On 12/05/2016 00:20, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 16:00:38 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:24:28 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 14:48:14 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 12:39, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 10:32:03 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 10:18, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 09:32:59 +0100, Bod wrote:


I wonder how many more things Einstein could have discovered if he
wasn't hampered by religion?


Einstein was driven by "How did he do it". So I have to say,
no. He probably would have just been mediocre.

"hampered by religion"? You lead an insular life.

Often times, those that say they don't believe in religion,
get caught up in religions by other names, such a secular humanism,
atheism, Liberalism, global warming (which is not science, but religoun).

Liberalism, which tells you what you can eat, what you can
wear, who you can speak with, what you can drive, yada, yada,
yada, is far more restrictive than Christianity. Hell,
Liberalism even tells you what you can think (political
correctness).

A lot of atheists are very religious people.

More dogmatically narrow minded than the most devout Jew, Muslim, or
southern Baptist Christian, by far.

Erm! I was bullied into going to church as a kid by a scarey Vicar.
Many Irish Catholics were also bullied and brainwashed to go to church.
Cross the line and you got kneecapped or tarred and feathered.
What lovely religious people.

Odd...I was raised Catholic, before I became Buddhist..and dont recall
any kneecappings or tar and feathers. Is this an English version of
some religion? Probably..afterall...you lads do do things rather
****ed up.

Gunner

Er, this was the *Irish*, *not* the English. The Irish Catholic IRA even
bombed several of our English cities causing death and carnage.
*That's* religion for you.

Thats odd..I thought the Inquistion and the Reformaton were largely
English hatred against other religions..particularly the Jews...few of
whom survived.

So you are trimming the data again eh? Typical of your lot

Gunner

So it was religious hatred then. Just as I thought.

Indeed it was. One English religion hated the Jews. The Jews of
course being very religious and not killing anyone. So its probably
the combination of English and a religion that turned it so brutal.
The Brits being well known thugs and all...shrug

Gunner
The "irish problem" was not based on "religion". It was based on
economics. The (protestant) British over-ran (catholic) Ireland and
took over the economy - relegating the Irish (who happened to be
Catholic) to the lowest economic strata. The English put down the
Irish - which of couse "got up the Irish" of the Irish - who fought
back, long and hard - to rid their country of the "English". With the
church being the social center of Irish life (next to the pub) it
became a "Catholic" thing - turning it into a "religious war"

It was not based on "religion" or "faith". It was primarily an
economic and nationalist conflict - with virtually NO "religious
tenents" involved.

What...you are denying Liberal History??!!!

And of course you are correct. The ****ing Brits beat the Irish down
like curs and murdered or moved out millions of them, to other lands.
They sold them like slaves as well.

There were more Irish in New York City than there were in Ireland by
1895.

And here we have Brits claiming that they are just and rightious
people. Bah!! Humbug!!

India is a perfect example of their work and deeds....(spit!)


Gunner

Hmm!....and *I* get accused of being hateful :-)

--
Bod

On 12/05/2016 00:33, Gunner Asch wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 17:39:38 +0100, Bod wrote:


"Religion is a cultural system of behaviors and practices, world views,
sacred texts, holy places, ethics, and societal organisation that relate
humanity to what an anthropologist has called "an order of existence".

"a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the
universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman
agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances,
and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs
..."

Technically, if a person identifies with a particular societal
organization that shares a specific mindset relating to such things as
stated above, it can be classified as a religion.

So in your strange interpretation, I am an Atheist who doesn't believe
in *any* religion, but I am religious!!?....hmm!

You are a ferverent atheist...making you very much subject to your
religious beliefs.

Your beliefs involve religion and gods....sorry chapy...you are just
as religious as a snake handler in Appalacia...just at the other end
of the spectrum

Gunner

Perhaps you don't understand the words "I do not believe".

--
Bod

Technically, if a person identifies with a particular societal
organization that shares a specific mindset relating to such things as
stated above, it can be classified as a religion.


So in your strange interpretation, I am an Atheist who doesn't believe
in *any* religion, but I am religious!!?....hmm!

No. I'm saying that the definition of a religion equates atheism as a
religion.

Being "religious" is a whole different practice.


So I'm not religious, but I am?

No. A "religion" is not the same thing as being "religious".

But I'm *not* religious in any way shape or form.


Snort! You are VERY much religious! And you preach your religion
long and loudly, to everyone you can force to listen.

Gunner

No, I offer my opinion. Religious people tend to get shirty when
challenged. You are no different.
I'm not attacking anyone.

--
Bod

On 12/05/2016 00:37, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 19:55:02 +0100, Bod wrote:



Oh dear, you are so deluded that you even change the meaning of words
to suit yourself.

Atheism
noun
"a disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods".

Relion - noun " A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the
teachings of a spiritual leader."

Exactly, Clare.


Then Buddhism/Toaism,Shintoism and many others such as Hinduism are
not religions? They have no leaders. Just teachers

Buddhism

noun
a widespread Asian religion or philosophy, founded by Siddartha Gautama
in NE India in the 5th century BC.

--
Bod

On Wed, 11 May 2016 23:57:14 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/11/2016 11:47 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 18:14:26 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/11/2016 6:08 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 11:09:51 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

I lost much of my hearing as a teen because I lived in a
household with parents who smoked and secondhand smoke floated in the
house constantly. It's a fact that me being exposed to those
contaminates caused my hearing loss.


So your parents used your skull for an ashtray? Fascinating


Secondhand smoke is more lethal than the ashes.

Oh of course it is. Which is why we have an entire nation of deaf
people who were born before 1980.

Right?

Gunner


You don't believe second hand smoke is dangerous, or causes health problems?

