsh or anything in our conversations. Listening to you relate your experiences makes me feel like we have even more in common.
I think you will agree that this life is full of struggles and pitfalls and so many hardships, but it sounds like you have a good grip on reality and you do sound content with your current outlook on life.
I only wish that you would come into a Kingdom Hall and really give it a chance.
I know that they may sound different or hard to understand, or even backwards compared to what you might consider "normal". But I honestly feel as if this organization is the truth. And if I feel that way, maybe you could find something there that you didn't expect.
I don't want to sound as if I am trying to convert you or anything, I just really wish that you could find something worth believing in concerning God's Word and his purposes.
Your life has probably been exponentially full compared to mine, and you probably do have many sources of happiness. But, when I was and sometimes still am so down that I don't want to go on anymore, I go to a meeting and I don't feel so bad anymore. The filiment of hope that I momentarily lost is restored to me in just the hour or two that I spent admiring all the happy normal people. They all seem so...real.
It truly is something that I don't think I could live without.
(sighs) So, just don't write off everything! Keep trying. You are a person who is on the quest for truth just like everyone else.
Don't overlook them, because you think they're weird!
You made a comment about how Christmas has pagan origins...This is one of the first things that I learned when I started associating with Jehovah's Witnesses.
So the next time they knock on your door, don't just tell them to go away, or pretend like your not there. Hear them out! You might find something that you agree with!
Please
P.S. I saw Queen of the Damned in theatres and I miss Aliah so much I want to cry. I really enjoyed that soundtrack, but I need to look for it again.
I also used to love Korn
Well Bret I'm glad you understand all these protons and neutrons and stuff . . . it's been a while since I was in the science club. I don't remember anyting (LOL)
I'm workin on somethin to post for . . oh shoot . . . yea Joel.
Sorry Janice if you feel out of the loop. :p
But Joel sounds like he would really enjoy the Creator book, don't you think?
Hey Joel
Have you ever heard of a program called Bleach?
Now that is some great music!
So because we've been unable to do it in a lab so far, that means there must be a god right?
There are any number of unaccounted for variables which could have been present at the time of the origin of life (god and space aliens being among the least likely) which would hold up the success of an experiment. Add to that the realization that these experiments have been going on for decades whereas the origination of life was the culmination of roughly a billion years of 'attempts'. The biggest flaw in your arguments is that you're failing to take into consideration the scope of time and the sheer volume of chemical interactions which would have taken place during that time span, only one of those interactions would have had to of caused life in order for life as we know it to have evolved. We're talking billions upon billions upon billions of interactions during the time period between the formation of the earth (not by god but by natural processes of gravity drawing together rocks and gasses from space) and the origin of life. This allows for the origin of life to be incredibly rare and improbable, the notion that in a few years laboratory results could mimic it and that a failure to do so is proof of a creator is preposterous.
Speaking of space aliens... Purely hypothetical question for you and Janice... If we were presented with conclusive proof that life on this planet were seeded by an advanced alien life form (who also had conclusive proof that they themselves evolved and were not created) would you stop believing in god?
As to the JW book, of course Dean Kenyon would say that, he's one of the (few) proponents of ID, saying anything else would contradict his program of attempting to give creationism a platform in the scientific world and school systems. The JW's have a bad track record regarding truth in their publications and changing of their doctrines when the prophecies are proven wrong. They once preached heavily that the world was going to end in 1914-1915, and that's not the only date (now concretely proven to be false) that they have pushed including claims that this came from direct revelation.
Here's a review of that book...
http://corior.blogspot.com/2006/02/book-review-of-is-there-creator-who.html
Some recommended sources...
http://books.google.com/books?id=kSZL8BWc9KcC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_summary_r&cad=0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses_and_blood
http://newsblaze.com/story/20081128120856zzzz.nb/topstory.html
http://www.jehovahswitnessrecovery.com/support-resources.html
http://www.iniquityx.com/category/jehovahswitnesses/
I'd highly recommend more research before getting involved with the Jehovah's Witnesses, I'm sure they may be great people, but it's a very controlling religion and has some very deep faults.
If you're only getting your science from the dozen or so ID proponents in the scientific community (seriously, very few genuine scientists ascribe any merit to it whatsoever) then of course you'll be left with the impression that there had to be a creator.
If you're talking about the Christian music group Bleach I have their CD Static, not really my style anymore... You should check out Snow Patrol.
For the record, I know this may sound harsh but...
If god would punish you for taking a life saving blood transfusion (especially in the case of a pregnant woman who needs it to save the life of her child) then that's a pretty fucked up god!
Joel
About the 1914 date.
The Witnesses never proclaimed that the world was going to end at that time.
There assertions about the year 1914 stems from thoroughly researched Bible Chronology.
If you don't mind I would like you to read this explaination:
DECADES in advance, Bible students proclaimed that there would be significant developments in 1914.
