@sohaibrocks1 Sadly, with many religions this is not possible. That is why atheist and other religious and non-religious people speak to each other.
An example a fundamental christian does not allow their daughter to be treated for a common but deadly disease. do you think we should allow them to live their lives according to doctrine or protect the child?
@BiblePreacher889 Unfortunately all of the Abrahamic religions are so entrenched in Bronze-Age ideas and morality that in order to be a modern, progressive person and be a member of one of its religions, you have to ignore, reinterpret, or reimagine a good portion of the holy texts.
i learned nothing from this post, please try to do a better job of making your point in futher posts. each and every time. more facts, less opinions, unless youre going for the religion formula
i learned nothing from this post, please try to do a better job of making your point in futher posts. each and every time. more facts, less opinions, unless youre going for the religion formula
i learned nothing from this post, please try to do a better job of making your point in futher posts. each and every time. more facts, less opinions, unless youre going for the religion formula
i learned nothing from this post, please try to do a better job of making your point in futher posts. each and every time. more facts, less opinions, unless youre going for the religion formula
I think back then people needed it but now we are smart enough to think for ourselves... but all religion is now is a source of money for greedy people..
Does religion improve our society? I would say "no", because religion does not irradicate sin, nor does it change the depraved nature of man. By religion, I mean moral rules, or the man made worship of self, or viewing God through the biased and presuppositional lense of personal opinion, desires and wants. So, religion does not improve society, and neither does athiesm.
@TheGeneralCritic In my comment, I qualified what I meant by religion. What I consider to be religion does not fit Christianity. However, I suppose in the generic sense of the word that non-Christians, churchianity, and religionist (those who are trying to earn favor with God), Christianity in accordance to their definition of Christianity would be a religion. As a Christian, my purpose in my worship of Christ is not to improve society. My purpose is to improve me, a wretched sinner.
@VeryImagesozo Then you're a selfish, immoral sycophant in thrall to a nonexistent psychopathic deity who has convinced you to feel shame for a crime He himself, if He existed, caused you to commit.
@TheGeneralCritic Actually, I am a wicked evil no good lousey sinner that is very grateful for God's grace...therefore, you were correct concerning the parts about being selfish and immoral.
@TheGeneralCritic After some consideration, I don't believe I have been clear concerning my statement. Here is clarification. I don't care about benefiting society, I care about men's souls. Society is not going to matter to us 1000 years from now, but the condition of our soul will. Society will always be depraved and human efforts to change that will always fail. God will do his work, rather it be divine judgment or divine grace. Also, I do appreciate your candor. Your not fake.
@VeryImagesozo What evidence do you have that souls exist? What evidence do you have that God exists? Can any of that evidence not be explained using naturalistic/materialistic mechanisms?
@TheGeneralCritic That depends on what you mean by evidence. If evidence means scientism, that is a fallacy. Scientism does not work because even the scientific method cannot be proven by science. Those who have been profoundly changed by the act of God in them, redeeming them, know the evidence, however, according to I Corinthians 2:14, it is impossible for an unbeliever to know the evidence because it is spiritually discerned. In other words, the narrow box of scientism cannot detect it.
@VeryImagesozo 1. There is no such thing as Scientism, you can't go making up words and expect me to take you seriously. 2. The scientific method is the reason you're saying it doesn't work in a nice house on an electrically-powered computer over the Internet right now. 3. Quoting Bible scripture at me does nothing because you haven't established that the Bible is to be trusted, much less that it is divinely inspired.
@yuo252 - I am Atheist too. I hope you notice that when I say "Atheists claim nothing", that that's referring to religious superstition. Atheists do not claim to absolutely know for sure that a god somewhere in this universe exists or has ever existed. If you do claim that, then you have no idea how to debate.
@SelfPromoting I could care less you're apologist panderings, I worship nothing and I follow nothing. In fact, you call what I've said as the ultimate optimism, with religion annihilated man cold pursue his greatest destiny, to live ones life without the subservience to some bullshit moral truth. Religion is a virus
Without doubt, one of the factors in the emergence of anti-religious ideas and a phalanx of deniers of God, has been the false teachings, the inadequacies and the intellectual perversions of the followers of some religions. The peculiarities and separate characteristics of each religion must, therefore, be individually examined when studying the reasons that have led men to adhere to that religion.
@1tabligh religions are all so vague and their interpretations so convoluted that anyone can take what they want from/see what they want in any religion.
This is why some who are 'faithful' to certain books fly planes into buildings in its name, while equally faithful adherents of the same book abhor such actions.
Religions aren't perverted or violent, people are. Religion is and always has been/will be 100% at the mercy of those who teach it.
@Bkkhngr81 Then how can the atheists delude themselve and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
@sparky7718 How could it be believed that matter should itself be the origin of millions of attributes and characteristics and thus be the equivalent of the purposeful, wise and all-knowing Creator?
How can it be supposed that belief in the existence of God is the acceptance of contradiction, whereas belief in the uncaused nature of an effect such as matter is not contradictory?
I am looking at a video showing the aftermath of a suicide bomber, there is blood spattered on every wall, bodies are mangled, torsos and heads are blown open exposing their insides. Yet one has to ask is "religion" of any benefit to humankind, nay it is the worst enslaver of the individual ever devised, it provides peace to some yet strife for many under dictatorial theocratic rule (The Middle east). It is a virus and needs to be exterminated.
Religion is the root cause of every war. Religion makes good people do evil. If there were no religions, this would be a far better world. People would value life more since this is the only life we have. People would be good to others because that is what you do in a civilized society.
If you didn't listen to the pope who is supposedly infallible, you would have used condoms/pill & not have been stuck in the situation in the first place. You can virtually eliminate unwanted pregnancy merely by properly using contraceptives.
I find it extremely amusing that Christians bitch about abortion, about fertilised eggs, foetuses and not being able to differentiate between those and a baby, calling themselves "pro-life" and that "life is sacred", these are the people who believe that god ordered the mass floodings, killings, rapings, ABORTIONS of enemy tribes etc.
@TurboDally People are going to hell for sinning. God often times in His grace and mercy, allows those who hate Him to continue living, for the sun to continue to rise on such mockers and blasphemers - He gives them the chance to repent (turn away from their sinning countless times daily). So it's hardly surprising God destroys people that outright curse Him and refuse to repent; refuse His forgiveness. Meanwhile God-haters make it nice and legal to kill 50,000,000 babies in past 30 years.
"God often times in His grace and mercy, allows those who hate Him to continue living"
Only for them to be sent to a place of eternal torment because they didn't tickle his ego?
"God-haters...kill 50,000,000 babies"
1) I don't hate god, I think your conception of god is manmade
2) Fertilised eggs are not babies, they neither have the neural network/body features to allow them. When the point occurs that the CNS develops - I think that to be a cutoff point for abortion.
@TurboDally -- I love it... God is merciful by allowing us Atheists to live. I don't want to say Hate Him since you can't hate something that doesn't exist. I just can't understand how anyone can worship a god that threatens to burn you in hell forever if you don't worship him. Insanity!
Psalms 127:3 Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.
Jeremiah 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.
the bible says plenty about life in the womb: that God knew us when we were still in the womb. That a baby is a gift from God, not a punishment for having sex that mankind has turned it into - a punishment that is to be killed.
Hosea 13:9 O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself; but in me is thine help.
God is a God of justice, and if an entire populations is going to blaspheme Him and refuse to repent when offered numerous chances, knowing the eventual, ultimate consequences for sinning against God *and* refusing to be forgiven for it, they are in effect destroying themselves and taking their children with them.
What did 50,000,000 babies do since 1973 to deserve being killed? Nothing.
David "angered" God? How about David slept with another man's wife, got her pregnant, then had the husband killed so that he wouldn't get in trouble for it. You minimize his murder, adultery and illigitimate baby as David "angered" God.
David's wives raped? No, his wives would leave him to be with another, and you call it being raped.
You want evidence of God? Ask yourself why you're either being dishonest about what the Bible says, or never checked to see what it really says.
I'm not diminishing David's crime, I'm asking why David's wives and child were punished for it instead of David.
BS, his wives were raped in public and his child was killed. "he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun." His wives didn't get a say in the matter nor did they leave him for another.
Fetuses are not the same as babies, and most animals are much, much more barbaric to their offspring, either totally abandoning them, or in many cases eating them.
@RichardMNixon You'll have to take that up with God. But as David later said, he would see His child again in heaven - so God pulled that child into heaven rather than be brought up in such a blasphemous, murderous environment.
And that anyone tries to justify killing their own baby as being ok, let alone "because some animals do far worse" is a testimony to how wicked we truly are.
@RichardMNixon Hello. No, I justified God calling that baby into heaven.
And I pointed out that most animals are not even barbaric to kill their own baby like we do, but you respond that there are some animals eat their own babies, hence it must be ok for us to kill our babies as well.
@RichardMNixon Hello. God sent that baby to heaven. Now you want to elevate us to God, justifying killing 50,000,000 of our own children? As I said, we only show how arrogant and wicked we truly are, and how much we deserve hell if we refuse to be forgiven, refuse to be sorry, and refuse to stop doing it.