I believe that second hand smoke CAN cause breathing issues in some
people, particularly those who are asthmatic or have lung degeneration
issues..and are subjected to living in a semi-truck cab structure for
12 hrs a day for months on end. Other than that..and similar odd and
really wierd circumstances...no.

I should mention that Im a pack a day smoker, have been for over 40
yrs, my wife is a half pack a day smoker, we are surrounded by over 20
dogs and a half dozen cats (we do animal rescue) and most of my
friends are smokers..though not all. All the studies so far to date,
show that about 25% of smokers will have some health problems as a
result, meaning 75% of smokers will not. And for those who get the
occasional wiff of a cigarette....and bitch and moan...tough.

I should mention that many...ladies in particular..over use toxic
perfumes and other similar products..and I dont see much bitching and
moaning about those, not to mention toxic cleaning supplies, motor
vehicle exhausts and nasty body oders that are the result of
uncleanliness.

I mentioned the dogs and cats..as I find more people to be allergic to
pet dander and fur fuzz than are allergic to cigarette smoke...this of
course does not include those "420 friendly" pot heads who gasp in
outrage while Im smokeing a Pall Mall Light 100 in the same room,
while they have just filled their lungs and brain cells with THC,
along with covering themselves with a nasty stench.

Oh..I should mention I dont drink booze either, with the single
exception of a cordial of Khalua about 6 times a year. Generally when
friends come over and we have just finished a nice big steak dinner
with all the fixings. I do however keep a liquor cabinet for my
friends. I just choose not to drink or do drugs. Nicotine and caffeine
are my drugs of choice.

Was there any other questions?

Gunner

On Thu, 12 May 2016 06:43:49 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 20:24, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 2:16 PM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 19:45, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 1:34 PM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 19:21, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 12:55 PM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 18:41, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 12:32 PM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 18:08, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 11:32 AM, Bod wrote:

And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided
the light from the darkness.

And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called
Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

And that was the beginning of science. The universe was
a creation of God and what we observed around us was nature,
not the work of petty human like gods and magic.

Glory be to God!
-T

String theory is really w-e-i-r-d.

Indeed, very similar to many religions, like Scientology/
Jehovah
Witlesses/ Moony loonies and Morons (sorry....Mormons, etc.

One thing that is true about people who have a religious belief
system
is that people of all levels of intelligence BELIEVE. How do you
explain
that many very smart people still believe in a God?

Many *smart people* have turned out to be conning thieving
villains.
So you can't measure by smartness.

Then we can agree that ones intelligence has no bearing on belief
in a
higher power?

Not necessarily, no. Maybe it depends whether they hear *voices in
their
heads*.


Ok. But you said "you can't measure by smartness". Maybe, I didn't
understand what you meant?

I thought you meant that intelligent (smart) people couldn't
really be
intelligent if they believed in a God or higher power, and then you
said
"you can't measure by smartness"? To me, it sounds like you're
contradicting yourself.


Smart can be applied to a Jack the lad type of character as well as an
astute businessman etc. Some people are smart at business, but lack
common sense in other ways. I've worked with a top respected scientist
who was the brains of his dep't, but was as thick as a brick with
everyday liasons.


Ok, I understand what you mean, and I do agree with you. I'm not sure
how you apply smart to people who believe in a God, though.


I don't equate being smart with religion.


Ok. I can accept that's how you feel. Does that make you right?

From what I've read and heard, yes.
As far as I'm concerned, the Universe was always around.
The rest simply evolved, IMO.


Did you mean to say the "Earth" was always round?

No. and to be pedantic, the Earth is not round, it's an oblate spheroid.

Thats actually one of the very few accurate things you have written.
Are you suddenly going honest on us? Or was it simply an accident?

Gunner

On Thu, 12 May 2016 06:51:52 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 21:00, wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:24:28 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 14:48:14 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 12:39, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 10:32:03 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 10:18, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 09:32:59 +0100, Bod wrote:


I wonder how many more things Einstein could have discovered if he
wasn't hampered by religion?


Einstein was driven by "How did he do it". So I have to say,
no. He probably would have just been mediocre.

"hampered by religion"? You lead an insular life.

Often times, those that say they don't believe in religion,
get caught up in religions by other names, such a secular humanism,
atheism, Liberalism, global warming (which is not science, but religoun).

Liberalism, which tells you what you can eat, what you can
wear, who you can speak with, what you can drive, yada, yada,
yada, is far more restrictive than Christianity. Hell,
Liberalism even tells you what you can think (political
correctness).

A lot of atheists are very religious people.

More dogmatically narrow minded than the most devout Jew, Muslim, or
southern Baptist Christian, by far.

Erm! I was bullied into going to church as a kid by a scarey Vicar.
Many Irish Catholics were also bullied and brainwashed to go to church.
Cross the line and you got kneecapped or tarred and feathered.
What lovely religious people.

Odd...I was raised Catholic, before I became Buddhist..and dont recall
any kneecappings or tar and feathers. Is this an English version of
some religion? Probably..afterall...you lads do do things rather
****ed up.

Gunner

Er, this was the *Irish*, *not* the English. The Irish Catholic IRA even
bombed several of our English cities causing death and carnage.
*That's* religion for you.

Thats odd..I thought the Inquistion and the Reformaton were largely
English hatred against other religions..particularly the Jews...few of
whom survived.

So you are trimming the data again eh? Typical of your lot

Gunner

So it was religious hatred then. Just as I thought.

Indeed it was. One English religion hated the Jews. The Jews of
course being very religious and not killing anyone. So its probably
the combination of English and a religion that turned it so brutal.
The Brits being well known thugs and all...shrug

Gunner
The "irish problem" was not based on "religion". It was based on
economics. The (protestant) British over-ran (catholic) Ireland and
took over the economy - relegating the Irish (who happened to be
Catholic) to the lowest economic strata. The English put down the
Irish - which of couse "got up the Irish" of the Irish - who fought
back, long and hard - to rid their country of the "English". With the
church being the social center of Irish life (next to the pub) it
became a "Catholic" thing - turning it into a "religious war"

It was not based on "religion" or "faith". It was primarily an
economic and nationalist conflict - with virtually NO "religious
tenents" involved.

