Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Page / 14
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 5:51:00 PM EDT
[#1]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


But you still can't find any Baptist boys flying jets into buildings.

Just as I said.

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”  - Voltaire


A stupid comment that is proven wrong every day.

As I noted, the boys from First Baptist Church haven't flown any jets into buildings.


eh...he'll reach back 400 years for the inquisition as proof.


Or I could reach back to yesterday for The Lord's Resistance Army, ISIS, the Christian militias in Palestine, the anti-Hindu movement in India, the Buddhists, Christians and Tamils in Sri Lanka, the Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland, etc. ad nauseum.


But you still can't find any Baptist boys flying jets into buildings.

Just as I said.



True. Other than bombing abortion clinics and an Olympic park, murdering doctors, and telling the families of dead soldiers that their sons and husbands are in hell, Baptists in America have been peaceful lately.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 6:09:11 PM EDT
[#2]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Okay, let's see the evidence to the contrary (ie: that whales and birds were created by God at the same time).

Meanwhile, here is some info about whale evolution, complete with talk of "transitional species" and vestigial limbs. Here is an example of atavism in an adult whale with hind legs. Here is some genetic evidence for you. Enjoy.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

"Science tells us."

Science tells us nothing.  It's simply a method of interpretation, and it can be, and is all the time, misinterpreted.  I don't think we should swerve this thread into one on evolution, but how, exactly, does science point towards land animals becoming sea creatures?


Archeological and genetic evidence along with the concepts and scientific theories of evolutionary biology.

Sea mammals evolved from land mammals. Birds evolved from reptiles.


This is another faith.  There is no proof of this, but there is evidence.  There's plenty of evidence to the contrary.  Whether or not you believe the creation story is direct history or a metaphor (I'm somewhat mixed on that), to use evidence to prove that the Bible is incorrect is a fallacy.  Evidence cannot prove something.

Okay, let's see the evidence to the contrary (ie: that whales and birds were created by God at the same time).

Meanwhile, here is some info about whale evolution, complete with talk of "transitional species" and vestigial limbs. Here is an example of atavism in an adult whale with hind legs. Here is some genetic evidence for you. Enjoy.


What I see in those links are things that could lead one to believe in evolution, but could also not, depending on the direction you want to go with it.

The first link - they mention a lot of species, and without proof they say that they are transitional species. And vestigal limbs - heck, we don't even know what the appendix is for.  Is it vestigal?  Who knows.  Those "vestigal limbs" in that one species could have aided in swimming, or steering, or who knows what else.  It's simply an assumption to say that it was a leftover from when it was a land animal.

Here's a quote:  "Hippos are large and aquatic, like whales, but the two groups evolved those features separately from each other. We know this because the ancient relatives of hippos called anthracotheres (not shown here) were not large or aquatic."

That doesn't even make sense.  We know that whales didn't evolve from the anthracotheres because the anthracotheres was neither large nor aquatic.  But hippos DID evolve from the anthracotheres, because they're large and aquatic.  WHAT?

Anyway, that article is full of claims that are based on other claims.

The second link - There's an awful lot of terminology that only someone with a very advanced degree in cellular bioloby could possibly understand, but I believe the gist is that a lot of land mammals and water mammals have a lot of similar DNA.  That's not surprising.  I hear we share something like 70% of genes with sponges.  Does that mean we evolved from the same original DNA, or that we have a common creator?  Who knows, but it doesn't only point one direction.

The third link - The picture doesn't show anything, but deformities do happen.  It doesn't mean it's a throwback to millions of years ago when they had hind legs.  Whales do have "arms" with the same basic structure as land mammals, so conceivably it could have a deformity that results in another set, just like people can have an extra arm coming out of their side.  I don't really see a lot of good detail in that paper.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 6:10:20 PM EDT
[#3]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


True. Other than bombing abortion clinics and an Olympic park, murdering doctors, and telling the families of dead soldiers that their sons and husbands are in hell, Baptists in America have been peaceful lately.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
But you still can't find any Baptist boys flying jets into buildings.

Just as I said.



True. Other than bombing abortion clinics and an Olympic park, murdering doctors, and telling the families of dead soldiers that their sons and husbands are in hell, Baptists in America have been peaceful lately.


You are REALLY reaching.

A few random kooks speak for millions of people?  You're nuking the fridge here.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 6:17:35 PM EDT
[#4]
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 6:25:10 PM EDT
[#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Baptists did not do those things, and you know it.

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
But you still can't find any Baptist boys flying jets into buildings.

Just as I said.



True. Other than bombing abortion clinics and an Olympic park, murdering doctors, and telling the families of dead soldiers that their sons and husbands are in hell, Baptists in America have been peaceful lately.


Baptists did not do those things, and you know it.



If they go to Baptist churches, and they call themselves Baptists, what are they, Roman Catholics? You may be thinking of Tim McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber. He was Catholic.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 6:32:30 PM EDT
[#6]
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 6:32:30 PM EDT
[#7]
Using the bible to support the bible is a mute point.

