The Religion Discussion

[illumin@ti]

razkal they claim to have found Noah's ark wouldn't that corrupt your argument a bit?
illumin@ti where do you stand in all this?

funny that you would pick now of all times to ask me this... seeing that yuh have meh classed already in your own mind.

its simple, i believe in reason and not blind inexplicable faith. you can feel free to believe in whatever you may.

so how will i know if your belief in reason is the way?

Do you seriously climb up on a stool and look over my shoulder to see if im pissing in the bowl properly? Man , the point of it all is that my beliefs are personal and pertain to me. it in no way colours my interaction with other people that may hold divergent beliefs. My concern is not if you , or picasso, or banzai or duane following the right path to salvation... who am i to adjudicate for them what is right. And by the way, what exactly is 'right' ? who determines it ? the book? the word? whos word? written by whom? interpreted by whom?.....reprinted and edited by whom?

Do i seriously need that to live my life properly and righteously? My belief is MY way. i dont beat ppl over their heads with it and try to convert them to it , nor do i denouce and scorn others who may not follow it......

am i clear?

[megadoc1]

razkal they claim to have found Noah's ark wouldn't that corrupt your argument a bit?
illumin@ti where do you stand in all this?

funny that you would pick now of all times to ask me this... seeing that yuh have meh classed already in your own mind.

its simple, i believe in reason and not blind inexplicable faith. you can feel free to believe in whatever you may.

so how will i know if your belief in reason is the way?

Do you seriously climb up on a stool and look over my shoulder to see if im pissing in the bowl properly? Man , the point of it all is that my beliefs are personal and pertain to me. it in no way colours my interaction with other people that may hold divergent beliefs. My concern is not if you , or picasso, or banzai or duane following the right path to salvation... who am i to adjudicate for them what is right. And by the way, what exactly is 'right' ? who determines it ? the book? the word? whos word? written by whom? interpreted by whom?.....reprinted and edited by whom?

Do i seriously need that to live my life properly and righteously? My belief is MY way. i dont beat ppl over their heads with it and try to convert them to it , nor do i denouce and scorn others who may not follow it......

am i clear?

ok so what is your purpose in this ched?
what can you share with us concerning God or no God?

[illumin@ti]

^^ fella ,, you are really one of the most ignorant ppl i have ever met. Remember - closer the church, further from god eh. You personify this.

[megadoc1]

^^ fella ,, you are really one of the most ignorant ppl i have ever met. Remember - closer the church, further from god eh. You personify this.

what this have to do with anything you believe in ?
you aint answer, you said that you believe in reasoning and its personal

the point of it all is that my beliefs are personal and pertain to me. it in no way colours my interaction with other people that may hold divergent beliefs. My concern is not if you , or picasso, or banzai or duane following the right path to salvation... who am i to adjudicate for them what is right. And by the way, what exactly is 'right' ? who determines it ? the book? the word? whos word? written by whom? interpreted by whom?.....reprinted and edited by whom?

Do i seriously need that to live my life properly and righteously? My belief is MY way. i dont beat ppl over their heads with it and try to convert them to it , nor do i denouce and scorn others who may not follow it......

if your beliefs are personal and pertain to you what it have to do with me or anyone else posting here what kinda reasoning is that?
that's why I ask what is your purpose posting here ?
what can you offer concerning your belief?
isn't it reasonable for me to ask such?
if not what is reasoning?
wait aren't you the one who bumped this ched after a 46 day hiatus ?

buh eh eh ,,,,, look cobweb up in harr ...*cough* ,,, Spike!!! Dappa !! Razkal !!! MG !! whey allyuh ?

how credible is this reasoning?

[illumin@ti]

razkal they claim to have found Noah's ark wouldn't that corrupt your argument a bit?
illumin@ti where do you stand in all this?

funny that you would pick now of all times to ask me this... seeing that yuh have meh classed already in your own mind.

its simple, i believe in reason and not blind inexplicable faith. you can feel free to believe in whatever you may.

so how will i know if your belief in reason is the way?

Do you seriously climb up on a stool and look over my shoulder to see if im pissing in the bowl properly? Man , the point of it all is that my beliefs are personal and pertain to me. it in no way colours my interaction with other people that may hold divergent beliefs. My concern is not if you , or picasso, or banzai or duane following the right path to salvation... who am i to adjudicate for them what is right. And by the way, what exactly is 'right' ? who determines it ? the book? the word? whos word? written by whom? interpreted by whom?.....reprinted and edited by whom?

Do i seriously need that to live my life properly and righteously? My belief is MY way. i dont beat ppl over their heads with it and try to convert them to it , nor do i denouce and scorn others who may not follow it......

am i clear?

What part of this cant your feeble brain understand?
why is it that i have to be the one to show you why I believe in something more tangible than a fairytale.. Do i disturb you in some way? Last i recall this is a public forum, and if it bothers u that much that i think the way i do, ur free to hit the post report button to the top right, or pm Duane or some other mod and cry the whole mountain...

what i dont get is why the overly 'religious' and newly saved like yourself tend to be the most sickening, hypocritical characters out. Ok so u believe in X and I believe in Y. fine why must you all seek to point out the dysfunction of all the other ppl that believe in something other than X. That, is hilarious. the way others like yourself tear into other Christians of differing flavour just because they dont believe in your flavour. Yuh sad Megadoc.. because a man has the choice to believe in whatever he may.. you dont have the right to condemn him for it. and you cant get it thru your thick waste of a skull that you are not evangelizing and doing your 'masters' work' if is scorn and division yuh spitting under the guise of being saved and holy. This is what you and others like you never seem to grasp. You may never get it.. Yet you think that having and endless resource of bible quotes at your disposal via cut and paste makes you a subject matter expert hilarious. Why must it be imperative that i demonstrate and justify to you why my belief in reason is the way? according to your twisted standards? You eh self know if yuh comin or going and i must justify to you anything?