The Catholics are at it again:

Northern Ireland terror threat level raised in Great Britain
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36267052

What..your fellow Communists are overstepping the Socialist boundries
again?

Gunner

On 12/05/2016 00:41, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 18:36:30 +0100, Bod wrote:


Nice atmosphere and plush decor etc in churches though.

So it doesnt work for you..at this point in your life. Shrug. You
might change...you might not. Its surprising the numbers of Atheists
who cry out to god(s) as the dark night closes in, at the end. Ive
seen and heard many of them do just this as they died..or thought they
were about to die. Shrug.

So why not leave those that believe differently than you do, to their
beliefs and faiths, and try finding something else to discuss?
Say...something like "survival"? Afterall..thats what this group is
all about.

Gunner

So you're frightened of discussing religion?

No..should I be? This however is alt.survival, not exactly a hotbed
of religious zeal. Stormy is probably one of the more vocally
religious here. In fact..I know only of 2 others who have strong
beliefs..one being Greek Orthodox and the other IRRC ...a Babtist of
some sort. None of who bothers to mistreat anyone else here. It takes
outsiders like you to do that. Which means of course you are
A..young, B. self centered, C. A yutz, and D. Ignorant as hell of the
world around him.

Gunner

So you've accused me of 1. "being hateful" and 2. I "mistreat people".
3. "self centred" 4. "a yutz" 5. "young"

You left out that I eat babies.
BTW, I'm 67.




--
Bod

On 12/05/2016 00:47, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 17:27:32 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 17:13, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 3:03 AM, Bod wrote:
On 10/05/2016 21:41, Muggles wrote:

It also helps when you have a personal relationship with Jesus
(God) and one of his saints. Can we say "voices in our heads?"
:-)

...a constant discussion and conversation, I'd say.

Voices in the head is a sign of madness.

Do you ever "think" about anything? Do you ever "contemplate" events,
or remember your past, or rehearse future discussions you want to have
with people in your head?

Voices in the head are normal. It's just unspoken conversation and
memories, whether it be from the past, or something inferred for the
futures.

I don't suffer with voices, but admit to having thoughts (like normal
people do).

Ill bet they are very similar to that uttered by a retarded 5 yr
old..often just grunts and nasty covered finger pointing.

Blimey! how did you know that! Spot on.

--
Bod

On 12/05/2016 00:50, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 18:28:29 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 18:01, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 11:27 AM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 17:13, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 3:03 AM, Bod wrote:
On 10/05/2016 21:41, Muggles wrote:

It also helps when you have a personal relationship with Jesus
(God) and one of his saints. Can we say "voices in our heads?"
:-)

...a constant discussion and conversation, I'd say.

Voices in the head is a sign of madness.

Do you ever "think" about anything? Do you ever "contemplate" events,
or remember your past, or rehearse future discussions you want to have
with people in your head?

Voices in the head are normal. It's just unspoken conversation and
memories, whether it be from the past, or something inferred for the
futures.


I don't suffer with voices, but admit to having thoughts (like normal
people do).


A thought is just a voice we hear in our heads.

No it's not, it's just a thought.

The enemy within: People who hear voices in their heads are being ...
www.independent.co.uk › Lifestyle › Health & Families › Health News
25 Jan 2015 - One night, during her first year at the University of
Sheffield, Rachel Waddingham struggled to fall asleep. She could hear
three middle-aged ...

Actually..with rare individuals..its other peoples voices.

http://www.themystica.com/mystica/ar...telepathy.html

Oh dear.

--
Bod

On 12/05/2016 01:00, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 20:16:08 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 19:45, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 1:34 PM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 19:21, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 12:55 PM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 18:41, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 12:32 PM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 18:08, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 11:32 AM, Bod wrote:

And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided
the light from the darkness.

And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called
Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

And that was the beginning of science. The universe was
a creation of God and what we observed around us was nature,
not the work of petty human like gods and magic.

Glory be to God!
-T

String theory is really w-e-i-r-d.

Indeed, very similar to many religions, like Scientology/ Jehovah
Witlesses/ Moony loonies and Morons (sorry....Mormons, etc.

One thing that is true about people who have a religious belief
system
is that people of all levels of intelligence BELIEVE. How do you
explain
that many very smart people still believe in a God?

Many *smart people* have turned out to be conning thieving villains.
So you can't measure by smartness.

Then we can agree that ones intelligence has no bearing on belief
in a
higher power?

Not necessarily, no. Maybe it depends whether they hear *voices in
their
heads*.


Ok. But you said "you can't measure by smartness". Maybe, I didn't
understand what you meant?

I thought you meant that intelligent (smart) people couldn't really be
intelligent if they believed in a God or higher power, and then you
said
"you can't measure by smartness"? To me, it sounds like you're
contradicting yourself.


Smart can be applied to a Jack the lad type of character as well as an
astute businessman etc. Some people are smart at business, but lack
common sense in other ways. I've worked with a top respected scientist
who was the brains of his dep't, but was as thick as a brick with
everyday liasons.


Ok, I understand what you mean, and I do agree with you. I'm not sure
how you apply smart to people who believe in a God, though.


I don't equate being smart with religion.


Ok. I can accept that's how you feel. Does that make you right?

From what I've read and heard, yes.
As far as I'm concerned, the Universe was always around.
The rest simply evolved, IMO.

So then the boffins and their Big Bang Theory are bonkers?

No.

--
Bod

On 12/05/2016 01:19, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 17:17:49 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 16:50, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 15:04:30 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 12:48, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 11:15:54 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 10:24, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:52:17 +0100, Bod wrote:

And looking around you, you see God's hand in everything.