It is a false book, written by men to support their agendas.  There is no evidence anywhere to support it, I have dug for years as I struggled with this.

Ever notice that some to the evils we find horrid today aren't even mentioned.  

The top ten of the old testament says nothing of child abuse or incest (in fact advocates it).  

Slavery is supported.

The god is evil, misogynistic, genocidal, infanticidal, advocates human sacrifice, forces adoration instead of earning it.  Those who don't adore god burn in "hell", what kind of choice is that?

There was no Ark or flood, there is no way the animals would fit 2 up in a boat, that is silly.  

Blood sacrifice is found throughout the document, Christ is a blood sacrifice.  

It gets it wrong from the very beginning.  There was no Adam and Eve or "original sin" that must be atoned.  It is myth and nothing more.  

The character of Christ is pretty good, I will say that.  Take away the "miracles".

To say that Christ and god are one in the same is crazy.  Was Christ praying to himself in the garden?  

I am out and most likely will get banned.  Free speech and all.


Many suffer from Cognitive Dissonance.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 6:34:40 PM EDT
[#8]
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 6:37:00 PM EDT
[#9]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Using the bible to support the bible is a mute point.

It is a false book, written by men to support their agendas.  There is no evidence anywhere to support it, I have dug for years as I struggled with this.

Ever notice that some to the evils we find horrid today aren't even mentioned.  

The top ten of the old testament says nothing of child abuse or incest (in fact advocates it).  

Slavery is supported.

The god is evil, misogynistic, genocidal, infanticidal, advocates human sacrifice, forces adoration instead of earning it.  Those who don't adore god burn in "hell", what kind of choice is that?

There was no Ark or flood, there is no way the animals would fit 2 up in a boat, that is silly.  

Blood sacrifice is found throughout the document, Christ is a blood sacrifice.  

It gets it wrong from the very beginning.  There was no Adam and Eve or "original sin" that must be atoned.  It is myth and nothing more.  

The character of Christ is pretty good, I will say that.  Take away the "miracles".

To say that Christ and god are one in the same is crazy.  Was Christ praying to himself in the garden?  

I am out and most likely will get banned.  Free speech and all.


Many suffer from Cognitive Dissonance.
View Quote


This will get the usual "change the subject/ post a sidestepping meme" reply.....


Oh wait. lol
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 6:37:17 PM EDT
[#10]
edit. Rodent is back to trolling.

Too bad, dude. When you're not discussing religion you seem decent.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 6:37:18 PM EDT
[#11]


Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:Does that mean we evolved from the same original DNA, or that we have a common creator?  Who knows, but it doesn't only point one direction.
View Quote





 











Ken Miller is a Catholic and a Professor of Biology at Brown.







The entire lecture can be seen at








 
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 6:42:30 PM EDT
[#12]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
edit. Rodent is back to trolling.

Too bad, dude. When you're not discussing religion you seem decent.
View Quote


Why, when someone disagrees, is he labeled a troll?
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 6:51:53 PM EDT
[#13]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Why, when someone disagrees, is he labeled a troll?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
edit. Rodent is back to trolling.

Too bad, dude. When you're not discussing religion you seem decent.


Why, when someone disagrees, is he labeled a troll?


He hits the "report" button almost every time I post.

I suspect that the reason religious folks get so irked at atheists is that, on some level, they realize that logic is not on their side. That's the price of choosing the mystical over the temporal.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 6:52:04 PM EDT
[#14]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Using the bible to support the bible is a mute point.

It is a false book, written by men to support their agendas.  There is no evidence anywhere to support it, I have dug for years as I struggled with this.

Ever notice that some to the evils we find horrid today aren't even mentioned.  

The top ten of the old testament says nothing of child abuse or incest (in fact advocates it).  

Slavery is supported.

The god is evil, misogynistic, genocidal, infanticidal, advocates human sacrifice, forces adoration instead of earning it.  Those who don't adore god burn in "hell", what kind of choice is that?

There was no Ark or flood, there is no way the animals would fit 2 up in a boat, that is silly.  

Blood sacrifice is found throughout the document, Christ is a blood sacrifice.  

It gets it wrong from the very beginning.  There was no Adam and Eve or "original sin" that must be atoned.  It is myth and nothing more.  

The character of Christ is pretty good, I will say that.  Take away the "miracles".

To say that Christ and god are one in the same is crazy.  Was Christ praying to himself in the garden?  

I am out and most likely will get banned.  Free speech and all.


Many suffer from Cognitive Dissonance.
View Quote


Thank you for your ignorant, hate-filled rant.  Now on to our regular broadcasting.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 7:22:06 PM EDT
[#15]
I don't get how you can read a book of bronze age myths and find anything that even approaches absolute truth.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 7:44:16 PM EDT
[#16]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Thank you for your ignorant, hate-filled rant.  Now on to our regular broadcasting.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Using the bible to support the bible is a mute point.