Yuh does make it sound like logic and reason is a religion. Its not. Its tools that minds (that actually function somewhat) use to operate in a world where the tangible is what we focus on. Yes,, real time, here and now business. I dealin with issues that affect me in everyday applications, so its not at the front of my head what Matthew, Mark or John the Baptist thought about it 2000+ years ago.. My logic tells me that if i work hard and persist then i should be ok, barring of course an unforeseen circumstance.... if that dont work,,, work harder. If that dont work, re-evaluate and try something different. I dont think that bruising my knees in the presence of the flock going to help me at my neediest hour. thats just me.

Given your 'performance' in this thread : viewtopic.php?f=4&t=299033&hilit=rise+from+the+dead

Im sayin that its my opinion that ur largely misguided. You dont care about the beliefs of anyone but yourself and other lemmings like yourself. You have openly denounced, rebuked, scorned, thrown fire upon and insulted the faith and belief systems of so many people here yet think that ur the shining example of what your belief of what a 'good christian' embodies. I hope yuh take a good dose of yuh own Buckley and realise that YOU TOO SHALL ANSWER when called. You have your own trials to go thru and your own crosses to bear. Must you torment the rest of the world for it? or are you going to pull up yuh 'Big man jockey shorts' and deal with it as a man.

I ask yet again




















































Am i clear?

[bluefete]

Does God discriminate? I used to think so at one point in time. But then God helped me to understand that we are all given different gifts. Even the blind have gifts that the sighted cannot see!!

here we go back to page 1 of this thread. What gifts does the baby born with HIV and other diseases having to live with deformities in squalor have?

There are times when man's will and God's will combine. Did we not have one of those times? If we had voted to put the PNM back into office, where do you think we would have ended up?

Saying it was God's will for one party to win an election is like praying to God that you win a fight or a war. What if the other side was praying too?

you are not making any sense

Most people who believe in God and are on opposite sides of a spectrum pray that they will be successful. When things do not go our way (i.e. - when we perceive our prayers are not answered or we lose), it is usually because God has a greater plan for us.

Adversity builds character and strength.

The baby born with HIV positive is also a gift from God. We do not know how God will use that child in its lifetime (brief though it may be for some).

[bluefete]

oh srry
what i meant was that for a certain animal, it it starts off as one cell, which then develops eventually
into what it supposed to be, and that other animals start off the same way, and are visually indistinguishable from the start cluster of any other animals.

if so many different looking things can start off lookin so similarly,
then, there are so many different variations of people. height, complexion, wight, shape, abilities, personalities,,,, and they all start biologically similar. if from the same type of cells, u can get so many variations of humans as the outcome then u see how one cell can have so many possible outcomes.
and he did not mean that every thing come out from one cell at the same time
what he means is that the off springs from one being, had variation from its predecessor, and that over time, the successive off spring evolved, e v e n t u a l l y

This is quite plausible. But doesn't DNA or genomes come into play somewhere? Forgive me, I am not a biologist. Our genetic makeup is fully coded in our DNA at conception. Therefore, this does not make all cells biologically similar.

[DrunkenMaster16]

hmmmmm
how about we sit back, knock a stag, heine or guinness; chillax and see how it turns out. chances are we prolly all have it wrong but in the end we will all find out.

Yup the flying spaghetti monster will have the last laugh, i assure you of this.

Believe what you want, don't preach or force your belief's on others as has been the case for thousands of years. I believe in a higher power be that power god, allah, buddha, zeus what ever you call him. Accept that other people do not always follow your beliefs and there will be alot less trouble in this world.

On another note palmiest grocery is out of 1.75L black label... I demand justice! I demand RUM!!!

[bluefete]

bluefete, the theory of evolution through the mechanism of natural selection IS the explanation for the biodiversity from one primordial ancestor. don't ask me to "answer you one question" if you refuse to even display coherence and insist quoting the bible is evidence enough. i don't quote animal planet to defend my beliefs or protect the theory of evolution.

i won't elaborate on it further because honestly, i can't stand another nonsensical display of irrelevant scripture!! it's insane how deluded you and megadoc are.



the simplest vid i can find..check it out and educate yourself a bit, i mean really.

Oh yes. The "great" atheist Richard Dawkins. He does not believe in God but he uses Biblical teachings to prove the origin of life.

He once stated that organisms may be composed of mud. Just as Genesis stated in the Bible.

Razkal, the truth is that you are unable to unverify the truthfulness of scripture. That is why so many logicalists get annoyed.

[bluefete]

I hear jesus used to bull this chick Mary and had a love child with her

And what was the child's name ???????????????????????????????????

[bluefete]

Professor G. G. Simpson, one of the elite spokesmen for evolution, writes about multiple, simultaneous mutations and reports that the mathematical likelihood of getting good evolutionary results would occur only once in 274 billion years! And that would be assuming 100 million individuals are reproducing a new generation Every Day! He concludes by saying, "Obviously, such a process has played no part whatever in evolution." The Major Features of Evolution, page 7.