As I look around *me*, I see many different religions all guessing that
their particular strain is the *only* religion.

Many? I see only a couple, Islam being the primary one.

Or did you somehow forget about the Reformation way back in the 1600s?

Gunner

What's that got to do with it? It simply highlighted the confusion of
religious beliefs. A form of cherry picking.

Yet your widespread statements seem to cover ALL religions

Wind back thousands of years and people believed that the Sun was the
real god. Some thought it was the moon.
Religious guesswork (cherry picking) has been going on since the world
evolved.

Yes it has. And you are as guilty of it as any.

Gunner

I don't preach, I give you my honest opinion, but I base it on reality
*not* a faith.

Actually..you do preach here. And I do not recall anyone asking for
your opinion on religion. So you did come in here and start preaching
your religion. As for how YOU View something...that neither makes
it true, nor false. Im still waiting for your Proof that there are no
god(s). Trot it out, feel free to use all the white space necessary.

Gunner

Religious people are the ones who claim there *is* a god, yet offer no
proof other than they believe.

Actually..there is more than a little actual proof out here.
"miracles" are just one type of th em.

The onus is on them to prove this existence.

The onus is on YOU to prove they dont exist.

How on earth does one prove that an invisible god does *not* exist?
The *invisible*/ imaginary bit is the bit that puzzles me.

You are often puzzled. Does crossing the street unattended also leave
you puzzled?


Bod

Every time.

--
Bod

On 12/05/2016 05:12, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 10:16 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 13:15:26 -0500, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 12:41 PM, Bod wrote:

2 people...1 man ...1 woman. They have children, explain how
their children created more babies without incest taking place?

Another explanation is God made more people besides just Adam and Eve.
That both Adam and Even were God's first man kind that he made, and that
the word "man" was plural in some usages, not always singular by
definition.

OK. Multiple creations. Adam and Eve sinned with the apple and were
banished from Eden, doomed to die and return to dust, struggle to feed
themselves, suffer in childbirth, etcetera.

Some of us must be descendants of the other creations. Why are we
inflicted with Adam's original sin?

IF the second possibility is the correct one, and the word "man" was
plural in some usages, it would be reasonable to conclude that all "man
(meaning both males and females)" that was created were subject to the
same judgement when the original "man and woman" sinned.

BUT, the text doesn't address either explanation 100%. They are the 2
possibilities that I've seen discussed that explains people living in
the land of Nod where Cain found a wife.

"Nod"! is that where the character *Noddy* comes from? ;-)

--
Bod

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 11:57:11 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 11:47 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 18:14:26 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/11/2016 6:08 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 11:09:51 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

I lost much of my hearing as a teen because I lived in a
household with parents who smoked and secondhand smoke floated in the
house constantly. It's a fact that me being exposed to those
contaminates caused my hearing loss.

So your parents used your skull for an ashtray? Fascinating

Secondhand smoke is more lethal than the ashes.

Oh of course it is. Which is why we have an entire nation of deaf
people who were born before 1980.

Right?

Gunner

You don't believe second hand smoke is dangerous, or causes health problems?
--
Maggie

I was exposed to a lot of second hand smoke when I was a kid back in the middle of the last century. I wasn't a "Snot nosed kid" I was a "Green slime kid" with a constantly runny nose. My parents were WWII vets and smoked like choo choo trains. I had constant sinus and ear infections and am lucky that I didn't suffer hearing loss. I am horribly allergic to tobacco smoke which has the same effect as pepper spray on me. I become asthmatic with just a slight exposure to that evil smoke. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Suffocating Monster

On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 1:15:03 AM UTC-5, Bod wrote:
Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name
Adam, in the day when they were created"
.....
I haven't decided which possibility I agree with.

So lots of could be's and maybe's. Nothing definitive then.

You expected differently? Why should this be any different than
Global Warming/Cooling/Change?

(VBG)

I expected a factual explanation, rather than interpreted waffle.
--
Bod

Do you like jam on your waffles? sticks out tongue ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Breakfast Monster

On 12/05/2016 11:20, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 1:15:03 AM UTC-5, Bod wrote:
Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name
Adam, in the day when they were created"
.....
I haven't decided which possibility I agree with.

So lots of could be's and maybe's. Nothing definitive then.

You expected differently? Why should this be any different than
Global Warming/Cooling/Change?

(VBG)

I expected a factual explanation, rather than interpreted waffle.
--
Bod

Do you like jam on your waffles? sticks out tongue ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Breakfast Monster

Hmm! that sounds like a sexual innuendo.

--
Bod

On 12/05/2016 11:44, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:


I don't think any individual religion has everything correct, but I do
think many religions make an attempt to acknowledge that there is a
greater power involved in our existence, which, in turn, acknowledges
that mankind is not equivalent to being a god.

I don't see any evidence of the existence of a "greater power."


IMO, there is too much evidence that it took intelligence to create
everything we see around us.

It depends upon what you mean by "everything we see around us." If
you're talking about the organisms that live and have lived on the
Earth, their existence doesn't require a "greater power." The universe
itself doesn't require a "greater power." Neither of these require any
sort of "creator" either.

The existence of a deity or deities is highly improbable, and is not
required to explain anything we can observe. When something is this
improbable, it's not worth expending any time and energy on.

If you want to know what I believe - I believe in human beings. We've
had a long, hard climb up, with many setbacks, but I think we will
eventually leave our cradle and spread into the rest of the solar system
and perhaps farther than that.

BTW, a lot of those setbacks have been caused by religion and religious
people. It's time we outgrew all of that.