I don't believe in god, heaven or hell. Therefore I think you are lying/making it up. Did you know what the crusaders said when they cleared land? "Kill all, let god decide the good from the bad".
I do have a interesting scenario you may want to consider. You're in a burning building and you have a choice:
1) Save the fridge of...100 fertilised eggs/embryos
@TurboDally Hello. The crusaders, and for that matter the catholic church, are not following God. God does not know them. As Jesus said, many will call Him Lord on the day of judgment and He will profess "I never knew you."
You can choose to not believe in gravity, but it will not change the results of you walking off a building.
Your choice involves the death of human life in either case, so it's a sad choice.
I have an interesting scenario everyone needs to consider. You made the choice to have sex and risked a child being conceived. She gets pregnant. Do you:
1) Allow the human being to live long enough to be adopted?
2) Kill him or her because you couldn't be bothered?
For 100,000,000 parents in the past few decades alone, they chose to kill their child, all in the name of they don't believe there's a God they'll be accountable to whether they claim to believe or not.
1) You did not ask my question. Since I have enough honesty, I'll go and answer yours anyway.
"X gets pregnant..."
Fertilised eggs are not human beings. Therefore it is best to get an abortion asap. If you delay it, the fertilised egg develops into foetus, then a baby in which case you can not abort as it has become a human being. Your misrepresentation of my view & that of others makes me doubt that you really believe in god at all, dishonesty in a Christian? Pah! Answer my Q.
Meanwhile, why have we made it nice and legal for parents to kill their own children if they couldn't be bothered raising him or her, over 50,000,000 babies killed by their own parents in the past few decades alone? Even most animals are not that barbaric towards their own offspring.
See we've all spent a lifetime sinning. Justice must be satisfied. God commands us to repent now while we're alive and turn to Christ, putting our faith in Him for forgiveness. Do we do this? No, we *refuse* God's forgiveness, *refuse* to repent, and continue to sin. If we refuse to repent we will all likewise perish.
Jesus said
Luke 13.3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.
We can't force anything - we can only offer the truth of God' s Word - the rest is between you and God.
No origins beliefs belong in the science classroom, including the fish to man version of evolution, which is unobservable and unable to be shown in a single test case.
And no, once we're dead God's mercy will run out and we will now face the judgment for our lifetime of sinning and REFUSING to be forgiven for it.
Intelligence is no measure for living a good life - use wisdom as a measure instead - Danish are fantastic people, not because of their intelligence but, because of their sensitivity. Behind religions, atheism etc.... behind any system and behind intelligence is the the important of sensitivity to ourself and others - that's wisdom ...
Intelligence is no measure for living a good life - use wisdom as a measure instead - Danish are fantastic people, not because of their intelligence but, because of their sensitivity. Behind religions, atheism etc.... behind any system and behind intelligence is the the important of sensitivity to ourself and others - that's wisdom ...
@benthemiester Oh so there is "scientists" and there is "knowledgable scientists"? So what does the plain scientist do for a living, stand there with a beaker in one hand, a calculator in the other, and a question mark above there head? Looks like you are the one doing the bullshitting here. LOL
You might want to look at statement again. I'm not even sure what your point is. Don't know what you mean by plane scientist, I know it means something in your head but not mine.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The question is easy to answer just compare the countries like N Korea, China, Cuba, these are countries that are officially atheist. You might not have freedom of speech but at least you'll be living in an atheist society. I don't see to many atheist jumping on an airplane and heading for any of those. Maybe u should count your blessings. No pun intended. Im not more intelligent..... I'm not more intelligent. I'm more knowledgeable. He's more knowledgeable than Einstein? Very amusing. Classic.
just by readin the video title "Does Religion Improve Our Society?" made me laugh
religion was in our society and all we got was witch hunts, killing muslims, technology not really improving that much in 800 years, killing atheists in the western world
come on took over 800 years just to prove the world was round, without religion maybe we only needed 200 years ro prove it
RELIGION made us have internet 2009 and not in the year 1700
ignore the bible? So we should ignore the comandsments of not stealing, not commiting adultry, refraining from, lust greed envy murder, seeking wisdom etc... Please tell me how my question is flawed......yes i guess its bigoted to preach those things in the world. 2 dudes marrying eachother is not natural and does not produce life tell me one person you know thats a product of homosexuality.
When it comes to stealing, murdering and so forth none of those moral ideas are original to the Bible and they are part of most moral philosophies.
Evidence points towards homosexuality being fully natural and even if it was unnatural that wouldn't make it wrong.
Whether a relationship brings forth ofspring or not has little to do with whether it should be considered moral or correct. Would it be wrong for two straight people to marry eachother if they did not intend to have children?
Just like murdering your own baby is now part of most "moral philosophies" world-wide. Well, the ones that reject God's commandments, that is. As is lying, having sex whenever people want and worse. Mankind has only shown that they have very few morals and are quite wicked when left to their own devices. One has only to note we've murdered almost 50 million babies since 1973 in the name of convenience. No, real morals have come from God and the Bible. We see what happens when people ignore it.
The Bible quite frankly says very little on abortion so one could hardly refer to that as biblical morality. And anyway, what punishment do you think the law should give to the women who do decide to abort their fetus?
You dont take the time to think. Youre thinking late term abortions. Its not like women want to kill babies. You need an abortion after your immune system kills the baby which is contrary to a religous belief. Plus many christians oppoese sex ed and condom/prevention. This is stupid because wether or not its their, teens will screw so atleast they can prevent a pregnancy, imagine.
No, the over 50 million abortions since 1973 are far from late term abortions. So as long as you don't "want" to murder, that makes murder ok? They were forced to have an abortion? Hardly.
Yes the mother can die if the child has already died by the immune system. I used to hate abortions, and I still admit I cringe but you have look from an unbiased view. Late terms, I think are horrible, unless the child has already died. Ok, the arguments are "When does life begin?". Is at conception? or what? But you have to speak to a doctor about that.
When does life begin? Don't need a doctor about that - in the vast majority of cases, after conception when nothing goes wrong, you have a human being that will come forth from the womb and live to be 80-100 years old. Life clearly begins at conception.
Psalms 90:1-2 .. Lord, thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations. 2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.
no it doesn't - life begins long before conception as both the egg and the sperm are alive. conception creates a situation in which healthy human life is possible, but by no means a guaranteed thing (as you seem to be implying).
Human life begins at conception, which is the point. And unless something happens after conception, a 80-100 year old is always the result. Just like as long as the baby doesn't die in the first few years of life, an 80-100 year old is the result.
no, the potential for human life begins at conception...considering that about 50% of all fertilized eggs are naturally aborted I think you are being quite generous with the "is always the result" statement. then if you lump ontop of that number all the still births, tubular pregnancies, and the like....having a living, healthy baby be the result of a sperm and an egg getting it on is actually not "always the result"...in fact it is probably only "sometimes the result".
So using your logic, even a baby one month old is only "potential" since such a baby can also die from natural causes. If nothing goes wrong, a baby will continue to live to be 80-100 year old human being. If nothing goes wrong, after conception, a human being will continue to live to be 80-100 years old, nine months of that time being spent in the womb.
and using your logic women are little more than breeding stock, used and discarded my men who need to control everything and everyone around them. furthermore, using your logic, life is sacred so long as it remains within the uterus as after it emerges it means little.
So that's the real issue for you: you want to be able to kill your own baby so that you don't feel "controlled" by men. You're willing to murder an innocent baby to get over your own issues with others. =( You know everything you need to know - doesn't matter how you justify it to anyone else; God is the one you'll have to say "But men were trying to control me, so I had to kill my baby to keep that from happening" - ask yourself if you really believe that's going to end well.
if the christian god does actually exist, according to his own text he has no problems with wholesale slaughter of innocents, so I'm not all that worried about him. in fact I would probably be a favorite of his (assuming I partake in abortions).
as for the kill my own baby comment, you are a fucktard....nobody has claimed that and as such I won't address your strawman.
He does have a problem with it - but He can't force people to not blaspheme Him and commit such atrocities, which is the point.
Meanwhile what did the 50 MILLION babies do to the mothers that murdered them? Nothing. Yet that doesn't seem to bother you in the least. Double standard. =(
well some of them were genetically disabled such that they would not have survived, some were positioned such that further development would lead to the death of the mother, some were pretty much dead already, some were unwanted...
and the christian god ordered those massacres and rapes and such...so I don't think that he has any problem with them. In fact, I think that he rather likes that sort of stuff...
Some? Try less than 1%. We're talking 50 MILLION babies murdered here by their own parents, annoyed at the consequences of having too much sex.
And no, now you're making things up that you don't understand. People that were killed were killed because they blasphemed God. If you want to blaspheme our holy and righteous creator, take your chances. Meanwhile the 50 MILLION babies did nothing to their parents or God, but were murdered nonetheless. Barbaric, sick society we've regressed into.
too much sex? are you nuts? there is no such thing as too much sex.
your god is a murderous bastard - and if we were supposedly created in his image then we too should be murderous bastards, so what is your issue with killing babies?
as for barbaric, sick societies, check out the bronze age culture described in the Bible....if you are honest, you have to admit that we are anything but that. that is if you are honest.....
