View Full Version : [Skurai] High's "Rush Limbaugh" club!
Skurai
2011-01-10, 09:40 PM
---Friday---
Brandon: You don't know who Rush Limbaugh is?
Skurai: Not really... I've heard of him.
Mr. Lamble: How do you not know what that is? *Pulls up the site on his computer*
Brandon: *clicks a few things* See? He's some kind of Conservative nut.
Mr. Lamble: He's pure evil.
Skurai: Oh, that's silly. Conservative's are the good guys.
Mr. Lamble: Excuse me?
Brandon: Lamble happens to love fetus' lying in his yard.
(...)
Mr. Lamble: (sarcasm) Y'know, since we have a John Marshall club, why not a "Rush Lumbaugh" club? Hahahaha!
Brandon: Would you be the teacher in charge...?
Mr. Lamble: Uhh...
Skurai: This could be fun. Hahaha...
Mr. Lamble: You're serious?
Brandon: Yeah.
Skurai: We're seniors this year. If we get Freshmen, this could be our chance to leave our perminate mark in the school!
Mr. Lamble: You'd either have to be creazy, or evil to join...
Brandon: We know plenty like that. I could be President, Noah could be Vice President, Skurai could be Treasurer...
Skurai: And with you as our supervision, all we'd need is members.
Mr. Lamble: ... Alright. If you can find some members, I'll talk about it with Leardi.
---The next monday---
Brandon: *sets down a paper* We have over twenty five members, six of them freshmen, two sophomore. The majority are juniors and seniors.
Skurai: [My girl] may-or-may-not join, so that's another sophomore.
Mr. Lamble: ...Alright. I've already got some ideas set up. That episode of family guy, some old Saturday Night Live episodes, for simple Political Satire...
Brandon: That's the first time Family Guy had been funny to me in a while.
Skurai: Me too, actually.....
Mr. Lamble: Then it's settled. I'll call Ramback and tell him to add us to the school's yearbook on yearbook picture day.
!King_Amazon!
2011-01-10, 11:13 PM
---Friday---
http://www.aceshowbiz.com/images/still/the_hangover18.jpg
---The next monday---
http://endodds.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/the_hangover_cast-10488.jpg
This thread is now about hangovers.
Skurai: Oh, that's silly. Conservative's are the good guys.
Please don't believe this.
http://www.determinismsucks.net/archive/1290285561114-IN_B4_RULE_34.jpg
Skurai
2011-01-13, 08:23 PM
Please don't believe this.
What am I supposed to believe? I'm sure not for getting high and stabbing fetus' in the womb, are you????
What am I supposed to believe? I'm sure not for getting high and stabbing fetus' in the womb, are you????
If you're talking about abortion, then of course I'm for abortion. A woman's body should be in her control.
And I think marijuana should be legal because frankly, alcohol is worse.
Skurai
2011-01-13, 08:26 PM
So molestation should be legal because rape is worse???
Why do you believe marijuana SHOULD be criminalized?
Same question for abortion.
Skurai
2011-01-15, 10:34 PM
I believe that any form of intoxicating drug be illegalized, no matter what level of danger it creates. I believe that any form of death by human hands is murder. I also think that if she'd kept her pants on, she wouldn't need to spend money on EITHER protection OR abortions. Not only is it less trouble, it's less costly. In the end, abortion is not "controlling" your body. It's paying other people to allow you to abuse it without consequence. Y'know. Like a child who doesn't want to get caught picking their nose, so they do it when nobody is looking. Some people say it's all about morals, but really, it's all about if they're a worthless shit or not.
!King_Amazon!
2011-01-16, 10:04 AM
I have you say you have a somewhat respectable world view. Your problem is that you are drawing conclusions about things that you can only speculate on. A wise thinker once said "You never understand a situation until you are faced with it."
In other words, it's easy to draw conclusions when you are looking in from the outside. It's also easy for those conclusions to be entirely wrong. People often say "I would never do _____" when what they really mean to say is "I've never been put in a situation or put myself in a situation where I had to do _____"
Another quote I really like is "Judge not lest ye be judged thyself." What I do to myself is my choice, not yours, and I have reasons for everything I do, even if they don't make sense to you or you don't agree with them. If you are attempting to label me or force me to do something I don't want to do or force me to stop doing something I want to do, and I'm not harming you in any way, you are out of place in my opinion. Our decisions are ultimately what makes us human, and taking away any human's ability to make decisions for themself is as much murder as putting a bullet in someone's brain, by my definition.