Religion is dying out in America: Just 18% of people 60 and younger
attend church and less than 50% believe in God

Read mo
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...#ixzz48RCIF82z



--
Bod

On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 5:31:26 AM UTC-5, Bod wrote:
On 12/05/2016 11:20, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 1:15:03 AM UTC-5, Bod wrote:
Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name
Adam, in the day when they were created"
.....
I haven't decided which possibility I agree with.

So lots of could be's and maybe's. Nothing definitive then.

You expected differently? Why should this be any different than
Global Warming/Cooling/Change?

(VBG)

I expected a factual explanation, rather than interpreted waffle.
--
Bod

Do you like jam on your waffles? sticks out tongue ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Breakfast Monster

Hmm! that sounds like a sexual innuendo.
--
Bod

What in whose end? o_O

[8~{} Uncle Shocked Monster

On 5/11/2016 11:03 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 22:03:50 -0400, Stormin Mormon
Justice is getting what you deserve. Grace is not getting what you
deserve on the one side, and getting what you don't desreve on the
other.. In the "new dispensation" or the "new testiment times" Goe
becomes a "loving god" - with-holding the punishments dictated by the
old law, while bestowing undeserved blessings.

A Christian


Interesting. As a Mormon Christian, that (above text) is
seriously close, maybe identical, to what Mormon
Christians teach.
From what I have come to understand, Mormons believe just enough of
what Christians believe to somewhat muddy the waters - same as the
JWs. Those who do not fully understand what Christianity is get fooled
into thinking it is Christianity.

Not saying most Mormons are not "good people" - a lot would make "good
christians" if they got their theology sorted out.


And, we believe much the same, but back at you. After
the death of Christ, there wasn't a proper succession
plan. The church fell into apostacy. It was only with
the restoration that the true church of Christ was
back on Earth. The Bible only churches may be sincere,
but without authority. Those who don't have continuing
revelation and don't have the Spirit wander in darkness.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On 5/12/2016 12:47 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 18:14:26 -0500, Muggles
I lost much of my hearing as a teen because I lived in a
household with parents who smoked and secondhand smoke floated in the
house constantly. It's a fact that me being exposed to those
contaminates caused my hearing loss.


So your parents used your skull for an ashtray? Fascinating


Secondhand smoke is more lethal than the ashes.

Oh of course it is. Which is why we have an entire nation of deaf
people who were born before 1980.

Right?

Gunner


When I was a child (of smokers), I had ear infections
on a regular basis. One was untreated too long, and
damaged my hearing.

We have enough people with damaged hearing. Does
not have to be "every single person" to be a
serious problem. Southern California isn't all
every single person an illegal border crossing
criminal. But there are enough to be a problem.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On 12/05/2016 12:22, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 5:31:26 AM UTC-5, Bod wrote:
On 12/05/2016 11:20, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 1:15:03 AM UTC-5, Bod wrote:
Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name
Adam, in the day when they were created"
.....
I haven't decided which possibility I agree with.

So lots of could be's and maybe's. Nothing definitive then.

You expected differently? Why should this be any different than
Global Warming/Cooling/Change?

(VBG)

I expected a factual explanation, rather than interpreted waffle.
--
Bod

Do you like jam on your waffles? sticks out tongue ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Breakfast Monster

Hmm! that sounds like a sexual innuendo.
--
Bod

What in whose end? o_O

[8~{} Uncle Shocked Monster

I your endo.

--
Bod

On 5/12/2016 2:30 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
And for those who get the
occasional wiff of a cigarette....
and bitch and moan...tough.


Was there any other questions?

Gunner


As with many smokers, you sure sound
inconsiderate. That may be too mild a
descriptor.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On 5/12/2016 2:32 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 06:51:52 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 21:00, wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:24:28 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 14:48:14 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 12:39, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 10:32:03 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 10:18, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 09:32:59 +0100, Bod wrote:


I wonder how many more things Einstein could have discovered if he
wasn't hampered by religion?

||
|| [christmas presents]

On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 6:41:54 AM UTC-5, Bod wrote:
On 12/05/2016 12:22, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 5:31:26 AM UTC-5, Bod wrote:
On 12/05/2016 11:20, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 1:15:03 AM UTC-5, Bod wrote:
Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name
Adam, in the day when they were created"
.....
I haven't decided which possibility I agree with.

So lots of could be's and maybe's. Nothing definitive then.

You expected differently? Why should this be any different than
Global Warming/Cooling/Change?

(VBG)

I expected a factual explanation, rather than interpreted waffle.
--
Bod

Do you like jam on your waffles? sticks out tongue ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Breakfast Monster

Hmm! that sounds like a sexual innuendo.
--
Bod

What in whose end? o_O

[8~{} Uncle Shocked Monster

I your endo.
--
Bod

Well, doctors have shoved a camera up my tailpipe a few times so it's nothing new. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Exhaust Monster

Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 19:59, Betty wrote:
Bod wrote:
[...]


Only by looking into someone's eyes can you see their sincerity.


How do blind people look into someone's eyes?

Have a wild guess.

"I expected a factual explanation ....".

You made a definite statement and should have an answer other than,
"Have a wild guess".

--
..

On 12/05/2016 13:43, Betty wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 19:59, Betty wrote:
Bod wrote:
[...]


Only by looking into someone's eyes can you see their sincerity.


How do blind people look into someone's eyes?

Have a wild guess.

"I expected a factual explanation ....".

You made a definite statement and should have an answer other than,
"Have a wild guess".

If you understand what blindness means, then it was a stupid question.

--
Bod

One of these days, I'll try a life test
with a leaky alkaline battery. See how
long that runs.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On 5/12/2016 7:35 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 5/11/2016 11:03 PM, wrote:

Not saying most Mormons are not "good people" - a lot would make "good
christians" if they got their theology sorted out.


And, we believe much the same, but back at you. After
the death of Christ, there wasn't a proper succession
plan. The church fell into apostacy. It was only with
the restoration that the true church of Christ was
back on Earth. The Bible only churches may be sincere,
but without authority. Those who don't have continuing
revelation and don't have the Spirit wander in darkness.

