|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Are you going to Heaven? |
| Yeah, man, for sure, Jesus is my savior |
|
50% |
[ 17 ] |
| No way, hell is where the party is at! |
|
8% |
[ 3 ] |
| Why not, everyone is going |
|
8% |
[ 3 ] |
| Dude, i am God. |
|
32% |
[ 11 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 34 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Rteacher
Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 4:43 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
This post is where you first start to confuse cosmology and evolution:
| Quote: |
| The problem with evolutionary thought is the rational that intellect and technology will solve all of the world's problems. Not only have the major think tanks wronged people with believing that the world was created out of chaos, but have seriously errored in not recognizing the consequence of sin. Not realizing that a wrathful and revengeful Lord is coming back for His bride. His Holy love will consume all sin and wickedness that prevents the fullness of His love being released in His bride. |
Your post was about evolution but your arguments are about the formation of the planet, an issue not addressed by evolutionary scientists but addressed by people concerned with how the universe and matter in the universe formed, that is cosmology.
You then compound your error by setting up this strawman:
| Quote: |
| The problem with evolutionary thought is the rational that intellect and technology will solve all of the world's problems. |
The problem is evolutionists DON'T make that argument. Never. Not one little bit. No no no. They really don't. Your pastor may tell you they claim that but they don't. Okay? Yes yes it makes you all shake your heads and go "ohhhh satan is science and thank jebbuuzzz we're christians and we know the way, the truth! Let's hug because we're all so morally superior being born into a Christian nation! Yi ha!" But evolutionists don't make that claim. Really. Can you find me one evolutionary scientist that makes this claim? I know you won't even look beyond your clutch of pop religious books. But really. Your pastor is a bald faced liar or can't grasp basic science. If he can't grasp basics, what else can't he grasp? If he's a liar, what else is he lying to you about? I mean pick up a book like The Selfish Gene (which you won't because it's written by one of the top evolutionary scientists and not a pastor who just says what you want to hear...). Dawkins is actually highly pessimistic about the ability of humans to solve problems if we simply apply "evolutionary thought".
| fiveeagles wrote: |
Instead of me showing links, that I have shown time and time again, proving the historical evidence of the scripture. Show me evidence that proves that the scriptures are wrong with Historical or Archaelogical evidence as reference. |
What's sad is you keep demonstrating a gross misunderstanding of basic logical principles. You don't even see the obvious fallacy.
First, when one makes a claim, be it some figure exists (Jesus, Washington, or Jason and his Argonauts) or some amazing claim like turning water into wine, the person making the claim has to put forward the evidence.
I have a unicorn in my officetel. Do you believe me? Prove I don't. See?
Second, I accept Jesus was a real person. The bible and third party historians both mention him. It's a MAJOR leap to say, one a court of law or a historian would not accept, that there existed a magical being who performed miracles and came back from the dead. While we accept Homer got it pretty close in details on Troy, that does not offer evidence for the existence of Zeus.
| fiveeagles wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Yeah, again, you claim in the age of the internet muslims in the hills of Pakistan have no excuse for not hearing the word of jeeeeeezuz. Now I wonder if god sent all those pre-pc bang pre-satellite modem muslims to hell? |
Buddy, I don't know if you are an ass or just a melon short of a Korean load, but your not quite hitting the mark for what I am saying.
With or without internet, there is no excuse. God's glory is revealed through many ways, like I have previously said. Dreams, visions, manifestations of angels and so on. However, if a nation denies the grace of God, the curse is upon that generation for many generations to come. |
Wow! So god curses whole nations now. That about wraps it up. Your faith is predicated on bigotry. Pure 'n' simple.
Frankly, the only reason the west has not fallen into religious barbarism and persecution is because the west has maintained a strong SECULAR tradition. We don't let Christians write our laws based on biblical principles. In fact, any nation that has tried to run itself based on biblical principles has quickly turned to violence. Ummm Salem witch trials? The inquisition? Jonestown? Christian Identity communes?
Thank god for non believers.
Last edited by mindmetoo on Mon Jun 19, 2006 10:12 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rteacher
Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sectarianism has many bad features, and religions based more on sentiment than philosophy are more prone to produce fanatics, but that doesn't mean that pure religion is bad.
Materialism is the greatest plague on mankind. Ignorance of transcendental knowledge (of what's beyond birth and death) is the underlying cause of all suffering. Only in the rarely attained human form are we capable of inquiring about the meaning of life and our relation to the Absolute Truth. Without at least some religion and/or spiritual progress, humans are no better than animals and will likely go down the evolutionary cycle once again . Our original spiritual identities will become even more mired in ignorance in the gross bodily conceptions of lower life-forms.