As recorded at Luke 21:24, Jesus said: “Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations, until the appointed times of the nations [“the times of the Gentiles,” King James Version] are fulfilled.”
Jerusalem had been the capital city of the Jewish nation—the seat of rulership of the line of kings from the house of King David. (Psalm 48:1, 2) However, these kings were unique among national leaders. They sat on “Jehovah’s throne” as representatives of God himself. (1 Chronicles 29:23) Jerusalem was thus a symbol of Jehovah’s rulership.
How and when, though, did God’s rulership begin to be “trampled on by the nations”? This happened in 607 B.C.E. when Jerusalem was conquered by the Babylonians.
“Jehovah’s throne” became vacant, and the line of kings who descended from David was interrupted. (2 Kings 25:1-26)
Would this ‘trampling’ go on forever? No, for the prophecy of Ezekiel said regarding Jerusalem’s last king, Zedekiah: “Remove the turban, and lift off the crown. . . . It will certainly become no one’s until he comes who has the legal right, and I must give it to him.” (Ezekiel 21:26, 27)
The one who has “the legal right” to the Davidic crown is Christ Jesus. (Luke 1:32, 33) So the ‘trampling’ would end when Jesus became King.
When would that grand event occur?
Jesus showed that the Gentiles would rule for a fixed period of time. The account in Daniel chapter 4 holds the key to knowing how long that period would last. It relates a prophetic dream experienced by King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon.
He saw an immense tree that was chopped down. Its stump could not grow because it was banded with iron and copper. An angel declared: “Let seven times pass over it.”—Daniel 4:10-16.
In the Bible, trees are sometimes used to represent rulership. (Ezekiel 17:22-24; 31:2-5)
So the chopping down of the symbolic tree represents how God’s rulership, as expressed through the kings at Jerusalem, would be interrupted. However, the vision served notice that this ‘trampling of Jerusalem’ would be temporary—a period of “seven times.” How long a period is that?
Revelation 12:6, 14 indicates that three and a half times equal “a thousand two hundred and sixty days.” “Seven times” would therefore last twice as long, or 2,520 days.
But the Gentile nations did not stop ‘trampling’ on God’s rulership a mere 2,520 days after Jerusalem’s fall.
Evidently, then, this prophecy covers a much longer period of time.
On the basis of Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6, which speak of “a day for a year,” the “seven times” would cover 2,520 years.
The 2,520 years began in October 607 B.C.E., when Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians and the Davidic king was taken off his throne. The period ended in October 1914. At that time, “the appointed times of the nations” ended, and Jesus Christ was installed as God’s heavenly King.—Psalm 2:1-6; Daniel 7:13, 14.
Just as Jesus predicted, his “presence” as heavenly King has been marked by dramatic world developments—war, famine, earthquakes, pestilences. (Matthew 24:3-8; Luke 21:11)
Such developments bear powerful testimony to the fact that 1914 indeed marked the birth of God’s heavenly Kingdom and the beginning of “the last days” of this present wicked system of things.—2 Timothy
Also about the Jehovah's Witnesses "no blood" teachings
The Bible itself speaks several times about "abstaining from blood" and not "eating" blood.
The Witnesses view blood as sacred because of the Bible's teaching that the only proper use of blood is for sacrifice.
Seeing how Christ has already produced the greatest and only valid sacrifice for restoring mankind (doing so with his shed BLOOD) the Witnesses teach that all other uses of blood are disaproved by God.
Also about the blood transfusion thing.
Doctors and modern Medicine have been highly benefited by Jehovah's
Witnesses no blood policies.
Because doctors needed to find ways to operate on Witness patients using bloodless methods. They have found that performing bloodless operations saves time, resources, and is much safer than the use of blood.
So many factors are involved in whether or not a person lives or dies after a blood transfusion. But it certainly is not as safe as it is assumed to be.
I don't have the link for more info about bloodless medicine but it is FACT that it works and is more cost effective and safer than operations requiring blood transfusions.
There are laws or commandments in the old and new testament concerning abstaining from blood. There are blood substitutes and other treatments now available. But I guess the equvalent would be mixing the blood of maybe a friend and a relative or a stanger and drink perhaps 2 to 3 pints or more.
Yes Joel
The Bible does not say anything like: "Thou shalt not conduct blood transfusions"
It simply exhorts us to abstain from blood and to not eat blood
In regards to not eating blood, it has been explained to me like this:
Say you are a recovering alcoholic and your doctor has told you that in order for you to live you must not drink any more alcoholic beverages.
Would you be okay with pumping into your veins though?
Hardly
P.S.
I was talking about an anime show called Bleach.
I guess you are too cool to watch anime.
But it does have great soundtrack
Also more about 1914
Significantly enough, if you do recall that was the year that marked the beginning of our war wrought times.
The First WORLD War!