Does this sound sort of confusing to you? They say mutation is necessary to make the changes required by their theory, yet they have to confess that it is scientifically impossible for mutation to make the changes. This is too typical of the puzzling twists and turns made by our evolutionist friends in their efforts to uphold an exploded theory. So the second point of contradiction with true science has been established.

Mutations, of course, do affect minor changes within the basic kinds, but those changes are limited, never producing a new family. They can explain many of the varieties of both plant and animals, but can never explain the creation of basic kinds as required by evolution.

The "common ancestor" that evolution demands has never existed. He is not a "missing link." He is a link who never was. Man and monkeys are supposed to stem from the same animal ancestry. Even chimpanzees and many monkey groups vary tremendously. Some are smart, others dumb. Some have short tails and some long. Some have no tails at all. Their teeth vary in number. A few have thumbs and others do not. Their genes are different. Their chromosomes do not jibe. Interestingly enough, apes only breed with apes, chimpanzees with chimpanzees, and monkeys with monkeys.

But when we start comparing humans with monkeys we get even more impossible differences than those between the simian types. In fact, these differences constitute another unanswerable support for the Bible rule of "after its kind." The fact that some monkeys can be trained to smoke a pipe, ride a scooter, or even hoist a test tube in a laboratory does not prove that scientists are evolved animals, or that monkeys are retarded, developing humans.

It has already been stated that evolutionists expected the fossil record to support their theory of species change. Their doctrine demanded vast numbers of scaly reptiles transforming the scales into feathers and their front feet into wings. Other reptiles, supposedly, should be changing into fur-bearing quadrupeds. Did they find those thousands of multi-changing creatures? Not one! No matter what particular strata they sifted through, all the fossils were easily recognized and classified within its own family, just as God decreed. If the evolutionary doctrine were true, the strata would be teeming with hundreds of millions of transition forms with combination features of two or more species. Not only so, but there would have to be millions upon millions of observable living links right now in the process of turning into a higher form. Darwin confessed: "There are two or three million species on earth. A sufficient field one might think for observation; but it must be said today that in spite of all the evidence of trained observers, not one change of the species to another is on record." Life and Letters, Volume 3, page 25.

How interesting! Then why insist that it had to be that way? This is one of the marvels of those who cling to a traditional theory. Even the most ancient fossil forms in the lowest fossil beds have stubbornly retained the same features of their modern counterparts, and it is amusing to listen to the exclamations of surprise by the evolutionists. The creationist is not surprised at all. His Bible told him it would be that way, and he has not been forced to puzzle over contradictory evidence.

Another frustration for the poor evolutionists is the strange case of the empty strata. Let me explain. As one digs deep into the earth, one layer or stratum after another is revealed. Often we can see these layers clearly exposed in the side of a mountain or roadbed cut. Geologists have given names to the succession of strata which pile one on top of another. Descending into the Grand Canyon, for example, one moves downward past the Mississippian, Devonian, Cambrian, etc., as they have been tagged by the scientists.

Here is the perplexity for the evolutionists: The Cambrian is the last stratum of the descending levels that has any fossils in it. All the lower strata below the Cambrian have absolutely no record of life, period. Why not? The Cambrian layer is full of all the major kinds of animals found today. In other words, there is nothing primitive about the structure of these most ancient fossils known to man. Essentially they compare with the complexity of current living creatures. But the big question is, "Where are their ancestors? Where are all the evolving creatures that should have led up to these highly developed fossils?" According to the theory of evolution, the pre-Cambrian strata should be filled with more primitive forms of those Cambrian fossils, in the process of evolving upward.

Darwin confessed in his book, Origin of the Species: "To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system I can give no satisfactory answer ... the case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained." Page 309.

How amazing! Darwin admitted having no way to defend his theory, but he still would not adjust his theory to meet the unanswerable arguments against it. Many other evolutionary scientists have expressed similar disappointment and frustration. Dr. Daniel Axelrod of the University of California calls it "one of the major unsolved problems of geology and evolution."

Dr. Austin Clark of the U.S. National Museum wrote concerning the Cambrian fossils, "Strange as it may seem ... mollusks were mollusks just as unmistakenly as they are now." The New Evolution: Zoogenesis, page 101.

Drs. Marshall Kay and Edwin Colbert of Colombia University marveled over the problem in these words: "Why should such complex organic forms be in rocks about 600 million years old and be absent or unrecognized in the records of the preceding two billion years? ... If there has been evolution of life, the absence of the requisite fossils in the rocks older than Cambrian is puzzling." Stratigraphy and Life History, page 102.

George Gaylord Simpson, the Crown Prince of Evolution, summarized it: "The sudden appearance of life is not only the most puzzling feature of the whole fossil record, but also its greatest apparent inadequacy." The Evolution of Life, page 144.

LOLA .308: THIS IS THE BEST POST I HAVE READ IN THIS THREAD.

[bluefete]

I hear jesus used to bull this chick Mary and had a love child with her

I heard that too cool story and that is all to it

Yes, thats what the bible is.

