Religion - the root of all evil?

Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX

02/03/2006 02:27:34 PM · #51

"but I'm sick of hearing people try and equate athiesm as some sort of religion."

It is a belief system and philosophy. I'm sick and tired of hearing tirades against all christians because of one or two individual freaks who killed an abortion doctor. At the same time, as being dismissed when I bring up the abuses of evolutionary philosophy as not being representative.

I feel like atheists like to point to a few examples as arguments. And then when they're faced with a few examples themselves....well, they use the "not representative of the whole" to avoid the accusation.

IMHO, atheists don't play fair. They quote rationality, than fail to use it. They constant air superiority and make comments about science and how much better they are because they use it and religious people do not. When such is not in fact the case. In fact, I make most of my arguments based on science and observations. When I debate topics I don't say "Well the Bible said so" I give my reasonings.

However, often I catch atheists and evolutionists in quandaries of doing the exact same thing they accuse religious people of doing.

- Religious Dogma kills people
vs.
-dogmatic evolutionary beliefs of superiority as the right to kill or enslave others

- Intelligent Design is unscientific (regardless, that few understand how broad ID philosophy is. It ranges from 6-day creationists, to by-design influenced evolutionists to the spaghetti monster. ID essentially just denotes that based on the observed complexity, patterns and order in our universe, as well as the complexity and programming like nature of the DNA code, that one may conclude the possibility of an intelligent design influence.
vs.
- Global Ice age cometh, wait 20 yrs, global warming cometh. It's all man's fault. Ignore the fact that earth has cycled much greater hot and cool periods. Ignore the recent observations of the polar ice caps melting on Mars. Dismiss scientific evidence that doesn't fit our theory cause we know our theory is right. (Now mind you, I strongly support renewable sources of energy, resource conservation, materials recycling and good stewardship. But I take issue with being told I am ignoring scientific evidence when I feel said community has flip-flopped on their message, their evidence and repeatedly ignored scientific data and historical observations.

- God cannot be proved by science since one cannot observe God and science is all about observation .Therefore, ID has no place in the classroom for discussion whatsoever.
vs.
- Discussions of search for extra-terrestial life (of which we have no proof and merely guesses, sure we conduct experiments but we have no clue as to whether any are valid. But we continue anyway. And rightly so, it's always good to explore the unknown.) But might I simply put forth that no one could observe an atom 200 yrs ago. And the concept of the atom goes back all the way to the greeks. But at it's conception, and even 200 yrs ago. The atom was no more real and observable than is God currently. Was science at fault? No, merely the fact that our lack of knowledge and technology level did not enable us to observe such 200 yrs ago. Now, I have no problems with agnosticism (in the sense of, I don't know if there is a Creator or not, I don't have evidence of one. But I am not going to absolutely say it's impossible. But it's pretty improbable in my book.) I believe such to be very rational. But this extreme form of atheism which constantly attacks the concept of an intelligent creator with religious fury. Something is extremely odd about it. Especially, at they constantly point to science as their philosophy and criticize the religious. But in truth, they are not being scientific they are stating a fact without evidence or observation to observe.

From a scientific standpoint, it may be the case there is no intelligent creator or designer of the universe. Though, as pointed above, the complexity and order seen in the universe and the programming like nature of DNA is observational evidence to put forth the possibility that such may be by design. As we see many similarities in concepts of that which we humans design.

However, to say God is unobservable and therefore can never be proved scientifically takes quite a leap of faith, IMHO. Is it possible that there could be evidence of a higher intelligence's involvement in our universe. And that we simply do not have the knowledge nor the technical abilities at this time to observe such occurrences? I mean, it was only 200 yrs ago that we had no means to really observe the atom. I am not asking for schools to teach christianity, or creationism. Merely, not to slam the door closed without warrant with regards to the evidence of design and order in our universe. And I find the atheists extremely hypocritical. Why? Because there is much discussion about what predated the big bang. Some theorize the universe repeatedly expands and contracts. There is no way to observe this as it predates our universe's existence. It is a theory based solely on the concept of an expanding universe and the observation of objects (such as a balloon) in our known universe expanding and contracting. However, such theories are equally unobservable as the theory of possible intelligent design influences. But no one is objecting to these being discussed within a classroom. Why?