I believe that any form of intoxicating drug be illegalized, no matter what level of danger it creates. I believe that any form of death by human hands is murder. I also think that if she'd kept her pants on, she wouldn't need to spend money on EITHER protection OR abortions. Not only is it less trouble, it's less costly. In the end, abortion is not "controlling" your body. It's paying other people to allow you to abuse it without consequence. Y'know. Like a child who doesn't want to get caught picking their nose, so they do it when nobody is looking. Some people say it's all about morals, but really, it's all about if they're a worthless shit or not.
I was fairly adamantly anti-drug until I was 16 or 17. It's something you may grow out of over time.
I would consider myself a fairly successful individual and I enjoy both drugs and sex. Life is short and there's no reason to not enjoy all aspects of it (within reason -- I'll never do life-ending drugs like heroin or meth and I practice safe sex).
KagomJack
2011-01-16, 12:24 PM
I do not know of any woman who uses abortions as an excuse to do whatever. A lot of women go through them because, hey, they don't need to have a child in their lives right now for whatever reason be it education of monetary. Making abortion illegal would not curb people seeking out the procedure elsewhere like they did in the days before Roe v Wade and not to mention seeking homemade abortion kits (see Revolutionary Road to see what I mean). Not to mention that there are women who are going through the procedure because they were raped or forced into an incestuous situation and should not even be expected to have the child.
As for marijuana, it has legitimate use medicinally and recreationally. Many use and abuse alcohol and tobacco and nicotine, but we don't make a big deal out of it despite the fact that abuse can be lethal. Marijuana, to date, has had no incidental or accidental deaths (look it up at the CDC's website). What gets me is when people go "I've seen what people on marijuana are like!" To me it means they don't like seeing people with a goofy disposition who like to eat and enjoy sex. A marijuana user is going to be NOTHING like the crazed reefer maniac you'd see in the original Reefer Madness or any anti-marijuana propaganda. Marijuana is harmless.
Good points Kagom.
Skurai, I never can tell if you're being serious or trolling a la Poe's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law) but I think you can do better than your current set of appropriated moral standards.
You seem like a kid who can grasp concepts if you're willing to, so I would hate to see you squander your burgeoning intelligence on an outdated and frankly dangerous socio-political agenda that you're picking up from demagogues, talking pundits or your guardians or your peers. The bottom line is that these talking heads support one thing above all else -- money. Money makes the capitalist world go 'round. The mass media is designed with money and only money in mind. "News" is entertainment with ratings and advertisement holding the reins. It just so happens that huge swaths of the country are receptive to emotional pleas of pride and a return to the good 'ol times, but unfortunately these rants consist of little more than buzzwords and hidden agendas.
I don't know if you respect us on this forum or not, but almost all Zelaron members here do have a few years on you. We've been through high school, some through college, but all through life. We've lived on our own. We've made observations about the state of the world as you can only see it with time, and we're still pretty young in general. But we've all come a really long way since we were your age. I hope you will gain a new perspective for the world when you strike out on your own. But for now, at least give us some benefit of the doubt... we're all friends here, and in some sense we are telling you this stuff in order to help you along through life. It's difficult, confusing, and crazy. For me the fourth wall of bullshit came crashing down years ago. Some people may never get there. But even if you don't respect us personally, at least respect our experiences and our wisdom, however limited it may be. I know when I'm 40 I'll be thinking that the current "me" was naive and ridiculous, but I've still come very far from being your age, and that's something everyone goes through but nobody believes until it happens to them. (An unfortunate human cognitive fault).
tl;dr - cut us some slack Skurai, I can't speak for others but I would like to see you better yourself.
KagomJack
2011-01-16, 02:14 PM
For some reason that reminds me of when I used to be a sexually confused Republican Catholic.
I figured I'd let you explain that one, haha.
jamer123
2011-01-16, 03:28 PM
even i have a few years on the board here .... i have my own views and the way that i let it show is my actions
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" - Charles Darwin
Or, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
KagomJack
2011-01-16, 07:17 PM
Nothing to explain. That says everything there is to say about that subject. :]
Skurai
2011-01-16, 10:54 PM
Our decisions are ultimately what makes us human, and taking away any human's ability to make decisions for themself is as much murder as putting a bullet in someone's brain, by my definition.
Then let me be a murderer, in that case. Our choices are our downfall and our weakness, God strike me now if I view things the way Lucifer does.
Then let me be a murderer, in that case. Our choices are our downfall and our weakness, God strike me now if I view things the way Lucifer does.
Lesson #1: there is no god. Seriously. None. Not a one.
Skurai
2011-01-17, 10:28 AM
That's not what flaming fingernails say.
KagomJack
2011-01-18, 12:56 AM
Taking away the ability to choose and make our own decisions is worse than anything god ever did to mankind. Or Satan, depending on who you believe is more evil.