Empiric knowledge won't do us any good at the time of death because it can't be taken with us, and God reserves the right not to be known by persons who are envious... Transcendental knowledge and any spiritual progress you make in one life carries over to your next life, and you begin from that point. (Practically, any spiritual progress made assures one of at least a human birth in a decent family...) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
n3ptne
Joined: 14 Sep 2005
Location: Poh*A*ng City
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Linear time isnt a judeo-christian idea. It is the absolute nature of reality.
The universe didn't look to the Christians for a good idea, and even if linear time is/was a judeo christian concept (a point I, in all reality could care less about) then it was more of a lucky parallel. Similar luckiness would be the biblical Adam & Even and the Mitochondrial Eve/Adam. There is no use speculating, the theology is flawed and useless.
'N if you want a directly observable proponent of linear time just look up. The stars you see are not as they are now, but rather how they existed. This fact holds true when you look at another person, a cigarette, anything. We do not percieve the present, we only percieve the past.
Oh and yeah... F' the Vedics, the Christians and the entire lot. Physics is the only thing worth wasting your mental energy on.
It is entirely irrelevant to consider the unknowable or to ask questions that have no answer (i.e. Is there a God, is there a heaven, etc.). Rather it is important to determine what is (i.e. I know I exist, etc.) and from that to extrapolate the necessary structure of the unknowable. In a sense to weed out the possibilities until only few are left and then to hazard a guess at the one which seems most probable. In this sense I highly doubt there is a Heaven. In a probablistic sense it is a fairly good guess to purport that there isn't a God as It's existence would be something of a long shot.
...however it's a longshot I'm willing to bet on. As for Heaven though? Ha. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
n3ptne
Joined: 14 Sep 2005
Location: Poh*A*ng City
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 10:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rteacher wrote: |
| Empiric knowledge won't do us any good at the time of death because it can't be taken with us, and God reserves the right not to be known by persons who are envious... Transcendental knowledge and any spiritual progress you make in one life carries over to your next life, and you begin from that point. (Practically, any spiritual progress made assures one of at least a human birth in a decent family...) |
You forget that God is the end all be all of everything.
You forget that no thing has ever put into action a series of events without having a rational motivation for doing so. (note, by rational motivation I mean a motivation that is rationally justifiable to the entity in question, not to the entities that observe it).
You forget that there are only two things, by the very nature of God's existence in the sense of his necessity for being boundless, that can ever fully understand the rationale of these justifications: God & the entity.
In this sense, as well as in the sense that all things must be equally composed of God and existing on his domain, God cannot possibly reserve the right not to be known by any specified group of individuals. It would be in defiance of the very nature of his absoluteness and thus render him a lesser quality of the rigidly necessary attributes for him to be considered God with a capital G. This of course could be the case, but in such a case there would be that which would be beyond him, and it would render him unfit for the object of worship by any "enlightened" being.
As for a next life? Sorry to burst your bubble mate. Not gonna happen. You are here, you do what you're designed to do, and then you're not. End of meeting, call it a day.
People who believe in Heaven or other lives, things beyond death or beyond this world, are people who don't really understand what being alive is about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| You forget that there are only two things, by the very nature of God's existence in the sense of his necessity for being boundless, that can ever fully understand the rationale of these justifications: God & the entity. |
You forget that we are ignorant and know nothing at all about God, motivation, entities, ideas, words........
Your statement is proof of our ignorance.......we exist in confusion and egoism....
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiveeagles
Joined: 19 May 2005
Location: Vancouver
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
Your post was about evolution but your arguments are about the formation of the planet, an issue not addressed by evolutionary scientists but addressed by people concerned with how the universe and matter in the universe formed, that is cosmology. |
I guess it's a pretty big leap for you, eh? That your evolutionary belief affects your cosmology. Not only you, but to all who hold to the belief of evolution. How can't it? Stephen Hawking is exploring the beginnings of time and whats to know what happened. Why do you think the Pope told him not to go there? (if he did) I guess the Pope didn't like the motivation behind Stephen Hawkings premise.
What about Einstein and the theory of relativity. Do you think he pursued the depths of the universe for pure reasons or did he do it in an attempt to explain away God and to destroy religion? Basically he did, by his own explanation.
Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future: it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural & spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity. (ReligiousTolerance.org)
Personally, I feel he missed it and that his theory of relativity doesn't fully see the whole picture.