It is a false book, written by men to support their agendas.  There is no evidence anywhere to support it, I have dug for years as I struggled with this.

Ever notice that some to the evils we find horrid today aren't even mentioned.  

The top ten of the old testament says nothing of child abuse or incest (in fact advocates it).  

Slavery is supported.

The god is evil, misogynistic, genocidal, infanticidal, advocates human sacrifice, forces adoration instead of earning it.  Those who don't adore god burn in "hell", what kind of choice is that?

There was no Ark or flood, there is no way the animals would fit 2 up in a boat, that is silly.  

Blood sacrifice is found throughout the document, Christ is a blood sacrifice.  

It gets it wrong from the very beginning.  There was no Adam and Eve or "original sin" that must be atoned.  It is myth and nothing more.  

The character of Christ is pretty good, I will say that.  Take away the "miracles".

To say that Christ and god are one in the same is crazy.  Was Christ praying to himself in the garden?  

I am out and most likely will get banned.  Free speech and all.


Many suffer from Cognitive Dissonance.


Thank you for your ignorant, hate-filled rant.  Now on to our regular broadcasting.


Don't refute it ... attack!
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 7:49:51 PM EDT
[#17]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

I suspect that the reason religious folks get so irked at atheists is that, on some level, they realize that logic is not on their side. That's the price of choosing the mystical over the temporal.
View Quote




Link Posted: 12/19/2014 7:51:25 PM EDT
[#18]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Don't refute it ... attack!
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Using the bible to support the bible is a mute point.

It is a false book, written by men to support their agendas.  There is no evidence anywhere to support it, I have dug for years as I struggled with this.

Ever notice that some to the evils we find horrid today aren't even mentioned.  

The top ten of the old testament says nothing of child abuse or incest (in fact advocates it).  

Slavery is supported.

The god is evil, misogynistic, genocidal, infanticidal, advocates human sacrifice, forces adoration instead of earning it.  Those who don't adore god burn in "hell", what kind of choice is that?

There was no Ark or flood, there is no way the animals would fit 2 up in a boat, that is silly.  

Blood sacrifice is found throughout the document, Christ is a blood sacrifice.  

It gets it wrong from the very beginning.  There was no Adam and Eve or "original sin" that must be atoned.  It is myth and nothing more.  

The character of Christ is pretty good, I will say that.  Take away the "miracles".

To say that Christ and god are one in the same is crazy.  Was Christ praying to himself in the garden?  

I am out and most likely will get banned.  Free speech and all.


Many suffer from Cognitive Dissonance.


Thank you for your ignorant, hate-filled rant.  Now on to our regular broadcasting.


Don't refute it ... attack!


You can't refute an attack.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 7:52:08 PM EDT
[#19]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I don't get how you can read a book of bronze age myths and find anything that even approaches absolute truth.
View Quote


Clearly many agree with you. But many also see it differently.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 7:52:09 PM EDT
[#20]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


He hits the "report" button almost every time I post.

I suspect that the reason religious folks get so irked at atheists is that, on some level, they realize that logic is not on their side. That's the price of choosing the mystical over the temporal.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
edit. Rodent is back to trolling.

Too bad, dude. When you're not discussing religion you seem decent.


Why, when someone disagrees, is he labeled a troll?


He hits the "report" button almost every time I post.

I suspect that the reason religious folks get so irked at atheists is that, on some level, they realize that logic is not on their side. That's the price of choosing the mystical over the temporal.


I don't think I've ever hit the report button on you.

Look, we admit it's not "logical" to have the unquantifiable factor of "faith" in our lives. I simply don't enjoy the attacks on Christianity when you smear it by calling the Westboro morons "Christians". They aren't.

You know those cases where people say "well X community should be outspoken against [the bad actors] or else people will think they're all like that"? This is one of them. I am speaking out against the Westboro morons - they are not Christians no matter what they call themselves. We know them by their actions - and their actions are not Christlike. You know this, yet you choose to label us all by their actions.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 7:53:20 PM EDT
[#21]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


What I see in those links are things that could lead one to believe in evolution, but could also not, depending on the direction you want to go with it.

The first link - they mention a lot of species, and without proof they say that they are transitional species. And vestigal limbs - heck, we don't even know what the appendix is for.  Is it vestigal?  Who knows.  Those "vestigal limbs" in that one species could have aided in swimming, or steering, or who knows what else.  It's simply an assumption to say that it was a leftover from when it was a land animal.


Here's a quote:  "Hippos are large and aquatic, like whales, but the two groups evolved those features separately from each other. We know this because the ancient relatives of hippos called anthracotheres (not shown here) were not large or aquatic."

That doesn't even make sense.  We know that whales didn't evolve from the anthracotheres because the anthracotheres was neither large nor aquatic.  But hippos DID evolve from the anthracotheres, because they're large and aquatic.  WHAT?

Anyway, that article is full of claims that are based on other claims.