There has been commentary on this significant date be secular sources. I don't have the names of the people who said it, but I think it went something like 1914 was a date marking the end of an era of world relations and all efforts toward peace.
Joel
I never said you were evil anymore than I am. Although we all have the potential to do evil. My comment was that war and violence was brought into the world by man’s sin, namely: Adam. We as Adam’s children suffer the evils of the world including war and suffering for many. The doctrine of Christianity is Not that a person is evil but sinful. There’s a difference. Sin means missing the mark or imperfect. Meaning an evil person can do good and a good person can do evil.
I don't have time to read a bunch of websites so try to post your concerns here or email me at janice_am@bellsouth.net so we don't flood the forum so much. What many consider contradictions or events that are not in chronological order and therefore we are left to make sense and put the pieces together. That's not to say there aren't some scribal errors but for the most part they aren't that dramatic. Maybe one ancient manuscript was hard to read and said a king was 8 instead of 18, things like that. The perfection of God's word is in its message which Jesus taught concerning the kingdom of God or new government.
I know you say you grew up Christian but I grew up Christian also. The difference may be that I didn’t entirely accept what I was told even from an early age and was brutally punished.. If Easter eggs are not in the Bible then what does that have to do with Jesus. “For the customs of the peoples are just an exhalation, because it is a mere tree out of the forest that one has cut down, the work of the hands of the craftsman with the billhook. With silver and with gold one makes it pretty. With nails and with hammers they fasten them down, that none may reel.” Je 10:3,4
These things were written down as a warning for us today long before Jesus’ birth and he certainly would not condone anyone celebrating his day of birth drawing attention away to himself instead of his Heavenly Father.
Some other things:
If an occasion arose where a son became absolutely rebellious and incorrigible after repeated warnings and the necessary discipline, a still sterner measure was taken. The son was brought before the older men of the city, and after testimony from the parents that he was an irreformable offender, the delinquent suffered capital punishment by stoning. Such arrangement evidently had reference to a son beyond the age of what is usually considered a young child, for this one the Scriptures describe as “a glutton and a drunkard.” (Deut. 21:18-21) One striking his father or mother, or calling down evil upon his parents, was put to death. The reason for such strong measures was that the nation might clear away what was bad from their midst and so that “all Israel [would] hear and indeed become afraid.” Therefore, any tendency in the nation toward juvenile delinquency or disrespect of parental authority would be greatly retarded by the punishment inflicted upon such offenders.-Ex. 21:15, 17; Matt. 15:4; Mark 7:10.
An example of juvenile delinquents were those that Elisha encountered on the way to Bethel showing great disrespect both to him and his office as prophet. “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!” the children jeered. They either mean for him to keep on going up to Bethel or to get off the earth just as his predecessor was supposed to have done. [Elijah] To teach these and other boys and their parents respect for the prophet of God, he turns and calls down evil upon them in Jehovah’s name. Suddenly two she-bears come out from the woods and tears to pieces forty-two of their number.-2 Ki. 2:23, 24
Maybe some may view the actions of these boys as harmful antics and youthful mischievousness, such juvenile behavior was not tolerated like it is today.
God-Ordained Warfare
In the scriptures, Jehovah is called “a manly person of war,” “the God of armies” and “mighty in battle.” (Ex. 15:3; 2 Sam. 5:10; Ps. 24:8, 10; Isa. 42:18). Not only has he the right as Creator and Supreme Sovereign of the universe, but he is also obligated by justice to execute or authorize execution of the lawless, to war against all obstinate ones who refuse to obey his righteous laws. God was therefore just in wiping out the wicked at the time of the Flood, in destroying Sodom and Gomorrah, and in bringing destruction upon Pharaoh’s forces. We also are condemned to death being imperfect creatures however God allows us to live for a short time.
The seven nations of Canaan, named at Deuteronomy 7:1, 2, were to be exterminated and devoted to destruction. Other cities were first warned and terms of peace extended. Not all wars fought by Israel were commissioned by God and some wars were fought in self defense. Killing the men removed danger of later revolt by the city and sparing of only virgins would serve to protect Israel from false worship and no doubt from venereal diseases.
While people make mention of the wars Israel fought against nations in the Promised Land, they fail to mention the nations that God allowed to war and conquer the Israelites. The Babylonians where allowed to take Israel into exile. Apparently the brutal Babylonians smash the Israelite children against the rocks. The Israelites even sang a song about getting even with their aggressors and doing the same to Babylonian children. Again the Jews suffered under the barbaric Romans as Jesus foretold the coming destruction of Jerusalem.
They say war is hell . . . whether fought by man or at the dictates of God. With man it’s a normal part of the evolutionary process, only the strongest survive.
I love bleach, I own the first two seasons and I've downloaded most of what isn't available here yet. Great show! Love the theme song!
