Lelouch24 Posts
BigLundi wrote...
Lelouch24 wrote...
It's nice to know that I have no right to post my opinions and beliefs
Please quote where I said anything like that at all. I think you'll find that I didn't. Nice job strawmanning the shit out of me :P
wow, really?
BigLundi wrote...
you used your OWN standard of morality ot make that decision. As far as saying whatever God says is right, is right, I have a lot of problems with that.Your contradicting option #2
No, I was explaining that you are. Explain how I'm doing something...simply saying "You'recontradicting something" isn't an argument. It's what's known as a bare assed assertion. :)
Yes, and you were saying god made what is moral, moral, therefore you were outright contradicting option 2. which is all I was pointing out. You were coming to the conclusion that it was both, when in reality it was onnly option one, and you were outright denying 2.
Let's start over, since logical reasoning didn't get through to you.
does this sentence imply that morality already existed?
2. Is what is morally right, morally right, and God is simply pointing it out?
As I already demonstrated, according to the original hebrew word, no they weren't, and they got punished unmercilessly, and unjustifiably.
I just used a couple verses, sorry, but that's not the only bad thing god does. Not only do you agree he orders ethnic cleansing, which by the way ,I want to state for the record, you support, but he also outlines the ways in which the slave trade should be instituted and run, and ordered the stoning to death of a man who recanted his beliefs of god, as well as the killing of a wife who might turn her husband from him, OH! and how about that lovely little law that if a man should hate his wife, he can claim she wasn't a virgin when they married, and, if the father of the wife cannot produce the bloody sheet she lost her virginity in, she is to be stoned to death. How's that one? Does that one not ust STING? That's God's law, by the way.
I will admit that this story makes people go O_o, but there was a (harsh) reason. I'll admit that this is a very good argument for your point, but I'm not gonna throw away my religious beliefs because something harsh happens in 2 verses
I just used a couple verses, sorry, but that's not the only bad thing god does. Not only do you agree he orders ethnic cleansing, which by the way ,I want to state for the record, you support, but he also outlines the ways in which the slave trade should be instituted and run, and ordered the stoning to death of a man who recanted his beliefs of god, as well as the killing of a wife who might turn her husband from him, OH! and how about that lovely little law that if a man should hate his wife, he can claim she wasn't a virgin when they married, and, if the father of the wife cannot produce the bloody sheet she lost her virginity in, she is to be stoned to death. How's that one? Does that one not ust STING? That's God's law, by the way.
I'll admit, crazy sh*t happens in the old testament. I'll never prove that the stuff here is acceptable by society, so I don't see any reason to keep trying. Keep in mind that these laws applied to God's people (not regular people), for the purpose of being a sign for the coming savior. I don't think most of these laws apply, now that the savior has come. as for stoning an unvirgin, "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her."
I'll admit, I didn't really answer "why"; I just said that it doesn't matter. However, your being very arrogant to say that this means my belief in morality is inferior. Since you think it's a shame I can't answer endless "why" questions, let's see how you do. I want you to explain why your morals are true, then explain why that is, then explain why that is,
All without using circular reasoning. If you can do that, then your belief of morals is superior. Until then, stop bringing up this argument, it's downright stupid.
Spoiler:
All without using circular reasoning. If you can do that, then your belief of morals is superior. Until then, stop bringing up this argument, it's downright stupid.
Ok, viciously circular. That's what you're being. I however, am not. Why is honesty right, rather than dishonesty? Simple, I prefer people to be honest to me, so, if I want to increase the chances of people being honest with me, I shall be honest to them. Why is it objectively right whereas dishonesty is objectively wrong, Also simple, in order to have a cooperative society, the well being of others is directly dependent upon many variables, one of them is inevitably the ability for some to be honest to others. this is a desired trait for survival, and makes it objectively right. "Ah hah!" I hear tyou saying, "But what makes survival preferred?!" Well, me. the people around me, you, unless you don';t want to survive. Everyone who wishes to survive makes survivability the desired trait. Could I go on? yes, I could, but I don't need to, because I've already demonstrated with my morality, I can go steps furthur than you claim yourself you ever possibly could. :)
um... you only got to saying that survival is our nature. I said Morality was God's nature, but apparently that's not enough for me. Your now at the same roadbump as me; tell me why it's our nature
BigLundi wrote...