To believe that scientists are purely motivated by philosophical reasons is naive. There is a lot on the line for those who discover and invent. University grants, recognition and power are only a few of the things that influence our universites and secular institutions for the fight for government funding and grants. Not that this is a necessary evil, but it can blind people to discover for pure motivations. Imagine the recognition if Stephen Hawkings would receive if he could come up with the Hypothesis that God is dead.
Unfortunately, mindmetoo, the scientific arena is very corrupt. Ask the fallen Korean scientist who wanted to make a name for himself in genetics. What you read in your discovery magazines and other literature isn't always what it seems to be.
| Quote: |
| The problem with evolutionary thought is the rational that intellect and technology will solve all of the world's problems. |
I think I just explained a part of the matrix for you.
| Quote: |
What's sad is you keep demonstrating a gross misunderstanding of basic logical principles. You don't even see the obvious fallacy.
First, when one makes a claim, be it some figure exists (Jesus, Washington, or Jason and his Argonauts) or some amazing claim like turning water into wine, the person making the claim has to put forward the evidence.
I have a unicorn in my officetel. Do you believe me? Prove I don't. See? |
What you don't understand that it was witnessed by more than one person. It's called collaboration. Ok, slowly say collaboration boys and girls. Like you have previously said, the disciples where not well known. In most bibilical accounts they were kinda slow and out of it. However, the FACTS are that there is accounts hold up. What I mean by this is that the 4 gospels are written by 4 different men. Those gospels have stories of rulers, times and places. When those times, places and rulers are investigated the gospels gain more esteem than less. This is very important, because when you do an investigation at a crime scene, the stories that don't add up usually tell you about what's happening. With the gospels, the stories add up and give us a fuller picture of what is happening.
Let me break this down for you. Lets say there was a unicorn in your office. Well did you have others who saw it? Ok, now have each person right down their own on story on the sighting. Then you might have a case.
It's like IGTG and his conspiracy theories. Which ones are right and which ones don't add up?? You have to consider a few aspects. How many people saw the events. What are there motivations behind the events. What do they have to gain from people believing their story.
What did the disciples have to gain by telling people about Jesus? Death.
Think about it.
| Quote: |
Wow! So god curses whole nations now. That about wraps it up. Your faith is predicated on bigotry. Pure 'n' simple.
Frankly, the only reason the west has not fallen into religious barbarism and persecution is because the west has maintained a strong SECULAR tradition. We don't let Christians write our laws based on biblical principles. In fact, any nation that has tried to run itself based on biblical principles has quickly turned to violence. Ummm Salem witch trials? The inquisition? Jonestown? Christian Identity communes?
Thank god for non believers. |
So it's official, your an ass.
The rewritting of American history |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Troll_Bait
Joined: 04 Jan 2006
Location: [T]eaching experience doesn't matter much. -Lee Young-chan (pictured)
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| fiveeagles wrote: |
Stephen Hawking is exploring the beginnings of time and whats to know what happened. Why do you think the Pope told him not to go there? (if he did) I guess the Pope didn't like the motivation behind Stephen Hawkings premise.
|
I think Stephen Hawking is just searching for knowledge, as are many people.
Many people are not satisfied with the Bible as the source of all knowledge because they feel that it doesn't hold up to objective scrutiny.
| fiveeagles wrote: |
What about Einstein and the theory of relativity. Do you think he pursued the depths of the universe for pure reasons or did he do it in an attempt to explain away God and to destroy religion? Basically he did, by his own explanation.
Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future: it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural & spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity. (ReligiousTolerance.org)
|
You completely contradicted yourself here.
First, you claim that Einstein wanted to "explain away God" and "destroy religion."
Then you printed his endorsement of Buddhism.
Here, let me make it clearer for you, since it seems that you cut-and-pasted without really reading.
| Quote: |
| Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future: it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural & spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity. |
Buddhism is a religion.
It's just not your religion.
| fiveeagles wrote: |
However, the FACTS are that there is accounts hold up. What I mean by this is that the 4 gospels are written by 4 different men.
|
Actually, the true facts (or FACTS, if you will) are that there were either one or two original gospels (the gospel of Mark, and, possibly, the lost gospel of Q), and that the others (Matthew, John, and Luke) were copied from the original(s). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endofthewor1d
Joined: 01 Apr 2003
Location: the end of the wor1d.