Honestly, I have no desire to get into Jehovah's Witnesses prophetic claims. Historically they have issues and their group is one of the few 'Orwellian' groups still around. With regards to the 'bloodless surgeries' I have no argument with you there, when it's appropriate. However there are many instances where a transfusion is necessary for survival, trauma etc., and to think that in these instances god would be angered by taking a transfusion to save your life is a warped way of thinking. If you're happy with it than go ahead and let yourself die if you get into that situation, but once you'd be willing to make a choice like that for your child, condemning them to death because of your mythology then you've lost any and all claims to morality. Life is the basis of morality, that which destroys life is immoral, refraining from a life saving transfusion or prohibiting one for your child is immoral.
Joel
I am glad to hear that you too are a fan of Bleach.
My favorite character is Sado or Chad.
I don't understand why you didn't give the 1914 thing more consideration. I think it is pretty remarkable that these people were preaching about 1914 probably in the late 1800s and when the date arrives we were plunged into WWI.
But I guess that isn't so remarkable to some.
Regarding the tranfusion stuff
What about the people who get a transfusion and die anyway because they were tranfused with "bad blood" that their body would not accept. Or what about the people who contract AIDS because they got a blood transfusion?
If I were to die because I refused a blood transfusion and the medical facility weren't able or were unwilling to conduct a bloodless operation (people have even gotten knee replacements done successful using bloodless methods)
I wouldn't be forsaken by God!
God has promised that in the near future there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous.
All those in God's memory will receive a resurrection.
Now if I was a Witness and I decided that I wanted to disregard God's warnings about abstaining from blood, and I was one of the unlucky who received a bad tranfusion and died anyway, what guarantees would I have about a resurrection? Would God remember me when my last decision was to disobey one of his commands?
That is only assuming that you are a Witness and regard blood as sacred.
"Historically, they have issues"
How would you know?
By using a search engine on the internet?
You are talking to one (Janice) and one who has been associated with them for a while (Me)
If there was anyone who might know about these "issues" that you speak of, I think we would be the ones to ask.
I have not been brainwashed. I am not in a cult. Yes I do believe that Jesus is our Savior. and Yes I am allowed to "have fun".
The only "issues" that I know of is having to decide what kind of food to bring to "goody night".
Joel
Come on!
You should check out Trigun too, same english voice actor for the main characters.
Loved it
Trigun was the best!
Until I discovered Ruroni Kenshin,
I fell in love with the Samurai pacifist over the Gun slinging one
Tee Hee
We have so much in common
(Besides the never ending Agnostic Vs. JW look alike contest we have going)
Anywayz
Are you willing to continue our intriguing dialogue, tomorrow?
I think I over did it working out today, and I must retire for now.
I think your interesting, no matter what you believe...
I just think you have given up on the Bible prematurely (Just my opinion)
TTFN
Actually Witnesses have open heart surgery without blood and organ transplants. In the case of children they have doctors and hospitals well informed on alternative treatments. However in some states the children can be forced to take the blood transfusions. However, many people have the right to refuse cerain types of treatments. Even some children teenagers and younger that are not JW decide decide not to continue cancer treatments after painful and sickening consequences.
from prayforbillmaher.com:
Going to Christian schools, and colleges and having a father as a pastor has made an atheist out of many people, including me. I was an atheist for years. Joel, do you know about the imprecatory psalms? What say ye on this? prayforbillmaher.com (That's not a trick question, just curious.)
Religulous was not played at the movie theater here in Ridgecrest, CA. I was so disappointed, but then I found out Mormons own the theater, so go figure!
Bret I forgot to commend you on the interpretation of Daniel's prophecy which led down to our day. I think about all the changes that have taken place just since within the last 100 years from horse and buggy to automobiles and airplanes. Computers that can reach across the world and enable us to talk to anyone.
If I wasn't living in it myself, I would think I dreaming a star trek episode.
I remember the verse, God says he will speed it up in its own time. I guess that time is here.
Ok, off to bed.
This will be my last post.
To those who have been put off from all forms of worship on a account of the disgusting practices of the religious leaders of our day, listen to the foretelling words of Peter, who loved the Christ:
2 Peter 2:1-3
However, there also came to be false prophets among the people, as there will also be false teachers among you.
These very ones will quietly bring in destructive sects and will disown even the owner that bought them, bringing speedy destruction upon themselves.
Furthermore, many will follow their acts of loose conduct, and on account of these the way of the truth will be spoken of abusively.
Also, with covetousness they will exploit you with counterfeit words. But as for them, the judgment from of old is not moving slowly, and the destruction of them is not slumbering.
...................................
All those reeling from the unfinished and incomplete pictures of God painted by this world's antiChrists, hear the words of Peter and turn away from them.
At the same time, do not lose hope in God and fall into this very same trap carefully laid to swallow up all those who were trying to get saved.
Satan's goal is to get us to either worship God in a way that disgusts Him, or come to the conclusion that there is no God at all.
