What I never understood was the rage some people had with religious folk.
Be intelligent and look at this from a different perspective.
They believe with all of their being that you will burn if they do not save you. They are trying to help, even if their efforts are misguided.
Yes it's annoying, but there's no reason to get flustered over it if you take the time to actually think about the dynamics of the situation.
Just ignore them and go about your business. No need to let it ruin your day. Be above it.
It's like getting angry over a stupid youtube comment. You mean there are dumb people in the world who will say stupid things?!? Shocking!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
What I never understood was the rage some people had with religious folk.
Be intelligent and look at this from a different perspective.
They believe with all of their being that you will burn if they do not save you. They are trying to help, even if their efforts are misguided.
Yes it's annoying, but there's no reason to get flustered over it if you take the time to actually think about the dynamics of the situation.
Just ignore them and go about your business. No need to let it ruin your day. Be above it.
It's like getting angry over a stupid youtube comment. You mean there are dumb people in the world who will say stupid things?!? Shocking!
Actually, I believe the 20th and 21th century created somewhat of a new religion. The religion of "no god". Let me clarify though because I don't want to be misquoted. What I mean by it is more on a concrete sense, like any religion, this one has its preachers, a whole lot of people absolutly sure they are right.
But, for example, I'm agnostic atheist myself (I don't believe in god but I may admit there might be something out of our understanding that rule the universe). So I'm somewhat part of this religion as I have its faith but like some christians I don't think I have all the answers and therefore don't preach.
So, to join you in your comment. For me what you are describing is just a natural thing (not good) of one faith ("no god" in this example) trying to convince another that they are right and getting angry in the process. Well it's fine to share opinions or to comment but when it comes to mock, being agressive or threaten someone to go to hell, that's not.
For some reason, those people are usually inclined to fight to the death over their no god belief. Ironic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
I am a Christian and I wanted to take some time to share my thoughts. If some of the points I bring up were mentioned before, then I apologize. I didn't read the whole 45 pages of the thread before I started writing this.
It's about as easy for them you prove his existence as it is for us to prove his non-existence.
I think Chezilla is absolutely right. My point in this post is not to "prove" God's existance. That is equivalent to convincing you that you like the color green. Whether or not someone believes in God is not a matter of proof. It is a matter of opinion (in secular terms) and it is a matter of faith (in spiritual terms). The very belief that God exist, or does not exist is purely based on how much "faith" one person has that He exists or how much "faith" they have that He doesn't exist.
Regardless of how you feel about the existance of God is irrelevant. The real question is what is truth? Does He exist or doesn't He? Take numbers for example. How do you know what "1" is? Someone taught you what one was. Number are a conceptual construct. Our of the context of counting, numebrs mean nothing. If no one ever taught you about numbers, then you would have no idea that you are seeing "6" apples when you are presented with half a dozen of apples. The very concept of counting would completely foreign to you. you might be wondering by now where I am going with this. Regardless of whether or not you understand numbers and counting, one apple is till one apple and six apples are still six apples. The fact that six apples are six apples as true ragardless of whether or not you understand the concenpt or whether or not you believe in the concept. It's the same with God. The truth about His existance is a constant. God doesn't exist one moment and the not exist the next. This fact is irrespective of whether people understand God or whether or not they believe in Him.
Knowing that, it really comes down to an indvidual decision. You either choose to have faith and believe in God - like myself. Or your choose to not have faith and not believe in Him. Again, regardless of this choice, the truth about His existance - whether true or not - is not determined by anyone's decision to this dillema.
...
They believe with all of their being that you will burn if they do not save you...
Umpa brings up an interesting point. As Christians it is our mission to spread the Gospel (the Good News - essentially Christs death on the cross for the remission of everyone's sin, His burial, and His resurrection 3 days later). The real question is what is our motivation to share our faith with other people. (I don't know the churches that are around where everyone that is reading this lives and there are many different denominations and different flavors of the Christian faith. I am speaking from a perspective that I have gathered from studying the Bible and not any particular denomination.)
In my church, there is no membership. No one keeps track of who you invited and who eventually became a Christian. There is no "rewards program" where you get "bonuses" for inviting people or their acceptance of Christ. There is absolutely no incentive for me to invite anyone to church other than the fact that if they accept Jesus as their Lord and savior I would know that I have been used by God to bring them to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.
I want to stress something, however, that seems to be a misconception among non-Christinas and even among some Christians. It is not the individual that is talking to another person that saves. The only one that can save is Jesus Christ. If any "Christian" tells you how many people he or she has "saved" then you are not talking to a person who understand what Chtrist did on the cross.
This brings me to another point that I wanted to make...
The Bible is the inerent word of The Lord Our God, correct?
So exactly why did we, tiny little worthless humans, vote on what books would be in the Bible if it was supposedly from The Lord Our God?
Regardless of whether it was translated correctly or not, it really doesn't matter, because it was decided by humans what books would be in it. This is not how a divine being gives orders to his creation. It's simply not how it works.
You are correct, I believe that the Bible is the innerant word of God. The humans that decided what texts were included in the Bible were moved by the Holy Spirit when they were making that decision. Of course in order to believe the statements in the previous two sentences, faith in God is a prerequisite.
...
Yes, there have been missionaries from other religions aswell but they're actually not actively pursuing the 'mission' anymore, whereas some christians will have no second thoughts about telling you that if you don't believe what they do, you'll go to that fancy place called Hell where you'll burn for all eternity even tho the 'heavenly father above' loves you.
...
You are correct, Luedine. There are some Christinas that will not hesitate to share their faith. Threatening people with going to Hell is not the best way to tell you about Jesus. Scaring people into heaven is just as easy as scaring them out of heaven.
The last part of your comment is another common misconception. God does not send anyone to Hell. Everyone has a choise and the choice is simple. Either someone believes in Jesus as the Son of God who died to pay for all the sins of the world, was burried, and resurrected three days later or they believe that none of this happened.
Romans 1:20 (NLT) "For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God."
You see, if you someone has told you about Jesus, they you have been given a choice. A choice to believe or not. Whether you believe or not, is up to you. Regardless if the choice, each person will have to accept the consequences of their own choice.
Let me close with this...
If am wrong, and I am convinced I am not, and there is no God, then I have lived a happy, full, life and hopefully have made other peoples lives better in the process.
The question that I want to leve everyone who does not believe with is this:
It is a fact that the flood never happened. It is a fact that creation as the Bible claims did not happen. It is a fact that the universe did not come into existence in 6 days. (Resting on the 7th.) These are facts, because we have evidnece that prove otherwise.