Lesson #1: there is no god. Seriously. None. Not a one.
Prove to me this lesson, and a pupil of yours I will become.
The burden of proof is on you. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
The burden of proof is on you. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Nice spin. :grin:
Skurai
2011-01-18, 07:23 PM
If presented with evidence, you would claim the picture was edited, it was a trick, or (knowing you) that you've simply gone insane.
KagomJack
2011-01-18, 08:21 PM
A truly open-minded individual will yield to empirical evidence if presented.
If presented with evidence, you would claim the picture was edited, it was a trick, or (knowing you) that you've simply gone insane.
A baseless claim. If there actually was evidence, it would be well known.
Don't waste your time on god-fearing. At least pick something fun to worship, like invisible pink unicorns. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_pink_unicorn)
Wed-G
2011-01-19, 07:14 AM
At least pick something fun to worship, like invisible pink unicorns. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_pink_unicorn)
http://image62.webshots.com/62/2/39/39/445023939bAaciG_ph.jpg
Damn. The Muslims beat you to it.
Lol.
I'm with Bill Maher in the "I don't know what to believe" category, personally.
!King_Amazon!
2011-01-19, 11:24 AM
Bill Maher is an apatheist. His statement would be "I don't care."
Bill Maher is an apatheist. His statement would be "I don't care."
Can you prove this? No.
http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/r/religulous-script-transcript-bill-maher.html
Here's a direct pull from Religulous script where he ask's his mother what her beliefs are
Ms. Maher: "I don't know
the answer to that."
To which, Bill Responds:
"That's my answer."
So his answer is, I don't know. Sorry to show you wrong, but I just watched this movie for like the 5th time a couple nights ago and recalled this portion. He may actually be apatheist, but I've never heard that before.
!King_Amazon!
2011-01-19, 01:01 PM
http://richarddawkins.net/videos/932-bill-maher-apatheist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Maher#Religion
"He declared himself an apatheist instead of an agnostic on Scarborough Country on April 24, 2007."
Before his movie came out.
"I don't know" and "I don't care" are not mutually exclusive ideas. Just because he said "I don't know" doesn't mean that "I don't care" doesn't apply equally or more. I've seen the movie multiple times myself, and I watch his show on HBO. "I don't know what to believe" sounds more like something an agnostic would say. If anything, Bill Maher would say "I don't know and I don't care."
Okay, I could agree to that.
But apatheists are ridiculous, they're even more lazy than calling themselves agnostic.
!King_Amazon!
2011-01-19, 02:13 PM
I don't see how calling yourself agnostic makes you lazy in the first place, but whatever.
Let's pretend a teacher hands you page worth of math problems and you have no idea how to figure it out. An agnostic would just be like, I don't know how to do it, and would put his head down. A religious extremist would rant and rave about how they have the answer, but only the teacher knows if they are right, and an apatheist, well they would just be like who cares about the test, why does anyone care about good grades?
!King_Amazon!
2011-01-19, 03:08 PM
Let's pretend a teacher hands you page worth of math problems and you have no idea how to figure it out. An agnostic would just be like, I don't know how to do it, and would put his head down. A religious extremist would rant and rave about how they have the answer, but only the teacher knows if they are right, and an apatheist, well they would just be like who cares about the test, why does anyone care about good grades?
In that scenario you are assuming that there is some absolute answer that can be found, and that we have the means to find it, but the agnostic person for some reason doesn't think the answer can be found, and the apatheist doesn't care enough to look for an answer. Which is pretty much apples to oranges in comparison to religion.
I don't see how, when asked an unanswerable question, saying "I don't know" is lazy. Maybe if you somehow equate "lazy" and "rational" in your head.
In other words, I'm not agnostic because I'm lazy, I'm agnostic because I'm rational.
Who the fuck cares about you, i'm talking about bill maher
!King_Amazon!
2011-01-20, 10:27 AM
I was using myself as an example to demonstrate that agnosticism does not imply laziness. You didn't even mention Bill Maher in the example I was responding to, moron.
Let's pretend a teacher hands you page worth of math problems and you have no idea how to figure it out. An agnostic would just be like, I don't know how to do it, and would put his head down. A religious extremist would rant and rave about how they have the answer, but only the teacher knows if they are right, and an apatheist, well they would just be like who cares about the test, why does anyone care about good grades?
!King_Amazon!
2011-01-20, 01:12 PM
Oh, ok.
Idk why we're arguing about this.
poor zelaron.
WetWired
2011-01-20, 05:57 PM
I believe that any form of intoxicating drug be illegalized, no matter what level of danger it creates.