And that's why I'm going to life test
an alkaline battery.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

Bod wrote:
On 12/05/2016 13:43, Betty wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 19:59, Betty wrote:
Bod wrote:
[...]


Only by looking into someone's eyes can you see their sincerity.


How do blind people look into someone's eyes?

Have a wild guess.

"I expected a factual explanation ....".

You made a definite statement and should have an answer other than,
"Have a wild guess".

If you understand what blindness means, then it was a stupid question.


Your statement was a stupid premise, you are just unwilling to amend
your statement.


--
..

On 5/12/2016 12:42 AM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 20:24, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 2:05 PM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 19:44, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 1:29 PM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 19:18, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 12:42 PM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 18:16, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 12:00 PM, Bod wrote:

As I look around *me*, I see many different religions all
guessing
that
their particular strain is the *only* religion. I also see
that
religion
in the UK is dying out except for the primitive Muslim
religions.
It's
true that as people get more informed and intelligent that
they
are
realising how misguided they have been.
It wasn't that long ago that people were worshipping the Moon/
the Sun
and many other objects as their god. Even today there are
Scientologist
idiots believing in Aliens etc.
If you read the Bible or the Koran, you'll see that they are
both
contradictory all the way through and the *believers* cherry
pick
what
they want to hear.


I don't think any individual religion has everything
correct, but
I do
think many religions make an attempt to acknowledge that there
is a
greater power involved in our existence, which, in turn,
acknowledges
that mankind is not equivalent to being a god.

IMO, there is too much evidence that it took intelligence to
create
everything we see around us.

And it all happened only 6 thousand years ago?

No.

Hmm! this disagrees with you:

The Biblical Age of the Earth - Truth In Genesis
http://www.truthingenesis.com/2013/0...-of-the-earth/
3 Jan 2013 - So, according to the Bible the earth is about 6000
years
old. ... How long did Joshua march around the walls of Jericho
anyway?
... He says, €œBy Periods God created that which produced the Solar
Systems; then that which ...


How many hours were in a day when Creation happened?


What!!?


In order to conclude that the Earth is 6000 years old, we have to
define
if a year was the same time increment when Creation happened. In
recent
history, time has been defined in seconds, minutes, hours, and years,
etc., but how do we define time when Creation was taking place?

But the Bible states 6,000 years ago. Time was no different
6,000 years ago.

No, the Bible doesn't say that.

What does it say then?

It doesn't say what the age of the Earth is.

So the Bible doesn't know then.

The Bible is text - it doesn't "know" anything. It only contains the
information the writers put there.

--
Maggie

On 5/12/2016 12:43 AM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 20:24, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 2:16 PM, Bod wrote:

From what I've read and heard, yes.
As far as I'm concerned, the Universe was always around.
The rest simply evolved, IMO.

Did you mean to say the "Earth" was always round?

No. and to be pedantic, the Earth is not round, it's an oblate spheroid.

Ok. How do you know the Universe is round? Who told you that?

--
Maggie

On 12/05/2016 16:24, Muggles wrote:
On 5/12/2016 12:42 AM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 20:24, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 2:05 PM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 19:44, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 1:29 PM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 19:18, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 12:42 PM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 18:16, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 12:00 PM, Bod wrote:

As I look around *me*, I see many different religions all
guessing
that
their particular strain is the *only* religion. I also see
that
religion
in the UK is dying out except for the primitive Muslim
religions.
It's
true that as people get more informed and intelligent that
they
are
realising how misguided they have been.
It wasn't that long ago that people were worshipping the Moon/
the Sun
and many other objects as their god. Even today there are
Scientologist
idiots believing in Aliens etc.
If you read the Bible or the Koran, you'll see that they are
both
contradictory all the way through and the *believers* cherry
pick
what
they want to hear.


I don't think any individual religion has everything
correct, but
I do
think many religions make an attempt to acknowledge that there
is a
greater power involved in our existence, which, in turn,
acknowledges
that mankind is not equivalent to being a god.

IMO, there is too much evidence that it took intelligence to
create
everything we see around us.

And it all happened only 6 thousand years ago?

No.

Hmm! this disagrees with you:

The Biblical Age of the Earth - Truth In Genesis
http://www.truthingenesis.com/2013/0...-of-the-earth/
3 Jan 2013 - So, according to the Bible the earth is about 6000
years
old. ... How long did Joshua march around the walls of Jericho
anyway?
... He says, €œBy Periods God created that which produced the Solar
Systems; then that which ...


How many hours were in a day when Creation happened?


What!!?


In order to conclude that the Earth is 6000 years old, we have to
define
if a year was the same time increment when Creation happened. In
recent
history, time has been defined in seconds, minutes, hours, and years,
etc., but how do we define time when Creation was taking place?

But the Bible states 6,000 years ago. Time was no different
6,000 years ago.

No, the Bible doesn't say that.

What does it say then?

It doesn't say what the age of the Earth is.

So the Bible doesn't know then.

The Bible is text - it doesn't "know" anything. It only contains the
information the writers put there.

So as I originally said, they are just unprovable stories.

--
Bod

On 12/05/2016 16:25, Muggles wrote:
On 5/12/2016 12:43 AM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 20:24, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 2:16 PM, Bod wrote:

From what I've read and heard, yes.
As far as I'm concerned, the Universe was always around.
The rest simply evolved, IMO.

Did you mean to say the "Earth" was always round?

No. and to be pedantic, the Earth is not round, it's an oblate spheroid.

Ok. How do you know the Universe is round? Who told you that?

