That shi% drives me nuts. If the faith mongers grill religion into our kids as adolecents, how are they supposed to be open minded and learn in college science class? Some will no doubt see through the veil of deception when they grow up, but most seem to be forever benched in academia over the paradox.

Nothing new here. The Talibaptists have been raising backwards, ignorant little Jihadiis for generations now.

Ralph Reed, the former head of the Christian Coalition, now a polititian, required that senior officers of the Christian Coalition vow to strive for The Death Penalty for adultery and violating any of the other Ten Commandments.

There is no difference between a fundamentalist nutjob in a turban or a buhrka, and a fundamentalist nutjob in a 3 peice suit or a prairie dress. They are both homicidally fanatic about their superstitions and are a danger to the life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for the world at large.

I'm with you Ichtyoid.

Well said, Ichty!!!

"There is no difference between a fundamentalist nutjob in a turban or a buhrka, and a fundamentalist nutjob in a 3 peice suit or a prairie dress. They are both homicidally fanatic about their superstitions and are a danger to the life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for the world at large."

That is the definition of a pluralist position and demonstrates tremendous ignorance of all religions. It is the same as saying all fish are the same so we should not care if our rivers are full of pikeminnow or wild steelhead.

There's no differencee between making your wife wear a prairie dress and blowing up a Planned Parenthood office and making your wife wear a burkha and blowing up busses.

It's just a change in regional fashion.

Rural American Burkha:




Taliban Burkha:



Glad you demonstrate your ignorance of fanatical zealotry, Cock.

"There's no differencee between making your wife wear a prairie dress and blowing up a Planned Parenthood office and making your wife wear a burkha and blowing up busses.

It's just a change in regional fashion."


Sure there is. First demonstarte where women in prarie dresses are partaking in such activity and which church is supporting such activity. Where has any Christian, Bhuddist, Hindu or Jewish leaders supported such actions Publically or privately? Please show where religous groups have supported blowing up planned parenthood clincs. Maybe you can also include their religous affiliation statements from the court docs to support your case. Then go to http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ and check out the Islamic side.
Please try to keep it in the last 30 or 40 years I doubt the crusades or natives in N And S America are releveant to what is happening in the world this day.

Now a pluralistic argument is ignorant and shows a lack of understanding of current world events re: religon.

You seem to have the answers, Knock. I'll ask you the same question Mooch side-stepped on the main page. Can you tell me how the church justify's the premise of man's creation predicated on incestous conception between a single couple, their off-spring and their off-spring's off-spring, only to condem incest as a sin in the same document that claims the act is responcible for the genisis of mankind?

By the way, I already know the answer. The greatest story ever told has more holes in it's logic than a piece of swiss cheese. But you morons eat it because you can't accept the fact your existence in the universe is finite.

Arguing over religion is no different than arguing who has the coolest pretend friend.

Sol,

There are several errors in your ? posed. First of you ask "how the Church" Its a biblical question not a matter of Church doctrine. You need to understand the difference between the two. Second you say you all ready know the answer. You may know an answer but clearly you do not know the answer. Your question and therefore most likely your answer are based on lack of study of the releveant parts or based parsed verses of the bible. Its all there and the answer is real simple.

Lets be honest you are asking the question in an attempt to put the premise of god on trial. Much wiser men than you have tried the same for centuries. The best answer I can give you is that man cannot come to the lord via scienctific study or trying to spread sheet study the bible. Your heart has to be opened to the lord by the lord himself and then you have to accept the grace that is offered by the cross.

BTW please show us your proof that the universe is finite? Where is the end and what does it look like?

Double talk, dude. I'll open my heart when the religious community opens their mind. I said our existence in finite. Our hypothisis is that the universe is of course, infinite.

Copernicus' model of our solar system had the sun and other planitary bodies orbiting the earth. When Gallelaeo published his observations stating that the earth orbited the sun instead, the caltholic church had him imprisoned for life, because it flew in the face of christian belief at the time. [BTW:The catholic church did not issue a formal appology to the scientific commumity over this incident until a few years ago].