You know, alcohol is mentioned plenty in the bible. Getting drunk is a sin, drinking is not. As far as marijuana goes, both sides of the debate spout a lot of BS, but at the end of the day the legalization side is more right; marijuana is no more dangerous than alcohol and should be treated the same way.
I believe that any form of death by human hands is murder. I also think that if she'd kept her pants on, she wouldn't need to spend money on EITHER protection OR abortions. Not only is it less trouble, it's less costly. In the end, abortion is not "controlling" your body. It's paying other people to allow you to abuse it without consequence. Y'know. Like a child who doesn't want to get caught picking their nose, so they do it when nobody is looking. Some people say it's all about morals, but really, it's all about if they're a worthless shit or not.
Statistics show that if a woman is going to get an abortion, she's going to do so regardless of the legality. Statistics also show that the chances of dying from an illegal abortion are significantly higher. Especially self-inflicted abortion has staggering risk of hemorage or sepsis. You might say that the murderer is worthy of death, but so is everyone else for various other sins. Where's the compassion? Abortion is gruesome and morally wrong, but that doesn't mean it should be illegal.
Too many blind followers following blind guides in today's "Christianity". Blindly following anyone is foolish. Study the bible yourself, do your own research, pray, and make your own decisions as the Spirit leads.
Skurai
2011-01-20, 10:10 PM
...Did that just happen?
KagomJack
2011-01-20, 10:19 PM
WetWired does exist.
Skurai
2011-01-20, 10:26 PM
I actually feel like I've legit'ly been "School'd, sucka". I like WetWired.
KagomJack
2011-01-20, 10:30 PM
WetWired is an anomaly.
He is the only person on this forum that I don't mind being religious. Simply because He is intelligent enough to make His own decisions.
You know, alcohol is mentioned plenty in the bible.
The bible says a lot of crazy shit like how women were made out of a rib, stories of a single man having 400 children, and the ark nonsense. The bible is meant to guide people's lives in the right direction, and those who make it into a literal interpretation need to holy-roll bitch smack themselves.
Skurai
2011-01-21, 08:31 PM
No, that's a Dr. Phil book. The Torah, Bible, Koran are all ment to be literal. Genesis kind of makes this... one could say, "obvious"?
!King_Amazon!
2011-01-21, 10:29 PM
Skurai, are you saying you take everything in the bible to be fact as written, literally? I'm really curious about this.
Skurai
2011-01-22, 07:30 PM
Not sure. Depends what comes to mind, when I read the story at the time. I guess not word-for-word-literal, but it should all be taken as seriousness, not just "some story, to make people act nice". Honestly, idk. You've got me.
!King_Amazon!
2011-01-23, 12:48 PM
So you believe that humans at one time lived for hundreds of years? You believe that the Earth is only 6000 years old, and humans and dinosaurs existed at the same time, even though science tells us that is completely incorrect? You believe a human was swallowed by a large fish and survived for days inside of the fish?
I can see arguments for reading between the lines and taking things from the bible, but unless you completely throw logic and facts out of the window I don't see how you can think the bible is a true story.
WetWired
2011-01-23, 01:22 PM
Aging is related to telomeres. It's entirely possible that in the distant past they were longer or better preserved. As for the age of the Earth, if God created Adam as a man (rather than an infant), why is it a stretch to assume that God also created the Earth with age? Alternately, the creation story is a poem shown to be full of alternate meaning; perhaps it is better to take it not-so-literally. Even so, I believe that Adam was the first man and the geneology is accurate. You find it hard to believe that a God capable of creating both time and space is capable of sustaining a single man's life for 3 days in a fish?
!King_Amazon!
2011-01-23, 06:37 PM
I find it hard to believe that such a God exists in the first place, the extension of that fact is not the issue.
Skurai
2011-01-23, 07:36 PM
Aging is related to telomeres. It's entirely possible that in the distant past they were longer or better preserved. As for the age of the Earth, if God created Adam as a man (rather than an infant), why is it a stretch to assume that God also created the Earth with age? Alternately, the creation story is a poem shown to be full of alternate meaning; perhaps it is better to take it not-so-literally. Even so, I believe that Adam was the first man and the geneology is accurate. You find it hard to believe that a God capable of creating both time and space is capable of sustaining a single man's life for 3 days in a fish?
Sounds like a check mate. K_A's only reaction being "But it's not, so ha!", more-or-less.
Yes, I do believe that. I also believe the story of "giant beasts" being "slain by angels". Also known as Dinosaurs going extinct.
!King_Amazon!
2011-01-23, 08:55 PM
Sounds like a check mate.
Call it what you want, kid.
As for the age of the Earth, if God created Adam as a man (rather than an infant), why is it a stretch to assume that God also created the Earth with age?
