The Canyon That God Built?

[Slug Toy]

alright i found this through the grapevine obviously because im into geology. i just cant let this one slide. check it out.

http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=801

so im all for freedom of speech, thought, belief, and all that jazz. this, however, is beyond anything sensible. this is beliefs being imposed on others, and worst of all its by government officials. what happened to separation of church and state?

what really gets me is the fact that a book was written stating that Noah's Flood made the grand canyon. someone who knows the bible help me out here... if im not mistaken, Noah didnt make the flood, he just survived it, and supposedly made a nice little boat to do that which was named after him (dont even get me started on that one... the sheer mass of all the animals on that boat is insane... at least 5 tons of beetles alone). not to mention the erosional forces involved in this. it rains for longer periods of time in certain places of the world, and you dont see canyons popping up everywhere... it just CANT happen in 40 days and 40 nights... water doesnt have that much power in it. if it did... all the land in the world would have been worn down to sand by now and ill bet there actually wouldnt be any land left.

anyways... i dont know about you guys, but i find this sickening. i dont do much protesting, but this has got me amazed and angry. theres just something about being told what to believe that doesnt agree with me... oh ya, thats because its WRONG!

[CanaBalistic]

Another thing that caught my attention is the fact that during the time of noah, north america hadnt even been discovered yet.


P.S. Noah's flood was an pre ice age melting of the polar caps resulting in raised sea levels. That much is clear.

[DaJe]

Speaking of North America being discovered. One thing I've always wondered, is during the time when all of the Bible stuff was going on, what was happening in the other parts of the world? Such as North America. There were still people there when all of this stuff was supposed to be happening. What about them?

[Drac998]

Speaking of North America being discovered. One thing I've always wondered, is during the time when all of the Bible stuff was going on, what was happening in the other parts of the world? Such as North America. There were still people there when all of this stuff was supposed to be happening. What about them?


Sshhh don't let it out that other people existed on the entire planet during that time.

[CanaBalistic]

The flood was inevitable. We've had about 6 ice ages that we know of. I dont think it would take to much to determin from records that another one was on its way.

Another misconception is that if the ice caps melted that there would only be a hand full of mountain peeks above water. Epic flood anyone? Actually it isnt true, The ocean levels would only rise about 80ft or so. It would be a real hasstle and would displace billions of people but there would still be lots of land.

On another note:
If any of you want to learn about global warming, Look for Al Gore's movie "The Inconvient Truth"

[edit]
SnowFire:
You cant prove science any more than you can prove god. There was a time when scientists believed the earth was flat. That was disproved, so can anything we NOW believe to be true.

[DaJe]

Wait, what happened to that other post that was above Cana-Balsitic's?

[Durrthock]

Can someone just lock this before someone gets into a Religion vs science argurment

[Slug Toy]

i dont think that is going to happen. i hope it doesnt, because i didnt intend for this thread to get out of control. if i see it getting messed up ill do something about it.

[d_stilgar]

First thing, it being God's flood when they call it Noah's flood is a matter of semantics.

Second, it has recently been proven that Noah could, in fact, have been able to build a boat capable of holding all the creatures of the earth. He would have room to hold two of all the non-edible kind and eight of the food kind.

Third, the last major ice age predates modern humans. We came later, and so did Noah. The flood of Noah's day, the one that geologists are saying carved the grand canyon, was caused by something else.

Fourth, water has incredible power. A water jet can cut one inch+ thick metal. Surely billions of gallons of water flowing over the land could carve out a canyon. Certainly there are some rocks that will last longer than others when punished in the same way, and I'm not a scientist, but scientists have gone to school, done their research, and have come to a conclusion based that school and research. For a bunch of computer enthusiasts to argue it in a computer forum is a little silly.

Finally, odds are that the geologists use the term "Noah's flood" as a way of dating when the canyon was carved that most people in the US will relate to, and are not trying to say that Noah existed and that Christianity is the truth that all must embrace.

[nil8]

Creationism has been proven wrong time and time again. It has no place in any realm of science. Theology isn't science.

As for this specific topic, to anyone who knows small parts of geology understands that the minerals the grand canyon is made out of can't be cut by massive flooding or ice drift. Neither can do such a deep cut in a short period of time on such hard material.

There are modeled experiments that can be done to show how the grand canyon was formed. Just like there are experiments to show how natural selection works to fuel evolution. There are scientific ways to debunk bull****, which is what this is.

This is what happens when you have fundamentalists running the show. It's there way or heresy.

"Geysers of Old Faithful: Nostrils of Satan" HAHA. I want to see that book. That would be a good laugh.

[Slug Toy]

well we geologists (and i say WE because i am going to school for geology) sure as hell dont call it noah's flood. it wasnt a flood that made the grand canyon anyways. it was a river.

yes, water is a damn strong force, but only under certain circumstances. if you pressurize it, yes it can cut metal, but rivers dont flow at 500psi. the strongest force is something called cavitation which is basically air bubble bursting with tremedous force in waterfalls. this is what is acting on the bottom of the niagra falls. given time (time meaning many millenia at least because the geological time scale usually deals with millions of years) all this will cut a canyon, but a flood means nothing when you're dealing with large rivers. there are already huge amounts of water flowing though the grand canyon, and yet there are no visible changes from day to day. in fact its widely accepted that the grand canyon is about... 5 million years old based on the fossil records.

anyways this HAS kind of gotten away from what i was trying to say. i wasnt trying to turn this into a debate about religion or anything like that. i was trying to point out how stupid it is that the government is doing exactly what it is supposed to prevent in this case. i mean... the whole "accommodating creationists" argument aside, whats in the constitution? freedom of speech for one thing. at the very least this issue about the grand canyon is unconstitutional and im amazed that we havent seen a real **** storm about it yet.

<EDIT> you posted while i was typing, nil8. just so you know, ice can do some damage. ice is what formed the nice jagged mountains up here (like the rocky mountains). the only thing is that the grand canyon is sandstone so if a glacier came through there, everything would be wiped clean, no canyons.

[Zephik]

You cant prove science any more than you can prove god. There was a time when scientists believed the earth was flat. That was disproved, so can anything we NOW believe to be true.