Bronze age culture parents didn't murder over 50 million of their very own babies over 30 years because they believe they were merely punishment for having sex. And no, you're the only one labeling God, then pretending He made us just like your false label.
again, who has claimed that babies are aborted because they are a "punishment for having sex"? put the straw down and stay on point.
the only reason why Bronze age people didn't murder 50 million of their own babies is that there were not 50 million to murder...read your bible...if god had had that many targets to shoot at, it would have been a blood bath. Considering his consideration for people, I think that it is a good thing that human population was low back then.
Oh I agree - my point was more to the fact that there were not 50million people to kill, and not that it was not a bloodbath. God-fearing people culled a large percentage of the population in order to show their love for their peace-loving god....sad.
And meanwhile 50 million babies killed by their own parents because they couldnt be bothered allowing him or her to live long enough to be adopted. Such a charming people with no god.
Those of us who refuse to stop blaspheming God, refuse to stop killing their own babies to avoid the invoncenience of allowing him or her to be adopted will get exactly what we're asking for: an eternity of separation from God.
Yeah, now only if Christians would stop forcing themselves on the rest of society an injecting their nonsense into science class and people's everyday life, then we'd have that separation already. But I guess for now we'll have to wait until we're dead to get rid of this imagined lunatic god-figure.
But as far as beliefs go, Darwin said there'd be billions of intermediate forms - showing how reptiles for example evolved eventually into giraffes. They've barely found a handful of supposed intermediate forms that are under contention of being intermediate forms at all. Many intermediate forms are faked, but only tossed out after being touted worldwide as a "missing link".
But it's all irrelevant - they're all just beliefs anyway about that which is unobservable, untestable and unverifiable
So I take it you're unaware that this is what evolutionists believe in - that populations of fish, over generations, eventually evolved into hippos, eagles, giraffes, and human beings, along with pretty much everything else.
Its not until God opens your eyes and ears so you can see and hear that a person starts thinking for themselves and see how absurd it is to believe populations of tiny fish can evolve, over generations, into hippos, giraffes, eagles and human beings. Its those who are lost that cannot think for themselves, who find it impossible to question the belief that all those animals, including human beings, evolved from populations of tiny fish over generations once upon a time.
Feel free to back up your claim and point out exaclty what was wrong about what I said, along with the correction. But of course, they never do - they just like to say "you're wrong" and run away. =/
I really don't have the time or space on this forum to give you the equivalent of a college level study of modern biology. But if you'd actually like to learn more about it, you could try reading Only A Theory by Ken Miller or Why Evolution is True by Jerry Coyne. Both do a much better job explaining how it works than a YouTube post with a 500 character limit.
I already have a college level study of modern biology - and that's the ridiculous things evolutionists (fish to man version, mind you) believe in. You need only point out which detail of what I said is supposedly wrong, and what's the correction. Oddly enough, no one ever gets beyond "you're wrong", so your reaction is hardly surprising and typical. The fact is, what I said is exactly what they claim, so your inability to correct it is also hardly surprising - never backing up their claim.
Well, if you actually took college level biology, then the mechanics of Darwinian Evolution ought to have been covered fairly well, so unless you went to a substandard school or weren't paying attention, you should have a passing familiarity with the evolutionary chain that led from the first chordates to modern mammals. But fish didn't directly turn into humans or any other mammals- some fish evolved into primitive amphibians, then reptiles, then mammals. But that doesn't count, right?
I never said they turned *directly*. What I said was accurate: populations of fish evolved, *over generations*, into giraffes, hippos, eagles, human beings (so they say) - the fact that got there via amphibians, then reptiles and so on doesn't change the accuracy of what I said, except your false claim I ever said "directly."
So then we agree - they believe populations of fish evolved over generations into hippos, giraffes, hippos and human beings (but you add via amphibians then reptiles)
Funny, but you seem to be the one tossing insults.
But since you insist, your description is flawed largely because it's too brief, none of the species you list are directly evolved from fish, they're evolved from more ancient mammals (and birds)- go back far enough and you eventually cross into reptiles, then amphibians, THEN fish. And it's not belief, it's a theory backed by scientific evidence from paleontology, genetics, and embryology. Belief is for things we can't test for, IE- religion
Yes they believe populations of fish evolved over generations into hippos, eagles, giraffes and humans via amphibians, reptiles and mammals - this doesn't change the truth of the statement.
No, it's a belief on what the evidence means to them, and what they want it to mean to everyone else. The belief itself: impossible to observe and impossible to test/verify - one can only believe in it. Not science, but religion by definition you point out.
We can test for the various principles of evolution. In fact, we have done so and continue to do so. Like I said, look it up.
And you want to know what the insult is? It's you coming in here, shouting "you're wrong" at everything, and failing to provide any meaningful statements to back up your opinion, then making your snarky little comments.
No, they can't show a test of it happening. They can only test by saying "do you believe what we believe when looking at these fossils?" and they think that's a test. The belief itself is impossible to test. Not science.
So saying "you're wrong" is an insult? (Actually you dishonestly say I shouted it, when I didnt even use all caps). You're stretching it to say the least.
Saying "you're wrong" and "that doesn't count" (which is what you've done with everything I've posted) over and over without offering any sort of evidence to back up your claim is being childish and insulting. And I noticed that you've completely ignored the other two branches of science I've listed, as well.
And here's how the fossil test goes- we look at two groups, reptiles and mammals, and we think that one gave rise to the other. So we find out what geologic layer we can find very primitive mammals in, and the layer we can find no mammals at all in. Now we predict that if evolution is correct, we should be able to look in the intermediate layer to find fossils with both reptilian and mammalian features. And what do you know, we do. And we keep doing this, and the results are always the same.
And when we try to compare organisms genetically, we get similar results.
It's the same principle as our ability to say with complete certainty that Pluto has an orbit of 247.99 Earth years despite it having been discovered only 80 years ago or how we can convict a man of murder despite not having actually seen him do it via forensic evidence. The natural world operates under testable, linear principles (ignoring Quantum Physics, which is outside the scope of this argument).
Genetics: they believe DNA similarity means creatures evolved from each other, then when they find creatures with similar DNA they think this proves they evolved from each other. Circular reasoning.
Show a population of [fruit flies] evolving over generations into animals that are no longer [fruit flies] at all, and show how similar their DNA is - that's science. But of course they can do no such thing as it's only a belief that has never happened in the entire recorded history of humanity.
So you believe mammals evolved from reptiles, you believe this means they would show up ijn the geological layers a certain way, and then you believe you're looking at an intermediate form because they believe it is, and all these beliefs are then passed off as science. Sorry, but that's not science at all.
Show a test of populations of [fruit flies] evolving over generations, into animals that are no longer [fruit flies] at all. No matter what animal, tests show this *never* happens.
// none of the species you list are directly evolved from fish
And you're being dishonest - I said over generations - I never said they evolved directly. But they still believe ultimately populations of fish evolved, over generations (via whatever else they imagine) into hippos, giraffes, eagles and human beings. More bizarre than most mythology or science fiction ever written.
We've already seen species evolve in response to external pressures- or were you unaware of pathogens that are becoming resistant to antibiotics? And that's just the tip of the iceberg as far as what we've seen happen with bacteria (they're easy to study for this because they reproduce so quickly). Why don't you actually go out and read about it, like I first suggested?
No, we've only seen populations of rats adapt over generations but remain rats. Populations of fruit flies adapt over generations, but remain fruit flies. Never the fish to man version: populations of rats adapt over generations into animals that are clearly no longer rats at all.
Please cite a single version of the fish to man version of evolution. No one can.
Like I've said before, you really need to study evolution a bit harder, because your idea is incorrect. Evolutionary theory is based on creatures adapting, not spontaneously shifting into something else. The boundaries between species are a lot blurrier than they used to be, and as a matter of fact, we remain every type of organism that every one of our ancestors was. That's right, we're actually both really really specialized fish. Don't believe me? Look it up.
And you continue to use the same, tired arguments that have been shown to be wrong, then cry "that doesn't count" on everything. I've played your little game, but I've got better things to do than continue to dance with a creationist troll who keeps using ignorance as evidence.
"Think for yourself?" I find it interesting that you believe people who read books that profess belief in God somehow means they do not think for themselves, and that people who don't believe in God read books that profess God doesn't exist, and that somehow shows they think for themselves. Nothing could be further from the truth. -->
Our society is getting worse and worse. More and more wrong things are getting legal. God gave humans the ten commandments to follow. It shouldn't surprise me if about twenty years pedofiles get accepted in our society. Our society needs rules how to behave.
Actually, no. Stupid rules that society no longer needs are getting dumped or questioned because the reason for why breaking it's bad to break them has not been demonstrated or were based on pure religious beliefs. That's the case of gay marriage. You can't force your belief upon others and order that they live by what you believe. The ten commandments are USELESS. The majority of them is just god and his gigantic ego. The only useful ones for society are, don't steal, and don't kill.
Do you realy think that do not steal and do not kill is the only one useful. How about do not lie. And do not be jealous. And do not commit adultery. I want you to read all the ten commandements and tell me what is wrong with each one of them.