I've never actually heard of, or thought about this analogy before and it's quite interesting. It's kind of like the holy trinity being referred to as water given that is has three states: gas, liquid and a solid. Clever, but accurate? Who knows.
Even so, I believe that Adam was the first man and the geneology is accurate.
What genealogy could you find to trace Adam throughout time to I suppose, Jesus that isn't credited to some geocities type-website from a religious fundamentalist author? I mean, if you want to read the bible it gives no actual chronological times to specifically pinpoint what has taken place. You honestly can't say the genealogy is correct, when stating your source is as credible as Wikipedia.
!King_Amazon!
2011-01-24, 12:45 PM
Unless you claim that God created all of the different races 6000 years ago, the ideas that Adam and Eve are the "first generation" and that the Earth is only 6000 years old are mutually exclusive. It is not possible for all of the different races to have developed over the course of 6000 years, and we've got fossil proof of humans having existed more than 6000 years ago, before Adam and Eve were supposedly manifested. It isn't as if the only human fossils we find are 6000 or less years old. Hell, the word "fossil" generally refers to things older than 10,000 years, which according to the Bible is before God created mankind.
It's a ridiculous argument, which is why I'm not really bothering to argue against it. There's no "check mate" here, it's more like "if you accept these absurd things to be true then no rational argument will persuade you anyway so whatever." Science and the Bible conflict severely when it comes to the age of the Earth. The only way you can claim that the Bible is correct (by literal interpretation) is if you claim that Science is wrong, and vice versa. The only way people have been able to reconcile the two in any rational way is by not taking the Bible literally as fact.
Skurai
2011-01-26, 08:01 PM
Well, a few thousand years of incest will likely make people look different (different "races" per-say), and the Tower of Babel could have easily separated people by looks. Thus, races were created.
Also, I believe there was a man in the bible who had four children, all a different color, all from the same mother.
!King_Amazon!
2011-01-27, 07:49 AM
Well, a few thousand years of incest will likely make people look different (different "races" per-say), and the Tower of Babel could have easily separated people by looks. Thus, races were created.
Also, I believe there was a man in the bible who had four children, all a different color, all from the same mother.
"if you accept these absurd things to be true then no rational argument will persuade you anyway so whatever."
Words
Do you read Harry Potter and litearlly intrepret it as fact Skurai?
Skurai
2011-01-27, 02:56 PM
No, it takes place in a modern day. Why?
!King_Amazon!
2011-01-27, 03:26 PM
Oh, also, if you believe the Bible to be literal fact, you believe the constant Pi=3 rather than 3.14159...
http://www.abarim-publications.com/Bible_Commentary/Pi_In_The_Bible.html
gg
Hell, while we are at it, http://biblebabble.curbjaw.com/errors.htm
Skurai
2011-02-02, 11:58 AM
Y u mad, sceptic?
!King_Amazon!
2011-02-02, 12:04 PM
It's spelled "skeptic"
No, it takes place in a modern day. Why?
illogical!
Skurai
2011-02-02, 02:21 PM
illogical!
Buses, trains, postal service, museums, foster care.
U mad?
!King_Amazon!
2011-02-02, 02:36 PM
I wish all of my arguments with creationists ended in them giving up the argument and repeating "u mad" over and over again. It would be a lot less frustrating to walk away from the debate.
Skurai
2011-02-02, 03:53 PM
I wish all my arguements ended in the other guy being a faggot about it.
!King_Amazon!
2011-02-02, 06:42 PM
You really suck at trolling.
Oh and:
Y u mad, sceptic?
Buses, trains, postal service, museums, foster care.
U mad?
What being a faggot might look like
Wed-G
2011-02-02, 10:11 PM
What genealogy could you find to trace Adam throughout time to I suppose, Jesus that isn't credited to some geocities type-website from a religious fundamentalist author?.
1. God
2. Adam
3. Seth
4. Enosh
5. Cainain
6. Mahalalel
7. Jared
8. Enoch
9. Methuselah
10. Lamech
11. Noah
12. Shem
13. Arphaxad
14. Cainan
15. Shelah
16. Eber
17. Peleg
18. Reu
19. Serug
20. Nahor
21. Terah
22. Abraham
23. Isaac
24. Jacob
25. Judah
26. Pharez
27. Hezron
28. Ram
29. Amminadab
30. Nahshon
31. Salmon
32. Boaz
33. Obed
34. Jesse
35. David
36. Nathan
37. Mattatha
38. Menna
39. Melea
40. Eliakim
41. Jonam
42. Joseph
43. Judah
44. Simeon
45. Levi
46. Matthat
47. Jorim
48. Eliezer
49. Joshua
50. Er
51. Elmadam
52. Cosam
53. Addi
54. Melchi
55. Neri
56. Shealtiel
57. Zerubbabel
58. Rhesa
59. Joanan
60. Joda
61. Josech
62. Semein
63. Mattathias
64. Mahath
65. Naggai
66. Hesli
67. Nahum
68. Amos
69. Mattathias
70. Joseph
71. Jannai
72. Melchi
73. Levi
74. Matthat
75. Heli
76. Mary & Joseph
77. Jesus
EDIT: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+3%3A23-38&version=NIV
!King_Amazon!
