Kittens are cramed into bottles for a stupid novelty. . . -

Sydney · #**181** 07-26-2001, 04:23 AM

Joe, it's not my fault someone keeps opening more cans of worms. And if someone directs something at me, I do my best to respond to them.

Joe the Intern · #**182** 07-26-2001, 05:00 AM

what ive been tryin to tell you is what you said. its becoming ridiculous and we need to stop arguing! im not sayin its your fault. cant we all just get along?

[ July 25, 2001: Message edited by: Joe the Intern ]

SpikeyMudokonPunk · #**183** 07-26-2001, 04:29 PM

Daniel, are you blind or what? I told you that I don't take the bible literally. Some of the scriptures have symbolism and stuff, to represent something. Sydney, we are talking about the bible changing in plots and settings, not languages. All the stories are the same. Yeah the bible is written in different languages, It elizabethan, and latin. but, they still have the same stories, but in a different language. God said that you can't change the bible. Like, you can't write Genesis, and it talks about satan in hell or something. You know what I'm saying yo?

[ July 26, 2001: Message edited by: SpikeyMudokonPunk ]

Danny · #**184** 07-26-2001, 04:53 PM

actually, pinky, sydman wasn't just talking about it changing languages, he was talking about the changes in meaning that occured as it changed language. after all, nothing translates exactly, and so a lot of changes in meaning have occurred to the bible. also there is a hell of a lot of ambiguity in the bible, which is why christians as varied as Mother Teresa and Adolf Hitler can use it as reasons for what they do.

SpikeyMudokonPunk · #**185** 07-26-2001, 05:13 PM

I think I understand what you are saying there Rettick.

Adolf Hitler a christian? What he did, I mean, he was the devil himself. faith comes by hearing, and hearing the word of God. You won't understand the bible and you will have doubts if you are not into the bible. But if you keep reading, and growing, you will learn that the bible does not sound so contradicting or abiguity. Because I use to be atheist, and thought the bible was contradicting and doubtful, and I got into an accident and I thank God today because I could been dead. So I gave him my life. You follow me?

I'm just saying, Matthew, Mark and Luke are still "Synpotic Gospels". God told people like Moses, Matthew and others, to write it exactly. If they made a mistake, they would have to destroy it and start all over.

Danny · #**186** 07-26-2001, 05:46 PM

I think I understand you now, Pinky. [Now THERE's a sentence I didn't think I'd be saying in this topic!

] You feel that, if God hadn't been watching out for you, you'd be dead, so you feel beholden to him for that. I feel that I understand you a bit better now.

But you have to admit that there have a been a long list of people who have twisted the words of the Bible and used it as an excuse to do bad things.

That is when, I think, Religion goes wrong. To me the best Religion isn't the one that is right, but it's the one that makes people treat each other better, which is why [no offense] I am a little dubious about Christianity, since a lot of Evil has been done in its name. And I think the First Commandment is responsible for quite a lot of it. Most of the rest of the commandments were good, and led to people being nicer to each other, but I can't see any possible way in which the First could have caused people to be nicer.

There, voices are lower, and it's a lot more relaxed here now. Well done, Sydney!

Ah, hell with it, let's go for 200!

PinkHaired Mudokon CWR · #**187** 07-30-2001, 12:56 PM

Well, I don't think the first commandment is considered bad, it just makes people confused. But I'm Christian and It's against my religion to believe in other Gods besides God himself and his son. Because God will punish me, If i believe in Hindu gods and worship them. That won't make any sense.

And Daniel, if your parents are so active in the bible, would they know that you can't think that the whole bible is not take n literally or not all christians are not in the same level? So some people would not know that, so you would have to teach them, not beat it in people like you did. Okay, one scripture it saids that fornication is a sin. Are you not going to take that literally? Yeaaeh. But in Proverbs, one verse states, "Wisdom cries out in the streets." Wisdom is not actually crying out of the street. It's just symbolizes, Wisdom being out there, and you either except it or not. It's not a sin to take the bible literally. And if people do, then you have no right to beat it down on them. Christ did not beat things down on people. Once you get baptized, you won't automatically stop smoking or use drugs, It takes time. You are a baby in Christ. it's like being a baby. When babys are born, can they feed themselves? I'm not there yet either. And Daniel, since your so worried about your parents, what have you been doing your self? When you face God, are you going to say my parents this and this, and God is going to tell you, what did you do? So you need to help your self be obidient also, instead of looking at other people.