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i saw the unicorn in mm2's officetel.
that was an awesome unicorn, mm2. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
n3ptne
Joined: 14 Sep 2005
Location: Poh*A*ng City
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
You forget that we are ignorant and know nothing at all about God, motivation, entities, ideas, words........
Your statement is proof of our ignorance.......we exist in confusion and egoism....
DD |
I'm not being arrogant, I fully admit our ignorance, that however does not excuse us from comprehending a few basic facts about the nature of God and the nature of the universe in comparison with thousands of years of scientific thought. We do not nothing about such things, however it is sufficient to say that we do know enough about them to be able to state what they cannot be. That is an important starting.
In reference to God: Everything that has a beginning must have an end. God, in order to be boundless, can have neither. Our universe, on the other hand, is a finite structure that definately had a beginning and will most certainly have an end. The nature of that end is entirely debatable, it might never "end" in the sense of it being destroyed, but it will certainly cease to exist in its current state at some eventual point. Another necessity is that it, the universe, must exist within a "structure" that eventually shows to be infinite (of course such a structure would prove to lack any structure). And a final point: It is irrelevant to know the specifics of motivations, etc, it is merely important to acknowledge they exist in light of accompanying philosophic thought.
In either case freewill is impossible and the implications of such a statement are profound in relation to religion, ethics, law, etc.
We may still be ignorant, but we are also far less ignorant (in a sense of potential not actuality) than those that went before us. We simply choose to ignore such a potential. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 10:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| fiveeagles wrote: |
What about Einstein and the theory of relativity. Do you think he pursued the depths of the universe for pure reasons or did he do it in an attempt to explain away God and to destroy religion? Basically he did, by his own explanation. |
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. I'm sorry but anyone who knows the first thing about Einstein knows this is UTTER crap. "God does not play dice with the universe." Do you understand why he said that?
You're like the guy who gets soundly beaten in a boxing match but thinks he came out on top because he did such a good job of stopping the other boxer's punches with his face.
Destroying an ability to interpret the bible as being wholly accurate on matters of cosmology doesn't at all mean a destruction of religion. Your head-in-ass version maybe, but there are a lot of reasonable christian cosmologists, christian evolutionary scientists, and christian physicist who don't think their scientific study is destroying religion.
| Quote: |
| Unfortunately, mindmetoo, the scientific arena is very corrupt. Ask the fallen Korean scientist who wanted to make a name for himself in genetics. What you read in your discovery magazines and other literature isn't always what it seems to be. |
Darn tootin' science is subject to corruption, as is religion. However, the difference is science does not have dogma. It has beliefs that temporarily win in the market of ideas, surely. And it requires good proof to convince scientists to abandon theories that seem to work perfectly well. What is key, science is subject to revision and self correction. Sure some scientists cook their books. But science is about repeatability. There's a reason we're not powering our homes with cold fusion. No one has ever been able to repeat the original experiment. Religion, sadly, does not have falsfiability. "Pray and god will heal you." "I didn't get healed. Does that mean god doesn't exist?" "Err no. Your faith wasn't strong enough."
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| The problem with evolutionary thought is the rational that intellect and technology will solve all of the world's problems. |
I think I just explained a part of the matrix for you. |
You made the claim. Now back it up. What evolutionary scientist has expressed this belief? Who told you that?
| Quote: |
| What you don't understand that it was witnessed by more than one person. It's called collaboration. Ok, slowly say collaboration boys and girls. Like you have previously said, the disciples where not well known. In most bibilical accounts they were kinda slow and out of it. However, the FACTS are that there is accounts hold up. What I mean by this is that the 4 gospels are written by 4 different men. Those gospels have stories of rulers, times and places. When those times, places and rulers are investigated the gospels gain more esteem than less. This is very important, because when you do an investigation at a crime scene, the stories that don't add up usually tell you about what's happening. With the gospels, the stories add up and give us a fuller picture of what is happening. |
There are a lot of books written about the exploits of the Greek pantheon. Does collaboration establish the truth of Zeus? Again, we come back to the facts: the gospels were written years after the fact by anonymous authors. They are clearly written not by independent observers but by hardcore followers, as fervent followers as had Charles Manson or Mao. We tend to discount the wilder claims of any historical figure's fervent followers. You keep failing to address this salient point. You keep failing to grasp the proofs you use to buttress your claims can be applied to any religious belief system. Rteacher said himself Krishna had all kinds of witnesses to his miracles. Does that make them true in your book? That's your test. Don't shift the baseline, now.
| Quote: |
| Let me break this down for you. Lets say there was a unicorn in your office. Well did you have others who saw it? Ok, now have each person right down their own on story on the sighting. Then you might have a case. |
Okay so someone gives you four documents written 30 years after I pass on. You don't know who wrote the documents. But they claim to have talked to people who had seen the unicorn. Is that good proof?
| Quote: |
| What did the disciples have to gain by telling people about Jesus? Death. Think about it. |
What do the die hard followers of any belief have to gain by telling people about their leader? What do the followers of falun gong have to gain by telling other chinese about their faith? Death. Jail. Torture. Does that make their belief true?
| Quote: |
| So it's official, your an ass. |
You're a bigot. Among other things you make obvious.