2011-02-03, 12:08 AM
1. God
2. Adam
3. Seth
4. Enosh
5. Cainain
6. Mahalalel
7. Jared
8. Enoch
9. Methuselah
10. Lamech
11. Noah
12. Shem
13. Arphaxad
14. Cainan
15. Shelah
16. Eber
17. Peleg
18. Reu
19. Serug
20. Nahor
21. Terah
22. Abraham
23. Isaac
24. Jacob
25. Judah
26. Pharez
27. Hezron
28. Ram
29. Amminadab
30. Nahshon
31. Salmon
32. Boaz
33. Obed
34. Jesse
35. David
36. Nathan
37. Mattatha
38. Menna
39. Melea
40. Eliakim
41. Jonam
42. Joseph
43. Judah
44. Simeon
45. Levi
46. Matthat
47. Jorim
48. Eliezer
49. Joshua
50. Er
51. Elmadam
52. Cosam
53. Addi
54. Melchi
55. Neri
56. Shealtiel
57. Zerubbabel
58. Rhesa
59. Joanan
60. Joda
61. Josech
62. Semein
63. Mattathias
64. Mahath
65. Naggai
66. Hesli
67. Nahum
68. Amos
69. Mattathias
70. Joseph
71. Jannai
72. Melchi
73. Levi
74. Matthat
75. Heli
76. Mary & Joseph
77. Jesus
EDIT: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+3%3A23-38&version=NIV
http://theframeproblem.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/break-the-cycle.jpg
And even if we assume that the Bible is correct, it is highly contradictory. In fact, here is a list of 456 specific things that the Bible contradicts itself on. The only "facts" used are passages straight from the Bible which you can check for yourself.
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html
that isn't credited to some geocities type-website from a religious fundamentalist author?.
1. God
2. Adam
3. Seth
4. Enosh
5. Cainain
6. Mahalalel
7. Jared
8. Enoch
9. Methuselah
..... that isn't credited to some geocities type-website from a religious fundamentalist author?
Wed-G
2011-02-03, 02:42 PM
that isn't credited to some geocities type-website from a religious fundamentalist author?
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+3%3A23-38&version=NIV
!King_Amazon!
2011-02-03, 03:36 PM
That website is using the Bible as its source. The Bible was written by religious fundamentalists. So was that website. My hair is a bird, your argument is invalid.
Wed-G
2011-02-03, 05:43 PM
That website is using the Bible as its source. The Bible was written by religious fundamentalists. So was that website. My hair is a bird, your argument is invalid.
However, I found a source, that isn't credited to some geocities type-website from a religious fundamentalist author. Point in case, it's from the Bible. Regardless of whether or not it's true, the Bible does give that genealogy.
And your "hair is a bird" argument is equivalent to South Parks "screw you guys, I'm going home." It's real mature, in a serious debate.
I honestly don't care whether I'm right or wrong. You can spend all the time in the world arguing against or for any sort of deity, it doesn't matter. But regardless, it seems that you're impassioned, or "wholly" devout, almost fanatically to the subject of a supreme being that you don't even believe exists. My neighbor could be a serial killer. But I've seen no evidence to support that claim, so I don't go to every single person I meet and fervently preach that he isn't. You could say the same to me, except opposite. But the only reason I even responded to this waste of human thought and reasoning is because you all jumped on Skurai, claiming his conservative opinions weren't his own and then trying to sway his opinions with your own. I'm sick of the pointless debate over God. God's neither provable or disputable. So why can't we just say, I believe, you do not and let it be the last we ever talk about God? Or religion. Or faith in any form. Not even a passing mention of anything remotely related to faith. Oh wait. Because we all have certain freedoms. Like freedom of speech, religion, right to assemble and petition the government.
So, I'm gonna exercise my right to believe what I want. If you don't believe, that's up to you. I'll let your choices and actions define my opinion of you, not whether or not you believe the same as me.
If you're right, great. Congratulations. We die and rot. There is no afterlife, no god. No reward or punishment.
!King_Amazon!