^^^And what evidence is that LinkX? And who is this 'we' you speak of? I've never seen any existence of your 'facts'. If it were so apparently clear that these events did not occur how come I've never seen evidence? Just saying...
Umpa and Wreaking Havoc make excellent and amusing points.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"So you have come here for information? I have some for you..."
“Life arose here on earth from inanimate matter, by some kind of evolutionary process, about four billion years ago.
This is not a statement of demonstrable fact, but an assumption almost universally shared by specialists as well as scientists in general. It is not supported by any direct evidence, nor is it likely to be, but it is consistent with what evidence we do have.”
Franklin M. Harold, Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colo State U., The Way of the Cell, 2001, p. 236.
“Oxygen is a poisonous gas that oxidizes organic and inorganic materials on a planetary surface; it is quite lethal to organisms that have not evolved protection against it.”
Peter Ward (Ph.D. Geology) and Donald Brownlee (Ph.D. Astronomy), Rare Earth, 2000, p. 245.
“Terrestrial explanations are impotent and nonviable”
William Bonner, Organic Chemist, Stanford University (World’s leading homochiral researcher), UCLA conference on life’s origins, 1995.
“If a particular amino acid sequence was selected by chance, how rare an event would this be?...
The great majority of sequences can never have been synthesized at all, at any time.”
Francis Crick, Life Itself: Its Origin and Nature, 1981, pp. 51-52.
“The likelihood of life having occurred through a chemical accident is, for all intents and purposes, zero.”
Robert Gange, Ph.D. (research scientist with extensive research in the field of cryophysics and information systems.), Origins and Destiny, 1986, p. 77.
“A fundamental problem that science has never been able to solve is how to produce energy flow through the system to do this work of coding in order to produce, for example, a functioning protein.
Living systems do, of course, harness energy for this purpose, but only because the required, purposefully assembled metabolic machinery is already in place and functioning.”
Neil Broom (Ph.D. Chemical and Materials Engineering), How Blind Is the Watchmaker, 2001, 80.
“The simplest living cell could not have arisen by chance.”
Johnjoe McFadden (Evolutionist & Professor of Molecular Biology and Quantum Physics), Quantum Evolution, 2000, p. 85.
“The origin of life is also a stubborn problem, with no solution in sight….”
Franklin M. Harold, Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colo State U., The Way of the Cell, 2001, p. 235.
“More than 30 years of experimentation on the origin of life in the fields of chemical and molecular evolution have led to a better perception of the immensity of the problem of the origin of life on Earth rather than to its solution.”
Dr. Klaus Dose, “The Origin of Life: More Questions than Answers,” Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, vol. 13, no. 4 1988, p. 348. (Dose is Director, Institute for Biochemistry, Johannes Gutenberg University, West Germany)
“The chances that life just occurred are about as unlikely as a typhoon blowing through a junkyard and constructing a Boeing 747.”
Chandra Wickramasinghe, “Threats on Life of Controversial Astronomer,” New Scientists, 1982, p. 140.
"Nine-tenths of the talk of evolutionists is sheer nonsense, not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by facts. This museum is full of proofs of the utter falsity of their views. In all this great museum, there is not a particle of evidence of the transmutation of species." (Dr. Etheridge, Paleontologist of the British Museum)
"I reject evolution because I deem it obsolete; because the knowledge, hard won since 1830, of anatomy, histology, cytology, and embryology, cannot be made to accord with its basic idea. The foundationless, fantastic edifice of the evolution doctrine would long ago have met with its long- deserved fate were it not that the love of fairy tales is so deep-rooted in the hearts of man." (Dr. Albert Fleischmann, University of Erlangen)
"By the late 1970s, debates on university campuses throughout the free world were being held on the subject of origins with increasing frequency. Hundreds of scientists, who once accepted the theory of evolution as fact, were abandoning ship and claiming that the scientific evidence was in total support of the theory of creation. Well-known evolutionists, such as Isaac Asimov and Stephen Jay Gould, were stating that, since the creationist scientists had won all of the more than one hundred debates, the evolutionists should not debate them." (Luther Sunderland, "Darwin's Enigma", p.10)
"The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based on faith alone; exactly the same sort of faith which is necessary to have when one encounters the great mysteries of religion... The only alternative is the doctrine of special creation, which may be true, but is irrational." (Dr. L.T. More)
"I have come to the conclusion that Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical research programme... (Dr. Karl Popper, German-born philosopher of science, called by Nobel Prize-winner Peter Medawar, "incomparably the greatest philosopher of science who has ever lived.")
"The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory -- is it then a science or faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation..." (Dr. L. Harrison Matthews, in the introduction to the 1971 edition of Darwin's "Origin of Species")
"What is so frustrating for our present purpose is that it seems almost impossible to give any numerical value to the probability of what seems a rather unlikely sequence of events... An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle... (Dr. Francis Crick, Nobel Prize-winner, codiscoverer of DNA)
"Once we see, however, that the probability of life originating at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think that the favorable properties of physics, on which life depends, are in every respect DELIBERATE... It is therefore, almost inevitable that our own measure of intelligence must reflect higher intelligences.. even to the limit of God." (Sir Fred Hoyle, British mathematician and astronomer, and Chandra Wickramasinghe, co-authors of "Evolution from Space," after acknowledging that they had been atheists all their lives)
"The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein... I am at a loss to understand biologists' widespread compulsion to deny what seems to me to be obvious." (Sir Fred Hoyle)
"The fossil record with its abrupt transitions offers no support for gradual change..." (Dr. Stephen Jay Gould, famous Harvard Professor of Paleontology)
"The fundamental reason why a lot of paleontologists don't care much for gradualism is because the fossil record doesn't show gradual change and every paleontologist has know that ever since Cuvier. If you want to get around that you have to invoke the imperfection of the fossil record. Every paleontologist knows that most species, most species, don't change. That's bothersome if you are trained to believe that evolution ought to be gradual. In fact it virtually precludes your studying the very process you went into the school to study. Again, because you don't see it, that brings terrible distress." (Dr. Stephen Jay Gould)
"To postulate that the development and survival of the fittest is entirely a consequence of chance mutations seems to me a hypothesis based on no evidence and irreconcilable with the facts. These classical evolutionary theories are a gross over-simplification of an immensely complex and intricate mass of facts, and it amazes me that they are swallowed so uncritically and readily, and for such a long time, by so many scientists without murmur of protest." (Sir Ernest Chain, Nobel Prize winner)
"Evolution is a theory universally accepted, not because it can be proved to be true, but because the only alternative, 'special creation,' is clearly impossible." (D.M.S. Watson, Professor of Zoology, London University)
Most all of these people consider themselves atheists
Hope you enjoyed!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“One thing a computer can do that most humans can't is be sealed up in a cardboard box and sit in a warehouse”
--Jack Handy
It is a fact that the flood never happened. It is a fact that creation as the Bible claims did not happen. It is a fact that the universe did not come into existence in 6 days. (Resting on the 7th.) These are facts, because we have evidnece that prove otherwise.