Last edited by mindmetoo on Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:04 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Troll_Bait
Joined: 04 Jan 2006
Location: [T]eaching experience doesn't matter much. -Lee Young-chan (pictured)
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 11:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Troll_Bait wrote: |
| Have you ever read this book? It entirely refutes yours, point-by-point. |
| fiveeagles wrote: |
I'm sure it does.  Looks like that is going to be a best seller. ha. |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| I'm more than familiar with Christian apologetics. I'd only take that book, cross out Christ, write in Allah, and hand it back. Odds are it would still read the same. |
| fiveeagles wrote: |
| Right. Nice cop out. |
Let me get this straight.
You suggest a book to us. When someone says, "No, thanks," you accuse him of a cop-out.
When I suggest a book, you respond with an arrogant rolling-eyes emoticon.
Do as I say, not as I do.
And by the way, I'm sure that "The Case For Christ" does out-sell "Challenging The Verdict." However, that's no indication as to which book is more scholarly.
Which sells more copies, "People" magazine or "The New England Journal of Medicine"?
Which author sells more books, Stephen Hawking or Stephen King?
I read your book, "The Case For Christ." As Yu_Bum_Suk said, it's pretty lame. It's not going to convince anyone who's not already heavily inclined to believe.
So, why won't you read my book? What are you afraid of?
You talk incessantly about "being in the light."
If "light" is knowledge, and "darkness" is ignorance, then it is you who is deliberately keeping himself in darkness.
| SeoulFinn wrote: |
| One month away from Dave's and the religious themes keep still popping up? |
That's because the religious threads are all started by the same guy.
Exception: I started the "Hell" thread, but only as a parody of the "Heaven" thread.
| fiveeagles wrote: |
I would rather be an idiot going to heaven than a genius going to hell.  |
What makes you so sure that you're going to heaven? Don't count your chickens before they're hatched, buddy. Pride goes before a fall. Spending eternity in a lake of molten lead would be quite a spectacular fall.
| fiveeagles wrote: |
| I thought buddhists didn't believe in hell? |
Once again, you betray your utter ignorance of other religions. How can you condemm something that you know absolutely nothing about?
Many Buddhists believe in different heavens and hells, but they are temporary, not permanent.
I hinted at such in my first post in this thread, for which you arrogantly accused me of thinking that I'm God.
| fiveeagles wrote: |
| Actually, when I was younger, Jesus took me to Heaven to show me how wonderful it is. It was incredible. I will never forget it. It was the most peaceful time I have ever had. |
Good for you. So did you learn anything about tolerating other people's beliefs while you were there?
| fiveeagles wrote: |
| If only you could meet Him Satori, then you would become beautiful too, because quite honestly, everything I know about you is ugly. |
Mr. Kettle, Mr. Pot just called.
| fiveeagles wrote: |
| Regardless, are you going to let the other poster answer about the caste system? What about the now? If Hinduism is altruistic, shouldn't it be about increasing in glory rather than diminishing? |
And why do you keep trying to use the caste system as a club with which to beat Rteacher over the head with?
As deadman pointed out, Rteacher has already said that he considers it to be a corruption of Vedic scripture.
Matthew 7:1 to 7:5
7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
7:4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam [is] in thine own eye?
7:5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
Mark 4:24 With what measure you measure, the same shall be measured to you.
Luke 6:37-42
37. Judge not, and you shall not be judged: condemn not, and you shall not be condemned: forgive, and it shall be forgiven to you.
38. Give, and it shall be given to you. Good measure, and pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall they give into your bosom: for the same measure, with which you measure, shall be measured again to you. (Again.)
41. And why seest thou a straw in thy brother's eye, and perceivest not a beam which is in thine own eye?
42. Or how will thou be able to say to thy brother, Brother, allow me to pull out the straw which is in thine eye, while thou seest not the beam which is in thine eye? Hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine eye, and then thou shalt see clearly, that thou mayest cast out the straw which is in thy brother's eye.