And Sydney, if you read 2Timothy 3:1-9, and 1 John and 2 John, you will know what I mean.

glukkon_daniel · #**188** 07-30-2001, 09:54 PM

I guess I should have been more clear. I meant that you take the bible too literally. Do you believe the Noah's Ark or Adam and Eve story?

You are a fundamentalist. My family is not. So we have different beliefs. All your beliefs are based on the bible, but all my beliefs are based on scientific proof and a little bit of the bible. However, all my morals and stuff like that IS based on the bible. I see the stories in the bible as stories setting examples and stories to inspire us and tell about the glory of God. But you see them as things that actually happened.

SpikeyMudokonPunk · #**189** 07-30-2001, 10:21 PM

That's why we have parables...
yeah, I do believe in the ark, because they found the ark in Russia. It's not bad to take the bible literally.

glukkon_daniel · #**190** 07-30-2001, 11:00 PM

They found the ark in Russia? Do tell...

PinkHaired Mudokon CWR · #**191** 07-30-2001, 11:08 PM

Yup, and the archor stones too

My bad

[ July 30, 2001: Message edited by: PinkHaired Mudokon CWR ]

glukkon_daniel · #**192** 07-30-2001, 11:13 PM

Can you give me a url or something?

PinkHaired Mudokon CWR · #**193** 07-30-2001, 11:17 PM

Absolutely

PinkHaired Mudokon CWR · #**194** 07-30-2001, 11:29 PM

Noah's ark

Robbo · #**195** 07-31-2001, 07:42 PM

WILL PEOPLE SHUT UP ABOUT THIS SICK JOKE ALREADY!!!

Alector · #**196** 07-31-2001, 08:10 PM

What are you talkin about, peoples????? Does we talk now about Noah's ark, or whaaaat???

help....my poor head...i'm too confused now

(Â¯`'Â·.,Â¸Â·Â´Â¯`Â·Â*> OÂºÂ°'Â´Â¨`Â·â€“l[

]lâ€“Â·Â´Â¨`'Â°ÂºO <Â*Â·Â´Â¯`Â·Â¸,.Â·'Â´Â¯)

glukkon_daniel · #**197** 07-31-2001, 10:13 PM

Munchy, shut up. We'll argue if we want.

Pinky, i couldn't be bothered to read the whole thing, but what I did read was very convincing. I do not know what to think.

Sydney · #**198** 08-01-2001, 03:18 AM

Ron Wyatt's "discoveries" have long been considered to be frauds. Most of the Christian community agree, and are furious with the bad name he is giving Christianity.

Both of these links were authored by Christians, who expose Wyatt as the hoaxer he is. http://www.tentmaker.org/WAR/ http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/wyatt.html

ODDBODD · #**199** 08-01-2001, 12:54 PM

HEY DUDES JUST ONE MORE POST AND THIS TOPIC WILL BE THE HIGHEST POSTS IN A TOPIC

PinkHaired Mudokon CWR · #**200** 08-01-2001, 01:11 PM

See, there you Go sydney, so full of pride and denial. There are other people who had proof too, like they found Kyafis tomb, Jesus Tomb, Joseph's letter. not all Christians think that he is a fraud. Have you actually went to russia? You need to stop worrying about other people's opinions, and see it for yourself.

Danny · #**201** 08-01-2001, 06:51 PM

okay, not meaning to be argumentative, but pinky, have YOU been to Russia to see the supposed Ark site?

i am not saying there never was an ark, but i think that it wasn't a worldwide event. it was probably a localised flood, since you couldn't get two of every species on one boat, no matter how big. anyway, that'd mean that every species was a big, inbred family, which we aren't...

PinkHaired Mudokon CWR · #**202** 08-01-2001, 06:53 PM

Yeah, I have been to russia and Iran! It was fun!