The truth of the matter, is (IMHO), one of fear. Atheists fear that such a discussion may lead some to convert to theism. That it might be used by religious people to convert others to their faith. Why would atheists fear such? really....why? Unless there is an element akin to religion, an element of wanting to have people in their group. Just like a religion.

Sure, atheists point out the crimes against humanity in the name of religion. But they also fail to point out the kindness and charity done likewise. And they also casually leave out the crimes against humanity done in the name of science & evolution.

My point is, it's the dogmatic beliefs. From whereever they may rise from that pose the risk. Now, it is my belief that I have addressed matters from a very rational stand point. And I beIieve, that although I have not necessarily given proof, that I have justly provided rationale for at least keeping said door open. also believe that most will agree that in no way did I try to shove my faith down anyone's throats with the above content.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Now, in perspective, this post, IMHO...is a blatant attack to fuel the fire. Most of it mere opinion, and much of that far from the rational and judicious thought it makes itself out to be. If this were the first post, or even if I thought this post was for the purpose of discussion - I would not be so passionate. But this is not the first post. It's one of many similar inflammatory type posts. And I believe it to brew hatred or at the least antagonism and greatly mis-portray matters.

But it gets tiresome making above counter-point arguments and explanations regularly. Especially, when it seems a small handful who most propagate such. I am all for rational discussions. Heck, we had a very heated one on the death penalty. And in truth, I came away somewhat changed and questioning my stance. Sure, it was a heated discussion with passions on both sides. But the topic was one of discussion. Not mere smearing of a particularly demographic.

Which is exactly what I see this post by LegalBeagle to be and nothing more. Progagating antagonism and ignorance. And yes, I am frustrated in that I have made certain posts considered by many to be inflammatory. And a select few are always ready to label me as bigot, intolerant, etc.

Is not this post bigoted? and prejudiced? is not this post quite intolerant?

Had this post been a post against some of the brutal and extreme common practices in regions of the Islamic pre-dominance in middle-east or if I stated that there seems to be an issue with extremism in said region. That although extremists are everywhere, they are usually in very small numbers. But there seems to be a disproportionately high level of extremists in these regions. I am sure many would be very critical and likewise label numerous labels. I am just not quite understanding why one such statement can be considered inflammatory and the other not. It does not come across to me as judicious.

milo655321

Nikon D70

02/03/2006 02:28:31 PM · #52

Originally posted by theSaj:

- NAZI's based a lot of their crimes against Jews and humanity on the basis of evolutionary principles, sub-human/uber-human

Bunk psuedoscience!

Originally posted by Mein Kampf:

Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord. Mein Kampf(p. 60)

Originally posted by Aloph Hitler:

�My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God�s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before in the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice�. And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people�. When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom to-day this poor people is plundered and exploited.
- Adolf Hitler, in his speech on 12 April 1922

Originally posted by 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16:

For you, brothers, became imitators of God's churches in Judea, which are in Christ Jesus: You suffered from your own countrymen the same things those churches suffered from the Jews, who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to all men in their effort to keep us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved. In this way they always heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of God has come upon them at last.

Originally posted by theSaj:

- Ethnic slavery in America drew much support from evolution as justification

Nonsense and drivel! The Origin of Species was published in 1859. The U.S. Civil War started in 1861. Darwin was personally appalled by the practice of slavery and considered to be a progressive thinker regarding race for his time.

Originally posted by Exodus 21:20-21:

If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.

Originally posted by Leviticus 22:10-11:

]No one outside a priest's family may eat the sacred offering, nor may the guest of a priest or his hired worker eat it. But if a priest buys a slave with money, or if a slave is born in his household, that slave may eat his food.

Originally posted by Leviticus 25:44-46:

Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

Originally posted by theSaj:

- Pygmy African was put in a zoo as an exhibit demonstrating evolution

Your shocked that people abused science to support their own prejudices?