2011-02-03, 07:10 PM
I cannot be right. I am not taking a side, so by definition I am not correct. I am of the opinion that nobody can know the truth, and I respect your right to believe what you want. My problem is when people cannot simply say "I don't believe it because it is scientific/factual evidence, I believe it because I believe it and its as simple as that." I particularly have a problem with people who attempt to rationalize how what they believe might be true rather than simply admitting that what they believe has no proof but they believe it anyway. This doesn't necessarily apply to you, but you did kinda take a retard approach to the debate and didn't give much else other than your "facts" in your argument, so I could only judge based on those. Here's a better example of what I'm referring to:
Aging is related to telomeres. It's entirely possible that in the distant past they were longer or better preserved. As for the age of the Earth, if God created Adam as a man (rather than an infant), why is it a stretch to assume that God also created the Earth with age? Alternately, the creation story is a poem shown to be full of alternate meaning; perhaps it is better to take it not-so-literally. Even so, I believe that Adam was the first man and the geneology is accurate. You find it hard to believe that a God capable of creating both time and space is capable of sustaining a single man's life for 3 days in a fish?
See, instead of simply saying "I believe it because the Bible says so" he attempted to find "scientific" rationalizations for the belief. I can respect someone who is willing to say "I realize that science and the Bible conflict, and I choose to believe the Bible." I cannot respect someone who is going to try to say that there's no disparity between science and the Bible , when there clearly is.
As I've already stated in this thread, science and the Bible conflict severely. The Bible even conflicts with itself. I can still respect someone if they believe the Bible as long as they are willing to admit the two previous sentences in this paragraph are correct, because they are inarguably correct. Simple as that. I'm not saying "the Bible is wrong," I'm saying "there's no proof that the Bible is right." For all I know the Bible is entirely true (minus the conflicts it has with itself, as those breakdowns cannot be resolved within the boundaries of logic.)
And really, it's nothing personal.
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html
This is a great website; Hebrews 7:3
"Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God," was Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.
There is no afterlife, no god. No reward or punishment.
Why do the religious types use such a harsh guilt system. They make it seem that if you don't go to church and preach their beliefs, then you're a bad person. That's what most non-knowing believe, we feel that people shouldn't be made to feel guilty over having a different opinion. That's at least why I fight so vehemently
Skurai
2011-02-05, 11:13 AM
You fail to see that contradictions in a story are a problem. Contradictions in real life are constant. If I asked, "Who was the president of the United States", there would be 43 contradicting answers - all of them correct.
Lenny
2011-02-05, 11:21 AM
Err... no.
If you contradict something, you deny the truth of it and instead preach the opposite to the statement as gospel.
If I say "George Washington" and you say "Abe Lincoln", we're not contradicting each other - both answers are correct, as both are truth.
If you say "Contradiction is someone giving a correct answer to a question and someone then giving another correct answer" and I say "Contradiction is denying the truth of a statement", then that is contradiction.
Get it?
!King_Amazon!
2011-02-05, 12:14 PM
Get it?
Don't hold your breath.
For the first time in awhile, we have an interesting thread. My two cents will be up soon.
Wed-G
2011-02-11, 01:38 AM
For the first time in awhile, we have an interesting thread. My two cents will be up soon.
I have an interesting share that I feel goes well with this blog. Oddly enough, it refutes any of my beliefs I have stated thus far.
Reason for posting? I want every opponent in religious debates against the existence of a god to have the same reasoning.
http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/1mf74n/public.youtranscript.com/zs/882.html
(http://zelaron.com/forum/public.youtranscript.com/zs/882.html)
!King_Amazon!
2011-02-11, 08:53 AM
I understand where she is coming from with her argument, but I disagree that lack of proof disproves the existence of God.
"But you don't tell me you can't know that there isn't. I would say yes I know there isn't because I have been given no evidence."
Lack of evidence should not give a rational person certainty that something is untrue. This is why I'm agnostic and not atheist. It's entirely possible for something to be true and at the same time there be no proof of it. Maybe I just did a backflip, but I wasn't recording it and there were no witnesses. I know I did a backflip, but I can never prove that I did it. That would be a case where something is true and also has no proof.
Lack of proof should cast doubt on something, but not disprove it. I'm pretty sure I've argued extensively with MJordan/Desmethones about this in the past.
Skurai
2011-02-11, 08:55 AM
jb5A4PcLBvw
Skurai
2011-02-11, 08:58 AM
Thank you for at least saying "maybe", !K_A!
That has me content enough to leave the arguement.
!King_Amazon!
2011-02-11, 03:00 PM
http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/5779/eatit.jpg
Wed-G
2011-02-11, 03:31 PM
I'm actually pretty content too. You have reasoned and argued rationally in a manner which promotes healthy debate.