Don't lie, and do not commit adultery, yes they are good, but they are not that much necessary to society. There's nothing in the 10 commandments about not being jealous. Don't worship other gods before me, not necessary for society, and if you think otherwise, please provide a TANGIBLE example of something bad that could happen directly because of breaking this rule. Keep the sabath as a holy day, nobody keeps that commandment anymore, and what happened? NOTHING.
Jesus said that the sabath was made for the humans. A resting day every seven day. Not only does humans need to sleep every night but also a resting day. I have heard that in the sovjet people worked for eight days then one resting day. The people was getting sick out of working so much.
There's nothing in the 10 commandments, or the book of the laws, OR THE ENTIRE BIBLE about pedophilia being wrong.I don't think it even mentions it. Please, when you respond to this, don't say; "oh yes there is..." don't be lazy and provide an example. Curious, if you get your morals from the Bible, and there's nothing in the Biblie about pedophilia being wrong...how do you know it's wrong?
No i don't find anything in the bible about pedophilia but having sex with someone other than your wife is adultery. I don't find anything about the lowest age for marriage. They married when they where adults.
What do you think is suddenly legal now that could be compared or be shown to lead to pedophilia? You can't. You're just fearmongering, you're a terrorist.
Have you ever worked on a sunday? I don't mean gone to work, I mean cooked or cleaned your house? That's a violation of the ten commandments, chief.
About 60 years ago homosexuals was considerd perverse and sick( which is true). Then it slowly got accepted and legall and even gay marriage. Same thing could happen to pedophilia. Then some kids voluntary have sex with adults. And this gets more usual. Then some people say: if kids wants to have sex with adults then it should be legal. I bet people that lived before didn't guess that our society would change so much. If you saw 50 years in to the future you would get disgusted by what you saw.
About 60 years ago, black people couldn't be in the same bar as white people. We learn a lot from the rights movements of both female and african americans.Society has evolved, and we learnt that it was wrong to segregate people because of their race or sexual orientation, FREEDOM FOR EVERYONE MEANS FREEDOM FOR EVERYONE. If you wanna think homosexuality is wrong, go ahead, but it's nothing more than your opinion and you can't force other people to live by what you believe.
Saying something is true doesn't make it so. Comparing pedophilia to homosexuality makes you a bigot. Have fun stoning people for working on the sabbath.
I guarantee in 50 years when gay marriage is legal everywhere, people will look back and say "killbill 402 wasn't a 'true christian' because 'true christians' love their neighbors."
True christians follow the bible. Homosexuality is wrong. Not only is it wrong, God say it is a detestable sin. A word that is also used for the sin: sex with animals.
True christians follow the bible? So if you catch someone working on the sabbath, you stone them to death? You think it's ok to beat your slave to death as long as he survives at least a day after the beating? If one of your friends told you he wasn't a christian you would immediately kill him?
Don't forget shellfish. Shellfish are also abomination.
I don't have to read it because your question is flawed. Being a humanist doesn't mean you should live the opposite life as described in the bible, it means you should ignore the bible. I do what I think is right, regardless of what some ancient bigots imagined their God thought was right.
Child molesters hurt children. Two dudes marrying does not. Straw man.
Yeaah, then you're not a true christian, in fact, nobody is. Read Leviticus 20, the most common phrase there will be "put to death." Slept with another woman, put to death, slept with an animal, put to death, cursed your father, put to death. Since you are not a murderer, are you a true christian? I know what you're going to say;"well that was then, we don't have to do that now" yeah, cherry pick what you want to obey and then invent some excuse not to obey the other, like a good christian.
When I was a Christian it was very simple to me. God makes it clear in the Bible, it is wrong, period. One day I wondered, what if this isn't the word of god? I mean, there are so many barbaric laws in these books, a god couldn't possibly have ever condoned this! Then I realized that other people have different beliefs, different ideologies, and it wasn't my right to shove the Bible in their face and tell them that what they do is wrong and they had to live by what I believed! THAT'S WRONG!
loving your neighbor and agreeing with a perverted lifestyle are 2 diffrent things. Do you love child molester, i mean certainly they didnt choose that life they cant help their feelings, so why not just go with they flow right if it feels good do it.
Religion is a way of life. Live your life and let others live theirs. The end.
sohaibrocks1 2 months ago
@sohaibrocks1 Sadly, with many religions this is not possible. That is why atheist and other religious and non-religious people speak to each other.
An example a fundamental christian does not allow their daughter to be treated for a common but deadly disease. do you think we should allow them to live their lives according to doctrine or protect the child?
NathanWubs 2 months ago
@sohaibrocks1 Unfortunately many irrational religious fundamentalists continually try to impose their sense of morality on everyone.
tranquility4all 2 months ago
@sohaibrocks1 the problem is that theist don't always let everyone live their lives. like opposing gay marriage
floriswazza 2 months ago
@BiblePreacher889 Unfortunately all of the Abrahamic religions are so entrenched in Bronze-Age ideas and morality that in order to be a modern, progressive person and be a member of one of its religions, you have to ignore, reinterpret, or reimagine a good portion of the holy texts.
TheGeneralCritic 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i learned nothing from this post, please try to do a better job of making your point in futher posts. each and every time. more facts, less opinions, unless youre going for the religion formula
tvanwye 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i learned nothing from this post, please try to do a better job of making your point in futher posts. each and every time. more facts, less opinions, unless youre going for the religion formula
tvanwye 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i learned nothing from this post, please try to do a better job of making your point in futher posts. each and every time. more facts, less opinions, unless youre going for the religion formula
tvanwye 4 months ago
i learned nothing from this post, please try to do a better job of making your point in futher posts. each and every time. more facts, less opinions, unless youre going for the religion formula
tvanwye 4 months ago
I think back then people needed it but now we are smart enough to think for ourselves... but all religion is now is a source of money for greedy people..
roguecj310 9 months ago
Does religion improve our society? I would say "no", because religion does not irradicate sin, nor does it change the depraved nature of man. By religion, I mean moral rules, or the man made worship of self, or viewing God through the biased and presuppositional lense of personal opinion, desires and wants. So, religion does not improve society, and neither does athiesm.
VeryImagesozo 11 months ago
@VeryImagesozo Christianity is a religion too, unless there was a memo I missed.
TheGeneralCritic 4 months ago
@TheGeneralCritic In my comment, I qualified what I meant by religion. What I consider to be religion does not fit Christianity. However, I suppose in the generic sense of the word that non-Christians, churchianity, and religionist (those who are trying to earn favor with God), Christianity in accordance to their definition of Christianity would be a religion. As a Christian, my purpose in my worship of Christ is not to improve society. My purpose is to improve me, a wretched sinner.
VeryImagesozo 4 months ago
@VeryImagesozo Then you're a selfish, immoral sycophant in thrall to a nonexistent psychopathic deity who has convinced you to feel shame for a crime He himself, if He existed, caused you to commit.
TheGeneralCritic 4 months ago
@TheGeneralCritic Actually, I am a wicked evil no good lousey sinner that is very grateful for God's grace...therefore, you were correct concerning the parts about being selfish and immoral.
VeryImagesozo 4 months ago
@VeryImagesozo You're better than your god. Stop feeling sorry for a condition you never had in the first place.
TheGeneralCritic 4 months ago
@TheGeneralCritic After some consideration, I don't believe I have been clear concerning my statement. Here is clarification. I don't care about benefiting society, I care about men's souls. Society is not going to matter to us 1000 years from now, but the condition of our soul will. Society will always be depraved and human efforts to change that will always fail. God will do his work, rather it be divine judgment or divine grace. Also, I do appreciate your candor. Your not fake.
VeryImagesozo 4 months ago
@VeryImagesozo What evidence do you have that souls exist? What evidence do you have that God exists? Can any of that evidence not be explained using naturalistic/materialistic mechanisms?
TheGeneralCritic 4 months ago
@TheGeneralCritic That depends on what you mean by evidence. If evidence means scientism, that is a fallacy. Scientism does not work because even the scientific method cannot be proven by science. Those who have been profoundly changed by the act of God in them, redeeming them, know the evidence, however, according to I Corinthians 2:14, it is impossible for an unbeliever to know the evidence because it is spiritually discerned. In other words, the narrow box of scientism cannot detect it.
VeryImagesozo 4 months ago
@VeryImagesozo 1. There is no such thing as Scientism, you can't go making up words and expect me to take you seriously. 2. The scientific method is the reason you're saying it doesn't work in a nice house on an electrically-powered computer over the Internet right now. 3. Quoting Bible scripture at me does nothing because you haven't established that the Bible is to be trusted, much less that it is divinely inspired.