^^^And what evidence is that LinkX? And who is this 'we' you speak of? I've never seen any existence of your 'facts'. If it were so apparently clear that these events did not occur how come I've never seen evidence? Just saying...
Umpa and Wreaking Havoc make excellent and amusing points.
In my opinion only ignorant Christians take the bible at literal face value. Scientists and preachers both teach using metaphors. It's a simple way to make it so people can wrap their minds around concepts.
Please NEVER use literal statements as facts against religion.
It is a fact that the flood never happened. It is a fact that creation as the Bible claims did not happen. It is a fact that the universe did not come into existence in 6 days. (Resting on the 7th.) These are facts, because we have evidnece that prove otherwise.
^^^And what evidence is that LinkX? And who is this 'we' you speak of? I've never seen any existence of your 'facts'. If it were so apparently clear that these events did not occur how come I've never seen evidence? Just saying...
Umpa and Wreaking Havoc make excellent and amusing points.
In my opinion only ignorant Christians take the bible at literal face value. Scientists and preachers both teach using metaphors. It's a simple way to make it so people can wrap their minds around concepts.
Please NEVER use literal statements as facts against religion.
Haha Yah I wasn't, I was quoting linkX's statement and questioning his meaning
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"So you have come here for information? I have some for you..."
We never came to a conclusion on Adolf Hitler's true views. And it is impossible to say that he felt this way or that way in his heart. The same argument could be used with Osama Bin Laden. He wasn't a "true Muslim", he just used Islam to further his goals. The Pope and the priests were not "true Catholics", they just used Catholicism to molest little children. Etc. All we can do is take his Catholic upbringing and his repeated use of Jesus and God in his books and speeches and accept that he made the claim that he was Christian, and furthermore Roman Catholic.
Neither religion(god) nor science(mainstream science) should be considered reliable source of information.
Still the bible (the book and its contents not the religious crap) is probably the most accurate history book
ever existed and it can answer many questions if know how to read between the lines and have
a lil bit of imagination to interpret the information.
Lolwut?
The Bible is the most accurate history book that ever existed?
So...did Noah's flood happen before or after the asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs? For that matter, how is the Earth ~4.5 billion years old when the universe is only 6 to 8 billion years old? Also, how have we kept from inbreeding to death if we started out with the genes from only two people?
You are correct, I believe that the Bible is the innerant word of God. The humans that decided what texts were included in the Bible were moved by the Holy Spirit when they were making that decision. Of course in order to believe the statements in the previous two sentences, faith in God is a prerequisite.
So the lord god's best way to make his holy book was to convince a bunch of people to go and vote on which books they like the best? (Most of which that became cannon contradict each other, mind you.) This is the best that an omnipotent, omniscient deity can do?
I gotta say, if that's true, I am disappointing in your god. Really, if he exists, I feel bad for him. I really, really do.
If am wrong, and I am convinced I am not, and there is no God, then I have lived a happy, full, life and hopefully have made other peoples lives better in the process.
If you are wrong and Allah is the lord god, then you will burn in hell forever and ever and ever, without even the courtesy of a single coffee break.
But if I am right, then you are wasting your life worshiping some imaginary friend.
It is a fact that the flood never happened. It is a fact that creation as the Bible claims did not happen. It is a fact that the universe did not come into existence in 6 days. (Resting on the 7th.) These are facts, because we have evidnece that prove otherwise.
^^^And what evidence is that LinkX? And who is this 'we' you speak of? I've never seen any existence of your 'facts'. If it were so apparently clear that these events did not occur how come I've never seen evidence? Just saying...
We have found the flood that the Bible speaks of. It was a small flood that flooded out most of the area, a far cry from a global flood. The most likely happening was that a merchant went and wrote it down, obviously making himself look better. It then changed over time until it was a world wide flood and he was a hero.
As for the fact that the universe not coming into existence in 6 days, explain to me why it took your god three whole days to make our solar system, but just one day to make all the other solar systems and all the other galaxies in the universe? Please? (Not evidence, but I really am curious why it takes three days to make Earth, but it takes one day to make everything else.)
In my opinion only ignorant Christians take the bible at literal face value. Scientists and preachers both teach using metaphors. It's a simple way to make it so people can wrap their minds around concepts.
No. When a scientist says that the universe is 13.7 billion years old, that's not a metaphor. When a scientist says that water is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen, that's not a metaphor.
And religion used to not be metaphors. The only reason they are now is because Science is learning about the universe. Religion has to backstep and say "Oh, haha, that seven day creation thing? We were kidding, it was actually a metaphor! Sorry for the miscommunication all these hundreds of years!"
We never came to a conclusion on Adolf Hitler's true views. And it is impossible to say that he felt this way or that way in his heart. The same argument could be used with Osama Bin Laden. He wasn't a "true Muslim", he just used Islam to further his goals. The Pope and the priests were not "true Catholics", they just used Catholicism to molest little children. Etc. All we can do is take his Catholic upbringing and his repeated use of Jesus and God in his books and speeches and accept that he made the claim that he was Christian, and furthermore Roman Catholic.
Therefore, he was Christian.
The Bible doesn't say commune with demons, try to contact aliens, cult rituals, prove the lineage of the Aryan race came from Atlantis and find magical artifacts.
The Quran, (as some people follow it) does say to kill in the name of God. A holy war. (as does the Bible.)
The bible doesn't say to have sex with young boys (only young girls ironically).
None of that is a good argument. I can claim I'm a cow if I eat hay and act like one, but then when I have a steak and a can of coke does that make me a cow still?
Or something a little less absurd. If I claim to be atheist, 100%, I do not accept the existence of God but then I pray, am I still an atheist?
If I'm a vegan but I eat hamburgers once a week, does that make me a vegan still?
When people say one thing and do another you're no longer in that group. When you are in a religion and you do things in STARK contrast to what that religion teaches, you're not really part of it. I believe he was RAISED Christian.
The Bible doesn't say commune with demons, try to contact aliens, cult rituals, prove the lineage of the Aryan race came from Atlantis and find magical artifacts.