The second link - There's an awful lot of terminology that only someone with a very advanced degree in cellular bioloby could possibly understand, but I believe the gist is that a lot of land mammals and water mammals have a lot of similar DNA.  That's not surprising.  I hear we share something like 70% of genes with sponges.  Does that mean we evolved from the same original DNA, or that we have a common creator?  Who knows, but it doesn't only point one direction.

The third link - The picture doesn't show anything, but deformities do happen.  It doesn't mean it's a throwback to millions of years ago when they had hind legs.  Whales do have "arms" with the same basic structure as land mammals, so conceivably it could have a deformity that results in another set, just like people can have an extra arm coming out of their side.  I don't really see a lot of good detail in that paper.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

"Science tells us."

Science tells us nothing.  It's simply a method of interpretation, and it can be, and is all the time, misinterpreted.  I don't think we should swerve this thread into one on evolution, but how, exactly, does science point towards land animals becoming sea creatures?


Archeological and genetic evidence along with the concepts and scientific theories of evolutionary biology.

Sea mammals evolved from land mammals. Birds evolved from reptiles.


This is another faith.  There is no proof of this, but there is evidence.  There's plenty of evidence to the contrary.  Whether or not you believe the creation story is direct history or a metaphor (I'm somewhat mixed on that), to use evidence to prove that the Bible is incorrect is a fallacy.  Evidence cannot prove something.

Okay, let's see the evidence to the contrary (ie: that whales and birds were created by God at the same time).

Meanwhile, here is some info about whale evolution, complete with talk of "transitional species" and vestigial limbs. Here is an example of atavism in an adult whale with hind legs. Here is some genetic evidence for you. Enjoy.


What I see in those links are things that could lead one to believe in evolution, but could also not, depending on the direction you want to go with it.

The first link - they mention a lot of species, and without proof they say that they are transitional species. And vestigal limbs - heck, we don't even know what the appendix is for.  Is it vestigal?  Who knows.  Those "vestigal limbs" in that one species could have aided in swimming, or steering, or who knows what else.  It's simply an assumption to say that it was a leftover from when it was a land animal.


Here's a quote:  "Hippos are large and aquatic, like whales, but the two groups evolved those features separately from each other. We know this because the ancient relatives of hippos called anthracotheres (not shown here) were not large or aquatic."

That doesn't even make sense.  We know that whales didn't evolve from the anthracotheres because the anthracotheres was neither large nor aquatic.  But hippos DID evolve from the anthracotheres, because they're large and aquatic.  WHAT?

Anyway, that article is full of claims that are based on other claims.

The second link - There's an awful lot of terminology that only someone with a very advanced degree in cellular bioloby could possibly understand, but I believe the gist is that a lot of land mammals and water mammals have a lot of similar DNA.  That's not surprising.  I hear we share something like 70% of genes with sponges.  Does that mean we evolved from the same original DNA, or that we have a common creator?  Who knows, but it doesn't only point one direction.

The third link - The picture doesn't show anything, but deformities do happen.  It doesn't mean it's a throwback to millions of years ago when they had hind legs.  Whales do have "arms" with the same basic structure as land mammals, so conceivably it could have a deformity that results in another set, just like people can have an extra arm coming out of their side.  I don't really see a lot of good detail in that paper.


I don't think that modern whale vestigial limbs aid them in much of anything...


Neither do vestigial hind limbs in some snakes. Many scientists think that the human appendix is vestigial, and that it played a greater role in early human populations.

The quote is poorly worded, but is simply stating that hippos and whales evolved into their aquatic environments separately at different times. That webpage appears to be written for college freshmen and is not rich with many details- I just wanted to give you an overview of whale evolution.

The second link was to provide evidence that vestigial limbs in whales are indeed the remnants of legs. Read the words instead of just looking at the picture. They exist in all whales, but simply don't develop to this extent normally. This is not the same thing as a person being born with additional limbs (caused by the atrophy of a conjoined twin).

The third link not only shows that their gene families are highly conserved among other closely related species, but that they have key differences that allow adaptation to an aquatic environment.

So to summarize: whales are aquatic mammals that breath air, have internal remnants of hind limbs, and are genetically similar to land mammals with the exception of key genes which aid them in their aquatic environment.

Additionally, (keep in mind that fossilization is an extremely rare process), changes are seen in the fossil record with regard to skull and limb morphology (Not going to link. Look up Remingtonocetids, Protocetids, Basilosauridae, etc). So we can look at this (alongside the overwhelming evidence of evolution in other animals) and conclude that whales evolved from land mammals, or we can say "Boy, that God sure had an imagination when he created these fellers."
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 7:55:41 PM EDT
[#22]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

I suspect that the reason religious folks get so irked at atheists is that, on some level, they realize that logic is not on their side. That's the price of choosing the mystical over the temporal.



I dunno, I see a lot of atheist people getting extremely irked.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 8:07:14 PM EDT
[#23]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I don't think that modern whale vestigial limbs aid them in much of anything...
http://hodnett-ap.wikispaces.com/file/view/whale-vestigial-structure.jpg/228456074/whale-vestigial-structure.jpg

Neither do vestigial hind limbs in some snakes. Many scientists think that the human appendix is vestigial, and that it played a greater role in early human populations.