Don't fall for this trick! There are many who will.
Sorry to see you go Bret.
I guess it would be best for everyone to take a breather, relax, reflect and meditate about life, God, and the real life to come.
Religion has made persons feel worthless, shameful, full of guilt and doubts, unloved by God.
You are correct in that an enemy has planted many lies in the world to turn people away from the One True God and used evolution and religion as its instrument.
I suppose if one grows up being yelled at and declared hellbound, supposedly it would be pleasant to believe one simply dies and never returns.
Learning about God should build one up not wear a spirit down. And serving God should be a positive experience, not hostile or clouded in negativity, criticisms, rudeness, obscenities or stepping over moral bounds. Serving God take humility and humbleness, not arrogance and sarcasm.
We should not let the enemy have success with us. Many have become true rebels against God like our first father in their relentless crusade and given up all hope.
Jesus set an example for us to follow and God was important to him, therefore God should be our concern as well.
. . . I don't if Joel is coming back but I had one post in response to his writers. Maybe I'll post it in a few days.
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/c0cf508ff8/prop-8-the-musical-starring-jack-black-john-c-reilly-and-many-more-from-fod-team-jack-black-craig-robinson-john-c-reilly-and-rashida-jones
Priceless! Anything with Neil Patrick Harris HAS to be worth watching :D
Oh Joel! You're back! Whew . . . I thought we had lost you . . . Ok, don't make me worry like that My goodness . . .
Saw the movie a couple of weeks ago. It was very entertaining and I was glad to see that there is at least one other person on this continent who is sane and holds nearly identical views to mine in regards to religion. While there were nothing new in it for me, from a philosophical perspective (sorry Bill) I am nonetheless thrilled that someone with an amount of intellectual clout, great humour, intelligence and integrity put this flick together - Thank you, Bill and Co.
I will see it. Buying it on DVD the moment it's available. In the meantime, I've started my very own parody religion: The Church of No, Thanks http://www.nothankschurch.com/. Stop on by. We have fudge.
The faults with most religion is not in the Bible but people - Case in point:
Antichrist means against or instead of Christ. The term applies to all who deny what the Bible says about Jesus Christ, all who oppose his Kingdom, and all who mistreat his followers. It also includes individuals, organizations, and nations that falsely claim to represent Christ or that improperly ascribe to themselves the role of Messiah. Read 1 John 2:18 and 2 John 7 - Notice that the “many antichrists” of 1 John 2:18 are referred to collectively ar 2 John 7 as “the antichrist.” [many deceivers])
More coming.......
Want to figure out why so many people lean toward creationism rather than a learned concept like evolution? Read this: http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/2008/12/10_teleology.shtml. This smart psychologist is adding to our understanding with real insight arising from some clever experiments. You also might understand teleology a bit better after reading this! Have fun!
I suppose you athiests believe that the earth was created by an explosion. An destructive explosion that comes to mind happened on September 11, 2001. It created nothing but rubble and killed too many innocent people. Explosion or Creation, Explosion or Creation. Explosions create rubble right?
What do atheists believe? Can you use atheist and believe in the same sentence? The guys I saw on CBC’s the hour looked like atheist freaks. Hey Bill, looking forward to battling your army of 4 athiests! Do you all live in Los Angeles?
I would see it, if you just had released it in some theatres in sweden, I means c'mon BILL! you could have huge audience over here!
I would see it, if you just had released it in some theatres in sweden, I means c'mon BILL! you could have huge audience over here!
This is a bit late . . . but in response to an earlier post . . .
Firstly, speaking in behalf of those of the Christian persuasion, we promise to God never to tire out or give up hope in anyone even in the last hour and imparting truth that leads to everlasting life will always be time well spent.
In answer to what appears to be scientific evidence of evolution as well as atheist/agnostic ideals, we would take offense.
Evolution has been conveyed as a better theory as opposed to Creation . . . An example that is commonly used for demonstration is the theory that evolution created an appendix by mistake . . . although as brought out postulated as once to be an instrument for digestion but actually having shrunk to the size it is today not really having any purpose.
Everything in life has a reason or a purpose including our eyelashes even if we may not fully understand those reasons at first glance . . . An ostrich has wings but can not take to flight, eyes blinded do not impede the termite worker, and mammals that live on land and in water . . .
Mistakes of Evolution . . . or perhaps God has a very good sense of humor (smile)
That’s not to say life in itself doesn’t have defects or sicknesses either from the environment or from the constant decline of our bodies and/or morals.
Research within the last few years has revealed:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/10/05/appendix.purpose.ap/index.html
“The function of the appendix seems related to the massive amount of bacteria populating the human digestive system, according to the study in the Journal of Theoretical Biology. There are more bacteria than human cells in the typical body. Most are good and help digest food.”
“But sometimes the flora of bacteria in the intestines die or are purged. Diseases such as cholera or amoebic dysentery would clear the gut of useful bacteria. The appendix's job is to reboot the digestive system in that case.”