Lelouch24 wrote...
I'm a Christian, so I have a really easy answer to What is moral; Whatever God says is Moral is moral. Atheists have a much harder time answering this question, but it's still important for them to answer. Most people just believe that the Law is the basis of morality. This usually works, but there are times when the law simply doesn't tell you when something is right or wrong.Your answer is extremely flawed. In reality, your morality isn't whatever god says is moral. The first thing you needed to do was determine that God is good, and that whatever he says is good. Whether you recognize it or not, you used your OWN standard of morality ot make that decision. As far as saying whatever God says is right, is right, I have a lot of problems with that. I'll go over that in the rest of your response.
It's nice to know that I have no right to post my opinions and beliefs
As a Christian, I believe God created the world, along with everything in it. If morality already exists in the world, it exists because God created it. Whether God is Declaring what is moral or if he's pointing out what is moral is irrelevant; either way, God is the source of Morality
Morality isn't a 'thing' though that's to be created. You've already chosen answer 1 OVER answer 2, and I've already explained why that creates not only a meaningles tautology as well as makes you...well...morally bankrupt. :/ I don’t have a hard time with morals, mine soar over the morals taught in the bible, as do…well most people who accept that the bible isn’t literally true, or whatever such nonsense.
Your contradicting option #2
2. Is what is morally right, morally right, and God is simply pointing it out?
This statement implies that morality already existed. I believe that morallity exists because God created it. Because of this, I don't see a difference in the 2 options.
Also, God is never unjust; he has never unjustly murdered anyone. There were some wars that God declared the Israelites to fight (such as the Amorites), but that was because of the Wickedness of the Amorites. God has the right to justly murder someone just as an executioner has the right to execute a criminal
Really…God has never…unjustly murdered anyone…Let’s take a look at Elijah and the bears, shall we? Found in the Book of Kings, Elijah is laughed at by 42 children because of his bald head. Elijah asked God to punih them, so God sent 2 she bears to maul and kill all the children.
Unfortunately, you are forced to believe that mass child murder for calling someone bald is moral…because you dogmatically must believe God cannot do anything wrong. How sad for you. : / Course, you can go ahead and believe that, but it just shows me once more why my morality is…better than yours.
First off, these weren't children. The hebrew word "Naar" is used, which has refered to guys as old as 28. They were Cursing God's chosen profit, Elisha. This was treated the same as cursing God, and the consequences were also the same. These guys were old enough to understand what they were doing, and They got punished for it.
I will admit that this story makes people go O_o, but there was a (harsh) reason. I'll admit that this is a very good argument for your point, but I'm not gonna throw away my religious beliefs because something harsh happens in 2 verses
I'll stop that circle then :)
Honesty is moral because God said "thou shalt not give false testimony". He said that because honesty is His nature. *From here, it's impossible for us to comprehend the reason for His nature, hell, we can't understand the reason for our own nature. If I asked you "why do you like Hentai", and kept asking "why", you would have circular reasoning. Just because we can't explain why something is the way it is doesn't mean it's not true.
Ultimately, If you're a Christian, and believe that what God says is true, than you won't question "why" God is the way he is; you'll just believe what he says is true and live by it.
Honesty is moral because God said "thou shalt not give false testimony". He said that because honesty is His nature. *From here, it's impossible for us to comprehend the reason for His nature, hell, we can't understand the reason for our own nature. If I asked you "why do you like Hentai", and kept asking "why", you would have circular reasoning. Just because we can't explain why something is the way it is doesn't mean it's not true.
Ultimately, If you're a Christian, and believe that what God says is true, than you won't question "why" God is the way he is; you'll just believe what he says is true and live by it.