TheGeneralCritic 4 months ago
@333skrapkilla333 I think I have a troll on my hands (you) Also learn to type 114 isn't anorexic 109 is
yuo252 11 months ago
why are all athiest fatt XD
333skrapkilla333 1 year ago
@333skrapkilla333 Why are all Christians that are black fat and annoying? There not Your just Ignorant and a Stereotyper.
yuo252 1 year ago
@yuo252 not really some are buff and thier wifes are hot athiest dont have any just thier hands
333skrapkilla333 1 year ago
@333skrapkilla333 You do understand I'm married? So was Einstein,Richard dawkins,and a few million other atheists whom are married.
yuo252 11 months ago
@yuo252 yeah with a fat bitch XD
333skrapkilla333 11 months ago
@333skrapkilla333 No Untrue My Wife is 114 5,6 Quite thin. Richard Dawkins's Wife is 152 5,10 Einstiens wife is 149 5,12.
yuo252 11 months ago
@yuo252 so shes anorexic wow your a sicc motherfucker
333skrapkilla333 11 months ago
Why does atheism claim science?
loroanno 1 year ago
@loroanno - Atheists claim nothing.
Critic863 1 year ago
@Critic863 I am a Atheist i Claim i am Alive and me typing right now proves that. A Claim and Evidence for my claim.
yuo252 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@yuo252 - I am Atheist too. I hope you notice that when I say "Atheists claim nothing", that that's referring to religious superstition. Atheists do not claim to absolutely know for sure that a god somewhere in this universe exists or has ever existed. If you do claim that, then you have no idea how to debate.
Critic863 1 year ago
@loroanno We Don't Claim it we use it.
yuo252 1 year ago
@SelfPromoting I could care less you're apologist panderings, I worship nothing and I follow nothing. In fact, you call what I've said as the ultimate optimism, with religion annihilated man cold pursue his greatest destiny, to live ones life without the subservience to some bullshit moral truth. Religion is a virus
viletree 1 year ago
@viletree Religion is a virus
____
Without doubt, one of the factors in the emergence of anti-religious ideas and a phalanx of deniers of God, has been the false teachings, the inadequacies and the intellectual perversions of the followers of some religions. The peculiarities and separate characteristics of each religion must, therefore, be individually examined when studying the reasons that have led men to adhere to that religion.
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh religions are all so vague and their interpretations so convoluted that anyone can take what they want from/see what they want in any religion.
This is why some who are 'faithful' to certain books fly planes into buildings in its name, while equally faithful adherents of the same book abhor such actions.
Religions aren't perverted or violent, people are. Religion is and always has been/will be 100% at the mercy of those who teach it.
Bkkhngr81 1 year ago 2
@Bkkhngr81 Then how can the atheists delude themselve and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh Atheists don't claim anything, religions do. Your question is a false accusation in the form of a question. Nice try. Fail.
sparky7718 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@sparky7718 How could it be believed that matter should itself be the origin of millions of attributes and characteristics and thus be the equivalent of the purposeful, wise and all-knowing Creator?
How can it be supposed that belief in the existence of God is the acceptance of contradiction, whereas belief in the uncaused nature of an effect such as matter is not contradictory?
1tabligh 1 year ago
I am looking at a video showing the aftermath of a suicide bomber, there is blood spattered on every wall, bodies are mangled, torsos and heads are blown open exposing their insides. Yet one has to ask is "religion" of any benefit to humankind, nay it is the worst enslaver of the individual ever devised, it provides peace to some yet strife for many under dictatorial theocratic rule (The Middle east). It is a virus and needs to be exterminated.
viletree 1 year ago
Religion is the root cause of every war. Religion makes good people do evil. If there were no religions, this would be a far better world. People would value life more since this is the only life we have. People would be good to others because that is what you do in a civilized society.
don28104 1 year ago
Does Religion Improve Our Society? thats up to us to decide.
deepengrave 1 year ago
all the atheists in prison aren't true atheists! :D Saying that is just as stupid as saying that the Christians in prison aren't true Christians
sanman312 1 year ago
X gets pregnant. Do you:
1) Allow the human being to live long enough to be adopted?
2) Kill him or her because you couldn't be bothered?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you didn't listen to the pope who is supposedly infallible, you would have used condoms/pill & not have been stuck in the situation in the first place. You can virtually eliminate unwanted pregnancy merely by properly using contraceptives.
TurboDally 1 year ago
I find it extremely amusing that Christians bitch about abortion, about fertilised eggs, foetuses and not being able to differentiate between those and a baby, calling themselves "pro-life" and that "life is sacred", these are the people who believe that god ordered the mass floodings, killings, rapings, ABORTIONS of enemy tribes etc.
TurboDally 1 year ago
@TurboDally People are going to hell for sinning. God often times in His grace and mercy, allows those who hate Him to continue living, for the sun to continue to rise on such mockers and blasphemers - He gives them the chance to repent (turn away from their sinning countless times daily). So it's hardly surprising God destroys people that outright curse Him and refuse to repent; refuse His forgiveness. Meanwhile God-haters make it nice and legal to kill 50,000,000 babies in past 30 years.
ForumLight 1 year ago
@ForumLight
"God often times in His grace and mercy, allows those who hate Him to continue living"
Only for them to be sent to a place of eternal torment because they didn't tickle his ego?
"God-haters...kill 50,000,000 babies"
1) I don't hate god, I think your conception of god is manmade
2) Fertilised eggs are not babies, they neither have the neural network/body features to allow them. When the point occurs that the CNS develops - I think that to be a cutoff point for abortion.
TurboDally 1 year ago
@TurboDally -- I love it... God is merciful by allowing us Atheists to live. I don't want to say Hate Him since you can't hate something that doesn't exist. I just can't understand how anyone can worship a god that threatens to burn you in hell forever if you don't worship him. Insanity!
don28104 1 year ago
Psalms 127:3 Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.
Jeremiah 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.
ForumLight 1 year ago
@thehabbadasher:
the bible says plenty about life in the womb: that God knew us when we were still in the womb. That a baby is a gift from God, not a punishment for having sex that mankind has turned it into - a punishment that is to be killed.
ForumLight 1 year ago
@ForumLight
Hosea 13:16 makes god look like a pretty big fan of abortion and baby murdering.
RichardMNixon 1 year ago
@RichardMNixon
Hosea 13:9 O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself; but in me is thine help.
God is a God of justice, and if an entire populations is going to blaspheme Him and refuse to repent when offered numerous chances, knowing the eventual, ultimate consequences for sinning against God *and* refusing to be forgiven for it, they are in effect destroying themselves and taking their children with them.
What did 50,000,000 babies do since 1973 to deserve being killed? Nothing.
ForumLight 1 year ago
@ForumLight
What did those babies do back then to deserve being killed by god?
Another of my favorites is 2 Samuel 12:11. David angered god, so god had David's wives raped and killed David's child. You call that just?
RichardMNixon 1 year ago
@RichardMNixon
David "angered" God? How about David slept with another man's wife, got her pregnant, then had the husband killed so that he wouldn't get in trouble for it. You minimize his murder, adultery and illigitimate baby as David "angered" God.
David's wives raped? No, his wives would leave him to be with another, and you call it being raped.
You want evidence of God? Ask yourself why you're either being dishonest about what the Bible says, or never checked to see what it really says.
ForumLight 1 year ago
@ForumLight
I'm not diminishing David's crime, I'm asking why David's wives and child were punished for it instead of David.
BS, his wives were raped in public and his child was killed. "he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun." His wives didn't get a say in the matter nor did they leave him for another.
Fetuses are not the same as babies, and most animals are much, much more barbaric to their offspring, either totally abandoning them, or in many cases eating them.
RichardMNixon 1 year ago
@RichardMNixon You'll have to take that up with God. But as David later said, he would see His child again in heaven - so God pulled that child into heaven rather than be brought up in such a blasphemous, murderous environment.
And that anyone tries to justify killing their own baby as being ok, let alone "because some animals do far worse" is a testimony to how wicked we truly are.
ForumLight 1 year ago
@ForumLight
You just justified killing a baby in your reply. An actual baby, not an unconscious lump of cells.
I only mentioned other animals because you lied about them when you brought them into it, that was your point.
RichardMNixon 1 year ago
@RichardMNixon Hello. No, I justified God calling that baby into heaven.
And I pointed out that most animals are not even barbaric to kill their own baby like we do, but you respond that there are some animals eat their own babies, hence it must be ok for us to kill our babies as well.
ForumLight 1 year ago
@ForumLight
Oh, so it's ok for us to send fetuses to heaven? Is that a godly thing to do?
RichardMNixon 1 year ago
@RichardMNixon Hello. God sent that baby to heaven. Now you want to elevate us to God, justifying killing 50,000,000 of our own children? As I said, we only show how arrogant and wicked we truly are, and how much we deserve hell if we refuse to be forgiven, refuse to be sorry, and refuse to stop doing it.
ForumLight 1 year ago
@ForumLight
"God sent that baby to heaven."
I don't believe in god, heaven or hell. Therefore I think you are lying/making it up. Did you know what the crusaders said when they cleared land? "Kill all, let god decide the good from the bad".
I do have a interesting scenario you may want to consider. You're in a burning building and you have a choice:
1) Save the fridge of...100 fertilised eggs/embryos
2) Save a recently born baby who's in the cot
TurboDally 1 year ago
@TurboDally Hello. The crusaders, and for that matter the catholic church, are not following God. God does not know them. As Jesus said, many will call Him Lord on the day of judgment and He will profess "I never knew you."
You can choose to not believe in gravity, but it will not change the results of you walking off a building.