Today rabbits can produce humans ears .. . stem cells, hormones and animal DNA in our corn and food, a smorgasbord of scientific possibilities. We don’t know what we’re eating really . . . cloned sheep, cats and perhaps humans, a wooly mammoth recreated in the laboratory, and if you want to live to be 150 yrs old that could take a special order . . . These so called gaps of evolution, incomplete fossil evidence, radiocarbon/argon inconsistencies - DNA concludes we all originated from one women in Africa . . . Surely we can collect DNA of any species on the face of this planet dead or alive and find the evolutionary missing link. But of course we are just lay people . . . maybe that’s not the way science works.
Serious scholars of Bible Theology do not rely on a God of Gaps theory. The Bible being thrown into doubt by Darwin’s imagination and accusations that many events and characters of the Bible were fictitious has cast doubt on God’s letter to us but nevertheless proved true in its narration of events in world history . . .
Critics claimed that Belshazzar never existed. However, ancient writings were found that identified Belshazzar as son of Nabonidus and coruler with his father in Babylon. For this reason, evidently the Bible says Belshazzar offered to make Daniel “the third ruler in the kingdom,” since Belshazzar himself was the second. (Daniel 5:16, 19)
Other accounts doubted by critics were eventually revealed to be true by archeological evidence:
-The Assyrian king Sargon’s conquest of Samaria. 2 Kings 17:6
-In Latin: ‘Caesariensibus Tiberium Pontius Pilatus Praefectus Iudaeae.’ (To the people of Caesarea Tiberium Pontius Pilate Prefect of Judea.) For the first time there was contemporary epigraphic evidence of the life of the man who ordered the crucifixion of Christ. John 19:13-16
-King Sennacherib’s mention of his victory over King Hezekiah although failing to admit he was forced to return home not being able to conquer Jerusalem 2 Kings 18:13-19:36
-Historian Philip Biberfeld wrote: “Only the Biblical account proved to be correct. It was confirmed in all the minor details by the inscription of Esar-haddon and proved to be more accurate regarding this event of Babylonian Assyrian history than the Babylonian sources themselves. This is a fact of utmost importance for the evaluation of even contemporary sources not in accord with Biblical tradition.” 2Kings 19:36, 37
-King Jehu or an emissary paying tribute to Kng Shalmaneser III
-Statutes of early Roman Caesars, Augustus, Tiberius and Claudius, who appear in Bible accounts and a silver Denarius coin, in fact, found that bears the image of Tiberius Caesar-a coin Jesus asked for when discussing the matter of taxes. Matthew 22:19-21
-A 1,749-foot-long tunnel that was cut through solid rock over 2,700 years ago by King Hezekiah to provide water for the city in anticipation of Sennacherib’s coming siege. 2 Kings 20:20; 2 Chron 32:30
Dr. Ze’ev Shremer, leader of a geological expedition in the Sinai Peninusula commented: “We have our own maps and geodetic survey plans, of course, but where the Bible and the maps are at odds, we opt for The Book.”
We also opt for “The Book” were there are conflicts between the ideals of man and the reliability of the Bible. That’s not to say the Bible is absolutely perfect. However, it has proved to be true over and above its skeptics. Therefore we see no need to put our trust in man to fill in the gaps of evolution since the fossil evidence shows that all species appeared suddenly just as the Bible records.
Darwin: “We do not make due allowance for the enormous intervals of time which have elapsed between our consecutive formations, longer perhaps in many cases than the time required for the accumulation of each formation. These intervals will have given time for the multiplication of species from some one parent-form: and in the succeeding formation, such groups or species will appear as if suddenly created.”
The world can be complex in every way but understanding life . . . or God does not have to be complicated. If the lay person is to understand evolution there should be clear and concise evidence thereof and not what appears to be . . . hogwash, or else persons lose interest. God does not require anyone to be a geologist, scientist, biochemist, astronomer what have you to believe in his promises to restore a perfect world. Unless evolutionist can come to the table and bring evolution down to eye level it will never move the masses. And even if it does, it will never turn people of faith away from their confidence in the unparalleled wisdom and knowledge of God.
Lastly, of course it’s always a pleasure to be able to read the thoughts and beliefs of others whether we agree or not . . . However, we have a saying: A person can be sincere in what they believe . . . and sincerely wrong . . .
We give consideration to the atheist/agnostic belief as well. In the irony of Ingersoll he praised “those who fell on the fierce fields of war,” “all the heroes, the thinkers, who gave their lives for the liberty of hand and brain-for the freedom of labor and thought”.
Those Thinkers were men then and now overwhelmingly believers in fighting for GOD and country. Ingersoll lacks in praise of the Creator instead idolizing the creation.