The quote is poorly worded, but is simply stating that hippos and whales evolved into their aquatic environments separately at different times. That webpage appears to be written for college freshmen and is not rich with many details- I just wanted to give you an overview of whale evolution.

The second link was to provide evidence that vestigial limbs in whales are indeed the remnants of legs. Read the words instead of just looking at the picture. They exist in all whales, but simply don't develop to this extent normally. This is not the same thing as a person being born with additional limbs (caused by the atrophy of a conjoined twin).

The third link not only shows that their gene families are highly conserved among other closely related species, but that they have key differences that allow adaptation to an aquatic environment.

So to summarize: whales are aquatic mammals that breath air, have internal remnants of hind limbs, and are genetically similar to land mammals with the exception of key genes which aid them in their aquatic environment.

Additionally, (keep in mind that fossilization is an extremely rare process), changes are seen in the fossil record with regard to skull and limb morphology (Not going to link. Look up Remingtonocetids, Protocetids, Basilosauridae, etc). So we can look at this (alongside the overwhelming evidence of evolution in other animals) and conclude that whales evolved from land mammals, or we can say "Boy, that God sure had an imagination when he created these fellers."
View Quote


This thread isn't about evolution, and like I said, I don't really care.  I used to be very vocal about it, but now it doesn't matter to me.  Maybe, maybe not.  I tend towards not believing it and I've done enough studying to see serious issues with it.

But I still think that the arguments for evolution, like the ones you cited, could point any which way, and are certainly not "proofs."  I do respect the fact that you seem to be quite nonjudgemental in your arguments and genuinely appear to want to inform.  I do still think your assertion that science "clearly tells us" on page 10 is incorrect, and that it does not definitely point to any one point of view in this case.

What I am offended by is the insulting nature of a lot on this thread that demean those who believe in a higher power and a savior.  You can disagree and believe in none of that, but many posts are downright nasty.  I don't appreciate that.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 8:11:11 PM EDT
[#24]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Are you a Jew living in Pre-Christ Israel?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
19 "Whenever a woman has her menstrual period, she will be ceremonially unclean for seven days. If you touch her during that time, you will be defiled until evening. 20 Anything on which she lies or sits during that time will be defiled. 21 If you touch her bed, you must wash your clothes and bathe in water, and you will remain defiled until evening. 22 The same applies if you touch an object on which she sits, 23 whether it is her bedding or any piece of furniture. 24 If a man has sexual intercourse with her during this time, her menstrual impurity will be transmitted to him. He will remain defiled for seven days, and any bed on which he lies will be defiled." 25 "If the menstrual flow of blood continues for many days beyond the normal period, or if she discharges blood unrelated to her menstruation, the woman will be ceremonially unclean as long as the discharge continues. 26 Anything on which she lies or sits during that time will be defiled, just as it would be during her normal menstrual period. 27 If you touch her bed or anything on which she sits, you will be defiled. You will be required to wash your clothes and bathe in water, and you will remain defiled until evening." 28 "When the woman's menstrual discharge stops, she must count off a period of seven days. After that, she will be ceremonially clean. 29 On the eighth day, she must bring two turtledoves or two young pigeons and present them to the priest at the entrance of the Tabernacle. 30 The priest will offer one for a sin offering and the other for a whole burnt offering. In this way, the priest will make atonement for her before the LORD for her menstrual discharge." 31 "In this way, you will keep the people of Israel separate from things that will defile them, so they will not die as a result of defiling my Tabernacle that is right there among them. 32 These are the instructions for dealing with a man who has been defiled by a genital discharge or an emission of semen; 33 for dealing with a woman during her monthly menstrual period; for dealing with anyone, man or woman, who has had a bodily discharge of any kind; and for dealing with a man who has had intercourse with a woman during her period."
Leviticus 15:19-33


Are you a Jew living in Pre-Christ Israel?


The laws regarding the menstrual cycle are in full force today for us religious Jews.  Almost sundown on Shabbos so can't use electricity.  Have to get off the computer now.  
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 9:32:09 PM EDT
[#25]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
If you are talking about the Westboro "Baptists", they are not recognized by any Baptist organization and are not Baptists in any sense of the word...
View Quote


You don't think they're qualified to be Baptists, and they probably don't think you are, either. But they call themselves Baptists. Wikipedia classifies them as Baptists. I haven't got any better ideas. They aren't Jews or Atheists or Sikhs.

Interesting aside: Wikipedia lists HUNDREDS of subdivisions of Baptists. Apparently they disagree with each other a lot.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 9:57:44 PM EDT
[#26]
A shining light of reason, citing Wikipedia as his source. Lol.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 10:16:47 PM EDT
[#27]
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 10:44:55 PM EDT
[#28]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Well, I read and caught up on this thread, hoping there might be some intelligent discussion going on.  But no, just the "usual suspects" posting their ignorance and insults.
View Quote


If you can skim this thread with an unbiased mind, you might be surprised at who most of the personal attacks are coming from.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 10:46:57 PM EDT
[#29]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Since I know you are smarter than this, I can only assume that you are trying to be insulting.  I thought better of you.