02/03/2006 02:32:34 PM · #53

Originally posted by dahved:

To theSaj,

Thanks for explaining some more. I still think that personal attacks will do nothing beneficial in trying to connect with someone. I'm all for getting at the truth, but it would be so much more effective and respectful to try and make comparisons and explanations without getting too emotional and personal. I know, we're all human, so we have emotions built in, but the challenge is really to try and see what the other's view is and why. Otherwise, I doubt you'll see anyone swayed to your belief system.

And you are quite right, and I can be over-zealous. The fact that I received notice regarding two delinquent parking tickets that I never actually commited has also left me in a rather heightened agitated and aggressive state.

I am, after all, only human.

So let me share what my faith does DO. If I did not believe what I do. I would not admit my wrong, nor would I feel obligated to bring myself back down to a more rational state as I have done. I was angered. Having faith doesn't mean one does not get angry nor that one does not fail. In fact, in my case, it is in part more of a recognition of that fact. And although I can be quick and speedy. I am also able to realize that likewise, some of those who I've been rubbed the wrong way by can likewise be so. And I can accept that fact and be graceful.

Though, often the case, it may take me a moment or a bit of redress to do so.

Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX

02/03/2006 02:32:59 PM · #54

haha nice post milo.

theSaj, aparently you believe in ID. I suggest you watch this public lecture and Q&A on ID and the Ohio trial about that just happend by biologist Dr. Kenneth Miller

mms://mv-helix1.cwru.edu/a/2006/biology/intelligent_design_384kbps_01_03_2006_1.wmv

Dr. Miller is well prepaired and a great public speaker. He is even quite funny.

RonB

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

02/03/2006 02:33:21 PM · #55

Originally posted by Prof_Fate:

Originally posted by sabphoto:
The Bible was written for all times all people. The situations may appear to have changed but the rules (laws) are still the same and can be applied to all situations, old and new.

The old testament was for the Jews. It is their law, and they sill abide by it.
Jesus gave us the new testament, and with that wiped away all the old laws.
If this is to be believed (if you are christian you do believe this or you're not one) then Jews are not going to be 'saved' when the final judgement comes. Umm..I think the Jews would differ on this.

SO we have one book and it is at odds with itself.

NOT. You need to READ before you WRITE.
The New Testament says ( in Paul's letter to the Romans ):

"For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile--the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!"
16 But not all the Israelites accepted the good news. For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed our message?" Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ."

And ( again, in Paul's letter to the Romans ):

"I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. Don't you know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah--how he appealed to God against Israel: "Lord, they have killed your prophets and torn down your altars; I am the only one left, and they are trying to kill me"? And what was God's answer to him? "I have reserved for myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal." So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace."

If there was at the time of the writing of the letter to the Romans a "remnant chosen by grace" then it may be fair to say that there is, even now, yet a remnant chosen by grace.

It is, however, safe to say that not ALL Jews will be saved. It is similarly safe to say that not all Christians will be saved ( as there are many who claim to be Christian, but are Christian in name only - they have not truly been "born again" ).

RonB

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

02/03/2006 02:38:14 PM · #56

Originally posted by MadMordegon:

Originally posted by sabphoto:
the words of the Bible came from God himself, they wrote what He gave them to write.

Can I see a source to back this claim please?

The source to back this claim is Scripture itself:

2 Timothy 3:16

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness"

To those who believe, it is sufficient. To those who will not, nothing would suffice.

sabphoto

Samsung Galaxy S8/S8+

02/03/2006 02:41:39 PM · #57

Originally posted by RonB:

Originally posted by MadMordegon:

Originally posted by sabphoto:
the words of the Bible came from God himself, they wrote what He gave them to write.

Can I see a source to back this claim please?

The source to back this claim is Scripture itself:

2 Timothy 3:16

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness"

To those who believe, it is sufficient. To those who will not, nothing would suffice.