Your choice involves the death of human life in either case, so it's a sad choice.
ForumLight 1 year ago
I have an interesting scenario everyone needs to consider. You made the choice to have sex and risked a child being conceived. She gets pregnant. Do you:
1) Allow the human being to live long enough to be adopted?
2) Kill him or her because you couldn't be bothered?
For 100,000,000 parents in the past few decades alone, they chose to kill their child, all in the name of they don't believe there's a God they'll be accountable to whether they claim to believe or not.
ForumLight 1 year ago
@ForumLight
1) You did not ask my question. Since I have enough honesty, I'll go and answer yours anyway.
"X gets pregnant..."
Fertilised eggs are not human beings. Therefore it is best to get an abortion asap. If you delay it, the fertilised egg develops into foetus, then a baby in which case you can not abort as it has become a human being. Your misrepresentation of my view & that of others makes me doubt that you really believe in god at all, dishonesty in a Christian? Pah! Answer my Q.
TurboDally 1 year ago
@RichardMNixon
Meanwhile, why have we made it nice and legal for parents to kill their own children if they couldn't be bothered raising him or her, over 50,000,000 babies killed by their own parents in the past few decades alone? Even most animals are not that barbaric towards their own offspring.
ForumLight 1 year ago
@RichardMNixon
See we've all spent a lifetime sinning. Justice must be satisfied. God commands us to repent now while we're alive and turn to Christ, putting our faith in Him for forgiveness. Do we do this? No, we *refuse* God's forgiveness, *refuse* to repent, and continue to sin. If we refuse to repent we will all likewise perish.
Jesus said
Luke 13.3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.
ForumLight 1 year ago
@laflugantabastardo:
We can't force anything - we can only offer the truth of God' s Word - the rest is between you and God.
No origins beliefs belong in the science classroom, including the fish to man version of evolution, which is unobservable and unable to be shown in a single test case.
And no, once we're dead God's mercy will run out and we will now face the judgment for our lifetime of sinning and REFUSING to be forgiven for it.
ForumLight 1 year ago
Religion is a violation of human rights.
HybridD91 1 year ago
Intelligence is no measure for living a good life - use wisdom as a measure instead - Danish are fantastic people, not because of their intelligence but, because of their sensitivity. Behind religions, atheism etc.... behind any system and behind intelligence is the the important of sensitivity to ourself and others - that's wisdom ...
genioinuk 1 year ago
Intelligence is no measure for living a good life - use wisdom as a measure instead - Danish are fantastic people, not because of their intelligence but, because of their sensitivity. Behind religions, atheism etc.... behind any system and behind intelligence is the the important of sensitivity to ourself and others - that's wisdom ...
genioinuk 1 year ago
lol, True Christians ®.
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
The lyrics at the beginning and end sound like "Because the world is round, it turns me on."
That sounds like the weirdest fetish ever :-P
technologysucks 2 years ago
It's exactly what it says. Have you ever listened to the beatles?
blapperz 2 years ago
"Does Religion Improve Our Society?" Umm.. nope! Not what I have seen so far but pretty much the opposite..
kaxitaksi 2 years ago
Most scientist were atheist long before they were knowledgeable scientist. Quit bullshitting each other. It's very unbecoming.
benthemiester 2 years ago
@benthemiester Oh so there is "scientists" and there is "knowledgable scientists"? So what does the plain scientist do for a living, stand there with a beaker in one hand, a calculator in the other, and a question mark above there head? Looks like you are the one doing the bullshitting here. LOL
virtualguitarist 1 year ago
You might want to look at statement again. I'm not even sure what your point is. Don't know what you mean by plane scientist, I know it means something in your head but not mine.
benthemiester 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The question is easy to answer just compare the countries like N Korea, China, Cuba, these are countries that are officially atheist. You might not have freedom of speech but at least you'll be living in an atheist society. I don't see to many atheist jumping on an airplane and heading for any of those. Maybe u should count your blessings. No pun intended. Im not more intelligent..... I'm not more intelligent. I'm more knowledgeable. He's more knowledgeable than Einstein? Very amusing. Classic.
benthemiester 2 years ago
just by readin the video title "Does Religion Improve Our Society?" made me laugh
religion was in our society and all we got was witch hunts, killing muslims, technology not really improving that much in 800 years, killing atheists in the western world
come on took over 800 years just to prove the world was round, without religion maybe we only needed 200 years ro prove it
RELIGION made us have internet 2009 and not in the year 1700
akumie 2 years ago
ignore the bible? So we should ignore the comandsments of not stealing, not commiting adultry, refraining from, lust greed envy murder, seeking wisdom etc... Please tell me how my question is flawed......yes i guess its bigoted to preach those things in the world. 2 dudes marrying eachother is not natural and does not produce life tell me one person you know thats a product of homosexuality.
cacoca79 2 years ago
When it comes to stealing, murdering and so forth none of those moral ideas are original to the Bible and they are part of most moral philosophies.
Evidence points towards homosexuality being fully natural and even if it was unnatural that wouldn't make it wrong.
Whether a relationship brings forth ofspring or not has little to do with whether it should be considered moral or correct. Would it be wrong for two straight people to marry eachother if they did not intend to have children?
TheHabbadasher 2 years ago 2
Just like murdering your own baby is now part of most "moral philosophies" world-wide. Well, the ones that reject God's commandments, that is. As is lying, having sex whenever people want and worse. Mankind has only shown that they have very few morals and are quite wicked when left to their own devices. One has only to note we've murdered almost 50 million babies since 1973 in the name of convenience. No, real morals have come from God and the Bible. We see what happens when people ignore it.
ForumLight 2 years ago
The Bible quite frankly says very little on abortion so one could hardly refer to that as biblical morality. And anyway, what punishment do you think the law should give to the women who do decide to abort their fetus?
TheHabbadasher 2 years ago
You dont take the time to think. Youre thinking late term abortions. Its not like women want to kill babies. You need an abortion after your immune system kills the baby which is contrary to a religous belief. Plus many christians oppoese sex ed and condom/prevention. This is stupid because wether or not its their, teens will screw so atleast they can prevent a pregnancy, imagine.
metalmosh6 2 years ago
No, the over 50 million abortions since 1973 are far from late term abortions. So as long as you don't "want" to murder, that makes murder ok? They were forced to have an abortion? Hardly.
ForumLight 2 years ago
Yes the mother can die if the child has already died by the immune system. I used to hate abortions, and I still admit I cringe but you have look from an unbiased view. Late terms, I think are horrible, unless the child has already died. Ok, the arguments are "When does life begin?". Is at conception? or what? But you have to speak to a doctor about that.
metalmosh6 2 years ago
When does life begin? Don't need a doctor about that - in the vast majority of cases, after conception when nothing goes wrong, you have a human being that will come forth from the womb and live to be 80-100 years old. Life clearly begins at conception.
Psalms 90:1-2 .. Lord, thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations. 2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.
ForumLight 2 years ago
no it doesn't - life begins long before conception as both the egg and the sperm are alive. conception creates a situation in which healthy human life is possible, but by no means a guaranteed thing (as you seem to be implying).
1n354a 2 years ago
Human life begins at conception, which is the point. And unless something happens after conception, a 80-100 year old is always the result. Just like as long as the baby doesn't die in the first few years of life, an 80-100 year old is the result.
ForumLight 2 years ago
no, the potential for human life begins at conception...considering that about 50% of all fertilized eggs are naturally aborted I think you are being quite generous with the "is always the result" statement. then if you lump ontop of that number all the still births, tubular pregnancies, and the like....having a living, healthy baby be the result of a sperm and an egg getting it on is actually not "always the result"...in fact it is probably only "sometimes the result".
1n354a 2 years ago
So using your logic, even a baby one month old is only "potential" since such a baby can also die from natural causes. If nothing goes wrong, a baby will continue to live to be 80-100 year old human being. If nothing goes wrong, after conception, a human being will continue to live to be 80-100 years old, nine months of that time being spent in the womb.
ForumLight 2 years ago
and using your logic women are little more than breeding stock, used and discarded my men who need to control everything and everyone around them. furthermore, using your logic, life is sacred so long as it remains within the uterus as after it emerges it means little.
1n354a 2 years ago
Life begins at conception and ends at birth.
TheSoSoAgnostic 2 years ago
So that's the real issue for you: you want to be able to kill your own baby so that you don't feel "controlled" by men. You're willing to murder an innocent baby to get over your own issues with others. =( You know everything you need to know - doesn't matter how you justify it to anyone else; God is the one you'll have to say "But men were trying to control me, so I had to kill my baby to keep that from happening" - ask yourself if you really believe that's going to end well.
ForumLight 2 years ago
if the christian god does actually exist, according to his own text he has no problems with wholesale slaughter of innocents, so I'm not all that worried about him. in fact I would probably be a favorite of his (assuming I partake in abortions).
as for the kill my own baby comment, you are a fucktard....nobody has claimed that and as such I won't address your strawman.
1n354a 2 years ago
He does have a problem with it - but He can't force people to not blaspheme Him and commit such atrocities, which is the point.
Meanwhile what did the 50 MILLION babies do to the mothers that murdered them? Nothing. Yet that doesn't seem to bother you in the least. Double standard. =(
Take care.