Impressions of Mr. Russel whomever were his comrades, he certainly did not perceive himself as responsible for their circumstances, misfortunes, suffering or despair as long as he could give them a sympathetic ear. Much of Society however, either singular or collective is responsible for the sufferings and despair for many in the world - A cause and effect of irresponsibility.
Ingersoll also makes reference to being free from monsters of the night, devils, ghosts, etc . . . as if people are afraid evil spirits will attack them in darkness. The reality is: many persons-though not all-have either seen or felt with their senses a supernatural event either good and/or evil in their lifetime during the day or the night. For many this seems like a ridiculous scenario, but something an ordinary person could possibly experience in a supernatural manner is coming in contact with a person and getting an eerie uncomfortable feeling or walking into a house or a building feeling the need to remove oneself immediately from the premises.
However, for the most part, evil has a vested interest in remaining unseen. In that way, it acts undetected as a catalyst influencing immorality, wrecking havoc, war, injustice, division, suffering, promoting disbelief and hopelessness. The best thing evil [wicked spirit creatures] has in its arsenal is being clever not to reveal itself [themselves] to those that deny its [their] existence . . . spreading lies, encouraging attitudes-‘eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we shall all die.’ Don’t worry, it’s only natural to be recycled as a tree or a frog. There’s no Creator . . . no Savior . . . no Jesus fellow coming back to save the world from its detriment . . .
To the contrary, secular history validates Jesus did exist and his life and words we read with an open mind and heart from God’s Word itself. We have hope and faith in Christ that he will restore peace on Earth in the near future and we trust that he is the only one appointed by God to do so. . .
Thus originally from the beginning of time, God created humans to live in peace and “time indefinite he has put in their heart,” the desire to live forever. However, “the good news . . . is veiled among those who are perishing, among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through.” (Eccl. 3:11; 2 Cor. 4:3, 4)
God’s spirit is very operational in the last days of this world searching for all those earnestly seeking him. If we keep on asking, we will receive.
Bill...
I finally got the chance to watch the movie. Kudos for an excellent project that was well presented.
I wanted to let you know that I literally laughed out loud when the imam you were speaking to said that "Islam" meant "peace". The word "Islam" means "Submission" (meaning submission to Allah"). Wish I'd been there.
If you ever do anything like this again, please get a hold of me. I'd gladly volunteer my services as a religion bullshit detector (and info guy). It's what I do
Again, great movie.
Wm. Hopper
author, The Heathen's Guide to World Religions
Bill
It's time to come out of the closet about being gay Bill! Also you need to talk about being a dud & outcast since your conception. Holding all these issues back has made you a angry and hateful dick!
Let it all out & have a good cry.
Merry Christmas & God Bless You
Matthew J Byrne
Iowa
great movie!! I'm always at a loss for words when in a religous debate. You've helped me put my thoughts into words.
thanks
Dear Bill
man.. you are sooo damn right !!
< it may sound strange: but i do feel so connected with you lol =) > .. i am ..well.. i do not believe in any of those religions.. but neither i am an atheist.. hmm.. i am VEGAN =)
i have seen your film right now and i am really faszinated. I HAVE HAD EXACTLY THE SAME DISCUSSIONS AROUND 100S OF TIMES ( though i am only 18, not graying, do not even have a penis, nor i am a comedian.. and cause i am austrian -i do make so many f. mistakes in this comment- i have usually argued about this topic in german )
anyway.. ahm.. you know what i think? i am quite sure there was a jesus.. but he might have been a "bastard" (child born outside marriage !! =) ).. Mary was def. not a virgin, i guess she got laid by a roman legionnaire.... and so on.. the problem is there is soooo much to say about all those stuff ( religion, faith, politics.. ) but i dont wanna "yak" you and your blog.. =)
i am just soo glad i found someone who believes in the same things as i do .. more or less.
i know you are a busy and famous person, but if you are serching someone to discuss about how fucked up all those religious ideas are , or somesome who helps you for your next project just leave me a message. i would be quite "gay" about it !! =)
have a nice day Bill
greetings from Austria
Iris
p.s(oh, though we are quite on the bottom on the "who believes in the evolution" list, i think those fairy tales and bedtime stories of adam and eve are fucked up !! )
I don't have a religion. That does not mean I don't believe in God. I believe that we must each of us answer for the choices we make in this life. FAITH is not a killer any more than a gun is a killer. We are the killers, faith is just another way for us to avoid taking responsibility for our actions. Taking away religion will not cure us of our head-long rush into chaos. We will not end up living the "Star Trek way of life". We are far too distructive for that. With the rules we are taught when we are young we learn responsibility. These are the same rules that apply in society and in the Bible. I don't believe this movie was a fair assessment of all religion. How can you believe that we came from monkey? And why aren't there still monkeys in various stages of evolution right now? It seems to me that evolution can be switched on and off at will!