Here's my point. The medicines we take when we're sick, the technologies we enjoy today, our understanding of the universe as we know it are all funtions of scientific method, which requires us to ask questions, experiment with hypothisis and prove right from wrong or true from false. Faith in god is the anti-science, because logic must be ignored for it to make sence. Our daily lives necesitate the use of logic or the consequence of stepping out in front of a bus would see our demise.

For this reason I have no use for god, jesus, religion or what have you, and I have little use for people of faith.

It seems that you hold a lot of theory to be truth and hold more faith in it and your thoughts than most do with their chosen religion.

Example: Explain how you can know a finite element can exhist in an infinite system?

Do you have proof? lay out the logic or is it based on faith?

My dick is 8 inches long, but the length of vagina from women the world over set end to end would be infinately long over time. And my dick is no stranger to vagina.

All well and good sir but the topic at hand was what takes place when the time of honoring your self comes to and end. It seems your version is based on faith as much as the next guys.

As logic would see it, my soul will cease to exist when my heart quits beating and my body will go back to the earth in the form of nutrients. No faith, just common sence.

Like I've said before People hate bad news, so they invented religion.
I dont think there's any worse news a person wants to hear than "You're going to die someday." So some clever little caveman invented the notion of "an everlasting soul" and went on to sell immortality for the small price of 10% of all his subscriber's incomes, and their everlasting, undying obedience to his word. I'd prolly say that it's a profession older than prostitution or even fishing; selling false hopes and empty promises, but people still swallow it because to them it sure sounds a whole lot better than becoming forgotten worm food...

Harps & trumpets... Laugh my ass off.

Suckers.

Here's the abrieviated version:

The gap between early molecular evolution and the origin of the first cell may have been bridged by a photoheterotrophic obcell, consisting of genes and ribosomes attached to the outer surface of a phospholipid vesicle containing a light-driven proton pump and a proton-driven pyrophosphate synthase. I argue that the obcell was the substratum for the origin of DNA replication; DNA segregation by the growth and division of the peptidoglycan murein; periplasmic solute-binding proteins; bioenergetics, including the F0F1 proton-driven ATP synthase; active transport of calcium; and facilitated diffusion of nutrients across membranes, and that it played the major role in the replacement of ribozymes by protein catalysts. Curved growth of the peptidoglycan and a mutation causing septum formation produced the first true cell. Evolution of porins, sodium extrusion and potassium import, conversion of the facilitated diffusion proteins to active pumps, and the evolution of intermediary metabolism, carbon and nitrogen fixation, and of substrate level phosphorylation, completed the origin of the first negibacterial eubacterium, from which all other cells evolved, and from which they have inherited most of their major catalytic properties--with the notable exceptions of reverse transcriptase, RNA splicing, and methanogenesis, all of which I believe evolved very much later.

[Source: Department of Biophysics, Cell and Molecular Biology, King's College London, United Kingdom.]

Are you still driving up?

WTF?!?

FLIES?

Is Sparkey going with you guys? :p

Interesting, did anyone notice that most of the slides about Jesus Camp were of young girls?? Perhaps that has no significance. (yeah sure)
I impatiently await the continued discussion on the relevance of the distinction twixt 'the works of man' vs the 'works of God.'
Personally the steelhead in the rivers used to be the works of God. And the eagle in the high country too. The beautiful architectural churches in Europe and the Mosques in the Middle East and the written dogma that the various religions use to give themselves justification for being, and for some of their atrocious behaviour, are all the works of man. I cannot envision a supreme being with so capricious and vengeful a nature. The only creature that comes close came from sillywood. On one of the old Star Trek episodes there was a displaced Greek God. He needed love and obeisance, and of course, a pretty bit of eye candy. Terminal intolerance did him in. So much for narcissism and its' risks.
The Ten Commandmants were a code to live by generated by some thinkers in times past. Good job. A society could do nicely following the rules.
The Cross and the Swastika are symbols so ancient that any claim to ownership of them today is ludicrous.