Thank you Ron...I'm at work and only get to look here in-between customers. Bravo to your words and God Bless you

milo655321

Nikon D70

02/03/2006 02:43:06 PM · #58

Originally posted by RonB:

And a perfect example of circular reasoning wherein you assume to be correct what you are attempting to prove to be correct.

02/03/2006 02:45:13 PM · #59

Originally posted by RonB:

It is, however, safe to say that not ALL Jews will be saved. It is similarly safe to say that not all Christians will be saved ( as there are many who claim to be Christian, but are Christian in name only - they have not truly been "born again" ).

WTF does this mean? How is this relevant in the world we ACTUALLY live in? Can you prove this? How does thinking about these types of things help anyone? And what does saved mean?

Originally posted by RonB:

Ahh yes RonB.. circular logic, the idea that the bible proves the bible. How about some proof outside the bible, like something factual?

Originally posted by RonB:

To those who believe, it is sufficient. To those who will not, nothing would suffice.

This is nonsense. If Jesus came down tomorrow and turned lake Michigan into wine and then walked across it while proclaiming the bible is his word, I would definitely believe in the bible.

Message edited by author 2006-02-03 14:46:01.

02/03/2006 02:48:27 PM · #60

"Bunk psuedoscience!"

Actually, not....sure Hitler may have divine aspirations. But the philosophy was current throughout much of the NAZI philosophy. Or are we dismissing the concept of the uber-race?

Why do atheistic evolutionists need to dismiss history? I at least am rational and honest enough to admit the brutal wrongs done in the name of religion.

Nonsense and drivel! The Origin of Species was published in 1859. The U.S. Civil War started in 1861. Darwin was personally appalled by the practice of slavery and considered to be a progressive thinker regarding race for his time.

The idea of biological evolution has existed since ancient times, notably among Hellenists such as Epicurus and Anaximander, but the modern theory was not established until the 18th and 19th centuries, by scientists such as Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and Charles Darwin. While transmutation of species was accepted by a sizeable number of scientists before 1859, it was the publication of Charles Darwin's The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection which provided the first cogent mechanism by which evolutionary change could occur: his theory of natural selection. Darwin was motivated to publish his work on evolution after receiving a letter from Alfred Russel Wallace, in which Wallace revealed his own discovery of natural selection. As such, Wallace is sometimes given shared credit for the theory of evolution.

The concepts pre-dated Darwin. And during much of the debate before, during the

Read about Ota Benga, the Pygmy African placed in the zoo.
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ota_Benga

Regular publications on race and other claimed differences between people of different geographical locations began at least as early as the 18th century. [1700's] It was especially during the end of the 19th century, though, [1800's]
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism

Your shocked that people abused science to support their own prejudices?

Not at all...

I am just shocked that atheists are so shocked that people can abuse religion to support their own prejudices. And then apply such occurrences to religion as a whole. While at the same time dismissing the application of such occurrences to atheism & evolution as a whole. All in the name of superior rationality.

Does seem quite irrational and illogical to me.

- Saj

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

02/03/2006 02:51:02 PM · #61

This is nonsense. If Jesus came down tomorrow and turned lake Michigan into wine and then walked across it while proclaiming the bible is his word, I would definitely believe in the bible.

Gee....you're easy to persuade. I'd be quite questionative and want to know if it were indeed so. And maybe I'd wait for some scientific tests.

Then, I'd at least want to know if the wine was a Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, Shiraz, or what not?

polkop

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

02/03/2006 02:52:20 PM · #62

I have being watching it and I have always said the same

(No religion has any fact sorry but that is my veiw and if you dont agree please dont quote me and have a go because nothing will change the way I think)

02/03/2006 02:52:40 PM · #63

theSaj, are you saying that Hitler was a Christian and also believed in Darwinian evolution but then somehow equating what he did to his evolutionary believes even though he himself proclaimed (as milo showed) his heavy Christian beliefs?