The Bible also doesn't say to play Diablo 3, eat Big Macs, drive Ford Trucks, and go biking with friends. Just because you do something that isn't in the BIble doesn't make you a non-believer.
As for communing with Demons, there is one book that has King Solomon going and fighting and controlling demons that didn't make it into the Bible during the Council of Nicaea. (This book has nothing to do with the argument. I just think it's neat. Lol.)
None of that is a good argument. I can claim I'm a cow if I eat hay and act like one, but then when I have a steak and a can of coke does that make me a cow still?
Or something a little less absurd. If I claim to be atheist, 100%, I do not accept the existence of God but then I pray, am I still an atheist?
I have a friend who is an Atheist. She still prays though. It's not to talk to any superhero deity out there, but rather as a form of meditation or something. But she is still a praying Atheist. So yes, you can be an Atheist and still pray.
When people say one thing and do another you're no longer in that group. When you are in a religion and you do things in STARK contrast to what that religion teaches, you're not really part of it. I believe he was RAISED Christian.
As Richard Dawkins said, we can only look at his upbringing and his personal claims. For us to claim to know what was in his heart would be tantamount to claiming to know the mind of god.
This is an answer to LinkX. Could not quote the message too much mess.
Dinosaurs existed before everything else then they dissapeared. Mainstream science tells you that it was
because of asteroid but it is what they believe and may not the be case.The flood is an event that happened thousands of years ago. It was so dramatic that it changed people lives and they wrote in down in the bible. Thats about it, no Noahs or whatever else (religious) there is.
The Earth is not 4.5 bil years old, there are research movies that are not mainstream and they show you
with some radio active stuff inside the rocks. This radio active substance can only be preserved in the rocks if they were to be created instantly. If the planet is 4.5 bil years old, this stuff should not be in the rocks but dissapear.
The garden of eden is the place where humans were created. In the bible they say "man was created from dirt and the woman from mans bone (i don't know english word). But really this place was something
like laboratory that created man and woman. Since they are smart beings didnt want to listen to someone else but follow their own path and so they were trown out of eden. The apple was representation of this moment and god was not really a god but a intelligent creature from another world.
This all leads to the most truthful theory of all: Ancient Astronauts. As I said, if you ignore the religious crap in the bible everything else is true.
Another example: Once a scientist tried to create life out of nothing (how mainstream science tells: there was nothing on the earth, but substance mixed blabla and there you go life) . And he did create it out of nothing, the problem was the life that he created HAD a creator, HE did it, it didnt happen by itself.
Edit: And btw if you read the bible, it tells you everything that sciense tells you today about the universe and life and so on. How was that possible if the book is thousand of years old?
Almost everithing that the Ancient Astrounaus tell us can be explained with simple things.
"If this alien race was so powerfull to travel around the space. Why they need pyramids to land and slaves to collect gold? Don't they have a GPS sistem or robots to do de job?"
Even the man can use machines to collect gold and do the hard job for us on the 21th century. If the aliens were really here, it was for terraforming and to do something with the earth races. If humans can turn deserts to forests, aliens can do that to planets and even better.
Your statement is wrong. First of all I didnt said anything about pyramids or collecting gold.
2nd. Pyramids were build to show next generations that our ancestors were actually smart and knew
technology way better than we think they do. They are a remider that the past was glorious and it should be considered significant part of humans life. This is why they are thousands years old and clearly not a GPS system.
3rd. Collecting gold? I don't believe in this. Once humans broke free, ancient astronauts didn't want to destroy their
creation so they tried to control it in many ways, creating an religion and belief in god is of them ( it can be seen in all cultures past or present).
It's not my statment. It's the theory statment. According to the Ancient Astrounauts, that alien race camed here to collect gold to their atmoshphere. Wich i agree with you that can't be true. There are many diferent races of aliens that the Ancient Astrounats tell us that camed here like the grey, Annunaki, Troppa and blah blah blah. It's possible that they fight once as many old reports from 500 years ago tell us.
Some Ancient Astrounauts belifers, tell us that the pyramids were build for probaly 3 purposes:
-Alien worship
- Alien airport, wich i belive that isn't true
- Big mines to collect gold.
I belive that the aliens just visited the earth milions of years ago to one purpose: Watch how live evolves here. This could explain the abductions and ufo sighitings, as well the sightings thousands of years ago.
If their technology is really of god-like beings. They could easily control human minds all at once or just kill us all at once like a god would do.
The pyramids cannot be used for gold collection, They are just a several, rather small tunnels, not really *storage facility*.
I think ancient astronaut theory is all wrong about pyramids. My theory seems to make whole lot more sense.
They are not stupid as we are. If we don't like it, kill it ;). They won't do that.
But you seems like you understand, I've got a question and would like to give me your opinion.
Here is an interesting question. Its a lil bit off topic but in general it is pretty good for what this thread is about.
Disclaimer: Im not jew.
Do you know who the Jews are? Do you know why Hitler wanted to kill the jews, or Egypt pharaoh didnt want to release them so they can go to their land free (from the bible), or do you know why in his laters State of the Union, Obama said : We will protect U.S. and Israel.
Why some people want to kill or defend the jews?
Why they are called Jewish Race, not religion.
Why if you are not Jewish enough (DNA wise) you are not considered jew?
Why they are the richest people in the world?
Why is a Russian closer to German (DNA wise) but Jewish DNA is way different from everyone else?
Why Jewish race is considered to be the survivor of the War of the gods in some old papers?
Edit: Why if a jew marry non jew is considered crime?
I find it rather interesting
Very intersting indeed. I think that what you are stating is that they are closer to these aliens, or gods. You are saying that they have conection to the gods powers, knowlodge also in religion terms. This would explain why Hitler wanted to kill them, he wanted to be powerfull and in racial terms, he considered them to be the closest to these gods, so in his mind, they needed to die to the german people be considered better than everyone.
This would mean that the jew and christian rapture would be some kind of mass teletransportation before the earth blews up?
Dinosaurs existed before everything else then they dissapeared. Mainstream science tells you that it was because of asteroid but it is what they believe and may not the be case.The flood is an event that happened thousands of years ago. It was so dramatic that it changed people lives and they wrote in down in the bible. Thats about it, no Noahs or whatever else (religious) there is.
So...why is there not a shred of evidence of any global flood?
And please, don't go quoting scripture or religious website. Kthx.
The Earth is not 4.5 bil years old, there are research movies that are not mainstream and they show you with some radio active stuff inside the rocks. This radio active substance can only be preserved in the rocks if they were to be created instantly. If the planet is 4.5 bil years old, this stuff should not be in the rocks but dissapear.