A cool story, and nothing more.

can you prove it ? else your statement is just that(a statement ) and nothing more

[bluefete]

doubt and uncertainty are wholly ingrained into the scientific process, scientists doubt and reevaluate data, theories and findings. not-knowing and the process to relieve that absence of knowledge is the essence of science.

no scientist has the ego or audacity to claim full and correct knowledge of the origin of species on earth (Scientists are not God. They do not have his perfect nature. Thus, logically, they cannot ever have full and correct knowledge of the origin of species on earth. That is, if they are looking from a purely non-God basis.), but the theory of evolution STILL offers the most viable explanation and logical train of thought for this pervasive question. with all the mathematical/statistical disproofs and lack of a complete, perfectly preserved (rolls eyes completely out of head btw) fossil record; evolution still isn't disproved.
what would disprove it however, is finding just ONE fossil in a geologic strata that it does not belong in (eg, an amphibian type creature in strata BELOW/before fishes left the oceans(What did these fishes turn into, after they left the oceans?). such a finding has not yet occurred and i welcome you to go searching yourself. please do actually.

i find it appalling that 'evolutionists' are required to 'find and present' all linkable fossils and evidence indicating slow and gradual change in the species record (when the process by which natural selection works does not require a fossil to be found for each intermediate, but gives an understanding that they would have existed for present observations to be made)...when (for eg.) bible thumpers can't find a gigantic ark somewhere in a european mountain range, but everyone is supposed to believe a catastrophic, world encompassing flood occurred, and believe it occurred without question or evidence. evidence, that if present at all, is frivolous at best in real scientific light. (When does a rainbow shine and what is it supposed to remind us of and what are the 2 basic "colours" missing from it?) THAT is blasphemy of the doctrine of logic!


Bertrand Russel once said: The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. So very true.

he also acknowledged the fact that realizing the extent of his own ignorance was the mark of an educated person.

picasso, please don't elongate the page by quoting long messages just to cheer in support. join the discussion if anything. this may count as my stupid statement, so call me a kant and consider the ants nest raised again.

[Chimera]

I hear jesus used to bull this chick Mary and had a love child with her

I heard that too cool story and that is all to it

Yes, thats what the bible is.

A cool story, and nothing more.

can you prove it ? else your statement is just that(a statement ) and nothing more

can you prove the existence of christ?

[bluefete]

Duane: This is for you.

Boris and Nicole Open Up About Sophie's Spina Bifida

Three-year-old Sophie Tei Naaki bounds into her family’s sunny Atlanta kitchen, all smiles and puffy pigtails. “I made poo-poo in the potty!” she declares as her parents erupt into cheers. It’s the kind of positive reinforcement familiar to all parents of young children, but in Sophie’s case, the accomplishment is truly remarkable. Born with spina bifida, Sophie requires round-the-clock catheterization for her bladder, and she must be diligent about potty breaks. “We celebrate the poo-poo here,” says Sophie’s mom, actress Nicole Ari Parker. “It’s good news in this house.”

There was a time when Nicole and her husband, actor Boris Kodjoe, feared there would be only bad news in their young daughter’s life. “We have gone through so many different emotional levels with Sophie,” says Boris, 35. “We had the fear of her dying to paralysis. All kinds of different monsters attacked us.”

It didn’t start out this way. Eight years ago the two met as co-stars on Showtime’s Soul Food, which aired from 2000 to 2004, and the couple went on to have their own short-lived series Second Time Around together. In 2004, the German-bred Boris proposed to Nicole, 38, near his hometown of Freiburg atop Kandel mountain. “It was like The Sound of Music,” recalls Nicole. “It was so romantic.”

Immediately after returning home, Nicole learned she was pregnant. “I was really into great preparation — hypno-birthing, prenatal yoga,” the actress says. “No morning sickness. We did all the testing. There was one test that came back [saying] a chromosome count was off, but when we went into genetic counseling, it was basically, ‘Don’t worry about it.’ And that’s what we decided to do.” Nicole — who was “religious” about taking prenatal vitamins — delivered Sophie on March 5th, 2005. “I labored for a very long time at home with a midwife. I got to the hospital at 7.5 cm and then I stalled,” she explains. “At 8 cm they gave me the epidural and I slept for 45 minutes. I woke up and pushed her out.”

With no apparent complications, Boris left the hospital to finish filming the 2005 movie The Gospel. The next day, “the neurologist came in and said, ‘We have something to tell you: The nurses found a dimple in the lower part of Sophie’s spine,’” recalls Nicole. A test confirmed spina bifida, a birth defect with varying degrees of severity. Phoning Boris with the devastating news, “it was like your whole world just crumbles,” he says. Adds Nicole: “We had to come together as a new couple. We went from a fairy tale to the fast track.”

As they came to terms with Sophie’s condition, Nicole grappled with whether or not she was to blame. “I’ve racked my brain, been to therapy, cried my eyes out with guilt,” she admits. But doctors assured her there was nothing she could have done. Boris agrees: “It was random.”

Diagnosed with the most serious form of the defect, Sophie would need surgery to detach her spinal cord from a fatty mass called a lipoma. With wedding plans already underway, the couple married in May 2005 in Freiburg. “Family was all around us, prayers were strengthening us,” says Nicole. “But the minute it was over, we flew back for the operation.” The surgery was deemed a success.

In October 2006, when Sophie was 19 months old, the couple welcomed their second child, son Nicolas Neruda. Although their little boy was healthy, Nicole was not. “I suffered from postpartum [depression] pretty bad with Nicolas, but because the anxiety level of protecting Sophie was so strong, [it was like I had] postpartum covered with super-mom-ness,” the actress explains. “I couldn’t afford to cry. There was no way.”

There was more to come. When Sophie was 2 years old, a severe urinary tract infection revealed that she had developed a neurogenic bladder, a frequent complication of spina bifida in which the nerves that carry messages from the bladder to the brain do not work properly.

Given the choice between surgically augmenting her bladder so it would empty through her belly button or catheterizing her themselves, they chose the latter. “We believe in the body healing itself,” says Boris. “We picked the option that gave her bladder that chance.”