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

02/03/2006 02:54:03 PM · #64

I'm a merlot man myself, perferably French organic.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

02/03/2006 02:58:06 PM · #65

Originally posted by RonB:

So if Dr. Suess wrote a book proclaiming to be the neatly rhyming word of God, he could just include a supporting limerick within the same book to back up his claim? Brilliant... the book is fact because the book says it's fact.

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

On a relative scale to God, you and I are undifferentiated from the mobster, serial killer, etc. We all fall short of the goal. We all fall short of the goal by a long way.

Same premise. We're all sinners because we're told we're all sinners. My 4 year old came home from "religious ed" and proudly recited what she had learned: "...forgive me for I have sinned..." Excuse me? She's 4 years old and not even capable of most sin, let alone proven guilty of it. Yeesh! If a Messiah appeared among us today, he (by sexist convention in many religions) would be told to recite the same thing.

milo655321

Nikon D70

Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX

02/03/2006 03:02:51 PM · #66

Originally posted by sabphoto:

See people making rules to fit themselves...no where does God say "Stone the sinners to death!"

I'd prefer the Holy Bible to speak for my argument in this matter.

Originally posted by Leviticus 20:10:

If a man commits adultery with another man's wife�with the wife of his neighbor�both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.

Originally posted by Leviticus 20:1-2:

The LORD said to Moses, "Say to the Israelites: 'Any Israelite or any alien living in Israel who gives any of his children to Molech must be put to death. The people of the community are to stone him.�

Originally posted by Leviticus 20:26-27:

You are to be holy to me because I, the LORD, am holy, and I have set you apart from the nations to be my own. " 'A man or woman who is a medium or spiritist among you must be put to death. You are to stone them; their blood will be on their own heads.' "

HighwayFlower

Konica Minolta DiMAGE Z5

02/03/2006 03:03:27 PM · #67

Originally posted by MadMordegon:

Originally posted by RonB:
It is, however, safe to say that not ALL Jews will be saved. It is similarly safe to say that not all Christians will be saved ( as there are many who claim to be Christian, but are Christian in name only - they have not truly been "born again" ).

WTF does this mean? How is this relevant in the world we ACTUALLY live in? Can you prove this? How does thinking about these types of things help anyone? And what does saved mean?

If you believe the world we ACTUALLY live in, was created by God, then of course this is relevant. If you believe that the world just burst out of the nothingness then it means absolutely nothing. It helps those who believe that by following the word of God, they will live for eternity with their creator. That is also what saved means.

It is your OPINION that these things mean nothing. However they mean a great deal to those who do believe them.

So we believe different things. That's all.

Ombra_foto

Olympus E-300 EVOLT

Olympus 40-150mm f/3.5-4.5 Zuiko Digital

02/03/2006 03:05:18 PM · #68

Originally posted by scalvert:

If a Messiah appeared among us today, he (by sexist convention in many religions) would be told to recite the same thing.

Actually he'd probably be jailed or shot, either for costing someone too much money or power.
He'd probably be safer with the athiests...lol

res0m50r

Canon EOS-30D

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

02/03/2006 03:11:00 PM · #69

Originally posted by MadMordegon:

I'm saying who cares what he believed... whether he is or isn't Christian.... the act of genocide isn't a Christian behavior and thus is action do not respresent a Christian faith.

I don't care what side claim him as a part of their group... I only hope that he did what was necessary to be saved before his death.

In context of Saj argument... logic and rationale show that no matter what group we are affiliated with we are definitely capable of anything, even things that are not inline with our own beliefs.

Message edited by author 2006-02-03 15:20:54.

sabphoto

Samsung Galaxy S8/S8+

02/03/2006 03:11:09 PM · #70

Originally posted by milo655321:

Originally posted by sabphoto:
See people making rules to fit themselves...no where does God say "Stone the sinners to death!"

I'd prefer the Holy Bible to speak for my argument in this matter.

Originally posted by Leviticus 20:10:
If a man commits adultery with another man's wife�with the wife of his neighbor�both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.