Shame. You actually think you answered the question, and have outright admitted that you have no interest in asking the question "why?". I'm sorry, but your level of morality is very inferior to secular morality, especially for that reason. You've admitted your answer as to WHY Honesty is moral is because God said it's moral, when asked why is God's word right, it's because...well...God's word is right. You don't care that you haven't answered the question to why...no...you simply say, "No no, you don't ask why, you just accept my answer. God said it, that settles it."
Sorry, but I will never be satisfied by such an...answerless answer.
I'll admit, I didn't really answer "why"; I just said that it doesn't matter. However, your being very arrogant to say that this means my belief in morality is inferior. Since you think it's a shame I can't answer endless "why" questions, let's see how you do. I want you to explain why your morals are true, then explain why that is, then explain why that is,
Spoiler:
All without using circular reasoning. If you can do that, then your belief of morals is superior. Until then, stop bringing up this argument, it's downright stupid.
I've watched Code Geass 4 times, and I wouldn't mind a 5th one sometime later. I tried re-watching Naruto and bleach, but they were too slow-paced for me to enjoy.
spectre257 wrote...
Taxes shouldn't be used to support abortion but for those who are pro-life you should open your wallets and help those women you denied the ability of have abortions who now have to raise a child at the ripe age of 18.Pro-life people aren't denying anyone an abortion. It is impossible to stop people from having abortions, and any attempt to deny abortions would result in people resorting to illegal, dangerous abortions.
It's not the responsibility of the pro-life people to deal with the child. People need to be responsible for their own decisions. Rape is not their own decision, so they don't have to be responsible for the child. An unexpected health problem that would cause the birth to fail is not their decision, so they don't have to be responsible. In all other cases (which is the majority of abortions), The couple needs to be responsible for their own decisions, not the pro-life people.
I'm a Christian, so I have a really easy answer to What is moral; Whatever God says is Moral is moral. Atheists have a much harder time answering this question, but it's still important for them to answer. Most people just believe that the Law is the basis of morality. This usually works, but there are times when the law simply doesn't tell you when something is right or wrong.
Now, what is moral, under the theistic mindset of God being the source? Well, to address this we look to the Euthyphro Dilemma, which is as follows.
1. Is what is moraly right, morally right because god says it is?
2. Is what is morally right, morally right, and God is simply pointing it out?
Now of course, neither answer really helps the theist's problem. If we go with option 1, then what is morally right is simply an arbitrary definition of 'whatever God says is right'. therefore, if God were to say, perhaps, that murder is ok, then murder just simply becomes ok. This offers a meaningless tautology that whatever god says is morally good, even if we don't find these things to be good.
If we go with option 2, then the use of God as far as morals go, becomes completely wiped out.
However, most apologists have come up with a third answer.
Neither, what is morally right is whatever reflects God's eternal unchanging nature. God's nature, is what is morally right, and things we see as being morally wrong, are simply things that are not in his nature.
As a Christian, I believe God created the world, along with everything in it. If morality already exists in the world, it exists because God created it. Whether God is Declaring what is moral or if he's pointing out what is moral is irrelevant; either way, God is the source of Morality
God doesn't request human sacrifices; technically he requested one from Abraham, but God stopped Abraham; it was a test of faith. Also, God is never unjust; he has never unjustly murdered anyone. There were some wars that God declared the Israelites to fight (such as the Amorites), but that was because of the Wickedness of the Amorites. God has the right to justly murder someone just as an executioner has the right to execute a criminal
God doesn't unjustly murder, and we don't have the right to unjustly murder. There aren't any contradictions in God's nature and the morals he gave us.
I'll stop that circle then :)
Honesty is moral because God said "thou shalt not give false testimony". He said that because honesty is His nature. *From here, it's impossible for us to comprehend the reason for His nature, hell, we can't understand the reason for our own nature. If I asked you "why do you like Hentai", and kept asking "why", you would have circular reasoning. Just because we can't explain why something is the way it is doesn't mean it's not true.
Ultimately, If you're a Christian, and believe that what God says is true, than you won't question "why" God is the way he is; you'll just believe what he says is true and live by it.
BigLundi wrote...