View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If you are talking about the Westboro "Baptists", they are not recognized by any Baptist organization and are not Baptists in any sense of the word...


You don't think they're qualified to be Baptists, and they probably don't think you are, either. But they call themselves Baptists. Wikipedia classifies them as Baptists. I haven't got any better ideas. They aren't Jews or Atheists or Sikhs.

Interesting aside: Wikipedia lists HUNDREDS of subdivisions of Baptists. Apparently they disagree with each other a lot.


Since I know you are smarter than this, I can only assume that you are trying to be insulting.  I thought better of you.





I get what you are saying OP, but how do they get away with calling themselves that?  Not being a smart guy or anything, but Catholics or Jews would never let someone get away with a hijack of the name like that.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 10:48:29 PM EDT
[#30]
I've always thought a lot of you guys who don't believe or have questions, or think everything if just a fairy tale would like a book by David Limbaugh, yes, Rush's brother. It's called Jesus on Trial (meaning he questions everything Jesus and Bible)
A Lawyer Affirms the Truth of the Gospel.






Link Posted: 12/19/2014 10:55:00 PM EDT
[#31]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


If they go to Baptist churches, and they call themselves Baptists, what are they, Roman Catholics? You may be thinking of Tim McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber. He was Catholic.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
But you still can't find any Baptist boys flying jets into buildings.

Just as I said.



True. Other than bombing abortion clinics and an Olympic park, murdering doctors, and telling the families of dead soldiers that their sons and husbands are in hell, Baptists in America have been peaceful lately.


Baptists did not do those things, and you know it.



If they go to Baptist churches, and they call themselves Baptists, what are they, Roman Catholics? You may be thinking of Tim McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber. He was Catholic.


Stalin  was an atheist if you want to play that game, he is responsible for the death of millions
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 11:04:02 PM EDT
[#32]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


I get what you are saying OP, but how do they get away with calling themselves that?  Not being a smart guy or anything, but Catholics or Jews would never let someone get away with a hijack of the name like that.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If you are talking about the Westboro "Baptists", they are not recognized by any Baptist organization and are not Baptists in any sense of the word...


You don't think they're qualified to be Baptists, and they probably don't think you are, either. But they call themselves Baptists. Wikipedia classifies them as Baptists. I haven't got any better ideas. They aren't Jews or Atheists or Sikhs.

Interesting aside: Wikipedia lists HUNDREDS of subdivisions of Baptists. Apparently they disagree with each other a lot.


Since I know you are smarter than this, I can only assume that you are trying to be insulting.  I thought better of you.





I get what you are saying OP, but how do they get away with calling themselves that?  Not being a smart guy or anything, but Catholics or Jews would never let someone get away with a hijack of the name like that.


What is anyone going to do?  Tell them to not call themselves baptists or Christians?  No one of any denomination can force someone to not call themselves by any denomination.

You are insinuating that Catholics and Jews do something about it when it happens to them.  What do they do about it?  And what should the Baptists do in this particular case?

Again, I know this might come off as accusatory, and I really don't mean it to be.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 11:04:29 PM EDT
[#33]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Stalin  was an atheist if you want to play that game, he is responsible for the death of millions
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
But you still can't find any Baptist boys flying jets into buildings.

Just as I said.



True. Other than bombing abortion clinics and an Olympic park, murdering doctors, and telling the families of dead soldiers that their sons and husbands are in hell, Baptists in America have been peaceful lately.


Baptists did not do those things, and you know it.



If they go to Baptist churches, and they call themselves Baptists, what are they, Roman Catholics? You may be thinking of Tim McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber. He was Catholic.


Stalin  was an atheist if you want to play that game, he is responsible for the death of millions


At least he didn't kill in the name of religion.

(sarcasm)
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 11:14:53 PM EDT
[#34]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


At least he didn't kill in the name of religion.

(sarcasm)
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

Stalin  was an atheist if you want to play that game, he is responsible for the death of millions


At least he didn't kill in the name of religion.

(sarcasm)


we wont mention that most atheist are liberals.
or
when atheist are in control millions die

I don't know of any hospitals or universities started by atheist.
pretty sure there are very few atheist charities.
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 11:26:16 PM EDT
[#35]
Link Posted: 12/19/2014 11:59:50 PM EDT
[#36]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
we wont mention that most atheist are liberals.

or

when atheist are in control millions die



I don't know of any hospitals or universities started by atheist.

pretty sure there are very few atheist charities.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Quoted:


Quoted:



Stalin  was an atheist if you want to play that game, he is responsible for the death of millions





At least he didn't kill in the name of religion.