You know, that is very true. So why can't we all just play nice? Do some people really believe that there is one way and only one way? Why? For me, I guess, I would say that the only thing that has truly been proven is that we are usually not entirely correct if not completely off. These people are supposed to be really smart right? So...idk? Isn't it true that we are usually, at the least, off in what we believe? Such as the world being flat for example...

[CanaBalistic]

My Final statement in this thread.

What gets us into trouble is not what we dont know.
It's what we know for sure that just ain't so.
-Mark Twain

[CanaBalistic]

Sorry for the double post. I know i said it was my last.

I thought what D_Stilgar said was a little odd. So i did some research.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human#Evolution

Anatomically modern humans appear in the fossil record in Africa about 130,000 years ago

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ice/chill.html

The most recent period of glaciation, which many people think of as the "Ice Age", was at its height approximately 20,000 years ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_painting
The choice of subject matter can indicate date such as the reindeer at the Spanish cave of Cueva de las Monedas which imply the art is from the last Ice Age. The oldest cave is that of Chauvet, and is 32,000 years old.

There have been 7 ice ages in the last 650,000 years according to scientific studies of the antarctic ice sheets.

Obviously, that many freeze/thaw periods could erode enough material to form the grand canyon. Another thing to note is that evidence of thies changes would be more apparent to earlier civilizations. Which could predict an ice age melting resulting in a flood.

As for Noah:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v8/i1/noah.asp

According to the Bible (Genesis 6:15), the length of the Ark was 300 cubits, the breadth of it was 50 cubits, and the height of it was 30 cubits. A cubit is known to be the distance between a man’s elbow and finger-tip. To decide the actual size of the Ark, a cubit had to be defined in terms of a modern unit. Scott7 collected the existing data about cubits around the Middle East area, and we adopted the common cubit (1 cubit = 17.5 inches) to approximate the size of the Ark. In modern units, the Ark was approximately 135m long, 22.5m wide and 13.5m high.

The apparent size of the ship according to the bible doesnt have enough space for all the animals it supposedly was able to hold.

[nil8]

<EDIT> you posted while i was typing, nil8. just so you know, ice can do some damage. ice is what formed the nice jagged mountains up here (like the rocky mountains). the only thing is that the grand canyon is sandstone so if a glacier came through there, everything would be wiped clean, no canyons.

Ice sheets formed parts of the midwest US as well.At least that's what I was told in high school. If I remember correctly, almost all of Iowa was formed by a sliding ice sheet.

What I was trying to say without being specific is that under the sandstone is limestone and schist, which are much harder to remove with either water, ice or erosion. It's still a beautiful canyon.

About the water cutting rock, Slug is completely correct. You're talking about pressure that is unbelievable and insanely controlled. A firehose that release 300 gal/min feels like a steady stream of punches and can bruise. Water under controlled pressure is an amazing force, but a flood isn't that.

[d_stilgar]

My argument on the water was just a way of saying that water, in fact, can cut stone. Not that one flood cut the grand canyon.

I just watched a show on the science channel about the ark. At the end, a skeptical ship builder and engineer and zoologist reviewed one man's research and found that Noah's ark was possible.

On what I said about modern humans, I was wrong. Anatomically correct human remains have been found dating back to 130,000 years ago. I've been watching "Walking with Cavemen" a lot recently and must have gotten my dates mixed up. Still, the history of modern men (by which I mean written language, not cave paintings, and where we moved from a nomadic people to using agricultire) is still only about 12,000 years old. That is pretty short.

I am not trying to argue the validity of the book published. I've always been told that the grand canyon was formed over millions of years by a river and I still believe that. But I also do not like people saying that things areimpossible. We have barely surpassed 100 years of flight, lets not rip on someone for believing something different. On that, if you want to see something that I think is complete garbage, google "age of earth". I had a roomate who believed that the earth is only 6000 years old. I completely think that is bull, yet I do not know everything, and there is no way you will win that argument, so I let him be.

[CanaBalistic]

I was mearly correcting the facts. Not that it was aimed at you in peticular.

[d_stilgar]

I was mearly correcting the facts. Not that it was aimed at you in peticular.

No offense taken, and I admit when I'm wrong. I'm not going to be so proud to deny becoming smarter.;)

[nil8]

On what I said about modern humans, I was wrong. Anatomically correct human remains have been found dating back to 130,000 years ago. I've been watching "Walking with Cavemen" a lot recently and must have gotten my dates mixed up. Still, the history of modern men (by which I mean written language, not cave paintings, and where we moved from a nomadic people to using agricultire) is still only about 12,000 years old. That is pretty short.

I am not trying to argue the validity of the book published. I've always been told that the grand canyon was formed over millions of years by a river and I still believe that. But I also do not like people saying that things areimpossible. We have barely surpassed 100 years of flight, lets not rip on someone for believing something different. On that, if you want to see something that I think is complete garbage, google "age of earth". I had a roomate who believed that the earth is only 6000 years old. I completely think that is bull, yet I do not know everything, and there is no way you will win that argument, so I let him be.

Walking with Cavemen is a really good documentary. Interesting stuff.
Humanity in the scope of the Earth's existence is a very short period of time. Civilized existence is a speck of time.

Things can be impossible. If all our current data points towards something not being possible, and incoming data continues to reinforce this, then it's probably not possible. Until it is objectively proven that it occurred or is possible, then it is called impossible. An easy example is you can't break the Earth's gravity by jumping. No human being can jump with his legs and feet fast enough or far enough to break gravity. It's impossible.

As for the past century, we've had more advancement in the past 100 years than humans have ever experienced before. The one thing that is still dragging behind is social behaviors and judgments. There's a quote I like to use in this debate(I debate a lot), it's by Robert Heinlein,"One man's mysticism is another man's engineering. Supernatural is a null term."

As for the age of earth nonsense, Bill Hicks definitely nailed it. "Explain dinosaurs.... You think somewhere in the Bible it would have been ****ing mentioned it. And oh, Jesus and his disciples walked to Nazareth. And oh, the path was blocked by a Brontosaurus with a splinter in his paw and the disciples did run around and exclaim "Oh what a big ****in' lizard lord!". But Jesus was unafraid and removed the splinter from the Brontosaurus paw and the big lizard became his friend. And Jesus sent him to Scotland where he lived in a loch for, oh so many years, inviting thousands of Americans families..."