What substance are you talking about. If you tell me, I can clear up the misunderstanding for you.
The garden of eden is the place where humans were created. In the bible they say "man was created from dirt and the woman from mans bone (i don't know english word). But really this place was something like laboratory that created man and woman. Since they are smart beings didnt want to listen to someone else but follow their own path and so they were trown out of eden. The apple was representation of this moment and god was not really a god but a intelligent creature from another world.
Oh hell... You are talking about the game Assassins Creed, arn't you!?
Boo!
Yea, after reading the rest of your post, it looks like you are going off Assassins Creed lore, rather then real history.
Do you know who the Jews are? Religious group of people
Do you know why Hitler wanted to kill the jews? His view of the Bible led him to believe Jesus wanted him to kill the Jews. (And gays, homos, gypsies, blacks, etc.)
Or Egypt pharaoh didnt want to release them? They were his slaves, aka his property. In his view, it's the same as asking why you didn't want to throw all your computers away.
Why in his laters State of the Union, Obama said : We will protect U.S. and Israel.He has to cater to the pro-israel crowd to be reelected. Obviously.
Why some people want to kill or defend the jews?They believe the Bible and don't want Armageddon to happen.
Why they are called Jewish Race, not religion.Very good P.R. They actually are a religion, and a culture in much the same way Islam is a religion and a culture.
Why if you are not Jewish enough (DNA wise) you are not considered jew?Ego
Why they are the richest people in the world? Back in the Middle Ages the Pope disallowed Christians from opening banks and such, but Jews were not under the control of the Pope so they could do so. This wealth has followed them ever sense.
Why is a Russian closer to German (DNA wise) but Jewish DNA is way different from everyone else? Same reason why Native Americans are closer DNA wise to Russians then Europeans.
Why Jewish race is considered to be the survivor of the War of the gods in some old papers? I actually don't have an answer to this. I've never heard of a "war of the gods". (Aside from the comic and the movie.) I feel less smart now... =(
Edit: Why if a jew marry non jew is considered crime? Where is it a crime?
I find it rather interesting
Nope, but unlike the Hitler issue or the Praying issue, eating a hamburger is in absolute opposition to being Vegan.
As Richard Dawkins said, we can only look at his upbringing and his personal claims. For us to claim to know what was in his heart would be tantamount to claiming to know the mind of god.
Dealing with the occult is in direct opposition with the bible. I don't care what Richard Dawkins says, if you're dabbling in every piece of occult intelligence you can get your hands on, you're not Christian. If you molest a child, you're not Christian. This isn't to say you can't atone for your sins and become a Christian again but it's clear he didn't do that since he committed suicide.
You just like to use Hitler as a Christian scapegoat. "Look how bad Christianity is! Hitler was Christian!" Find someone who actually claimed to be Christian and at least somewhat practiced it. Pick Jim Jones, or the guy that founded the Heaven's Gate cult, Jeffrey Dahmer, David Berkowitz, Stalin, or Ted Bundy.
They all killed people, the bible, especially the old testament condones killing people under certain circumstances. It DOES NOT EVER condone worshiping false idols, trying to gain the power of god, trying to converse with supernatural beings and demons, or any of the other occult stuff Hitler was a part of. Don't make him the poster child of Christianity gone wrong just to suit your needs its a far, far stretch and there are plenty of other people that fit the bill.
Dealing with the occult is in direct opposition with the bible. I don't care what Richard Dawkins says, if you're dabbling in every piece of occult intelligence you can get your hands on, you're not Christian. If you molest a child, you're not Christian. This isn't to say you can't atone for your sins and become a Christian again but it's clear he didn't do that since he committed suicide.
As long as the occult you are dabbling in is not contradictory to the rules of Christianity, then it's not direct opposition. There are some occult that is, obviously, but there is other occult that is not. Saying that all occult is opposition to Christianity is like saying all rectangles are squares. (Bad example, but you get the idea.)
You just like to use Hitler as a Christian scapegoat. "Look how bad Christianity is! Hitler was Christian!" Find someone who actually claimed to be Christian and at least somewhat practiced it. Pick Jim Jones, or the guy that founded the Heaven's Gate cult, Jeffrey Dahmer, David Berkowitz, Stalin, or Ted Bundy.
Not everybody knows who Jim Jones is, or who Jeffrey Dahmer is, or who many of them are. (And Stalin was an Atheist to the best of my knowledge.) The reason I use the Christian Adolf Hitler is because there is no documented evidence of him ever renouncing his faith or of ever loosing his faith. And until somebody invents something that can read minds, we can only go by what he has said.
They all killed people, the bible, especially the old testament condones killing people under certain circumstances. It DOES NOT EVER condone worshiping false idols, trying to gain the power of god, trying to converse with supernatural beings and demons, or any of the other occult stuff Hitler was a part of. Don't make him the poster child of Christianity gone wrong just to suit your needs its a far, far stretch and there are plenty of other people that fit the bill.
Solomon conversed, and even controlled, demons. Just sayin'. And if the Bible does not say "Thou shall not do this" then it isn't against the Bible. Not condoning is not the same as condemning something. (You know, like how the Bible made it very clear to never, ever, wear polyester, eat shellfish, work on sunday, or touch the skin of a pig. Important stuff like that.)
And he's not the posterchild of Christianity gone wrong, that's the pope. ;D
No, but seriously the main reason why I use him is because out of all the evil Christians, he is the most well known. Does that mean all Christians are bad? Of course not. There are many good ones. (And some not so good, but who have their hearts in the right place.)
And just as an aside, I would laugh if it turns out that I am wrong about religion and I go to hell to suffer for all eternity, while Adolf Hitler is up in heaven.
And as another aside, nice to see you again Daemaro.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Be intelligent and look at this from a different perspective.
They believe with all of their being that you will burn if they do not save you. They are trying to help, even if their efforts are misguided.
Yes it's annoying, but there's no reason to get flustered over it if you take the time to actually think about the dynamics of the situation.
Just ignore them and go about your business. No need to let it ruin your day. Be above it.
It's like getting angry over a stupid youtube comment. You mean there are dumb people in the world who will say stupid things?!? Shocking!
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
Actually, I believe the 20th and 21th century created somewhat of a new religion. The religion of "no god". Let me clarify though because I don't want to be misquoted. What I mean by it is more on a concrete sense, like any religion, this one has its preachers, a whole lot of people absolutly sure they are right.
But, for example, I'm agnostic atheist myself (I don't believe in god but I may admit there might be something out of our understanding that rule the universe). So I'm somewhat part of this religion as I have its faith but like some christians I don't think I have all the answers and therefore don't preach.