(sarcasm)




we wont mention that most atheist are liberals.

or

when atheist are in control millions die



I don't know of any hospitals or universities started by atheist.

pretty sure there are very few atheist charities.
I haven't read the entire thread, so perhaps I'm taking your comments out of context.



But after reading this post, I'm curious:  what do you feel that you're accomplishing by likening atheists (who, by last count, comprise about 30% of the membership here) to Stalin, and attacking them by insinuating that they would kill millions of people if given the opportunity?



Do you actually know any atheists?  I know quite a few, and not one of them bears the slightest resemblance to the characterization that you've tried to portray here.  



 
Link Posted: 12/20/2014 12:06:33 AM EDT
[#37]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I haven't read the entire thread, so perhaps I'm taking your comments out of context.

But after reading this post, I'm curious:  what do you feel that you're accomplishing by likening atheists (who, by last count, comprise about 30% of the membership here) to Stalin, and attacking them by insinuating that they would kill millions of people if given the opportunity?

Do you actually know any atheists?  I know quite a few, and not one of them bears the slightest resemblance to the characterization that you've tried to portray here.  
 
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Stalin  was an atheist if you want to play that game, he is responsible for the death of millions


At least he didn't kill in the name of religion.

(sarcasm)


we wont mention that most atheist are liberals.
or
when atheist are in control millions die

I don't know of any hospitals or universities started by atheist.
pretty sure there are very few atheist charities.
I haven't read the entire thread, so perhaps I'm taking your comments out of context.

But after reading this post, I'm curious:  what do you feel that you're accomplishing by likening atheists (who, by last count, comprise about 30% of the membership here) to Stalin, and attacking them by insinuating that they would kill millions of people if given the opportunity?

Do you actually know any atheists?  I know quite a few, and not one of them bears the slightest resemblance to the characterization that you've tried to portray here.  
 


you are taking it out of context.
I know  a few atheist, we get along just fine. they are good guys.
Link Posted: 12/20/2014 8:51:07 AM EDT
[#38]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



I haven't read the entire thread, so perhaps I'm taking your comments out of context.



But after reading this post, I'm curious:  what do you feel that you're accomplishing by likening atheists (who, by last count, comprise about 30% of the membership here) to Stalin, and attacking them by insinuating that they would kill millions of people if given the opportunity?



Do you actually know any atheists?  I know quite a few, and not one of them bears the slightest resemblance to the characterization that you've tried to portray here.  

 
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Quoted:


Quoted:


Quoted:



Stalin  was an atheist if you want to play that game, he is responsible for the death of millions





At least he didn't kill in the name of religion.



(sarcasm)




we wont mention that most atheist are liberals.

or

when atheist are in control millions die



I don't know of any hospitals or universities started by atheist.

pretty sure there are very few atheist charities.
I haven't read the entire thread, so perhaps I'm taking your comments out of context.



But after reading this post, I'm curious:  what do you feel that you're accomplishing by likening atheists (who, by last count, comprise about 30% of the membership here) to Stalin, and attacking them by insinuating that they would kill millions of people if given the opportunity?



Do you actually know any atheists?  I know quite a few, and not one of them bears the slightest resemblance to the characterization that you've tried to portray here.  

 
You’re ignoring the post he was responding to.

 
Link Posted: 12/20/2014 8:55:24 AM EDT
[#39]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Since I know you are smarter than this, I can only assume that you are trying to be insulting.  I thought better of you.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Quoted:


Quoted:

If you are talking about the Westboro "Baptists", they are not recognized by any Baptist organization and are not Baptists in any sense of the word...




You don't think they're qualified to be Baptists, and they probably don't think you are, either. But they call themselves Baptists. Wikipedia classifies them as Baptists. I haven't got any better ideas. They aren't Jews or Atheists or Sikhs.



Interesting aside: Wikipedia lists HUNDREDS of subdivisions of Baptists. Apparently they disagree with each other a lot.




Since I know you are smarter than this, I can only assume that you are trying to be insulting.  I thought better of you.




 
What's insulting about what he said?




Seems like the post is pretty factual, with sources provided?
Link Posted: 12/20/2014 11:12:59 AM EDT
[#40]
Link Posted: 12/20/2014 11:30:13 AM EDT
[#41]
For the sake of the discussion, I'm willing to go with "The Westboro Baptist Church Which Is Not Affiliated With Any Baptist Organizations That Old Painless Approves Of" for the rest of the thread. There's gotta be a good acronym in there somewhere.
Link Posted: 12/20/2014 11:42:05 AM EDT
[#42]
Link Posted: 12/20/2014 11:51:04 AM EDT
[#43]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Wrong again.  It has nothing to do with what "I" approve of.

NO national Baptist Church recognizes Westboro as being a Baptist church.  

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
For the sake of the discussion, I'm willing to go with "The Westboro Baptist Church Which Is Not Affiliated With Any Baptist Organizations That Old Painless Approves Of" for the rest of the thread. There's gotta be a good acronym in there somewhere.


Wrong again.  It has nothing to do with what "I" approve of.