Read what I said again "the Earth is not round, it's an oblate spheroid"

--
Bod

On 5/12/2016 1:30 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 23:57:14 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/11/2016 11:47 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 18:14:26 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/11/2016 6:08 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 11:09:51 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

I lost much of my hearing as a teen because I lived in a
household with parents who smoked and secondhand smoke floated in the
house constantly. It's a fact that me being exposed to those
contaminates caused my hearing loss.


So your parents used your skull for an ashtray? Fascinating

Secondhand smoke is more lethal than the ashes.

Oh of course it is. Which is why we have an entire nation of deaf
people who were born before 1980.

Right?

Gunner

You don't believe second hand smoke is dangerous, or causes health problems?

I believe that second hand smoke CAN cause breathing issues in some
people, particularly those who are asthmatic or have lung degeneration
issues..and are subjected to living in a semi-truck cab structure for
12 hrs a day for months on end. Other than that..and similar odd and
really wierd circumstances...no.

I should mention that Im a pack a day smoker, have been for over 40
yrs, my wife is a half pack a day smoker, we are surrounded by over 20
dogs and a half dozen cats (we do animal rescue) and most of my
friends are smokers..though not all. All the studies so far to date,
show that about 25% of smokers will have some health problems as a
result, meaning 75% of smokers will not. And for those who get the
occasional wiff of a cigarette....and bitch and moan...tough.

My parents were chain smokers, which meant our house was a cloud of
secondhand smoke all the time. I lived there for nearly 2 decades, so I
had to breathe the smoke every day. The smoke was in everything - the
drapes, our clothes, the carpet, my toys, the furniture, etc. When I
left the house my friends thought I was a smoker, which, horrified me.
They said I smelled like smoke all the time.

I was sick often, and if I got in a car with my parents smoking I'd get
physically sick to my stomach. I was told there was something wrong with
me because I couldn't travel without getting sick. I had bronchitis on a
regular basis, ear infections so severe that my ears would swell shut,
which caused me to have hearing loss.

Back then, it was cool to smoke, and no one would acknowledge that
secondhand smoke could be harmful to anyone, let alone harm kids who
lived in that environment.


I should mention that many...ladies in particular..over use toxic
perfumes and other similar products..and I dont see much bitching and
moaning about those, not to mention toxic cleaning supplies, motor
vehicle exhausts and nasty body oders that are the result of
uncleanliness.

I can't visit some stores because of the VOCs in the air from the items
they stock. I'm now super sensitive to many pollutants in the air, too.
They all turn my stomach, give me headaches, and trigger lungs
problems. I'm not the only adult who suffers from being exposed to
secondhand smoke as a child.

I mentioned the dogs and cats..as I find more people to be allergic to
pet dander and fur fuzz than are allergic to cigarette smoke...this of
course does not include those "420 friendly" pot heads who gasp in
outrage while Im smokeing a Pall Mall Light 100 in the same room,
while they have just filled their lungs and brain cells with THC,
along with covering themselves with a nasty stench.

Irrelevant, or should I say you're just trying to muddy the water with
other issues to avoid the real issue that smoking hurts other people.
It's like a person who may be a carrier of some contagious disease, but
never suffers from it himself. He can give it to other people, though,
and they are his collateral damage.

You being a smoker have every right to do that to your own body, but at
the same time your right to smoke ends where you pollute the air someone
else has to breathe. In addition to the secondhand smoke stinking, your
clothes more than likely stink everywhere you go, and when you pass by
others they can smell your stench at you pass by. To be real you can
literally make people sick by your presence.

I'm not being cruel by saying so, I'm telling you the truth, and if you
don't care that you make people sick just by passing by others, that's
your own character flaw you have to live with.

Oh..I should mention I dont drink booze either, with the single
exception of a cordial of Khalua about 6 times a year. Generally when
friends come over and we have just finished a nice big steak dinner
with all the fixings. I do however keep a liquor cabinet for my
friends. I just choose not to drink or do drugs. Nicotine and caffeine
are my drugs of choice.

So, you're an addict, then ...

Was there any other questions?

Why don't you care that you make other people sick?

--
Maggie

On 5/12/2016 2:10 AM, Bod wrote:
On 12/05/2016 05:12, Muggles wrote:

BUT, the text doesn't address either explanation 100%. They are the 2
possibilities that I've seen discussed that explains people living in
the land of Nod where Cain found a wife.


"Nod"! is that where the character *Noddy* comes from? ;-)


Who knows? Probably!

--
Maggie

On 5/12/2016 5:17 AM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 11:57:11 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 11:47 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 18:14:26 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/11/2016 6:08 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 11:09:51 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

I lost much of my hearing as a teen because I lived in a
household with parents who smoked and secondhand smoke floated in the
house constantly. It's a fact that me being exposed to those
contaminates caused my hearing loss.

So your parents used your skull for an ashtray? Fascinating

Secondhand smoke is more lethal than the ashes.

Oh of course it is. Which is why we have an entire nation of deaf
people who were born before 1980.

Right?

Gunner

You don't believe second hand smoke is dangerous, or causes health problems?


I was exposed to a lot of second hand smoke when I was a kid back in the middle of the last century. I wasn't a "Snot nosed kid" I was a "Green slime kid" with a constantly runny nose. My parents were WWII vets and smoked like choo choo trains. I had constant sinus and ear infections and am lucky that I didn't suffer hearing loss. I am horribly allergic to tobacco smoke which has the same effect as pepper spray on me. I become asthmatic with just a slight exposure to that evil smoke. o_O

The subject inspires me. Can you tell? LOL

--
Maggie

On 5/12/2016 5:44 AM, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:


I don't think any individual religion has everything correct, but I do
think many religions make an attempt to acknowledge that there is a
greater power involved in our existence, which, in turn, acknowledges
that mankind is not equivalent to being a god.


I don't see any evidence of the existence of a "greater power."

Perhaps, you need to think about what it means?