So, to join you in your comment. For me what you are describing is just a natural thing (not good) of one faith ("no god" in this example) trying to convince another that they are right and getting angry in the process. Well it's fine to share opinions or to comment but when it comes to mock, being agressive or threaten someone to go to hell, that's not.
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
they cant prove his existance at all.
its more like "no one can prove god exists anymore than they can disprove he exists"
I am a Christian and I wanted to take some time to share my thoughts. If some of the points I bring up were mentioned before, then I apologize. I didn't read the whole 45 pages of the thread before I started writing this.
I think Chezilla is absolutely right. My point in this post is not to "prove" God's existance. That is equivalent to convincing you that you like the color green. Whether or not someone believes in God is not a matter of proof. It is a matter of opinion (in secular terms) and it is a matter of faith (in spiritual terms). The very belief that God exist, or does not exist is purely based on how much "faith" one person has that He exists or how much "faith" they have that He doesn't exist.
Regardless of how you feel about the existance of God is irrelevant. The real question is what is truth? Does He exist or doesn't He? Take numbers for example. How do you know what "1" is? Someone taught you what one was. Number are a conceptual construct. Our of the context of counting, numebrs mean nothing. If no one ever taught you about numbers, then you would have no idea that you are seeing "6" apples when you are presented with half a dozen of apples. The very concept of counting would completely foreign to you. you might be wondering by now where I am going with this. Regardless of whether or not you understand numbers and counting, one apple is till one apple and six apples are still six apples. The fact that six apples are six apples as true ragardless of whether or not you understand the concenpt or whether or not you believe in the concept. It's the same with God. The truth about His existance is a constant. God doesn't exist one moment and the not exist the next. This fact is irrespective of whether people understand God or whether or not they believe in Him.
Knowing that, it really comes down to an indvidual decision. You either choose to have faith and believe in God - like myself. Or your choose to not have faith and not believe in Him. Again, regardless of this choice, the truth about His existance - whether true or not - is not determined by anyone's decision to this dillema.
Umpa brings up an interesting point. As Christians it is our mission to spread the Gospel (the Good News - essentially Christs death on the cross for the remission of everyone's sin, His burial, and His resurrection 3 days later). The real question is what is our motivation to share our faith with other people. (I don't know the churches that are around where everyone that is reading this lives and there are many different denominations and different flavors of the Christian faith. I am speaking from a perspective that I have gathered from studying the Bible and not any particular denomination.)
In my church, there is no membership. No one keeps track of who you invited and who eventually became a Christian. There is no "rewards program" where you get "bonuses" for inviting people or their acceptance of Christ. There is absolutely no incentive for me to invite anyone to church other than the fact that if they accept Jesus as their Lord and savior I would know that I have been used by God to bring them to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.
I want to stress something, however, that seems to be a misconception among non-Christinas and even among some Christians. It is not the individual that is talking to another person that saves. The only one that can save is Jesus Christ. If any "Christian" tells you how many people he or she has "saved" then you are not talking to a person who understand what Chtrist did on the cross.
This brings me to another point that I wanted to make...
You are correct, I believe that the Bible is the innerant word of God. The humans that decided what texts were included in the Bible were moved by the Holy Spirit when they were making that decision. Of course in order to believe the statements in the previous two sentences, faith in God is a prerequisite.
You are correct, Luedine. There are some Christinas that will not hesitate to share their faith. Threatening people with going to Hell is not the best way to tell you about Jesus. Scaring people into heaven is just as easy as scaring them out of heaven.
The last part of your comment is another common misconception. God does not send anyone to Hell. Everyone has a choise and the choice is simple. Either someone believes in Jesus as the Son of God who died to pay for all the sins of the world, was burried, and resurrected three days later or they believe that none of this happened.
Romans 1:20 (NLT) "For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God."
You see, if you someone has told you about Jesus, they you have been given a choice. A choice to believe or not. Whether you believe or not, is up to you. Regardless if the choice, each person will have to accept the consequences of their own choice.
Let me close with this...
If am wrong, and I am convinced I am not, and there is no God, then I have lived a happy, full, life and hopefully have made other peoples lives better in the process.
The question that I want to leve everyone who does not believe with is this:
What happens if I am right?
^^^And what evidence is that LinkX? And who is this 'we' you speak of? I've never seen any existence of your 'facts'. If it were so apparently clear that these events did not occur how come I've never seen evidence? Just saying...
Umpa and Wreaking Havoc make excellent and amusing points.
“Life arose here on earth from inanimate matter, by some kind of evolutionary process, about four billion years ago.
This is not a statement of demonstrable fact, but an assumption almost universally shared by specialists as well as scientists in general. It is not supported by any direct evidence, nor is it likely to be, but it is consistent with what evidence we do have.”
Franklin M. Harold, Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colo State U., The Way of the Cell, 2001, p. 236.
“Oxygen is a poisonous gas that oxidizes organic and inorganic materials on a planetary surface; it is quite lethal to organisms that have not evolved protection against it.”
Peter Ward (Ph.D. Geology) and Donald Brownlee (Ph.D. Astronomy), Rare Earth, 2000, p. 245.
“Terrestrial explanations are impotent and nonviable”
William Bonner, Organic Chemist, Stanford University (World’s leading homochiral researcher), UCLA conference on life’s origins, 1995.
“If a particular amino acid sequence was selected by chance, how rare an event would this be?...
The great majority of sequences can never have been synthesized at all, at any time.”
Francis Crick, Life Itself: Its Origin and Nature, 1981, pp. 51-52.
“The likelihood of life having occurred through a chemical accident is, for all intents and purposes, zero.”
Robert Gange, Ph.D. (research scientist with extensive research in the field of cryophysics and information systems.), Origins and Destiny, 1986, p. 77.
“A fundamental problem that science has never been able to solve is how to produce energy flow through the system to do this work of coding in order to produce, for example, a functioning protein.
Living systems do, of course, harness energy for this purpose, but only because the required, purposefully assembled metabolic machinery is already in place and functioning.”
Neil Broom (Ph.D. Chemical and Materials Engineering), How Blind Is the Watchmaker, 2001, 80.
“The simplest living cell could not have arisen by chance.”
Johnjoe McFadden (Evolutionist & Professor of Molecular Biology and Quantum Physics), Quantum Evolution, 2000, p. 85.
“The origin of life is also a stubborn problem, with no solution in sight….”
Franklin M. Harold, Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colo State U., The Way of the Cell, 2001, p. 235.