ForumLight 2 years ago
well some of them were genetically disabled such that they would not have survived, some were positioned such that further development would lead to the death of the mother, some were pretty much dead already, some were unwanted...
and the christian god ordered those massacres and rapes and such...so I don't think that he has any problem with them. In fact, I think that he rather likes that sort of stuff...
so again...abortions win you lose.
Season's greetings!
1n354a 2 years ago
Some? Try less than 1%. We're talking 50 MILLION babies murdered here by their own parents, annoyed at the consequences of having too much sex.
And no, now you're making things up that you don't understand. People that were killed were killed because they blasphemed God. If you want to blaspheme our holy and righteous creator, take your chances. Meanwhile the 50 MILLION babies did nothing to their parents or God, but were murdered nonetheless. Barbaric, sick society we've regressed into.
ForumLight 2 years ago
too much sex? are you nuts? there is no such thing as too much sex.
your god is a murderous bastard - and if we were supposedly created in his image then we too should be murderous bastards, so what is your issue with killing babies?
as for barbaric, sick societies, check out the bronze age culture described in the Bible....if you are honest, you have to admit that we are anything but that. that is if you are honest.....
1n354a 2 years ago
Bronze age culture parents didn't murder over 50 million of their very own babies over 30 years because they believe they were merely punishment for having sex. And no, you're the only one labeling God, then pretending He made us just like your false label.
Take care.
ForumLight 2 years ago
again, who has claimed that babies are aborted because they are a "punishment for having sex"? put the straw down and stay on point.
the only reason why Bronze age people didn't murder 50 million of their own babies is that there were not 50 million to murder...read your bible...if god had had that many targets to shoot at, it would have been a blood bath. Considering his consideration for people, I think that it is a good thing that human population was low back then.
1n354a 2 years ago
@1n354a
But it WAS a bloodbath!
Joshua 6:21 has everybody, young and old, in Jericho die by the sword.
Judges 20:43-46 in which everybody is killed.
Joshua 8:24-29, where, after the battle, they return to the enemy city, slaugher everyone and hang the enemy king from a stake.
At least in Judges 21:10-11 they didn't kill the female virgins.
Such a charming people with a lovely god.
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
@laflugantabastardo
Oh I agree - my point was more to the fact that there were not 50million people to kill, and not that it was not a bloodbath. God-fearing people culled a large percentage of the population in order to show their love for their peace-loving god....sad.
1n354a 1 year ago
@1n354a
I realized that, and totally saw your point. ;-)
I just saw the opening to post that and took it, that's all. See how they wiggle their way out of this one.
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
@1n354a
No, the fact is no one went out of their way to kill their own baby. Now people do it as if it's in style.
ForumLight 1 year ago
@laflugantabastardo
And meanwhile 50 million babies killed by their own parents because they couldnt be bothered allowing him or her to live long enough to be adopted. Such a charming people with no god.
ForumLight 1 year ago
@ForumLight
Oh well, at least we don't live under the barbaric god of the bible. That should at least comfort you.
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
@laflugantabastardo
Those of us who refuse to stop blaspheming God, refuse to stop killing their own babies to avoid the invoncenience of allowing him or her to be adopted will get exactly what we're asking for: an eternity of separation from God.
ForumLight 1 year ago
@ForumLight
Yeah, now only if Christians would stop forcing themselves on the rest of society an injecting their nonsense into science class and people's everyday life, then we'd have that separation already. But I guess for now we'll have to wait until we're dead to get rid of this imagined lunatic god-figure.
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
What is conception?
TheSoSoAgnostic 2 years ago
But as far as beliefs go, Darwin said there'd be billions of intermediate forms - showing how reptiles for example evolved eventually into giraffes. They've barely found a handful of supposed intermediate forms that are under contention of being intermediate forms at all. Many intermediate forms are faked, but only tossed out after being touted worldwide as a "missing link".
But it's all irrelevant - they're all just beliefs anyway about that which is unobservable, untestable and unverifiable
ForumLight 2 years ago
you're mentally retarded dude.. maybe it's time to shut up...
Battery9876 2 years ago
Ask yourself if youre able to doubt the belief in the fish to man version of evolution, then ask yourself again if you really are a free thinker.
ForumLight 2 years ago
Fish to man? Ah yes, the CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON theory.
GoblinXXX 2 years ago
So I take it you're unaware that this is what evolutionists believe in - that populations of fish, over generations, eventually evolved into hippos, eagles, giraffes, and human beings, along with pretty much everything else.
ForumLight 2 years ago
And how do you think it happened?
GoblinXXX 2 years ago
Its not until God opens your eyes and ears so you can see and hear that a person starts thinking for themselves and see how absurd it is to believe populations of tiny fish can evolve, over generations, into hippos, giraffes, eagles and human beings. Its those who are lost that cannot think for themselves, who find it impossible to question the belief that all those animals, including human beings, evolved from populations of tiny fish over generations once upon a time.
ForumLight 2 years ago
Sorry, but your complete ignorance of how evolution works does not count as evidence against it.
Macrochenia 2 years ago 2
Feel free to back up your claim and point out exaclty what was wrong about what I said, along with the correction. But of course, they never do - they just like to say "you're wrong" and run away. =/
ForumLight 2 years ago
I really don't have the time or space on this forum to give you the equivalent of a college level study of modern biology. But if you'd actually like to learn more about it, you could try reading Only A Theory by Ken Miller or Why Evolution is True by Jerry Coyne. Both do a much better job explaining how it works than a YouTube post with a 500 character limit.
Macrochenia 2 years ago 2
I already have a college level study of modern biology - and that's the ridiculous things evolutionists (fish to man version, mind you) believe in. You need only point out which detail of what I said is supposedly wrong, and what's the correction. Oddly enough, no one ever gets beyond "you're wrong", so your reaction is hardly surprising and typical. The fact is, what I said is exactly what they claim, so your inability to correct it is also hardly surprising - never backing up their claim.
ForumLight 2 years ago
Well, if you actually took college level biology, then the mechanics of Darwinian Evolution ought to have been covered fairly well, so unless you went to a substandard school or weren't paying attention, you should have a passing familiarity with the evolutionary chain that led from the first chordates to modern mammals. But fish didn't directly turn into humans or any other mammals- some fish evolved into primitive amphibians, then reptiles, then mammals. But that doesn't count, right?
Macrochenia 2 years ago
I never said they turned *directly*. What I said was accurate: populations of fish evolved, *over generations*, into giraffes, hippos, eagles, human beings (so they say) - the fact that got there via amphibians, then reptiles and so on doesn't change the accuracy of what I said, except your false claim I ever said "directly."
So then we agree - they believe populations of fish evolved over generations into hippos, giraffes, hippos and human beings (but you add via amphibians then reptiles)
ForumLight 2 years ago
Yes, this is a correct, if extremely brief, description of how animals evolved into their modern forms occurred.
Now that we've got that cleared up, what exactly is your problem that nobody's answering?
Macrochenia 2 years ago
"I already have a college level study of modern biology"
Then why don't you understand what it is?
Carpathia25 2 years ago
Feel free to point out exactly how what I said was wrong, rather than throw a few insults and vanish.
ForumLight 2 years ago
Funny, but you seem to be the one tossing insults.
But since you insist, your description is flawed largely because it's too brief, none of the species you list are directly evolved from fish, they're evolved from more ancient mammals (and birds)- go back far enough and you eventually cross into reptiles, then amphibians, THEN fish. And it's not belief, it's a theory backed by scientific evidence from paleontology, genetics, and embryology. Belief is for things we can't test for, IE- religion
Macrochenia 2 years ago
Please quote where I've insulted anyone.
Yes they believe populations of fish evolved over generations into hippos, eagles, giraffes and humans via amphibians, reptiles and mammals - this doesn't change the truth of the statement.
No, it's a belief on what the evidence means to them, and what they want it to mean to everyone else. The belief itself: impossible to observe and impossible to test/verify - one can only believe in it. Not science, but religion by definition you point out.
ForumLight 2 years ago
We can test for the various principles of evolution. In fact, we have done so and continue to do so. Like I said, look it up.
And you want to know what the insult is? It's you coming in here, shouting "you're wrong" at everything, and failing to provide any meaningful statements to back up your opinion, then making your snarky little comments.
Macrochenia 2 years ago
No, they can't show a test of it happening. They can only test by saying "do you believe what we believe when looking at these fossils?" and they think that's a test. The belief itself is impossible to test. Not science.
So saying "you're wrong" is an insult? (Actually you dishonestly say I shouted it, when I didnt even use all caps). You're stretching it to say the least.
ForumLight 2 years ago
Saying "you're wrong" and "that doesn't count" (which is what you've done with everything I've posted) over and over without offering any sort of evidence to back up your claim is being childish and insulting. And I noticed that you've completely ignored the other two branches of science I've listed, as well.
Macrochenia 2 years ago
And here's how the fossil test goes- we look at two groups, reptiles and mammals, and we think that one gave rise to the other. So we find out what geologic layer we can find very primitive mammals in, and the layer we can find no mammals at all in. Now we predict that if evolution is correct, we should be able to look in the intermediate layer to find fossils with both reptilian and mammalian features. And what do you know, we do. And we keep doing this, and the results are always the same.
