Who Here Believes In God?

[NCC10281982B]

From the same guy as the 10 questions video.

[iKillSteal]

so you agree with what i said after beating around the bush and the assume that we will in time have God like powers? "Science does not operate on blind faith in a higher power." <------ did you not just say this? yet by blind faith you assume in time we will have God like powers? hmmm alrighty then....

 

im not interested in what that group of people think and yes science supports Gods existence please lets not get on the topic of carbon dating as it is flawed...... ever seen someone take a chicken bone fresh and have it carbon dated? i have the first one said it was around 600 years old and the second opinion said it was around 200..... see something with your own eyes and dont depend on what they tell you on the science channel.

Responding to the section in bold: Do note that "God" was in quotes in my post pertaining to the section you reference. This doesn't mean I'm acknowledging there is a "God", simply that we will eventually be able to perform actions such as the ones the bible lists "God" as doing. Please, do read a bit more closely, the punctuation is important. I'm also not going on blind faith that we will eventually have these abilities. It's called progress and to a lesser extent, evolution. It's happening all the time.

 

Responding to the second portion: The overwhelming majority of evidence states that carbon dating is an extremely accurate process for measuring extremely old objects. You wouldn't run febreze through a mass spectrometer to figure out how old it is based on its chemical breakdown so why would you apply a very specific test like carbon dating to a fresh chicken bone? It's meant for very, very, very, very old things but it's not perfect. When you're dating 40,000 year old objects, a 200-600 year margin of error makes zero difference. You can't dismiss it as invalid simply because you "saw" an improper application of C14 dating. Heck, I could use your logic and completely dismiss the bible because of the many inconsistencies in it.

 

Responding to your final quip: I sat in on a demonstration lecture where a professor at IUPUI(The college I'm attending) performed an example carbon dating test on a bone fragment recovered from a peat bog. It was pegged at around 2,700(-+220 years I think he said) years old. I've seen the process performed first-hand by a man who has dedicated his entire life to working with the ancient remains of the dead. He was confident in its accuracy. I'm confident in his professional opinion based upon dozens of years of experience.

 

BIG NOTE: I'm not trying to turn you away from your faith. I let others believe as they want to but when false assumptions and bad logic are applied to such a delicate issue, I feel it necessary to point them out and present information to the contrary. That all having been said, I'm going to sleep. Can't believe I'm debating religion at 4am...

[davidst]

Jesus said there will be signs in the stars... Go to 1:15. Right in the center, you can see that the nebulae on your screen creates the number 3.

 

Take a look at this image here...

 

 

This is a sign! The coming of the 3rd installation of the godly franchise that is Half Life! Rejoice and let your voices be heard!

 

But in all seriousness, earlier on, Nuke specifically mentioned "Why won't god heal amputees?"

Well, I have a video here, from a website of the exact same name, funnily enough.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jk6ILZAaAMI&feature=player_embedded

 

My answer is NO. I liked the milk jug!

[NCC10281982B]

Which explains why "Please GOD I just want to hear from her one more time" stopped working.

 

so if im replying to people's specific posts with questions in them, thats spam? should i wait till someone else posts then come back and respond to a post then that i could have done earlier?

You can respond (with a quotation) to multiple questions with one post. I have found it handy from time to time.

 

I like civilized debate and everything but these topics usually run in circles with these two duking it out.

http://bit.ly/9HTP8I & http://bit.ly/aN0ZIK

 

Also: http://bit.ly/cdi7aJ

 

The yes/no/wait remark reminds me of these.

[PeeWee90]

Just... No.

[Compxpert]

I think I have the answer to this thread. There are two things you should never talk about in mixed company. These are Religion and Politics.

 

/thread

[dr_bowtie]

AMEN...

 

both cause heated flames because either party totes jibberish without fully knowing the truth about the topic at hand...they are all just repeaters/interpreters.....

[LoArmistead]

I think I have the answer to this thread. There are two things you should never talk about in mixed company. These are Religion and Politics.

 

/thread

 

I always hated that saying, particularly in regards to politics. If peoples' politics were genuinely their own (as in the way they voted had no economic effect on anyone else), then I would respectfully not bring politics up around them. But so long as the political atmosphere in the country revolves around people voting for politicians who promise to steal my money to give it to them or somebody else, I think I have every right in the world to openly question the politics of the person voting for those politicians. If Joe Blow walked up to me on the street and started to stick his hand in my pocket to take my wallet out, I would sure as hell give him a piece of my mind. And if Joe Blow votes for a politician who passes a law that makes it legal for the government to take money from my wallet to then give to Joe Blow, does that make the act any less wrong, any less questionable, or any more respectable? Hell no. As long as another person's political "opinions" negatively affect my well-being and the well-being of my family, I will most .ing certainly not stay quiet out of respect for them. I will question their judgment, as I see it as flawed, and worthy of scrutiny.

 

I've come to believe that the "no politics in mixed company" phrase was something invented by leftists in order to stop people from challenging their weak and easily-refuted moral arguments. But that's just my opinion, and until they drag me off to a re-education camp, it isn't going to change.

[Compxpert]

I always hated that saying, particularly in regards to politics. If peoples' politics were genuinely their own (as in the way they voted had no economic effect on anyone else), then I would respectfully not bring politics up around them. But so long as the political atmosphere in the country revolves around people voting for politicians who promise to steal my money to give it to them or somebody else, I think I have every right in the world to openly question the politics of the person voting for those politicians. If Joe Blow walked up to me on the street and started to stick his hand in my pocket to take my wallet out, I would sure as hell give him a piece of my mind. And if Joe Blow votes for a politician who passes a law that makes it legal for the government to take money from my wallet to then give to Joe Blow, does that make the act any less wrong, any less questionable, or any more respectable? Hell no. As long as another person's political "opinions" negatively affect my well-being and the well-being of my family, I will most .ing certainly not stay quiet out of respect for them. I will question their judgment, as I see it as flawed, and worthy of scrutiny.

 

I've come to believe that the "no politics in mixed company" phrase was something invented by leftists in order to stop people from challenging their weak and easily-refuted moral arguments. But that's just my opinion, and until they drag me off to a re-education camp, it isn't going to change.

I always looked at it as just meaning you don't talk about it because it just breeds argument. This thread is a fine example of the former of the two. I'm sure I could find a few closed political threads as well though.

[LoArmistead]

I always looked at it as just meaning you don't talk about it because it just breeds argument. This thread is a fine example of the former of the two. I'm sure I could find a few closed political threads as well though.

 

Haha, now what on earth would possess people to argue over the rights to their personal property!?

[Kash]

so ill check back later and if enough are interested i will post back with it and after a while and people have had time to comprehend it, it i will see how some if any try to argue against it. really you cant but i know some will try to do so. im pretty sure its something none of you have ever thought of or seen.

 

 

and if i gave you evidence that what is in the bible is true, then that would be firmer grounds for divinely inspired men chosen by God to have written, yes???

 

 

no spam here friend, just waiting for others to show interest in what i mentioned, if none ask for it then i wont. its much better than pics by the way lol

 

 

and if none ask then they dont. maybe you should try asking.

 

What is it with your obsession of having people ask for this so-called proof of yours? If you have something compelling to provide, then just post it, don't sit there begging people to ask you for what you have to say.

[ccokeman]

Everyone has to believe in something!