Yea, it's meant to be comedy. Best comedian ever.

I'm not trying to pick on you stilgar. You're entitled to your ideas, as I am mine. Just trying to share my thoughts on the matter. Admitting your wrong is a good thing and making mistakes is often the best teacher because you forget your mistakes less than your successes.

[DaveW]

Can someone just lock this before someone gets into a Religion vs science argurment

I tend to find that these things stay in the 'intelligent debate' category to be honest, i've never had to lock a thread for developing into a flame fest.

Keep it that way guys! ;)

-Dave

[d_stilgar]

I never said that I believed what my roomate thought. I actually agree with you. How do you explain dinosaurs if the earth is only 6000 years old. But as much as we can say that science disproves it, I don't think knowledge can ever be completely solid. An example that has been said before, the earth is flat . . . boy were we wrong.

I personally am not going to limit my thought on what people say can or can't be done. I will never limit myself in that way. And yet, I am also not going to believe complete crap to be true when I'm 99.99% sure it isn't.

That said, I know where I stand in all this and there is no point arguing it any further.

[CanaBalistic]

The 6000 year thing is from the bible. Apparently (according to the great beyond) dinosaur fossils were put there to "test our faith"...

I believe the more scientific definition of 4.54 billion years and also that jesus was put here to test our faith of the scientific.

Glass half empty vs half full.

[Airbozo]

little fyi; Not everyone believed that the world was flat. This was misinformation promulgated by the church. You believe them or... well, die! This is the same church that would put people to death for believing that the solar system did NOT revolve around the earth, in fact it was the churches belief that _everything_ revolved around the earth and the earth was flat to boot.

If it comes out of a religious tome I would tend NOT to take it at face value. I took some religious theory classes many moons ago and was told this by _most_ of my professors (who are Jesuit priests). Most of them did not think the bible was factually correct, rather a "guideline" of events. It is the people that take the bible and other religious tomes as 100% fact that tend to be fanatics...

[CanaBalistic]

If it comes out of a religious tome I would tend NOT to take it at face value. I took some religious theory classes many moons ago and was told this by _most_ of my professors (who are Jesuit priests). Most of them did not think the bible was factually correct, rather a "guideline" of events. It is the people that take the bible and other religious tomes as 100% fact that tend to be fanatics...


The reason the facts are misconstrued is because jesus never had a testament. He left it to james and the other deciples to create the testament's. Which is why we have so many off shutes of christianity. No one has the actual facts. Only the interpritation of the facts by the deciples.

Apparently judas had a testament aswell. I wonder what church destroyed that little tid bit of information. (please dont reply to the last sentence, that is mearly my interpritation)

[Airbozo]

I know you didn't want a reply, but...
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/gospeljudas.html

Yes there is a gospel according to Judas testament, found in 1994 by Russian archaeologists. Not read anything about it, but yes it does exist.

Interpretation is why there are so many off-chutes of ANY religion. You would think that if there was a god and he/she/it wanted us to worship them, there would be no confusion as to HOW to worship them or what religion was correct (Uhm Morman, Morman is the correct answer, sorry Jerry Falwell). You would also think that with the redphone to the creator, that little things like flat earth, planet revolution, witches would have been taken care of a little better by previous pope's and other spiritual leaders. I mean who in their right mind would argue that the Spanish Inquisition was from god and not man?

Man invented God(s) to explain what they could not.
Man invented religion to control other men.

[Zephik]

Whenever I hear the name of Jerry Falwell, I think "mega-church". What a laugh...

Don't mormons like worship seagulls and believe jesus was a cowboy or something? lol don't ask where I get my facts, I just make them up as I go along ...wait, that kind of sounds like religion! :dead:

"Man invented God(s) to explain what they could not.
Man invented religion to control other men."

I still believe in the possibility of a higher being or whatever, but I couldn't agree with you more there. especially the second part. Makes me think of early Catholicism.

[d_stilgar]

Don't mormons like worship seagulls and believe jesus was a cowboy or something? lol don't ask where I get my facts, I just make them up as I go along ...wait, that kind of sounds like religion! :dead:


Less than two minutes of research . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seagull_Monument

[DaveW]

Wait, that's true? That's freakin hilarious!


Which is why we have so many off shutes of christianity


Interpretation is why there are so many off-chutes of ANY religion.

for the record, the word is off-shoots.

-Dave

[Slug Toy]

you know what ive just realized? every thread like this one so far has boiled down to a debate about religion. just once id like to have a discussion about volcanogenic massive sulphide exhalites, or sedimentary processes.

[DaveW]

volcanogenic massive sulphide exhalites, or sedimentary processes.

Yeah...what now? :s

-Dave

[Airbozo]

you know what ive just realized? every thread like this one so far has boiled down to a debate about religion. just once id like to have a discussion about volcanogenic massive sulphide exhalites, or sedimentary processes.

That would probably be a lonely conversation...

SnowFire: I also would like to believe in a higher being, but so far the evidence just doesn't add up. I am still holding out though. I really don't think any of the organized religions have it right. To much violence and anger in most of the worlds religions for me.

My wife was raised Catholic and most of her family still does the stand up, sit down, kneel, routine... She does not. Her grandmother was appalled that we got married outside on Catalina Island until we reminded her that outside is gods church. She ate it up. Religious conversations clear the table in her family faster than the political conversations (which they encourage).

SlugToy: One of my best friends dad is a geologist. Now retired, but he plans several trips each year to different geological formations (dessert, mountains, etc...). We have some of the best conversations after their trips... He is more geeky-excited about his rocks then any computer geek is about their computer.

[jaxspades]

Hey Slug Toy--in Genesis 7:11 it reads, "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened."

That's where the Hydroplane theory comes from--they believe that when the waters 'burst forth', places like the Grand Canyon, Mariana's Trench, and the Mid-Atlantic Ridge were created.

That much water could drastically change the world's shape, especially if it was shooting out at speeds faster than any rocket we could build. Plus, with water falling down from the heavens--not from clouds but a canopy of water so to speak, it is possible.

Plus, if you believe in God, and I do, and I'm not imposing here, then it's easy to believe that an all-powerful being could change the shape of the world, even with the tiniest amount of water.