It has been a huge commitment, with the couple catheterizing Sophie every three hours. It’s also been a difficult adjustment, but one that has gotten better with time.

“[When we introduced it,] they told us it would take six weeks for her to adjust. She was screaming. You would’ve called social services,” admits Nicole. “One day Mommy was using a wipey and changing her diaper, and the next day I’m holding her down, Daddy’s pinning her down and tubing her. It was the worst feeling ever. It was saving her life, so we had to do it. For some reason, after 10 days, she understood.” Adds Boris: “Now she sings, ‘Take the pee-pee out!’ She took charge.”

Still, Nicole and Boris are realistic about the situation. “We don’t fill her head with false optimism,” Nicole explains. “My plan is to teach her by the time she’s five years old about the importance of clean hands, that she can have her own [catheter] case and go to slumber parties. Just [to] have her self-esteem intact. I’m moving in the direction of self-sufficiency with the catheterization.”

Now close to celebrating her fourth birthday, Sophie is doing well. “Her personality surprises us every day,” says Boris. “She’s just sunshine, she’s so bubbly.” Adds Nicole: “After all the crying we’ve done, to hear the giggles, it’s like heaven. Through all the grave circumstances of Sophie’s life, let it be known that she’s still the bossy big sister!”

Boris and Nicole pursue alternative therapies for Sophie, including acupressure massage, laser acupuncture and probiotic supplements to encourage a healthy digestive tract. “[Initially] there’s no time to tell anybody, there’s no time to cry, there’s no time to do anything but make sure your daughter is okay,” Nicole explains. “Now we’re in a rhythm where we feel comfortable blending our Eastern tendencies with Western medicine.” And it’s working. “All the doctors here at the spina bifida center, every time we have another checkup they say, ‘Wow, based on her diagnosis, this is a miracle. Keep doing what you’re doing,’” shares Boris proudly.

Reveals Nicole, “Instead of an antibiotic, we give her a herbal remedy that strengthens the kidneys and is kind of an antiviral formula — UTI Clear. Once in a while she’ll still get a UTI, but before she was getting them once a month! We then put her on a 7-day course of Bactrim — she’s treated with antibiotics on an as-needed basis. When she had her last set of checkups, her kidney and all her bladder functions were amazing.”

The couple has started Sophie’s Voice Foundation with the goal of raising $2 million for the trial of a new surgical procedure which reroutes nerves from functioning legs onto the bladder, where they are taught a new job — to void. “The success has been incredible,” Boris explains. “God doesn’t give you anything you can’t handle. And I’m not going to lie: At first it’s a shock. You want to cry. But especially by looking at Sophie, you get over it quickly. [Fame] is not just a privilege, I think it’s a responsibility. We are here to lend people a voice who don’t have a voice. We’ve committed to that, and we’re going to do whatever we can to give this a huge voice and hopefully change it.”

Adds Nicole, “Sophie says, ‘Mommy, when I grow up I won’t use the tubes anymore!’ And I’m hopeful that she’s right.”

Spina Bifida Facts:

Spina bifida occurs when a baby’s spine fails to close during the first month of pregnancy, resulting in nerve and muscle damage that ranges from mild to extreme. It is estimated that neural tube birth defects like spina bifida occur in seven out of every 10,000 live births in the U.S., according to the Spina Bifida Association.

Research shows that folic acid in prenatal vitamins taken daily prior to conception and during pregnancy can reduce these defects by up to 70%. Fetal surgery — in which doctors operate on the baby’s spine in utero — may also be an option.






http://celebritybabies.people.com/2009/ ... na-bifida/

[bluefete]

Alright ... lets revisit this. for the many ppl that just jump in a ched to post.

I can bet that many reading this might not have even looked at the first 10 pages.

Nor do they know that the ched title was changed a total of 5 times now by the OP.

Bluefete, really? now at page 77 ur telling me that the will of god extends to that of political motives?... You started the thread seeking to explain the presence of god through inexplicable occurrences that made clear in one's mind the presence of a supernatural deity with a guiding hand. You then, when questioned about the unfairness in the distribution of his grace (e.g. child disability and disease) you basically came up blank......Later on after a title change yuh came back and said that all these natural disasters that taking a lotta lives are the works of god.... on a deserving flock.... when asked how that could be so, how can he mete out that punishment so broadly and catch so many undeserving people in the same net you just shrugged and offered no real explanation save a flurry of cut and pastes and not your own words, why?

we went everywhere in this thread and you and others that act like bandwagonists just never cease to amaze...... if any one single thing to me in this whole thread stood out to me like a 2 pound floater in a porcelain bowl, refusing to go down, is the assertion that 'god' had anything to do with the PNM losing the election. What you are telling me is literally now and conveniently so - that Vox populi, vox dei is a valid concept u hold.. or rather that u misinterpret conveniently and quote conveniently...

the voice of the people is the voice of god? and that now god say fire bun manning?

how bout we not take just the cool lil quote and expand upon where it came from and in the context that it was originally meant - THEN debate the validity of such;

Nec audiendi qui solent dicere, Vox populi, vox Dei, quum tumultuositas vulgi semper insaniae proxima sit.

which means in its entirety:

And those people should not be listening to those who keep saying the voice of the people is the voice of God, since the riotousness of the crowd is always very close to madness.
this reference to the expression is in a letter from Alcuin to Charlemagne in 798, although it is believed to have been in earlier use.

point is, that context plays a great part in the meaning of something. So now, tell me please... with no spiritual quotes, no wiki/google/bing .... in yuh own words , from your own mind, how is it that you believe that the election result is a direct reflection of god's will

I started answering this and lost much of it because log-in time ran out. Anyway! God intervenes in the activities of men. Both sides pray to God but sometimes we do not always get what we ask for. Many times there is a greater lesson to be learned in losing than in winning. God knows this best of all. Adversity builds character.