Next, I'd like to address the argument that if an objective morality exists, then clearly, god must be the source for this morality. Well...that's...self defeating. There are in fact so many problems with this argument, I couldn't fit them al in the generous amount of characters Fakku posts allow. However, I'm only going to address for now, a couple of them, as they directly correlate with my own ideas of morality.Now, what is moral, under the theistic mindset of God being the source? Well, to address this we look to the Euthyphro Dilemma, which is as follows.
1. Is what is moraly right, morally right because god says it is?
2. Is what is morally right, morally right, and God is simply pointing it out?
Now of course, neither answer really helps the theist's problem. If we go with option 1, then what is morally right is simply an arbitrary definition of 'whatever God says is right'. therefore, if God were to say, perhaps, that murder is ok, then murder just simply becomes ok. This offers a meaningless tautology that whatever god says is morally good, even if we don't find these things to be good.
If we go with option 2, then the use of God as far as morals go, becomes completely wiped out.
However, most apologists have come up with a third answer.
Neither, what is morally right is whatever reflects God's eternal unchanging nature. God's nature, is what is morally right, and things we see as being morally wrong, are simply things that are not in his nature.
As a Christian, I believe God created the world, along with everything in it. If morality already exists in the world, it exists because God created it. Whether God is Declaring what is moral or if he's pointing out what is moral is irrelevant; either way, God is the source of Morality
2 problems with that.
Firstly, Is murder wrong? Well duh, murder's wrong. For the purposes of this post, we'll define murder as "Intentionally terminating the life of another human being without consent." Consent, btw, can include having given up their right to life, say by attacking you, or having already murdered someone else. Well why is it wrong? Well as the apologist says, "It's wrong because murder does not reflect the eternal unchanging nature of...god...uh oh...see now we have a problem. Anyone who's read the bible understands that God's nature is, most certainly that of allowing murder in many many cases. He commanded it on a regular basis and even accepts human sacrifice. So clearly that...can't be the reason. What CAN be the case, if we want to be consistant with the apologist explanation of morality and god, is we can say that clearly murder, or rather, the intentional termination of human life without consent, does in fact reflect God's nature. I'm gonna do a little syllogism to illustrate my point.
1. Actions consistent with god's nature are moral, while actions inconsistant with god's nature are immoral.
2. God's actions are always consistent with God's nature.
3. (from 1 and 2) God's actions are always moral.
4. God performs the act of intentionally terminating the lives of human beings without their consent.
Conclusion: From 3 and 4, it is then moral to intentionally terminate the life of a human being without their consent.
Firstly, Is murder wrong? Well duh, murder's wrong. For the purposes of this post, we'll define murder as "Intentionally terminating the life of another human being without consent." Consent, btw, can include having given up their right to life, say by attacking you, or having already murdered someone else. Well why is it wrong? Well as the apologist says, "It's wrong because murder does not reflect the eternal unchanging nature of...god...uh oh...see now we have a problem. Anyone who's read the bible understands that God's nature is, most certainly that of allowing murder in many many cases. He commanded it on a regular basis and even accepts human sacrifice. So clearly that...can't be the reason. What CAN be the case, if we want to be consistant with the apologist explanation of morality and god, is we can say that clearly murder, or rather, the intentional termination of human life without consent, does in fact reflect God's nature. I'm gonna do a little syllogism to illustrate my point.
1. Actions consistent with god's nature are moral, while actions inconsistant with god's nature are immoral.
2. God's actions are always consistent with God's nature.
3. (from 1 and 2) God's actions are always moral.
4. God performs the act of intentionally terminating the lives of human beings without their consent.
Conclusion: From 3 and 4, it is then moral to intentionally terminate the life of a human being without their consent.
God doesn't request human sacrifices; technically he requested one from Abraham, but God stopped Abraham; it was a test of faith. Also, God is never unjust; he has never unjustly murdered anyone. There were some wars that God declared the Israelites to fight (such as the Amorites), but that was because of the Wickedness of the Amorites. God has the right to justly murder someone just as an executioner has the right to execute a criminal
Now, while most of us look at that and see the flaw, a christian might be tempted to make the argument, "Morality is such that intentionally terminating the life of a human being without their consent is moral when performed by god, but immoral when performed by us."...For...whatever bullshit reason.