Also, 2 of every kind isn't necessarily EVERY species--you could take 2 dogs, which would separate into all the different breeds after the flood, same with cats, or any animal of the like...etc...and I believe that this may also explain dinosaurs being extinct, so Noah wouldn't have to deal with their weight...bit of dry humor there for ya.

Hope the bible passage helped--again, I'm not imposing, and you were asking for someone to explain it biblically.

Also, check out Answers in Genesis--these are Biblical scholars and scientists, including Geologists who answer questions like this thread.

Here's their Q&A page. http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/qa.asp

Airbozo--the confusion in religion isn't God's fault--Satan confuses it, and, come to think of it, the biggest religion in the world is Christianity, which to me shows us that God is saying, "Hey, worship me."

Enough chat from me in this post--if you want answers, you may look to the Bible, and you may find something. I did. Maybe not. Some don't find what they look for. Yet, it doesn't hurt to try, right?

[d_stilgar]

Wait, that's true? That's freakin hilarious!
-Dave

I think I was trying to show that it is false. The statue is a historical monument, not an idol.

[Zephik]

Yeah, I don't think they are worshiping the seagull. Its more like a memorial.

If you have ever been to the ocean, you notice huge flocks of seagulls. What do they do? They go where the food is. Especially when the crabs are in the shallow water! GEESH! I've never seen so many in my life! lol

So I wouldn't call this event a "miracle". It's more like the seagulls were at the right place at the right time and decided to fill their gluttonous bellies because thats what they do.

I've actually been to Salt Lake City, but I don't remember seeing the seagull monument. I do remember seeing the founder of their religion HIGH up on a point of one of the buildings. I think he is gold? Maybe bronze? But if you haven't been there, and you are close enough to make a trip, I say do it. I could care less about their contradicting religion, but they have BEAUTIFUL buildings. The architecture is freaking awesome. ...just don't talk to the old ladies. They are freaking the MOST closed minded people I have ever had a conversation with in my entire freaking life. I mean, you can tell them the world is round and they would tell you the world is flat and then they would make sure that you couldn't say anything else about it. STUBBORN!!!! lol I feel better now.

[Airbozo]

...

Airbozo--the confusion in religion isn't God's fault--Satan confuses it, and, come to think of it, the biggest religion in the world is Christianity, which to me shows us that God is saying, "Hey, worship me."

Enough chat from me in this post--if you want answers, you may look to the Bible, and you may find something. I did. Maybe not. Some don't find what they look for. Yet, it doesn't hurt to try, right?

I absolutely HATE "the confusion is satans fault" answer. If some omnipotent being actually does exist, and did create man AND wanted us to worship it/she/he then there would be NO confusion as to what/who/where/when to worship. Anything else points to some omnipotent being that screwed something up and uses a fallen angel (another screw up...) to explain all the faults it/she/he made...

If the biggest religion IS Christianity, then why are there so many different sects of it? All those Christians cannot come to an agreement of how their god wants us to act and worship? All the priests and preachers argue about "how to be faithful" and what it means to be a christian? They are all using the same study guide and cannot agree on the contents... I thought they worshiped the same god?

Some of my favorite Frank Zappa quotes on this subject;
The whole foundation of Christianity is based on the idea that intellectualism is the work of the Devil. Remember the apple on the tree? Okay, it was the Tree of Knowledge. "You eat this apple, you're going to be as smart as God. We can't have that."
-- Frank Zappa

"Hey, let's get serious... God knows what he's doin' He wrote this book here And the book says: 'He made us all to be just like Him', So... If we're dumb... Then God is dumb... (And maybe even a little ugly on the side)"
- -Frank Zappa

and one not from Zappa;
"The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has killed a great many philosophers."
-- Denis Diderot


Now all of this sounds like I hate religion or Christianity, but that is not true. I think that the bible was one of the best and worst things to happen to this planet. Imagine if everyone was an atheist, there would be no moral retribution for bad deeds so why would anyone show any restraint? The threat of burning in hell for eternity has probably had some effect on the actions of others...

BTW looking to the bible to answer questions in the bible does not seem logical to me...

Enough on the religion. I don't want to make this a religious war here. We are after all modders not apostles.

[d_stilgar]

I think looking to the bible for answers to (most) bible questions makes sense.

Example: What book comes after Genesis? I look in the bible and I will find that it is Exodus.

I do understand your thinking though.

[Zephik]

I absolutely HATE "the confusion is satans fault" answer. If some omnipotent being actually does exist, and did create man AND wanted us to worship it/she/he then there would be NO confusion as to what/who/where/when to worship. Anything else points to some omnipotent being that screwed something up and uses a fallen angel (another screw up...) to explain all the faults it/she/he made...

What I don't understand is if god knows ALL, how did the whole fallen angel thing happen? ...unless of course he let it happen for a reason.


If the biggest religion IS Christianity, then why are there so many different sects of it? All those Christians cannot come to an agreement of how their god wants us to act and worship? All the priests and preachers argue about "how to be faithful" and what it means to be a christian? They are all using the same study guide and cannot agree on the contents... I thought they worshiped the same god?

Simple answer. Human stupidity.


Some of my favorite Frank Zappa quotes on this subject;
The whole foundation of Christianity is based on the idea that intellectualism is the work of the Devil. Remember the apple on the tree? Okay, it was the Tree of Knowledge. "You eat this apple, you're going to be as smart as God. We can't have that."
-- Frank Zappa

Hmmm, why did god not want them to eat the apple? Well I guess it makes sense if you think of it as before and after. Before they were happy and pretty oblivious to everything. After, they weren't so happy and they had to endure the pains of the world. So.... god being like a good father, did not want his children to suffer.


"Hey, let's get serious... God knows what he's doin' He wrote this book here And the book says: 'He made us all to be just like Him', So... If we're dumb... Then God is dumb... (And maybe even a little ugly on the side)"
- -Frank Zappa

I still don't understand what is meant when "god" says we are made after him. I thought god didn't have a form or shape that was comprehendable? Well, then again in the bible it does say something about this not being our "true forms". More like vessels?


and one not from Zappa;
"The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has killed a great many philosophers."
-- Denis Diderot

I love that one. It's sad, because its true. The mass of people are stupid, while intelligent people are few and sit idly by while the mass destroys the world. < Thats what I say. It just means that stupid people rule the world. ....which is painfully obvious where ever you go.