Macrochenia 2 years ago
And when we try to compare organisms genetically, we get similar results.
It's the same principle as our ability to say with complete certainty that Pluto has an orbit of 247.99 Earth years despite it having been discovered only 80 years ago or how we can convict a man of murder despite not having actually seen him do it via forensic evidence. The natural world operates under testable, linear principles (ignoring Quantum Physics, which is outside the scope of this argument).
Macrochenia 2 years ago
Genetics: they believe DNA similarity means creatures evolved from each other, then when they find creatures with similar DNA they think this proves they evolved from each other. Circular reasoning.
Show a population of [fruit flies] evolving over generations into animals that are no longer [fruit flies] at all, and show how similar their DNA is - that's science. But of course they can do no such thing as it's only a belief that has never happened in the entire recorded history of humanity.
ForumLight 2 years ago
So you believe mammals evolved from reptiles, you believe this means they would show up ijn the geological layers a certain way, and then you believe you're looking at an intermediate form because they believe it is, and all these beliefs are then passed off as science. Sorry, but that's not science at all.
Show a test of populations of [fruit flies] evolving over generations, into animals that are no longer [fruit flies] at all. No matter what animal, tests show this *never* happens.
ForumLight 2 years ago
"you believe this means they would show up ijn the geological layers a certain way,"
Which they actually do! So why is that a "belief"?
Carpathia25 2 years ago
// none of the species you list are directly evolved from fish
And you're being dishonest - I said over generations - I never said they evolved directly. But they still believe ultimately populations of fish evolved, over generations (via whatever else they imagine) into hippos, giraffes, eagles and human beings. More bizarre than most mythology or science fiction ever written.
ForumLight 2 years ago
We've already seen species evolve in response to external pressures- or were you unaware of pathogens that are becoming resistant to antibiotics? And that's just the tip of the iceberg as far as what we've seen happen with bacteria (they're easy to study for this because they reproduce so quickly). Why don't you actually go out and read about it, like I first suggested?
Macrochenia 2 years ago
No, we've only seen populations of rats adapt over generations but remain rats. Populations of fruit flies adapt over generations, but remain fruit flies. Never the fish to man version: populations of rats adapt over generations into animals that are clearly no longer rats at all.
Please cite a single version of the fish to man version of evolution. No one can.
ForumLight 2 years ago
Like I've said before, you really need to study evolution a bit harder, because your idea is incorrect. Evolutionary theory is based on creatures adapting, not spontaneously shifting into something else. The boundaries between species are a lot blurrier than they used to be, and as a matter of fact, we remain every type of organism that every one of our ancestors was. That's right, we're actually both really really specialized fish. Don't believe me? Look it up.
Macrochenia 2 years ago
I never said "spontaneously shifting into something else" - Ive always said over generations. You continue to tell lies to try making a point. =(
ForumLight 2 years ago
And you continue to use the same, tired arguments that have been shown to be wrong, then cry "that doesn't count" on everything. I've played your little game, but I've got better things to do than continue to dance with a creationist troll who keeps using ignorance as evidence.
Macrochenia 2 years ago 2
"Think for yourself?" I find it interesting that you believe people who read books that profess belief in God somehow means they do not think for themselves, and that people who don't believe in God read books that profess God doesn't exist, and that somehow shows they think for themselves. Nothing could be further from the truth. -->
ForumLight 2 years ago
Our society is getting worse and worse. More and more wrong things are getting legal. God gave humans the ten commandments to follow. It shouldn't surprise me if about twenty years pedofiles get accepted in our society. Our society needs rules how to behave.
killbill402 2 years ago
Actually, no. Stupid rules that society no longer needs are getting dumped or questioned because the reason for why breaking it's bad to break them has not been demonstrated or were based on pure religious beliefs. That's the case of gay marriage. You can't force your belief upon others and order that they live by what you believe. The ten commandments are USELESS. The majority of them is just god and his gigantic ego. The only useful ones for society are, don't steal, and don't kill.
DumbDesign 2 years ago
Do you realy think that do not steal and do not kill is the only one useful. How about do not lie. And do not be jealous. And do not commit adultery. I want you to read all the ten commandements and tell me what is wrong with each one of them.
killbill402 2 years ago
Don't lie, and do not commit adultery, yes they are good, but they are not that much necessary to society. There's nothing in the 10 commandments about not being jealous. Don't worship other gods before me, not necessary for society, and if you think otherwise, please provide a TANGIBLE example of something bad that could happen directly because of breaking this rule. Keep the sabath as a holy day, nobody keeps that commandment anymore, and what happened? NOTHING.
DumbDesign 2 years ago
Jesus said that the sabath was made for the humans. A resting day every seven day. Not only does humans need to sleep every night but also a resting day. I have heard that in the sovjet people worked for eight days then one resting day. The people was getting sick out of working so much.
killbill402 2 years ago
Actually, we are not talking about a resting day, we are talking about a day when you do NOTHING. Ask the jews, you can't even push buttons.
DumbDesign 2 years ago
There's nothing in the 10 commandments, or the book of the laws, OR THE ENTIRE BIBLE about pedophilia being wrong.I don't think it even mentions it. Please, when you respond to this, don't say; "oh yes there is..." don't be lazy and provide an example. Curious, if you get your morals from the Bible, and there's nothing in the Biblie about pedophilia being wrong...how do you know it's wrong?
DumbDesign 2 years ago
No i don't find anything in the bible about pedophilia but having sex with someone other than your wife is adultery. I don't find anything about the lowest age for marriage. They married when they where adults.
killbill402 2 years ago
What do you think is suddenly legal now that could be compared or be shown to lead to pedophilia? You can't. You're just fearmongering, you're a terrorist.
Have you ever worked on a sunday? I don't mean gone to work, I mean cooked or cleaned your house? That's a violation of the ten commandments, chief.
RichardMNixon 2 years ago
About 60 years ago homosexuals was considerd perverse and sick( which is true). Then it slowly got accepted and legall and even gay marriage. Same thing could happen to pedophilia. Then some kids voluntary have sex with adults. And this gets more usual. Then some people say: if kids wants to have sex with adults then it should be legal. I bet people that lived before didn't guess that our society would change so much. If you saw 50 years in to the future you would get disgusted by what you saw.
killbill402 2 years ago
About 60 years ago, black people couldn't be in the same bar as white people. We learn a lot from the rights movements of both female and african americans.Society has evolved, and we learnt that it was wrong to segregate people because of their race or sexual orientation, FREEDOM FOR EVERYONE MEANS FREEDOM FOR EVERYONE. If you wanna think homosexuality is wrong, go ahead, but it's nothing more than your opinion and you can't force other people to live by what you believe.
DumbDesign 2 years ago 2
Saying something is true doesn't make it so. Comparing pedophilia to homosexuality makes you a bigot. Have fun stoning people for working on the sabbath.
I guarantee in 50 years when gay marriage is legal everywhere, people will look back and say "killbill 402 wasn't a 'true christian' because 'true christians' love their neighbors."
RichardMNixon 2 years ago 2
True christians follow the bible. Homosexuality is wrong. Not only is it wrong, God say it is a detestable sin. A word that is also used for the sin: sex with animals.
killbill402 2 years ago
True christians follow the bible? So if you catch someone working on the sabbath, you stone them to death? You think it's ok to beat your slave to death as long as he survives at least a day after the beating? If one of your friends told you he wasn't a christian you would immediately kill him?
Don't forget shellfish. Shellfish are also abomination.
RichardMNixon 2 years ago
read the book of proverbs should we be living in the opposite direction?
cacoca79 2 years ago
I don't have to read it because your question is flawed. Being a humanist doesn't mean you should live the opposite life as described in the bible, it means you should ignore the bible. I do what I think is right, regardless of what some ancient bigots imagined their God thought was right.
Child molesters hurt children. Two dudes marrying does not. Straw man.
RichardMNixon 2 years ago
Yeaah, then you're not a true christian, in fact, nobody is. Read Leviticus 20, the most common phrase there will be "put to death." Slept with another woman, put to death, slept with an animal, put to death, cursed your father, put to death. Since you are not a murderer, are you a true christian? I know what you're going to say;"well that was then, we don't have to do that now" yeah, cherry pick what you want to obey and then invent some excuse not to obey the other, like a good christian.
DumbDesign 2 years ago
When I was a Christian it was very simple to me. God makes it clear in the Bible, it is wrong, period. One day I wondered, what if this isn't the word of god? I mean, there are so many barbaric laws in these books, a god couldn't possibly have ever condoned this! Then I realized that other people have different beliefs, different ideologies, and it wasn't my right to shove the Bible in their face and tell them that what they do is wrong and they had to live by what I believed! THAT'S WRONG!
DumbDesign 2 years ago
loving your neighbor and agreeing with a perverted lifestyle are 2 diffrent things. Do you love child molester, i mean certainly they didnt choose that life they cant help their feelings, so why not just go with they flow right if it feels good do it.
cacoca79 2 years ago