And you know what That's fine, that's a perfectly legitimate way...to cop out. But it's not without its consequences. See, it then follows from THAT argument that neither God's actions, nor god's nature are TRULY the standard for what is objectively moral. See, if intentionally terminating the life of a human being without their consent is morally wrong, and clearly it is, then...why...is it moraly wrong, if it's not morally wrong for GOD to do so?
And you know what That's fine, that's a perfectly legitimate way...to cop out. But it's not without its consequences. See, it then follows from THAT argument that neither God's actions, nor god's nature are TRULY the standard for what is objectively moral. See, if intentionally terminating the life of a human being without their consent is morally wrong, and clearly it is, then...why...is it moraly wrong, if it's not morally wrong for GOD to do so?
God doesn't unjustly murder, and we don't have the right to unjustly murder. There aren't any contradictions in God's nature and the morals he gave us.
The SECOND problem wit hthe aplogetic response to the Euthyphro Dilemma is that saying Morality is reflected by God's nature...doesn't...answer...the question. It just puts the question in seperate terms. It just makes the dilemma more interesting. Does God's nature, for instance, include honesty? Then we simply re word the question.
1. Is honesty right?
2. Is honesty right, because god's nature is honest?
To say that God's nature is honesty just because honesty is morally better than dishonesty certainly doesn't answer the question, and any 4 year old could destroy that answer just by having the capacity to ask, "Why?"
Why is honesty morally better than dishonesty? "Well because honesty reflects God's nature whereas dishonesty doesn't." Right, but why is god's nature one of honesty and not dishonesty? "Well because honesty is morally better than dishonesty." And why is honesty morally better than dishonesty? "Because honesty reflects God's nature whereas dishonesty does not."
Circular reasoning...is circular. Get out of the merry go round, view morality not as simply a question of God, but a question of why.
Thanks for reading.
1. Is honesty right?
2. Is honesty right, because god's nature is honest?
To say that God's nature is honesty just because honesty is morally better than dishonesty certainly doesn't answer the question, and any 4 year old could destroy that answer just by having the capacity to ask, "Why?"
Why is honesty morally better than dishonesty? "Well because honesty reflects God's nature whereas dishonesty doesn't." Right, but why is god's nature one of honesty and not dishonesty? "Well because honesty is morally better than dishonesty." And why is honesty morally better than dishonesty? "Because honesty reflects God's nature whereas dishonesty does not."
Circular reasoning...is circular. Get out of the merry go round, view morality not as simply a question of God, but a question of why.
Thanks for reading.
I'll stop that circle then :)
Honesty is moral because God said "thou shalt not give false testimony". He said that because honesty is His nature. *From here, it's impossible for us to comprehend the reason for His nature, hell, we can't understand the reason for our own nature. If I asked you "why do you like Hentai", and kept asking "why", you would have circular reasoning. Just because we can't explain why something is the way it is doesn't mean it's not true.
Ultimately, If you're a Christian, and believe that what God says is true, than you won't question "why" God is the way he is; you'll just believe what he says is true and live by it.
I didn't even know hentai had dubs, though I'm not surprised they suck. I recently watched Elfen Lied (dub), and the main character had the worst voice ever
My first 2 animes were naruto (dub) and bleach (dub), in which she voices Hinata and Orihime. I think she's really good, though I kinda grew up listening to her
Zeriam wrote...