Now all of this sounds like I hate religion or Christianity, but that is not true. I think that the bible was one of the best and worst things to happen to this planet. Imagine if everyone was an atheist, there would be no moral retribution for bad deeds so why would anyone show any restraint? The threat of burning in hell for eternity has probably had some effect on the actions of others...

I completely agree.


BTW looking to the bible to answer questions in the bible does not seem logical to me...

Again, I completely agree. It would make more sense to go back to the dead sea scrolls or whatever to answer questions in the bible. Oh wait, thats right, even the most intelligent people have a difficult time deciphering them. People back then thought completely different than how we do now. Thats what I think and thats why I don't, if not completely, believe in the bible. That and I haven't read any of the foundations of the bible so I can not believe that what I am reading has come from that which I have not read.


Enough on the religion. I don't want to make this a religious war here. We are after all modders not apostles.

I don't think it is bad to discuss religion and our beliefs on it. Thats why you are not a closed minded fool isn't it Airbozo? Because you are open to other ideas aside from your own and are not afraid of being wrong? Thats how I feel at least. Just keep the flames of war down and don't say anything REALLY stupid and we shouldn't have problem. If you feel the urge to flame someone, like me haha, then just keep repeating to yourself to stay calm. ^^

Slug Toy: I'm sorry I do not know more about rocks. I do know that it is possible to have a pretty in depth discussion about them though. There is alot more than what meets the eye, archaeologists realize that I think.

[Airbozo]

I don't think it is bad to discuss religion and our beliefs on it. Thats why you are not a closed minded fool isn't it Airbozo? Because you are open to other ideas aside from your own and are not afraid of being wrong? Thats how I feel at least. Just keep the flames of war down and don't say anything REALLY stupid and we shouldn't have problem. If you feel the urge to flame someone, like me haha, then just keep repeating to yourself to stay calm. ^^


Hehe, Spot on! I don't get into flame wars, in fact I rarely get angry enough to intentionally insult anyone (except that guy who shot at my house...). You are right, I try to keep an open mind about everything. I even have multiple takes on the "made in gods image" line from the bible, and several different twists on religion itself. We learn more by being wrong than being right. At least the lesson sticks better. IMHO conversations about religion go one of two ways: SHUT UP GODLESS HEATHEN! or That is an interesting take, how about this?

Sometimes I do say/type stupid things, but the beauty of a forum, is that you get to show _extra_ patience (and intelligence) by going back and re-reading your post before hitting the submit button. All of life should be like that.

[Ironcat]

I think it is entirely possible to believe in BOTH the THEORY of evolution AND creation.
I do NOT think the Grand Canyon was carved from water in the 40 day flood but since we went off on the little tangents about whether or not the ark was real or even possible, here's my .02

If you read the bible, there were only three requirements for the animals to be loaded on the ark. They had to be:
Air-breathing. Specifically it says "nostrils", more on that later.
Terrestrial (land-dwelling).
Of the same biblical kind.

The word species and the biblical word kind are often used interchangeably. But this is incorrect since they are not synonymous terms. The book of Genesis uses the word kind to denote an organism that reproduces others like itself. Since the species concept is much narrower, many species can be included in one single biblical “kind.” The term kind
is probably closer to the modern taxonomic classification of genus, and in some cases the larger taxonomic classification, family.
The Canidae (canine) family includes about 14 genera of dog-like animals. These include the dog, coyote, wolf, jackal, etc. The ark did not have to contain the hundreds of species of canines that make up this group because these were all represented by a few biblical “kind.” These “kind” would then produce all the animals that make up the Canidae family. For example, all of the hundreds of varieties of domestic pigeons that have been produced originated from one species, apparently the wild rock pigeon (Columbia livia).
The ark did not need to carry every species (possibly numbering in the millions) of animal. The ark was designed to carry only every biblical kind (numbering in the few thousands) of terrestrial, air-breathing animals.

God reiterates this point when He describes the kind of animals that perished during the Flood. These were specifically the type of animals that Noah was told to take on board the ark. “Every living thing that moved on the earth perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died”

Millions of beetles thing? The Flood wiped out all land animals which breathed through nostrils except those on the Ark. Insects do not breathe through nostrils but through tiny tubes in their exterior skeleton.

It is evident, when all the facts are examined that there is no scientific evidence that the biblical account of Noah's ark is a myth or fable. The facts support the view that Noah's ark was large enough to carry the number of animals required to repopulate the earth after the flood and that Noah and his family were capable of caring for the animals during their time on the Ark.

[d_stilgar]

I think it is entirely possible to believe in BOTH the THEORY of evolution AND creation.


I completely agree.

[Airbozo]

I think it is entirely possible to believe in BOTH the THEORY of evolution AND creation.
...

I also think this is in the realm of possibility. Who's to say god is not a single cell organism with higher brain activity and no sense of time as we see/feel it today? (or something like that). No less credible than "!POOF!" let there be light...

Back to the canyon question; One thing that convinces me that it was formed over a great period of time is the different wear patterns on the sides of the canyons. Some parts could have been gouged in a short period of time and some show patterns of wear and re-filling, then wear again. Hey maybe some of it could be receding water and some could be glacial.

[Slug Toy]

Hey Slug Toy--in Genesis 7:11 it reads, "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened."

That's where the Hydroplane theory comes from--they believe that when the waters 'burst forth', places like the Grand Canyon, Mariana's Trench, and the Mid-Atlantic Ridge were created.

ok, i dont mean to pointlessly shoot holes in this, but is the bible saying that noah lived for at least 600 years?

also, the mariana's trench is the product of rapid subduction. the plates are being forced down very fast (fast in terms of geological processes). a jet or water cant do that to rock, and anyways the trench is still going down, and seeming as there is no flooding going on there anymore, that kind of settles that. its not the weight of the water either. if it were, then all the land under the water would be sinking.

the mid atlantic ridge is a volcanic process. we can measure it. the sea floor is spreading there. i dont know how a flood would trigger that to happen.