IMO, there is too much evidence that it took intelligence to create
everything we see around us.

It depends upon what you mean by "everything we see around us." If
you're talking about the organisms that live and have lived on the
Earth, their existence doesn't require a "greater power." The universe
itself doesn't require a "greater power." Neither of these require any
sort of "creator" either.

How do you know?

The existence of a deity or deities is highly improbable, and is not
required to explain anything we can observe. When something is this
improbable, it's not worth expending any time and energy on.

At one time it was improbable that we'd be able to fly planes.

Just because ones mindset can't imagine something is probable, doesn't
make them right. It just means they have limited vision as to what is
possible beyind their finite thinking.

If you want to know what I believe - I believe in human beings. We've
had a long, hard climb up, with many setbacks, but I think we will
eventually leave our cradle and spread into the rest of the solar system
and perhaps farther than that.

So, you're a humanist?


BTW, a lot of those setbacks have been caused by religion and religious
people. It's time we outgrew all of that.


The root cause of all setbacks people engage in is human nature.

--
Maggie

On 5/12/2016 7:01 AM, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:


I've asked many questions, myself. As far as creation goes, including
human beings, the rules were defined in the beginning. Babies being
born blind or limbless and other such things happened after sin entered
the world. There is now more chemicals and pollution that we're exposed


I get right off that boat when it comes to things like "original sin."
Why would a newborn baby be punished for something that someone else did
far in the past?

What kind of petty, vengeful god would cause a newborn baby to be born
blind of limbless?

According to the bible, God "created" everything "in the beginning". At
that time all rules of nature and creation were also set into motion.

WE create the newborn baby based on the laws set into motion "in the
beginning". Since, sin entered the world, nothing has been perfect,
which allowed disease and imperfection to occur. Everything humanity
has done from the time of the fall leads up to a certain result - our
actions have consequences in our lives and our bodies, and that includes
our children.

This world was given to us to have dominion over, and what we have today
is a result of OUR dominion over this world, not God's. God gave it to
us, and he hasn't taken it back. Mankind in it's limited understanding
has thoroughly screwed things up over and over again, and yet, the bible
still tells us that God is waiting for us to acknowledge him and come to
him, and he will stand by our sides as we deal with this world and help
us, lead us, give us wisdom, and live in this world that he gave us.

THAT is what the bible says, not me.


There's something really wrong with your god - it's all too human. I see
nothing of a superior being there.

According to the bible, God "created" us in his image. An image is only
a 2 dimensional reflection of the original. We are missing multiple
personality traits of the original, and because we're missing those
traits we make mistakes repeatedly, we aren't perfect, we're slaves to
our humanity and our own imperfections, and we simply have difficulty
understanding the very nature of a creator God, let alone understand how
perfection thinks or functions. When we don't understand something or
someone we have a tendency to reject it/them, attack, get angry, muster
support so others will also do likewise against the object of our
misunderstanding.

Accepting that we're only human means to accept that we're limited in
our abilities, and it also means we may have to acknowledge there's
something greater than ourselves that our human minds will never fully
understand. Humanity wants to admire itself.

You also really have to wonder about what kind of god would want to be
worshipped. That seems really immature to me.


We, the creation, want to be worshiped by our peers, don't we? Or should
I just say that we want the admiration and respect of our peers? Right?
Some people like to earn that admiration and respect of their peers,
but other people don't care how they get it if it means hurting other
people or forcing other people to do it.

Since we're only a reflection of a creator God, how much more do you
think a God would desire his creation to voluntarily admire and respect
him? The difference is such a God would do so perfectly, not in a
humanistic way, and since we're not perfect, again, understanding a
God's desire for admiration and respect is something we have difficulty
understanding OR accepting.

This is also what the bible says, not me.

to than there ever was, and that doesn't include what people voluntarily
do to each other or themselves exposing themselves to all sorts of
contaminates. I lost much of my hearing as a teen because I lived in a
household with parents who smoked and secondhand smoke floated in the
house constantly. It's a fact that me being exposed to those
contaminates caused my hearing loss.

I've never heard of anyone losing their hearing due to secondhand
smoke. Can you tell us more about this?

I posted that to Gunner where he was talking about smoking.

We blame god for everything bad that happens to us, and don't take into
consideration that perfection ended with creation after sin entered the
world.

I don't blame your god for anything.

Really? Then why did you pose this question: "What kind of petty,
vengeful god would cause a newborn baby to be born blind of limbless?"

To me it sounds like you blame God.

That's my take on it, anyway.

Both Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens have written extensively
on this topic. What they have written is far more eloquent than anything
I can write here. I would suggest that you seek out some of their works
and read them.

Why? They aren't on this newsgroup.

--
Maggie

On 5/12/2016 10:27 AM, Bod wrote:
On 12/05/2016 16:24, Muggles wrote:

So the Bible doesn't know then.

The Bible is text - it doesn't "know" anything. It only contains the
information the writers put there.

So as I originally said, they are just unprovable stories.

Q: Do you think that someone who loves someone else would show the
person they love patience?

--
Maggie

On 5/12/2016 10:28 AM, Bod wrote:
On 12/05/2016 16:25, Muggles wrote:
On 5/12/2016 12:43 AM, Bod wrote:
On 11/05/2016 20:24, Muggles wrote:
On 5/11/2016 2:16 PM, Bod wrote:

From what I've read and heard, yes.
As far as I'm concerned, the Universe was always around.
The rest simply evolved, IMO.

Did you mean to say the "Earth" was always round?

No. and to be pedantic, the Earth is not round, it's an oblate spheroid.

Ok. How do you know the Universe is round? Who told you that?

Read what I said again "the Earth is not round, it's an oblate spheroid"


ack! sorry, my bad. I read you to say the "Universe was always round",
but you actually said the "Universe was always Around".

--
Maggie