Originally posted by Leviticus 20:1-2:
The LORD said to Moses, "Say to the Israelites: 'Any Israelite or any alien living in Israel who gives any of his children to Molech must be put to death. The people of the community are to stone him.�

Originally posted by Leviticus 20:26-27:
You are to be holy to me because I, the LORD, am holy, and I have set you apart from the nations to be my own. " 'A man or woman who is a medium or spiritist among you must be put to death. You are to stone them; their blood will be on their own heads.' "

I stand corrected and should have said it differently, but it should also be noted that that is the old testament. Jesus changed this and would not allow the old ways like this to happen any longer.

RonB

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

02/03/2006 03:11:49 PM · #71

Originally posted by MadMordegon:

Just what it says. Not all Jews will be saved, but some will. Not all Christians will be saved, only those who are born again.

Originally posted by MadMordegon:

How is this relevant in the world we ACTUALLY live in?

Scripture quotes Christ as saying: "I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly."
Those who believe have the opportunity to have a more abundant life

Originally posted by MadMordegon:

Can you prove this?

Prove what? That some Jews will be saved and others not? That some Christians will be saved and others not? That anyone will be saved and someone not? No, I can't. Can you prove that anyone will NOT be saved?

Originally posted by MadMordegon:

How does thinking about these types of things help anyone?

It helped ME. That's sufficient for me.

Originally posted by MadMordegon:

And what does saved mean?

It means guaranteed a place in heaven when one physically dies.

Originally posted by MadMordegon:

Originally posted by RonB:
The source to back this claim is Scripture itself:

2 Timothy 3:16

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness"

Ahh yes RonB.. circular logic, the idea that the bible proves the bible. How about some proof outside the bible, like something factual?

If I could provide something "factual" enough to convince you, then there would be no need of faith. Scripture says ( Hebrews 11:6 ): "Without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him."

Originally posted by MadMordegon:

Originally posted by RonB:
To those who believe, it is sufficient. To those who will not, nothing would suffice.

This is nonsense. If Jesus came down tomorrow and turned lake Michigan into wine and then walked across it while proclaiming the bible is his word, I would definitely believe in the bible.

Scripture says ( John 10 ): "Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to them, "I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?" "We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."

You see, Miracles were not enough then, and would not be enough now. Those who refuse to believe will not believe even if miracles are evident.

02/03/2006 03:18:34 PM · #72

"theSaj, are you saying that Hitler was a Christian and also believed in Darwinian evolution but then somehow equating what he did to his evolutionary believes even though he himself proclaimed (as milo showed) his heavy Christian beliefs?"

No, I am saying two things:

a) Hitler mis-used a lot of beliefs sets

b) The NAZI's included more than just Hitler, there were christians in line with the NAZI's and there were scientists and evolutionists in line with the NAZI's.

My point being that these things tend to be inherent in the worst of human nature and not solely attributes of religion.

In other words, remove every religion and every religious believer from the world. I'll wager you $15,000 (about what I got in my IRA) that you will still have violence, still have hatred, and still have genocide.

Religion or science may be the excuse but it's hatred and self-serving that are the real motivators.

--------

Dr. Suess... Scalvert, how dare you profane the great Dr. Suess ;-)

BTW...one may believe 2 Timothy 3:16, but yes, I agree, it's not an argument for the unbeliever. Hence, though I may believe what I believe I seldom reference scripture or religion for the basis of my arguments thereof.

--------

"Actually he'd probably be jailed or shot, either for costing someone too much money or power. He'd probably be safer with the athiests...lol"

Well, most likely be given the electric chair. Especially after filling the 5,000 homes with heating oil. And it'd like be Pat Robertson beating him down as a heretic before the execution. Both the Democrats (Saducees) & Republicans (Pharisees) would call for his death.

Actually, I've long wanted to get a pendent of an electric chair to wear in place of the cross. The idea being, as a reminder that the cross was once a brutal execution method. The electric chair probably being our closet representative protrayal.

I kid you not, if anyone just re-did the Gospels flat out in modernism without trying to alter, or deface them. The liberals would probably be amazed how much they actually like Hesus. (He would be Hispanic right?)