[Ironcat]

From Wikipedia:

The Bible contains many accounts of long-lived humans, the oldest being Methuselah living to be 969 years old (Genesis 5:27). Today some maintain that the unusually high longevity of Biblical patriarchs are the result of an error in translation: lunar cycles were mistaken for the solar ones, and that the actual ages being described would have been 12.4 times less (a lunar cycle being 29.5 days). This makes Methuselah's age only 78, still an impressive number bearing in mind the average life expectancy at the time. This rationalization, however, seems doubtful too since patriarchs such as Mahalalel (ibid 5:15) and Enoch (ibid 5:21) were said to have become fathers after 65 "years". If the lunar cycle claim were accepted this would translate to an age of about 5 years and 3 months. One Christian apologist claim is that the life span of humans has changed; that originally man was to have everlasting life, but due to man's sin, God progressively shortened man's life in the "four falls of mankind" -- first to less than 1000 years, then to under 500, 200, and eventually 120 years. After those long living people died, God decided that humans would not be permitted to live more than 120 years (Genesis 6:3.) However, since later biblical figures (and actual people) such as Sarah lived for longer than that, 120 years should be considered the "usual" upper limit to man's lifespan. Some individuals can live slightly longer than that. Furthermore, starting with Calvin and Luther, an alternative explanation has arisen : 120 years would not refer to man's lifespan but to the amount of time left before the flood.

[Durrthock]

Can someone just lock this before someone gets into a Religion vs science argurment

Who Called It!!!

[Slug Toy]

you definitely did, but i still dont think it needs to be locked.

[Zephik]

Who Called It!!!

Why do you not want to discuss this? I have seen no "YOU ARE WRONG!" as of yet. You don't have to participate in this discussion, but I for one find all of this extremely interesting so I hope this discussion does not end. Like I said before, as long as we keep this to a dull roar, I believe that we can all benefit from it.

Ironcat: That was a really good article, Thanks for digging that up for us. Sure does explain alot! I personally think that the mistranslation part is especially something to consider. As even the people who have translated for us admit it.

About the part of a 65 year old man having offspring, things were different back then. I'm sure his wife was young enough to give birth, but unless human anatomy was different back then somehow, I don't think he could of "performed". That said, maybe he hand picked a "exceptional" lad to do it for him? I think that is a possibility when you think about "how things were" back then. Its almost like adoption today. Or maybe that is it, adoption. Even a adopted son or daughter is still a son or daughter. Creating children from sexual performance isn't the only way to become a father or a mother or a parent. Just a thought I had.

[DaveW]

I see no reason to lock this.

-Dave

[nil8]

Medical and historical evidence contradicts the idea that people are living shorter lives. Modern medicine and healthcare have allowed a large percentage of the population to live past 40, which in reference to the average age 400 years ago is outstanding results. Hooray modern medicine.

As for the flood, I need to cite my sources on this, but there are other historical accounts of a large flood in the region around the same time as Noah's ark. If it happened or not doesn't mean a thing to me. Just the idea of Creationists saying that natural phenomenon are caused by amything in the Bible. This entire debate is often lumped with the idea of Intelligent Design.

As a personal note, I have a tendency to scare off the closed minded religious types. I mention my affiliations, they get an idea in their heads, and off they go. It's funny on the surface, but sad on a deeper level. They fear things they know nothing about. I will say that this is not everyone and I hope it's not a majority.

Men can technically have offspring their entire lives after puberty, so it's possible.

[jaxspades]

If water ripped a hole in the earth, then magma would come out causing volcanoes, right?

That's an honest question, I am in no way a geologist.


Also, if you read the Bible, actually study it, you will find answers--it's just like any other book that you read--you gain knowledge in the subject and find answers.

And it is Human Stupidity that ruined religion, and SnowFire had a good point with his 'Good Father' thinking--God didn't want us to know sin and evil and pain, so he told us to stay away.

Why did he create the tree?

What is worship? Obedience. If they obeyed Him in this one thing, they would be constantly honoring Him and worshiping Him.

Why did he just simply not create Lucifer?

Well, He knew what would happen, so He did it anyways, so he could put into place the most amazing, loving, selfless act ever--being the ultimate sacrifice.

To me, that shows more love than if he would have left Lucifer out of the 6 days.

[Airbozo]

RE: Marianas Trench... I was in the sonar room when my ship crossed the Trench. Most Navy ships run sonar mapping runs as they cross the ocean and then send their data (the unclassified part) to all the research stations and mapping groups. It was _really_ eerie to see the sonar pings, suddenly drop off. It did not slowly get deeper, it just dropped off. A little while later it picked up again. I personally thought the sonar went on the blink. The sonar techs knew where we were and kind of ribbed me about it.

Performing at 65... My Father-in-law is 65 and has _no_ problems. Just ask my Mother-in-law...

Studying the bible... I have studied the bible and _most_ theologists agree that it raises more questions than it answers. Most (95%) of my professors also agreed that the bible is more of a religious guideline than a strict doctrine.

Worship is _not_ obedience.
transitive verb
1 : to honor or reverence as a divine being or supernatural power
2 : to regard with great or extravagant respect, honor, or devotion <a celebrity worshipped by her fans>
intransitive verb : to perform or take part in worship or an act of worship

Those who demand obedience tend to be megalomaniacs and dictators, not loving gods.

[jaxspades]

If you honor God, you have to obey him.

To disobey him is spitting in his face and dishonoring him.

It is a strict doctrine. Read it. It's right there many times in many different ways that it is a strict doctrine.

Psalm 119:30, Exodus 24:12, John 17:17--these all say that the Bible is true, it is strict commands.

Here's an interesting one...
2 Timothy 4:3

And another
1 Timothy 6:3--this one even calls the Word of God the "sound instruction"--sounds like strict doctrine to me.

Titus 1:9, Isaiah 45:19

The Bible IS NOT guidelines. It is doctrine.
It is a book on how to live, and how you are saved, it is not something that you just take 'a bit of this, a bit of that' and throw away what you do not like to read.

You do not have to believe it, and I will not scorn you for it, but please do not insult my religion or my God by saying His word is not true or strict.

I'm sorry, but I know it is more than that. It even says so itself, and I think I proved my point with the seven passages I picked that it even claims straight forward that it is not just 'guidelines'.