Stephanie Sheh.My first 2 animes were naruto (dub) and bleach (dub), in which she voices Hinata and Orihime. I think she's really good, though I kinda grew up listening to her
I've always had a Download speed of about 15 Mb/s, but right now there's a problem and it's .75 Mb/s
now I see why lots of people download instead of stream; it takes 30 minutes to load a 5 minute youtube video(360p)
now I see why lots of people download instead of stream; it takes 30 minutes to load a 5 minute youtube video(360p)
I kinda agree with him, but I think it's important to make the distinction between what I think is erotic and what I like. Boobs are definitely the most erotic thing for me. I'm straight, but I think that when the penis is gone, it's not erotic (just look at censorship, it's a total turn-off). The butt is kinda erotic, and I have no idea how feet are erotic.
but I think it's important to realize that there are things that some guys really like, but don't necessarily find it erotic. for me, I love a cute face more than anything. I like happy, loyal, loving relationships, as well as an innocent attitude. These things aren't erotic, but I like them.
force/rape h-manga is very erotic for me, but I don't like them. I really like soft vanilla/echi, but I don't think they're erotic. overall, I prefer what I like over what is erotic. they're are times when the vanilla just isn't working and I resort to rape, but honestly, I don't like it. I love vanilla, and I usually don't care what's erotic.
but I think it's important to realize that there are things that some guys really like, but don't necessarily find it erotic. for me, I love a cute face more than anything. I like happy, loyal, loving relationships, as well as an innocent attitude. These things aren't erotic, but I like them.
force/rape h-manga is very erotic for me, but I don't like them. I really like soft vanilla/echi, but I don't think they're erotic. overall, I prefer what I like over what is erotic. they're are times when the vanilla just isn't working and I resort to rape, but honestly, I don't like it. I love vanilla, and I usually don't care what's erotic.
Reasonably Bored wrote...
Woman has sex, her choice. Woman has abortion, her choice. Why should she be forced to raise a child if she doesn't want to?As I said earlier, the woman is not forced to raise a child unless she was raped.
Reasonably Bored wrote...
A woman's role in life is not primarily to have children, she has her dreams and aspirations. Sex is a biological urge encrypted into our DNA and rather than condemning women who have chosen to have sex, why can't we be compassionate towards them?There are many contributing factors when it comes to actually having sex: lack of sex education, media, porn, etc. It's not simple as "the girl was stupid, she should have kept her legs closed, she deserves to live this way".
Sorry folks but we don't live in the dark ages anymore.
As already said by Sam, they need to be mature enough to take responsibility for their actions.
SamRavster wrote...
As I have stated earlier in this thread, I would rather have money be used to raise a life than destroy a potential one. Even if the costs are so much more expensive, the fact remains that the women who choose to still have the baby besides being, want for a better word, poor haven't chosen to chicken out of their responsibility. When you have sex at the time of ovulation, condom...spermicide aside, you should be prepared to think "Okay, if things go bad, I might end up getting pregnant". If you can't do that, then you're too immature to be having sex in the first place.
I play basketball, and lift weights. I worked out a ton this summer, but I've kinda gotten lazy now that schools back.
My routine is 12-15 reps of workout A, 30 sec rest, 12-15 reps of workout B, 30 sec rest, repeat workouts A and B, then move on to the next 2 workouts. once I'm done I eat eggs 'till I feel sick, which is usually after 8.
My routine is 12-15 reps of workout A, 30 sec rest, 12-15 reps of workout B, 30 sec rest, repeat workouts A and B, then move on to the next 2 workouts. once I'm done I eat eggs 'till I feel sick, which is usually after 8.
If anyone has some sort of asshole-ness inside them, they'll always let in out online before they do IRL
Flaser wrote...
Am I the only one who thinks it gross and utterly villainous to force a woman to carry several pounds of burden, be forced have trouble (and sometimes pain) peeing, then force said package through her vagooo - her most sensitive part - just because the state demands it?um, how is she forced to do this? the only way she'd be forced to do this is if she was raped, which is an incredibly small percent of the reasons for abortions. Most abortions are the results of people not being responsible. I don't think the taxpayers should pay for the irresponsibility of others. I think abortion should only be funded under certain conditions, just as Sam described
SamRavster wrote...
Spoiler:
EDIT: I'm sorry Gizgal, I posted this before I noticed your post
in my defense, I said people need to be responsible, which includes the guy
The Bible is never "updated" or changed, it's been the same for the last 1900+ years. people make new translations of it so that it uses more modern language, but the version they translate from (the original Hebrew version) never changes. If you want a true translation, read something like the "youngs literal transation", but if you want something easy to understand, read the New international version.