[bluefete]

the voice of the people is the voice of god?

quoting panday dey...lol

Or Manning or Both?

Not true at all.

[bluefete]

^^ fella ,, you are really one of the most ignorant ppl i have ever met. Remember - closer the church, further from god eh. You personify this.

Take it easy, 'Nati

[bluefete]

hmmmmm
how about we sit back, knock a stag, heine or guinness; chillax and see how it turns out. chances are we prolly all have it wrong but in the end we will all find out.

Errmmm, how's about an orange juice? I'm not a beer person. Truer words were never written. Good for discussion anyway. Me likes this lola.308 person.

[bluefete]

I hear jesus used to bull this chick Mary and had a love child with her

I heard that too cool story and that is all to it

Yes, thats what the bible is.

A cool story, and nothing more.

can you prove it ? else your statement is just that(a statement ) and nothing more

can you prove the existence of christ?

Can you prove your great, great, great, great, great grandparents existed?

[megadoc1]

razkal they claim to have found Noah's ark wouldn't that corrupt your argument a bit?
illumin@ti where do you stand in all this?

funny that you would pick now of all times to ask me this... seeing that yuh have meh classed already in your own mind.

its simple, i believe in reason and not blind inexplicable faith. you can feel free to believe in whatever you may.

so how will i know if your belief in reason is the way?

Do you seriously climb up on a stool and look over my shoulder to see if im pissing in the bowl properly? Man , the point of it all is that my beliefs are personal and pertain to me. it in no way colours my interaction with other people that may hold divergent beliefs. My concern is not if you , or picasso, or banzai or duane following the right path to salvation... who am i to adjudicate for them what is right. And by the way, what exactly is 'right' ? who determines it ? the book? the word? whos word? written by whom? interpreted by whom?.....reprinted and edited by whom?

Do i seriously need that to live my life properly and righteously? My belief is MY way. i dont beat ppl over their heads with it and try to convert them to it , nor do i denouce and scorn others who may not follow it......

am i clear?

What part of this cant your feeble brain understand?
are you ok ? i see you quoting your self here?
why is it that i have to be the one to show you why I believe in something more tangible than a fairytale..why is it that you have to ? Do i disturb you in some way?nope do i disturb you in some way ? Last i recall this is a public forum,correct and if it bothers u that much that i think the way i do,you realy think you are bothering me? ur free to hit the post report button to the top right, or pm Duane or some other mod and cry the whole mountain...so if i never press those buttons it means i am never bothered right?

what i dont get is why the overly 'religious' and newly saved like yourself tend to be the most sickening, hypocritical characters out.show your proof remember you are govern by reasoning Ok so u believe in X and I believe in Y. fine why must you all seek to point out the dysfunction of all the other ppl that believe in something other than X. so you believe in y and i believe in x why must you seek to point out the dysfunctions
of all the other ppl that believe in something other than y without reason? That, is hilarious. understandable the way others like yourself tear into other Christians of differing flavour just because they dont believe in your flavour. Yuh sad Megadoc..
its not about flavor it is about truth because a man has the choice to believe in whatever he may.. you dont have the right to condemn him for it. and you cant get it thru your thick waste of a skull that you are not evangelizing and doing your 'masters' work' if is scorn and division yuh spitting under the guise of being saved and holy. do you have something to back this up or is this an emotional rant ? This is what you and others like you never seem to grasp. You may never get it.. Yet you think that having and endless resource of bible quotes at your disposal via cut and paste makes you a subject matter expert what you have at your disposal ? I think I ask you to share it a few post a back it seems u have nothing available or you dont understand what youre about hilarious. Why must it be imperative that i demonstrate and justify to you why my belief in reason is the way? according to your twisted standards? You eh self know if yuh comin or going and i must justify to you anything? no one dragged you in here but since you posted , nothing of it seems reasonable
and i think if reasonable stuff came from you this ched might have been a good place to hang out but your claim to reasoning is just a claim, now tell me more about my twisted standards

Yuh does make it sound like logic and reason is a religion. Its not. Its tools that minds (that actually function somewhat) use to operate in a world where the tangible is what we focus on. Yes,, real time, here and now business. I dealin with issues that affect me in everyday applications, so its not at the front of my head what Matthew, Mark or John the Baptist thought about it 2000+ years ago.. My logic tells me that if i work hard and persist then i should be ok, barring of course an unforeseen circumstance.... if that dont work,,, work harder. If that dont work, re-evaluate and try something different. I dont think that bruising my knees in the presence of the flock going to help me at my neediest hour. thats just me. did you apply reason to that staement or anything mentioned in it?