[Slug Toy]

I'm sorry, but I know it is more than that. It even says so itself, and I think I proved my point with the seven passages I picked that it even claims straight forward that it is not just 'guidelines'.

but then, the argument could be made that if you're a responsible person, you shouldnt need to be told how to live.

i for one dont take kindly to being told how to do things, especially how to run my life. when i hear about the bible being more than just guidelines and suggestions, i get a sense of restriction to put it lightly. being told what to do and how to do it takes away a fundamental freedom that im not willing to sacrifice no matter what. i really cant understand how anyone CAN do that, but i know they do. it just seems so irrational. i think that anyone who uses a book to govern their life is losing out big time.

[jaxspades]

I don't think so--I feel pretty free. If you remember what Jesus said, he summed up all 10 commandments into 1--Love. I like that.

I don't need sin, I'll let God tell me to steer clear of it. I don't want to sin anyways, I feel bad when I do things like lie, or hurt someone's feelings.

Besides, is Evil really all that necessary?

No. I like living within God's bounds--I'm not perfect, I still sin, and here's where I get comfort--even if I do sin, God loves me, because he saved me from sin. I guess I am pretty free after all-free from sin, death, and Satan.

[Zephik]

If you honor God, you have to obey him.
If god could somehow prove to me of his existence and then tell me that I should follow this or that in this or that way. I would "obey" him. Not because he told me to, but because if my blood father asked me to do something, I would do it out of the love for my father. If not for him, I would not exist. So it would be no different for my "heavenly" father who created myself as well as my father. If god does exist that is, which I have yet to discover. Thats how I feel at least.

To disobey him is spitting in his face and dishonoring him.
If I were to disobey my father, I suppose you could say that I would dishonoring him. So I can understand why you feel this way and thinking of it in this way, I would have to agree.

It is a strict doctrine. Read it. It's right there many times in many different ways that it is a strict doctrine.

Psalm 119:30, Exodus 24:12, John 17:17--these all say that the Bible is true, it is strict commands.

Here's an interesting one...
2 Timothy 4:3

And another
1 Timothy 6:3--this one even calls the Word of God the "sound instruction"--sounds like strict doctrine to me.

Titus 1:9, Isaiah 45:19

The Bible IS NOT guidelines. It is doctrine.
It is a book on how to live, and how you are saved, it is not something that you just take 'a bit of this, a bit of that' and throw away what you do not like to read.
This is like what someone said before, finding answers to the bible from teh bible just doesn't make sense to me. But you are right about the take a bit o this and a bit o that. Many people do that and if you ask anyone who studies the bible, whether religious or not, will tell you that if you do that you can twist it around to however you want. You have to take the entire bible in as a whole and not focus on one passage or another. Thats what I think at least.

You do not have to believe it, and I will not scorn you for it, but please do not insult my religion or my God by saying His word is not true or strict.
I do not think he was insulting your religion or god. This is, let me remind you, an "open minded" discussion. We share what we know and believe but we do not go so far as to "correct" someone. That would only and simply prove our ignorance and stupidity. So think of what he said as what he thinks and/or believes (like what you think and believe) and not as he was trying to correct you or insult you in anyway. After all, you can believe in whatever you want, as we can and do too, but it doesn't mean any of us are right. That is why we are having this discussion in the first place. So we can be more open minded people and not fools who think only themselves to be right.

I'm sorry, but I know it is more than that. It even says so itself, and I think I proved my point with the seven passages I picked that it even claims straight forward that it is not just 'guidelines'.
I personally would have to read the bible more thoroughly before I can comment on this. As I stand now, I see the bible as guidelines because I do not believe in god as of yet. But then again, what I have read, it is always in the sense of "you should or should not do this or that" and not "well I would like if you did not do this or that, but you can anyways". So I guess I am going to have to agree with the bible being more like strict rules rather than guidelines. Anyone else have a different view on this?


but then, the argument could be made that if you're a responsible person, you shouldn't need to be told how to live.

I agree


I for one don't take kindly to being told how to do things, especially how to run my life. when i hear about the bible being more than just guidelines and suggestions, i get a sense of restriction to put it lightly. being told what to do and how to do it takes away a fundamental freedom that I'm not willing to sacrifice no matter what. i really cant understand how anyone CAN do that, but i know they do. it just seems so irrational. i think that anyone who uses a book to govern their life is losing out big time.

I also agree with this, because this is how I feel as well. Another reason why I think the bible isn't a true "holy book". I mean, it says to not do this and not do that, but why? Again, probably because I have not read enough of it, but why can't we do some things? Like homosexuality? It says that "god" says that it is wrong and we should not do it. Why? I can understand that if we were to all turn homosexual that our planet would probably die off. But I don't think that is likely to happen, especially with medical science. As well as the fact that the entire population of earth would ever become entirely homosexual. But that is the only reason I can think of as to why it could be "wrong". I just can't bring myself to see it as being wrong, gross maybe, but not wrong.

[jaxspades]

God made us male and female--he gave us women for companions, so that we wouldn't be homosexual. Plus, He did this so that we had a sure set way of procreating,a nd to set up the family unit, which is the fundamental building block of society.

It's hard to build a family when the Mom and Dad are actually just 2 dads or 2 moms. It's possible through adoption, but then the children will be psychologically affected. I learned that in Psych class, and I agree--Women are just naturally better at being moms then men are, and everyone needs a Mom and a Dad.

Also, I suppose we wouldn't die out, we would clone, but I hope I never see the day where we clone humans...

I'm sorry I took his words that way, I shouldn't have. I guess I'm so used to defending myself, because, let's face it--Christians get persecuted. Thanks for pointing that out to me, I shouldn't have taken his words so impolitely.

[Slug Toy]

oh, no, you arent being impolite at all. we're just debating here. you can defend yourself until the cows come home, and we'll keep... counter-attacking. at least we cant beat each other up. ive been in some debates that spiraled down into a brawl. go figure.. they were about religion.


Besides, is Evil really all that necessary?

i would say yes. if it werent, why would god have made satan? why wouldnt god help everyone instead of some? standing by and watching misfortune is just as bad as causing it in my books.

and besides, evil can be relative. in a perfect world, the small things would stick out as an evil, such as improper table settings. maybe thats why the eccentric rich people get all snooty about it... they arent exposed to every day troubles, so they find other things to trouble them. so maybe to an eccentric two salad forks side by side is murder.