PinkHaired Mudokon CWR · #**203** 08-01-2001, 06:54 PM

It had to be worldwide, because every country has a rainbow, and that was the covenant made from God, that he would never drwon the world again.

DarkHoodness · #**204** 08-01-2001, 10:15 PM

Whoo-hoo!!
*Is proud of starting the biggest topic on the board*
Keep posting!!

- DH

Danny · #**205** 08-01-2001, 11:29 PM

[we going for 250 now? okay...]

yeah, but have you seen this 'ark'? and the rainbow is caused by light refracting in raindrops.

Sydney · #**206** 08-02-2001, 04:57 AM

:

Originally posted by PinkHaired Mudokon CWR:
See, there you Go sydney, so full of pride and denial.

Pinkhaired? You really do confuse me sometimes. I was being prideful? I think someone needs to remove the log from their eye before pointing out the speck in others.

Anyway, did you even visit the links I posted? The people who worked with Wyatt on his "archeaological expeditions" are even furious with him because of his misrepresentation of the findings. They openly describe Wyatt as a liar and a fraud. These people too, are Christians, and they don't like to back their faith up with lies. Don't take it personally when I respond to your points, Pinkhaired.

You are the one in denial if you continue to follow Wyatt's lies, not me, so don't accuse me of such.

Joe the Intern · #**207** 08-02-2001, 05:14 AM

well, i have something to point out. not every species on earth could have fit on the ark today but, thousands of years ago it may have been possible since there werent as many species then. new species came about through selective breeding in humans. take dogs for example. everyone knows that a long time ago they used selective breeding on dogs. they used it on horses too. but i admit, there are a lot of things that cant be explained about the ark either.

Lampion · #**208** 08-02-2001, 06:45 AM

It seems that all this aguementation arose because someone believes that:

"Humans are NOT animals",

then someone replied:

"Humans ARE animals".

Who is right? I'd say both. Because, although they are using the same words ( humans and animals) they have different concepts for these words.

That's the main reason of so much misunderstanding in the world. If I say "I'm a good person", I would be telling the truth if the concept I have of being a good person fits the way I behave. But everyone else would agree I'm a good person? Every single person has her own concept of what a "good person" is, and it certanly doesn't fit exactly my own concept.

Ok, let's forget about this human-animal subject, I'd like to talk a little about the later discussion (Noah's Ark, scientific proofs of Biblical events, Creationism-evolutionism).

I followed the links Sydney and Pinkhaired provided, and I found them very interesting, and after reading them I came to a conclusion:

The real scentific method start from one point: observation. Then some [b/]hipothesys[/b] arise. An experimentation method is apllied, after all some results are collected. Then, a theory is formulated to explain the results of the investigation. That theory can be proved or refuted, and it is refuted, improvements on the theory are made to fit the new discoveries. Then life goes on.

It seems that fundamentalist and Creationist scientists have just reverted the process. They start from the point that "The Bible is all the truth. It's the infallible speech of God herself, amen" and then they go on trying to prove ideas that doesn't need to be proved, because the first assumption made by them was that it is already the truth. The right word here is acceptance. You accept it or not.

Well, now I'm lost. I forgot where was I trying to reach. Just concluding:

Religion belief is a matter or faith. It can't be proved or refuted. Science also have it load of faith in it, since we can prove or refute every single scentific theory about the world. We just accept most of them.

But there is a great difference between Science and Religion. Science allows refutation. Something that was right could be turned out to be wrong. Religious dogmas don't have such flexibility.

Sydney - I can clearly see your point, and I agree with it.

Pinky - What is your point? What are you trying to tell us? Sincerely, I don't get it.

PinkHaired Mudokon CWR · #**209** 08-02-2001, 12:29 PM

*sigh* Nevermind my goodness. If rettick could understand so can you atleast.

PinkHaired Mudokon CWR · #**210** 08-06-2001, 06:52 PM

You never get anything Lampion and you never will. You don't get what Sydney is taliking about because I seriously don't know what you are talking about. It's not heard to comprehend anything, If other people can get it, and I could, then you can too, and your like older than me!