Given your 'performance' in this thread : viewtopic.php?f=4&t=299033&hilit=rise+from+the+dead
the memories......... yes wow check your try at reasoning
I think I can boast and say a lot of improvement took place on my behalf
can you do the same ? ....no

Im sayin that its my opinion that ur largely misguided.can you show how? and can you tell me how one can be properly guided? and then look at it carefully and not think you will seem to be doing just like me?
You dont care about the beliefs of anyone but yourself and other lemmings like yourself. You have openly denounced, rebuked, scorned, thrown fire upon and insulted the faith and belief systems of so many people here *in urkell's voice * did i do all that?....are you playing hero now? where was your reasoning when all this was happening? yet think that ur the shining example of what your belief of what a 'good christian' embodies.
I am not a good christian but a true christian the one to never break scripture I hope yuh take a good dose of yuh own Buckley and realise that YOU TOO SHALL ANSWER when called.I look forward to it with joy and confidence You have your own trials to go thru and your own crosses to bear. I am bearing my cross and my trials are being dealt with Must you torment the rest of the world for it?torment? lol or are you going to pull up yuh 'Big man jockey shorts' and deal with it as a man.
what do you suggest ?

I ask yet again
Am i clear? yes....... clearly unreasonable

doh beat up

[sMASH]

http://www.carm.org/religious-movements ... -god-islam

this site have reaaaalllllllll1 lllllll ridiculous statements.

it says that the christian version of god cannot accept sincere repentance because it coming from a human, and humans are sinful so the repentance are sin touched, and he too perfect for that.

it says, now, to circumnavigate that, he sent himself, as the second in command to die, in our place. we were all supposed to die, for the sin we have whether or not we committed it.

if he did not kill him self, we would not be in heaven.

but he is too holy to accept or repentance, but he could come down to earth to mingle with the sinners.

but, if repentance is too sinful for him to accept, he could not have possibly made it nor could sin have come from him.

^^ u know what that implicates? this would mean that sin come from someone else, or some thing else. if it come from something else, then he did not create it. if he did not create it, then he is not the creator of every thing. if he not the creator of every thing, he not the supreme creator.

he not even all powerful because something else do something that he did not intend. because u dont set a series of events into motion where it requires u to kill ur self in order to rectify.

if u have to kill urself for something, that means that u really really really really want it.
god really really really wants us, so much so that he had to kill him self. it seems that if we dont get saved he would be sad, and may have lost out on something. if he not loosing out on anything, why torture ur self for it and kill urself for it

[bluefete]

Megadoc:

Ouch!!

[megadoc1]

I hear jesus used to bull this chick Mary and had a love child with her

I heard that too cool story and that is all to it

Yes, thats what the bible is.

A cool story, and nothing more.

can you prove it ? else your statement is just that(a statement ) and nothing more

can you prove the existence of christ?

yes I can .... can you make a liar out of me?

[megadoc1]

http://www.carm.org/religious-movements ... -god-islam

this site have reaaaalllllllll1 lllllll ridiculous statements.

it says that the christian version of god cannot accept sincere repentance because it coming from a human, and humans are sinful so the repentance are sin touched, and he too perfect for that.

it says, now, to circumnavigate that, he sent himself, as the second in command to die, in our place. we were all supposed to die, for the sin we have whether or not we committed it.

if he did not kill him self, we would not be in heaven.

but he is too holy to accept or repentance, but he could come down to earth to mingle with the sinners.

but, if repentance is too sinful for him to accept, he could not have possibly made it nor could sin have come from him.

^^ u know what that implicates? this would mean that sin come from someone else, or some thing else. if it come from something else, then he did not create it. if he did not create it, then he is not the creator of every thing. if he not the creator of every thing, he not the supreme creator.

he not even all powerful because something else do something that he did not intend. because u dont set a series of events into motion where it requires u to kill ur self in order to rectify.

if u have to kill urself for something, that means that u really really really really want it.
god really really really wants us, so much so that he had to kill him self. it seems that if we dont get saved he would be sad, and may have lost out on something. if he not loosing out on anything, why torture ur self for it and kill urself for it

nowhere there you can see the great love that god have for us?

http://www.carm.org/christianity/evange ... -gods-work

The Lamp Analogy 1

Let's say I am at your house or apartment with my wife. We are talking about church and in my zeal I accidentally knock over your lamp. Now, this lamp is special. A dear friend gave it to you and it has great sentimental value, and besides, you need a light in your room. After a moment or two you realize that the damage is done and decide to forgive. You say to me, "That is alright, Matt. I forgive you for breaking the lamp, but give me ten dollars."

Is asking for ten dollars after you've just forgiven me, true forgiveness? Certainly not! When God forgives our sins, He says He will remember them no more (Jer. 31:34). Forgive and forget are similar in spelling and similar in meaning. If you forgive me can you demand payment from the one forgiven? No, because a forgiven debt does not exist.

Let's say that instead of asking me for ten dollars you turn to my wife and say, "Matt broke my lamp. You give me ten dollars for it."

I ask you again. Is that true forgiveness? No. You are simply transferring the debt to someone who was not involved in the original offense.
But, we have a problem. The lamp needs to be replaced. In true forgiveness, then, who pays for its replacement? (Think about this a bit before you go on to read the answer.) Who pays? You do! You're the only one left. Remember, if you've forgiven me the debt, how can you demand payment?

Now, who was my offense against? You. Who forgives? You do. Who pays? You do.

When we sin, who do we sin against? God. Who forgives? God. Who pays? God! Did you get that? God pays! How does He do that? Simple. 2000 years ago on a hill outside the city of Jerusalem He bore our sins in His body and died on the cross (1 Pet. 2:24). He took our punishment: "Surely our griefs He Himself bore, and our sorrows He carried... He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; the chastening for our well-being fell upon Him..." (Isaiah 53:4-5).

God is just. God is merciful. God is gracious. In the justice of God, He took our place. In the mercy of God we don't get punished. In the grace of God, He gives us eternal life.