“More than 30 years of experimentation on the origin of life in the fields of chemical and molecular evolution have led to a better perception of the immensity of the problem of the origin of life on Earth rather than to its solution.”
Dr. Klaus Dose, “The Origin of Life: More Questions than Answers,” Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, vol. 13, no. 4 1988, p. 348. (Dose is Director, Institute for Biochemistry, Johannes Gutenberg University, West Germany)
“The chances that life just occurred are about as unlikely as a typhoon blowing through a junkyard and constructing a Boeing 747.”
Chandra Wickramasinghe, “Threats on Life of Controversial Astronomer,” New Scientists, 1982, p. 140.
"Nine-tenths of the talk of evolutionists is sheer nonsense, not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by facts. This museum is full of proofs of the utter falsity of their views. In all this great museum, there is not a particle of evidence of the transmutation of species." (Dr. Etheridge, Paleontologist of the British Museum)
"I reject evolution because I deem it obsolete; because the knowledge, hard won since 1830, of anatomy, histology, cytology, and embryology, cannot be made to accord with its basic idea. The foundationless, fantastic edifice of the evolution doctrine would long ago have met with its long- deserved fate were it not that the love of fairy tales is so deep-rooted in the hearts of man." (Dr. Albert Fleischmann, University of Erlangen)
"By the late 1970s, debates on university campuses throughout the free world were being held on the subject of origins with increasing frequency. Hundreds of scientists, who once accepted the theory of evolution as fact, were abandoning ship and claiming that the scientific evidence was in total support of the theory of creation. Well-known evolutionists, such as Isaac Asimov and Stephen Jay Gould, were stating that, since the creationist scientists had won all of the more than one hundred debates, the evolutionists should not debate them." (Luther Sunderland, "Darwin's Enigma", p.10)
"The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based on faith alone; exactly the same sort of faith which is necessary to have when one encounters the great mysteries of religion... The only alternative is the doctrine of special creation, which may be true, but is irrational." (Dr. L.T. More)
"I have come to the conclusion that Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical research programme... (Dr. Karl Popper, German-born philosopher of science, called by Nobel Prize-winner Peter Medawar, "incomparably the greatest philosopher of science who has ever lived.")
"The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory -- is it then a science or faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation..." (Dr. L. Harrison Matthews, in the introduction to the 1971 edition of Darwin's "Origin of Species")
"What is so frustrating for our present purpose is that it seems almost impossible to give any numerical value to the probability of what seems a rather unlikely sequence of events... An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle... (Dr. Francis Crick, Nobel Prize-winner, codiscoverer of DNA)
"Once we see, however, that the probability of life originating at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think that the favorable properties of physics, on which life depends, are in every respect DELIBERATE... It is therefore, almost inevitable that our own measure of intelligence must reflect higher intelligences.. even to the limit of God." (Sir Fred Hoyle, British mathematician and astronomer, and Chandra Wickramasinghe, co-authors of "Evolution from Space," after acknowledging that they had been atheists all their lives)
"The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein... I am at a loss to understand biologists' widespread compulsion to deny what seems to me to be obvious." (Sir Fred Hoyle)
"The fossil record with its abrupt transitions offers no support for gradual change..." (Dr. Stephen Jay Gould, famous Harvard Professor of Paleontology)
"The fundamental reason why a lot of paleontologists don't care much for gradualism is because the fossil record doesn't show gradual change and every paleontologist has know that ever since Cuvier. If you want to get around that you have to invoke the imperfection of the fossil record. Every paleontologist knows that most species, most species, don't change. That's bothersome if you are trained to believe that evolution ought to be gradual. In fact it virtually precludes your studying the very process you went into the school to study. Again, because you don't see it, that brings terrible distress." (Dr. Stephen Jay Gould)
"To postulate that the development and survival of the fittest is entirely a consequence of chance mutations seems to me a hypothesis based on no evidence and irreconcilable with the facts. These classical evolutionary theories are a gross over-simplification of an immensely complex and intricate mass of facts, and it amazes me that they are swallowed so uncritically and readily, and for such a long time, by so many scientists without murmur of protest." (Sir Ernest Chain, Nobel Prize winner)
"Evolution is a theory universally accepted, not because it can be proved to be true, but because the only alternative, 'special creation,' is clearly impossible." (D.M.S. Watson, Professor of Zoology, London University)
Most all of these people consider themselves atheists
Hope you enjoyed!
--Jack Handy
In my opinion only ignorant Christians take the bible at literal face value. Scientists and preachers both teach using metaphors. It's a simple way to make it so people can wrap their minds around concepts.
Please NEVER use literal statements as facts against religion.
Haha Yah I wasn't, I was quoting linkX's statement and questioning his meaning
OVERRULED!
We never came to a conclusion on Adolf Hitler's true views. And it is impossible to say that he felt this way or that way in his heart. The same argument could be used with Osama Bin Laden. He wasn't a "true Muslim", he just used Islam to further his goals. The Pope and the priests were not "true Catholics", they just used Catholicism to molest little children. Etc. All we can do is take his Catholic upbringing and his repeated use of Jesus and God in his books and speeches and accept that he made the claim that he was Christian, and furthermore Roman Catholic.
Therefore, he was Christian.
Lolwut?
The Bible is the most accurate history book that ever existed?
So...did Noah's flood happen before or after the asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs? For that matter, how is the Earth ~4.5 billion years old when the universe is only 6 to 8 billion years old? Also, how have we kept from inbreeding to death if we started out with the genes from only two people?
Just curious.
Salutations! Welcome to the forum!
So the lord god's best way to make his holy book was to convince a bunch of people to go and vote on which books they like the best? (Most of which that became cannon contradict each other, mind you.) This is the best that an omnipotent, omniscient deity can do?
I gotta say, if that's true, I am disappointing in your god. Really, if he exists, I feel bad for him. I really, really do.
If you are wrong and Allah is the lord god, then you will burn in hell forever and ever and ever, without even the courtesy of a single coffee break.
But if I am right, then you are wasting your life worshiping some imaginary friend.
So, what happens if you pick the wrong god?
We have found the flood that the Bible speaks of. It was a small flood that flooded out most of the area, a far cry from a global flood. The most likely happening was that a merchant went and wrote it down, obviously making himself look better. It then changed over time until it was a world wide flood and he was a hero.
As for the fact that the universe not coming into existence in 6 days, explain to me why it took your god three whole days to make our solar system, but just one day to make all the other solar systems and all the other galaxies in the universe? Please? (Not evidence, but I really am curious why it takes three days to make Earth, but it takes one day to make everything else.)