NO national Baptist Church recognizes Westboro as being a Baptist church.  



This illustrates one of the evils of religions. They inevitably branch into literal thousands of offshoots, each one believing that it is the true and correct one, and as religious zeal increases, so does intolerance.
Link Posted: 12/20/2014 12:00:28 PM EDT
[#44]
Link Posted: 12/20/2014 12:04:49 PM EDT
[#45]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Wrong again. (You are setting some kind of record for foolish statements about a subject you are not knowledgeable about.)

I am a Southern Baptist, and I do not think that it is the only "true and correct one".  Most differences between denominations are about non-essential things, such as how to worship, church structure, etc.  I still believe that the vast majority of Protestant churches are still preaching the Gospel of Jesus, and a person can be saved as part of any of those churches.  And even though I am not a Roman Catholic, I also believe that a person can be a Catholic and be saved.  It is all about Jesus' Grace, and not denomination.

Talk about jet fighters, or some other subject where you have expertise.  This isn't one of them.

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

This illustrates one of the evils of religions. They inevitably branch into literal thousands of offshoots, each one believing that it is the true and correct one, and as religious zeal increases, so does intolerance.


Wrong again. (You are setting some kind of record for foolish statements about a subject you are not knowledgeable about.)

I am a Southern Baptist, and I do not think that it is the only "true and correct one".  Most differences between denominations are about non-essential things, such as how to worship, church structure, etc.  I still believe that the vast majority of Protestant churches are still preaching the Gospel of Jesus, and a person can be saved as part of any of those churches.  And even though I am not a Roman Catholic, I also believe that a person can be a Catholic and be saved.  It is all about Jesus' Grace, and not denomination.

Talk about jet fighters, or some other subject where you have expertise.  This isn't one of them.


There is tension here between the faiths. We got a decent number of faith around here, jews, Amish, catholic, 20 different kinds of protestants, you name it. No violence, but plenty of places arent welcoming to outside faiths. Especially towards Amish folk.
Link Posted: 12/20/2014 12:10:31 PM EDT
[#46]
Link Posted: 12/20/2014 12:15:59 PM EDT
[#47]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Talk about jet fighters, or some other subject where you have expertise.  This isn't one of them.
View Quote


I would not begrudge you posting in a thread about jet fighters, even if I don't consider you to be an expert on them.
Link Posted: 12/20/2014 12:16:23 PM EDT
[#48]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


No doubt.

But Rodent falsely stated that religions "branch into literal thousands of offshoots, each one believing that it is the true and correct one".  That is false, as I noted, at least for Christian churches.

Of course, we strongly disagree with non-Christian churches, or we would just join one of them.

Sure, some are not accepting of other denominations, but that is a minority.  And the Amish are a "special" case, as their doctrines require them to "come out from among them and be ye separate".

As Baptists, we may disagree with other Christian denominations, but there is no hatred towards them.

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

This illustrates one of the evils of religions. They inevitably branch into literal thousands of offshoots, each one believing that it is the true and correct one, and as religious zeal increases, so does intolerance.


Wrong again. (You are setting some kind of record for foolish statements about a subject you are not knowledgeable about.)

I am a Southern Baptist, and I do not think that it is the only "true and correct one".  Most differences between denominations are about non-essential things, such as how to worship, church structure, etc.  I still believe that the vast majority of Protestant churches are still preaching the Gospel of Jesus, and a person can be saved as part of any of those churches.  And even though I am not a Roman Catholic, I also believe that a person can be a Catholic and be saved.  It is all about Jesus' Grace, and not denomination.

Talk about jet fighters, or some other subject where you have expertise.

 This isn't one of them.


There is tension here between the faiths. We got a decent number of faith around here, jews, Amish, catholic, 20 different kinds of protestants, you name it. No violence, but plenty of places arent welcoming to outside faiths. Especially towards Amish folk.


No doubt.

But Rodent falsely stated that religions "branch into literal thousands of offshoots, each one believing that it is the true and correct one".  That is false, as I noted, at least for Christian churches.

Of course, we strongly disagree with non-Christian churches, or we would just join one of them.

Sure, some are not accepting of other denominations, but that is a minority.  And the Amish are a "special" case, as their doctrines require them to "come out from among them and be ye separate".

As Baptists, we may disagree with other Christian denominations, but there is no hatred towards them.


Yeah. in the 21frst century christians killing christians over minor differences in faith is largly a thing of the past.
Link Posted: 12/20/2014 12:17:41 PM EDT
[#49]
Link Posted: 12/20/2014 1:40:03 PM EDT
[#50]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

... But Rodent falsely stated that religions "branch into literal thousands of offshoots, each one believing that it is the true and correct one".  That is false, as I noted, at least for Christian churches....
View Quote


In just the US, there are a couple thousand denominations of Protestants alone.

Throughout history, uncountable thousands of religious sects have come and gone.

All over the world, even today, people are fighting over laughably trivial points of silly dogma.
Page / 14
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top