Even though we are unworthy of salvation, even though we are unworthy of God's love, even though we are unworthy of mercy, even though we are worthy of wrath, God saved us. He did so not because of who we are, but because of who He is, not because of what we do, but because of what He did. God is love (1 John 4:16). God is holy (1 Peter 1:16). God is good (Psalm 34:8). We could never fathom the depths of His purity and kindness (Rom. 11:33). We could never, through our own efforts, attain Him. There is only one thing left for us. We must worship Him, love Him, and serve Him. He alone is worthy. Blessed be the name of the Lord.

tell me why shouldn't I stick with this God

[sMASH]

"ey, hossman, i reall sorry , and i tryin meh best to do bettah"
" alrite kool, i accept, ur forgiven,,"

that is love


...plus, if god too holy to accept repentance, then he could not have created it because it would have dissolved or burn him when it came from him, and keellled him dead.

sooooooo, he did not create sin, and was not the only creator, so not the ultimate power, and so not the supreme being.

[bluefete]

http://www.carm.org/religious-movements ... -god-islam

this site have reaaaalllllllll1 lllllll ridiculous statements.

it says that the christian version of god cannot accept sincere repentance because it coming from a human, and humans are sinful so the repentance are sin touched, and he too perfect for that.

it says, now, to circumnavigate that, he sent himself, as the second in command to die, in our place. we were all supposed to die, for the sin we have whether or not we committed it.

if he did not kill him self, we would not be in heaven.

but he is too holy to accept or repentance, but he could come down to earth to mingle with the sinners.

but, if repentance is too sinful for him to accept, he could not have possibly made it nor could sin have come from him.

^^ u know what that implicates? this would mean that sin come from someone else, or some thing else. if it come from something else, then he did not create it. if he did not create it, then he is not the creator of every thing. if he not the creator of every thing, he not the supreme creator.

he not even all powerful because something else do something that he did not intend. because u dont set a series of events into motion where it requires u to kill ur self in order to rectify. A very, very interesting point. However, Lucifer was closest to the throne. When he rebelled, humans were no match for him. We can never understand God's infinite wisdom and plan. Death is something that is unique to earthly life forms. Sin is such a terrible, terrible thing that once it happened, there was really no way back to God. That is why he had to send an intercessor to die, otherwise that gap would never have been bridged. If you are infinite, time is limitless to you. Everything that has happened is part of God's infinite plan. That tells you how powerful he is. Just look at the responses to this thread. It shows the very nature of our free will at work.

if u have to kill urself for something, that means that u really really really really want it.
god really really really wants us, so much so that he had to kill him self. it seems that if we dont get saved he would be sad, and may have lost out on something. if he not loosing out on anything, why torture ur self for it and kill urself for it

Unless you are a parent, you will never understand what it means to love a child. Even when that child goes astray, you are still willing to do your best to bring her back on track. For some parents, this may mean sacrificing their own lives. That is perfect love. God's love is so perfect that he sent Jesus Christ to die on our behalf so that we could=restore our broken relationship with Him.

[bluefete]

"ey, hossman, i reall sorry , and i tryin meh best to do bettah"
" alrite kool, i accept, ur forgiven,,"

that is love


...plus, if god too holy to accept repentance, then he could not have created it because it would have dissolved or burn him when it came from him, and keellled him dead.

sooooooo, he did not create sin, and was not the only creator, so not the ultimate power, and so not the supreme being.

If God was not the only creator: Are you implying that different Gods made the Muslims, Hindus, Atheists (that's a good one there), Sais, and so on?

[megadoc1]

"ey, hossman, i reall sorry , and i tryin meh best to do bettah"
" alrite kool, i accept, ur forgiven,,"

that is love


...plus, if god too holy to accept repentance, then he could not have created it because it would have dissolved or burn him when it came from him, and keellled him dead.

sooooooo, he did not create sin, and was not the only creator, so not the ultimate power, and so not the supreme being.

u have actual data to back up this crap?
or did that come from your head?

[sMASH]

i am implying that christianity says that the supreme creator is not the only creator, and therefore not the supreme creator

what i believe, is that when god say he make every thing,,, he made everything.
if he say he could for give u, u would be forgiven,
if he say he not forgiving u, u wouldnt
he doesnt need us to be forgiven, we need us to be forgiven
god does not benefit if we make it to heaven, we benefit if we make it to heaven.

god does not prosper from our deeds, so why would he want to kill himself

i believe that god loves us so much that if we come with what ever little we have, no matter how pitiful it may be, as long as we sincere he would forgive us.

i believe that god is so powerful, that he dont need to make him self dead to forgive a sin.




if the trinity was like a husband and wife, and we were like their children, imagine if u will.

some children do bad. so much so that he cannot let them into the house. so the children get put out, with rain and dogs and aligators, and centipedes and no food outside. what was the bad the children do, they eat a fruit he told them not to eat.

but god love the children, and want them to come inside. so he devise ah plan. his plan was not to ask them to say sorry for eating the fruit and then for give them and let them come inside. his plan was to send his wife outside wiht them, let some of the children kill her, then resurrect her, and say that no matter what the children do, as long as they say that me and meh wife is one, they could come in side.

so some children say so, some didnt, some children kill other children and others tried to help the others. some children tried to kill out the dog and aligator and centipede, and others tried to preserve them.

but no matter what the good the children do, the only ones being let into the house are those which say jesus is lord and savior.

and no matter how much killing and robbing and disobedience they doing, the only ones staying outside are those who dont say jesus is lord and saviour.