No. When a scientist says that the universe is 13.7 billion years old, that's not a metaphor. When a scientist says that water is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen, that's not a metaphor.
And religion used to not be metaphors. The only reason they are now is because Science is learning about the universe. Religion has to backstep and say "Oh, haha, that seven day creation thing? We were kidding, it was actually a metaphor! Sorry for the miscommunication all these hundreds of years!"
The Bible doesn't say commune with demons, try to contact aliens, cult rituals, prove the lineage of the Aryan race came from Atlantis and find magical artifacts.
The Quran, (as some people follow it) does say to kill in the name of God. A holy war. (as does the Bible.)
The bible doesn't say to have sex with young boys (only young girls ironically).
None of that is a good argument. I can claim I'm a cow if I eat hay and act like one, but then when I have a steak and a can of coke does that make me a cow still?
Or something a little less absurd. If I claim to be atheist, 100%, I do not accept the existence of God but then I pray, am I still an atheist?
If I'm a vegan but I eat hamburgers once a week, does that make me a vegan still?
When people say one thing and do another you're no longer in that group. When you are in a religion and you do things in STARK contrast to what that religion teaches, you're not really part of it. I believe he was RAISED Christian.
The Bible also doesn't say to play Diablo 3, eat Big Macs, drive Ford Trucks, and go biking with friends. Just because you do something that isn't in the BIble doesn't make you a non-believer.
As for communing with Demons, there is one book that has King Solomon going and fighting and controlling demons that didn't make it into the Bible during the Council of Nicaea. (This book has nothing to do with the argument. I just think it's neat. Lol.)
Horses have been fed horse meat before.
I have a friend who is an Atheist. She still prays though. It's not to talk to any superhero deity out there, but rather as a form of meditation or something. But she is still a praying Atheist. So yes, you can be an Atheist and still pray.
Nope, but unlike the Hitler issue or the Praying issue, eating a hamburger is in absolute opposition to being Vegan.
As Richard Dawkins said, we can only look at his upbringing and his personal claims. For us to claim to know what was in his heart would be tantamount to claiming to know the mind of god.
Almost everithing that the Ancient Astrounaus tell us can be explained with simple things.
"If this alien race was so powerfull to travel around the space. Why they need pyramids to land and slaves to collect gold? Don't they have a GPS sistem or robots to do de job?"
Even the man can use machines to collect gold and do the hard job for us on the 21th century. If the aliens were really here, it was for terraforming and to do something with the earth races. If humans can turn deserts to forests, aliens can do that to planets and even better.
It's not my statment. It's the theory statment. According to the Ancient Astrounauts, that alien race camed here to collect gold to their atmoshphere. Wich i agree with you that can't be true. There are many diferent races of aliens that the Ancient Astrounats tell us that camed here like the grey, Annunaki, Troppa and blah blah blah. It's possible that they fight once as many old reports from 500 years ago tell us.
Some Ancient Astrounauts belifers, tell us that the pyramids were build for probaly 3 purposes:
-Alien worship
- Alien airport, wich i belive that isn't true
- Big mines to collect gold.
I belive that the aliens just visited the earth milions of years ago to one purpose: Watch how live evolves here. This could explain the abductions and ufo sighitings, as well the sightings thousands of years ago.
If their technology is really of god-like beings. They could easily control human minds all at once or just kill us all at once like a god would do.
Very intersting indeed. I think that what you are stating is that they are closer to these aliens, or gods. You are saying that they have conection to the gods powers, knowlodge also in religion terms. This would explain why Hitler wanted to kill them, he wanted to be powerfull and in racial terms, he considered them to be the closest to these gods, so in his mind, they needed to die to the german people be considered better than everyone.
This would mean that the jew and christian rapture would be some kind of mass teletransportation before the earth blews up?
What you asked is a mistery without an awnser.
So...why is there not a shred of evidence of any global flood?
And please, don't go quoting scripture or religious website. Kthx.
What substance are you talking about. If you tell me, I can clear up the misunderstanding for you.
Oh hell... You are talking about the game Assassins Creed, arn't you!?
Boo!
Yea, after reading the rest of your post, it looks like you are going off Assassins Creed lore, rather then real history.
My answers in bold.
Dealing with the occult is in direct opposition with the bible. I don't care what Richard Dawkins says, if you're dabbling in every piece of occult intelligence you can get your hands on, you're not Christian. If you molest a child, you're not Christian. This isn't to say you can't atone for your sins and become a Christian again but it's clear he didn't do that since he committed suicide.
You just like to use Hitler as a Christian scapegoat. "Look how bad Christianity is! Hitler was Christian!" Find someone who actually claimed to be Christian and at least somewhat practiced it. Pick Jim Jones, or the guy that founded the Heaven's Gate cult, Jeffrey Dahmer, David Berkowitz, Stalin, or Ted Bundy.
They all killed people, the bible, especially the old testament condones killing people under certain circumstances. It DOES NOT EVER condone worshiping false idols, trying to gain the power of god, trying to converse with supernatural beings and demons, or any of the other occult stuff Hitler was a part of. Don't make him the poster child of Christianity gone wrong just to suit your needs its a far, far stretch and there are plenty of other people that fit the bill.
As long as the occult you are dabbling in is not contradictory to the rules of Christianity, then it's not direct opposition. There are some occult that is, obviously, but there is other occult that is not. Saying that all occult is opposition to Christianity is like saying all rectangles are squares. (Bad example, but you get the idea.)
Not everybody knows who Jim Jones is, or who Jeffrey Dahmer is, or who many of them are. (And Stalin was an Atheist to the best of my knowledge.) The reason I use the Christian Adolf Hitler is because there is no documented evidence of him ever renouncing his faith or of ever loosing his faith. And until somebody invents something that can read minds, we can only go by what he has said.
Solomon conversed, and even controlled, demons. Just sayin'. And if the Bible does not say "Thou shall not do this" then it isn't against the Bible. Not condoning is not the same as condemning something. (You know, like how the Bible made it very clear to never, ever, wear polyester, eat shellfish, work on sunday, or touch the skin of a pig. Important stuff like that.)
And he's not the posterchild of Christianity gone wrong, that's the pope. ;D
No, but seriously the main reason why I use him is because out of all the evil Christians, he is the most well known. Does that mean all Christians are bad? Of course not. There are many good ones. (And some not so good, but who have their hearts in the right place.)
And just as an aside, I would laugh if it turns out that I am wrong about religion and I go to hell to suffer for all eternity, while Adolf Hitler is up in heaven.
And as another aside, nice to see you again Daemaro.