Stop worrying about the speck in Rteacher's eye and start worrying about the plank sticking out of your own eye-socket.
| fiveeagles wrote: |
Like I have said in previous threads, all the historical evidence points to the validity of the scriptures.
|
Utterly untrue. Modern archaeology has shown the Bible to be largely inaccurate. Examples? You know the story about how "the walls of Jericho came tumbling down," right? Archaeology has found that cities of that time and place were not walled. And rather than ruling great empires, David and Solomon ruled minor kingdoms -if they even existed at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Troll_Bait
Joined: 04 Jan 2006
Location: [T]eaching experience doesn't matter much. -Lee Young-chan (pictured)
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2006 4:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| fiveeagles wrote: |
| So it's official, your an ass. |
Grammatical error aside, whatever happened to ... ?
Matthew 5
38. You have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.
39. But I say to you, Do not resist evil: but whoever, shall inflict a blow on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
43. Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love they neighbor, and thou shalt hate thy enemy.
44. But I say to you, Love your enemies: bless those who curse you: do good to those that hate you: and pray for those who injure and persecute you.
Luke 6
27. But I say to you who hear, Love your enemies: do good to those who hate you.
28. Bless those who curse you, and pray for those who injure you.
29. To him who striketh thee on one cheek offer also the other, and from him who taketh away thy cloak, do not forbid thy coat also.
31. And as you wish that men should do to you, do you also to them likewise.
32. And if you love those who love you, what good-will shall it be in you? for sinners also love those by whom they are loved.
33. And if you shall do good to those who do good to you, what good-will shall it be in you? for sinners also do this.
35. But love your enemies. And ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind to the unthankful and evil.
Matthew 7
12. All things, therefore, whatsoever you would wish that man should do to you, do so also to them: for this is the Law and the Prophets.
John 15
12. This is my commandment, that you love one another, as I have loved you.
Jesus would be proud. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flotsam
Joined: 28 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2006 4:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
TB, have you ever considered running for Grand Poobah of the world? (I will knock on doors.)
Dude. You are so lucky your quote is so long or I would immortalize you in your own thread in the other forum. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
n3ptne
Joined: 14 Sep 2005
Location: Poh*A*ng City
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2006 7:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. I'm sorry but anyone who knows the first thing about Einstein knows this is UTTER crap. "God does not play dice with the universe." Do you understand why he said that? |
...he said that in response to the Quantum Mechanics claim that there is such a thing as random behavior exhibited in the universe which is a misunderstood function of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.
To which Niels Bohr responded, "Einstein, stop telling God what to do".
Einstein was very much against the idea of freewill, point in case: He used Spinoza's model of the Universe to extrapolate certain aspects of relativity.
For those of you who don't know... Spinoza was more than a little against the idea of freewill, heaven, the soul, so forth and so on... he was however very pro-God. Sadly he lived hundreds of years ago and didn't have the benefit of modern science to use as a backdrop for his philosophy. Einstein was said to have "fallen in love with his theory of the universe".
Nevertheless, Einstein, as Quantum Mechanics is continuing to demonstrate, was most probably correct. God, assuming he exists, most certainly does not play dice. Here's a few more insightful quotes from the man, most of which are quite relevant to the discussion:
Everything is determined, the beginning as well as the end, by forces over which we have no control. It is determined for the insect as well as for the star. Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper.
There is no logical way to the discovery of these elemental laws. There is only the way of intuition, which is helped by a feeling for the order lying behind the appearance.
No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.
There comes a time when the mind takes a higher plane of knowledge but can never prove how it got there.
The distinction between the past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.
That deep emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God.
The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible.
It should be possible to explain the laws of physics to a barmaid.
My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind.
I want to know all Gods thoughts; all the rest are just details.
I do not believe in the God of theology who rewards good and punishes evil.
I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation and is but a reflection of human frailty.
I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it.
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice.
A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
All religions, arts and sciences are branches of the same tree.
All these constructions and the laws connecting them can be arrived at by the principle of looking for the mathematically simplest concepts and the link between them.
Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish.
Considered logically this concept is not identical with the totality of sense impressions referred to; but it is an arbitrary creation of the human (or animal) mind.
Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even incapable of forming such opinions.
God always takes the simplest way.
God does not care about our mathematical difficulties. He integrates empirically.
The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it.
Last edited by n3ptne on Wed Jun 21, 2006 7:23 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