Thanks Allison for your comments. We need more like yours. I'm noticing more and more, the godless seem to stretch over the morality limits and it shows in their language. My dsl in down so I'm limited on the dial up here but I'll be back by Friday I suppose.
I just saw your movie and i think its a very account on religion in our times. I was wondering why Buddhism wasn't on the list...
Dude...I liked the movie but really though you are putting your neck on the line. People are crazy. If they are crazy enough to believe in shit like religion I am quite sure they are capable of following the "voice," in their heads. I don't know how to counter-act this "faith," of theirs but I do know that they need to somehow get it across their feeble minds that we, humans, are the only ones capable of bringing about real change.
your moive was an exquisite piece of work bravo! as far as religion being the killer i beg to differ
i believe
it is
humans. every religious text read to date has been edited revised
a couple of hundred times
and has had a couple of chapters removed from its
full text. to suit and justify what humans have done to each other . in other words its a way of stating the ends justify the means .i think religion started off as something to help humans because humans are inherenlty evil thomas hobbes wrote about humans
inherent evil
in the leviathan and many other philosphers have indulged in the idea.and this is coming from a christian blogger. people have a need to belong and be right we go to such extremes soley believing in one thing because we are all afraid of the questions we cannot answer remember mob mentality can be a killer!!!
when i think the answer
is simple enjoy your life, love one another no matter what respect and enjoy each others differnces and well be always a sceptic in a text but and a believer in the
power of love. even through it goes agianst
our nature you'd be surprized at what a little effort an do to change the world. dont fret
about a book but do fret about living your personal best life no matter what your beliefs are . and you
will make a mistake or two your human. by the way im sure god who ever he / she / it is cool because he wouldnt have made everything so grand and beautifull . dont believe me look sky or nature beautifull stuff.
I wish you would have pursued the arguments that Muslim terrorists are politically motivated. On 911 they didn't fly buildings into churches. They hit the symbols of America's economic and military might. Surely that makes them politically motivated.
Has everybody forgotten the sanctions we imposed on Iraq which caused the deaths of over 500,000 Iraqi children aged under 5? Wouldn't that make anybody really pissed off, politically?
Have a look at these shocking utterings from our side. Such arrogance and callousness is bound to produce a political backlash.
Here's Madeline Albright saying half a million dead kids was "worth it".
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=FbIX1CP9qr4
Here's Cheney saying the sanctions will destroy Iraq's economy. Nobody seemed to care how many innocents that would hurt.
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=syutGpk1tSc
Remember all the goings on in the Iran/Contra scandal with Ronny Raygun and W's Dad back in the 80's? The USA bankrolled both sides in the Iran/Iraq war which cost 2 million lives. No religion there. Come to think of it, no political ideology either...
I loved the film but I can't see how we can ignore the political context that so much of this terrorism and hatred of the USA has come from. To solely blame religion is disingenuous.
I think the motivations for the backlash are much more political than we will ever admit. And you can bet the people on the other side running the terrorism are building empires and are much more self serving than they will admit. Either way, religion is only window dressing.
Maybe people start to think religiously when they are desperate as Bill said about the man going into prison saying he had nothing but Jesus. Perhaps after seeing things like sanctions killing 500,000 kids people become desperate to retaliate so they commit atrocities hiding behind a smokescreen of religion.
I don't see a clear link between religion and this violent backlash against the USA and it's allies. The political motivations are glaringly obvious. Until we realise that and do something about it there won't be a way out of the lunacy and the carnage.
While this was a great movie, I am wondering Bill, why did you not interview any atheists?
I know this movie was for entertainment purposes first but leaving atheists completely out of the "documentary" on religion makes it feel kind of incomplete as a documentary. I mean, if entertainment was your goal and the obvious choice Richard Dawkins was a bit boring why not interview I don't know Marilyn Manson etc?
Hey Bill,
I am Indian and followed George Carlin all my life. After him its you :)....I saw Religulous and its a great documentory but I dont think you got the facts right about the Hindu God "Krishna" in the movie. He was not born to virgin mother. His mother and his father were prisoned by his uncle "Kans" where he awaited them to give birth to their 8th kid who was supposed to kill 'Kans'. Kans knew that the 8th kid would kill him so he wanted to monitor them in Jail. I bet they had plenty sex there...she was not virgin. How did you get that worng man? Even wikipedia says all that. Whats the source of your information??
Would love if you could drop me a mail and I can help you with the facts.
Cheers and keep up the great work,
Deepak (kiddingme.areyou@gmail.com)
I saw Religulous and expected a good documentary. What I got was a comedy, and a funny one at that. But the message at the end was comedic. I thought you wanted a serious discussion about religion? Making fun of those with extreme views and then condemning all who believe doesn't sit right. There are critical thinkers out here who are Christians. Please visit http://blogs.pioneerlocal.com/religion/2008/10/religulous_disguises_itself_as.html and the links where some of the charges you make are addressed.
Post a Comment