Lack of proof should cast doubt on something, but not disprove it. I'm pretty sure I've argued extensively with MJordan/Desmethones about this in the past.
This is essentially how I feel about it, somewhat. I just feel that human logic and understanding isn't capable of unwrapping the universe we live in. What if there are multiple universes? Mankind cannot grasp at these straws at more than things we can measure with our current intellect and technology, but it doesn't mean we should sit around and worship something that a group of men wrote a couple thousand years ago, we should instead go out and try to solve the answers as a human race.
Skurai
2011-02-14, 08:46 PM
I honestly don't care what's in the Universe/Multiverse. I have a laptop, and it works by me plugging it in, and programing it to do whatever I want it do. Gears turn, data saves. That's all I need to get by. All anyone else needs is to know how to make it. The world can be perfectly content with that.
!King_Amazon!
2011-02-14, 09:40 PM
Well it's a good thing you can speak for the whole world.
Wed-G
2011-02-15, 02:44 AM
Gears turn
lolwut?
Skurai
2011-02-15, 08:32 PM
Well it's a good thing you can speak for the whole world.
Well, what purpose do you care? No matter how much you look at what a rock is made of, it's still just going to sit there, doing nothing but rock-ing around. The moon moves around us, the sun gives us light. Why bother looking at them and figuring out what direction everything is going? It's nothing special.
!King_Amazon!
2011-02-15, 10:12 PM
Having more knowledge is rarely a bad thing. If humans just took everything at face value and didn't ask questions, we would still be living in caves.
Skurai
2011-02-16, 05:44 AM
And many less species would be dying. Including the planet itself.
!King_Amazon!
2011-02-16, 08:04 AM
We wouldn't know that it is our fault or how to fix the problem and prevent it in the future if we didn't ask questions. Are you saying you agree with the nutjobs that call for all humans to kill themselves for the good of the planet? If so, please get started with yourself.
And many less species would be dying. Including the planet itself.
I can agree with this. But at the same time, we have the capability to fix our issues.
Skurai
2011-02-16, 10:00 PM
We wouldn't know that it is our fault or how to fix the problem and prevent it in the future if we didn't ask questions. Are you saying you agree with the nutjobs that call for all humans to kill themselves for the good of the planet? If so, please get started with yourself.
No, that would be Mdselctr. (That's your cue, buddy!)
I just think we should turn off all types of Government, other than a basic law system, and toss out un-needed electronics. I don't need a 306 inch T.V. to go with my $6,000,000 DVD player. I'd much rather go for a walk with a good friend and talk. It lasts longer, is healthier, costs nothing, and harm nobody.
!King_Amazon!
2011-02-16, 10:44 PM
That's the nice thing about freedom. See, you're free to do whatever you want. Don't want to live with electronics? Turn them off or get rid of them. Just because you don't want it doesn't mean everyone else agrees. And that certainly isn't stopping you.
Skurai
2011-02-17, 08:29 PM
If it would save a thousand people, would you give up your freedom, !K_A! ?
!King_Amazon!
2011-02-17, 08:34 PM
1. How is that relevant to the topic at hand?
2. You're going to have to present a less generic scenario for me to make a decision.
Skurai
2011-02-17, 08:40 PM
1. How is that relevant to the topic at hand? When did religion come in? This was a topic about a Republican Club at my school.
2. You're going to have to present a less generic scenario for me to make a decision.Alright, I'll try.
Let's say a man who has a grudge against you comes into enough power to have a thousand people killed on live television around the world. He also has you. His goal is not to harm you, but crush you, emotionally and mentally. He wants you as a slave for the rest of your life (he may even brainwash you, if he must). He has you, on camera, and asked you to become his slave, in exchange for these thousand lives. Do you accept it? The entire world will see your answer.
!King_Amazon!
2011-02-17, 11:35 PM
I would die or deny him before I would agree to something like that.
Skurai
2011-02-18, 06:30 AM
And now he bumps the number to ten thousand. He asks you again, saying your slavery would only last 50 years. Do you continue to refuse his offer?
!King_Amazon!
2011-02-18, 09:07 AM
http://www.myteespot.com/images/Images_d/DSCF7453.jpg
Skurai
2011-02-20, 08:49 PM
Of course. Considering his money and position in power, it is 110% possible you can do that. You're so smart.
So like, 100% then 10% of fairy dust?
Skurai
2011-02-21, 09:43 PM
I was being a smart ass, smart ass.
It's funny when a dumbass calls oneself a smartass, and the world explodes.
Skurai
2011-02-22, 09:18 PM
There is absolutely nothing funny about the world exploding, D3V.
vBulletin® v3.8.2, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.