-PSST, THE QUOTE'S FROM A GAME-
Example to my statement: "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty, and justice for all."
We pledge to flag symbolizing god
Contradiction: God's Commandments states we cannot have an idol or symbol representing him. This was emphasized in a story i believe.
Another one would be the US not favoring any certain religion in it's Deceleration of Independence, the government shall not force a religion onto people and as well as the government
Feel free to correct me, just don't blow up and WRTE LIEK A FVE YAER OLLDD in caps
do you seriously think that the revelation quote is from a game (I'm curious which game it's in)?, The bible is almost 2000 years old! obviously the game quoted the bible. also, in the pledge of allegiance, we pledge to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God. um... the flag represents the USA, not God. The only thing it says about God is that our nation is under God.
I'll admit that there are alot of controversies in interpreting the bible, but most of these are minor. I believe that we have guilt when we sin, and that this guilt lets us know what's a sin and what's not. other stuff like baptism is not very important; I think that if it was important there would be very clear, detailed instructions about it. The bible is not flawed, and I believe that God protected His word during translations
NeroDBringer wrote...
I never took the Holy Bible into a part of my life, i had a few Bible study lessons, but then just gave up, found it very contradicting to both the USA's laws and the words of god, i am an atheist though i only like 1 phrase from the bible. and some examples below It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life.
-PSST, THE QUOTE'S FROM A GAME-
Example to my statement: "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty, and justice for all."
We pledge to flag symbolizing god
Contradiction: God's Commandments states we cannot have an idol or symbol representing him. This was emphasized in a story i believe.
Another one would be the US not favoring any certain religion in it's Deceleration of Independence, the government shall not force a religion onto people and as well as the government
Feel free to correct me, just don't blow up and WRTE LIEK A FVE YAER OLLDD in caps
do you seriously think that the revelation quote is from a game (I'm curious which game it's in)?, The bible is almost 2000 years old! obviously the game quoted the bible. also, in the pledge of allegiance, we pledge to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God. um... the flag represents the USA, not God. The only thing it says about God is that our nation is under God.
I'll admit that there are alot of controversies in interpreting the bible, but most of these are minor. I believe that we have guilt when we sin, and that this guilt lets us know what's a sin and what's not. other stuff like baptism is not very important; I think that if it was important there would be very clear, detailed instructions about it. The bible is not flawed, and I believe that God protected His word during translations
I don't care at all; I don't know the eye color of most of my friends.
my favorite is probably purple eyes
my favorite is probably purple eyes
AvatarEnd wrote...
Go_Master wrote...
So a Girl Had Just Asked Me to have Sex with Her... For religious reason, I've made up my mind not to have sex before marriage when I was a kid.You answered your own question.
he answered his own question when he was a kid, he's re-asking it now that he's older
I would say don't have sex with her, because as you said,
Go_Master wrote...
We're NOT IN A RELATIONSHIP!If you like her, then pursue a relationship, but don't go straight to the sex. earlier you didn't want to have sex before marriage, and your considering having sex before a relationship!?! If that's how you want to lose your virginity, go ahead, but it sounds like that's not what you want
I go to a Christian school, so I'm not really around Atheist, except online.
I think that the problem is not that Atheists are aggressive, but that some people dislike Christians. They have a reason to dislike Christians, which is that Christians profess divine judgment. interestingly, Muzlums also profess divine judgement, but because of their violent reputation, they aren't aggressively disliked.
Most people will accept differences in our beliefs, but there will always be people who dislike Christianity, and we will just have to deal with it
I think that the problem is not that Atheists are aggressive, but that some people dislike Christians. They have a reason to dislike Christians, which is that Christians profess divine judgment. interestingly, Muzlums also profess divine judgement, but because of their violent reputation, they aren't aggressively disliked.
Most people will accept differences in our beliefs, but there will always be people who dislike Christianity, and we will just have to deal with it