I guess I am pretty free after all-free from sin, death, and Satan.

haha, let me know how that death thing works out. you can call me in a hundred years or so at 1-800-6-ft-down. its free for the first eternity.

im just curious. whats god's stance on gay animals? monkeys do it sometimes. there are shows on regularly about homosexuality in the animal kingdom. do they go to hell? actually what of animals in general? heaven, hell, or nothing? how about the more self aware ones like elephants and primates... and squid? they communicate and appear to understand right and wrong... do they have a place in heaven if they are good? man isnt the only smart one, so surely heaven cant be reserved purely for us. the animals deserve it just as much, if not more because man has cause oh so much evil.

[DaveW]

The Bible IS NOT guidelines. It is doctrine.

I've been trying to avoid this thread, but I'm curious as to how you can say this is doctrine when the bible is clearly so open to interpretation, and therefore corruption.

-Dave

[Ironcat]

The Bible is NOT open to interpretation.... it is what it is.

If it was read the way it was written, then it would make perfect sense.

The problem is that it was written and rewritten in Aramaic, and in Hebrew, and in Greek, translated, and rephrased by the powers that be at the time.

It was written by about 40 people over roughly 1500 years.

It gets a mite confusing.

[DaveW]

The Bible is NOT open to interpretation.... it is what it is.

If it was read the way it was written, then it would make perfect sense.

The problem is that it was written and rewritten in Aramaic, and in Hebrew, and in Greek, translated, and rephrased by the powers that be at the time.

It was written by about 40 people over roughly 1500 years.

It gets a mite confusing.

Are you implying that the bible has been corrupted?

-Dave

[AJ@PR]

The Bible - The Greatest Open Source Story Ever Told

[Airbozo]

jaxspade: I am sorry if my comments were construed as offensive. That was not my intent. I was sharing information that was given to me by my Jesuit Priest Professors when I said it was more of a religious guideline than strict doctrine. Back in the late '80s I was taking classes to get my IT professional certification and the best college for that program at the time (in my area), was Regis College in Denver. A Jesuit College. Part of the requirements was to take several credits of religious studies (turned out to be 2 years of classes). It turned out to be more fun than I anticipated, because I was used to sunday school and church. Actually learning about the history of religions and the implications on society is completely different than sitting in church trying not to fall asleep.

Most of my professors agreed (and taught) that using the bible as we know it today as a literal representation of gods word was way off base due to the fact that our current version of the bible has been corrupted by interpretation and translation for _many_ years. Only when you can study some of the oldest transcripts can you get the complete meaning and story that the bible presents. The King James version of the bible (which is most widely used in America), is one of the more _impure_ (for lack of a better word) versions of the new testament due to the several different language translations. When you translate something from one language to another to another something will always get lost or misconstrued and then it is up to the religious leaders of the time to "interpret" the intended meaning. This is why the Professors taught it as guidelines to live your life by and not the true words of God, rather the interpretation of God's words.

I also do not believe in god. BUT I could be wrong and freely admit that. I have searched for that higher power. I have been baptized, attended baptist church as a kid, Spent several years studying the version of the bible used by Jehovah Witnesses, got involved with Born again Christians (who spend way too much time feeling sorry for their sins and not living a happy life), spent some time with the Morman community (some scary sheeite there!), and am now surrounded by Catholics thanks to my Wifes side of the family (some of the most closed minded people when it comes to their religion).

There is still debate as to what language most of the texts were written in, but most believe it was Greek although the argument is that some were written in Aramaic. There are even "books" that were left out. When the different tomes were written a group of clerics got together to decide what was actually put in the new testament. Over the course of several hundred years some books were even removed.

Although I do not at the moment believe in god, I do believe that _something_ happened at the time that Jesus was supposed to have walked the earth. Something that affected the Christians, Muslims and Hindus (sorry if I left anyone out). So why was this phenomenon isolated to the European continent and surrounding areas? China has no historical reference to Christ's birth. Nor does north or south America, southern Africa, or Australia. This is confusing for _many_ scholars as well.

BTW I have forgot many things I learned in the religious studies classes (after all it was 20+ years ago and _many_ parties later), but would recommend them to _everyone_, if not to learn about your particular religion, then to understand the differences and similarities between ALL religions.

If I may bring it back to topic, Due to all the translations and interpretations, the timing of the bible may have suffered as well. The measurement of time has changed over the years so it is possible that the meaning of a "year" has changed as well. This did not come up in one of my classes, but it was something I saw on a Discovery Channel special about the Dead Sea Scrolls. One of the comments by the Scholars translating the Scrolls (which were not allowed out of the devout religious leaders control for many many years for fear that they would be misinterpreted), was that the translation of the words for years and centuries or eons were similar (I may have the increments wrong) and early man had no concept of "thousands of years", as we do today. So it could be possible that the 6000 years of earth (or whatever) could be interpreted as 6000 centuries or eons.

Ok, I guess I can blame that ramble on the extra strong coffee I got on my way to work. I should know better than to fill up my cup from the pot labeled "Jet Fuel".

[Slug Toy]

If it was read the way it was written, then it would make perfect sense.

the big problem with this one is the fact that people are really good at reading things wrong. its bad enough trying to read body language when you're talking with a person face to face. take away the person, and put in written word instead, and you pretty much lose all feel of the emotion and power that went into making the book. written word just adds a whole new level of ambiguity over every day troubles.

[jaxspades]

The bible is misinterpreted, and mistranslated at times, but it was written by God through the believers who wrote each book--it is infallible in my religion.

That is why in the Wisconsin Ev. Lutheran Synod, the 'sect' you could call it of Christianity, our pastor track men spend roughly 9 or more years studying Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic, so that when they are Pastors in the field, they are quite adequate at translating.

Animals simply die, they go nowhere because they do not have a soul. The bible makes this distinction often by talking of our souls, and never says that animals have a soul. Also, Adam was breathed into by God--this is where God gave him a soul. When God created animals, he never did this, thus, they have no soul.

Again, we believe it is not an open source, for it was written by God through the men who physically wrote it down. They were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Here are some passages about that--read if you want.
2 Peter 1:21; 2 Timothy 3:16

By the way, I've been getting my passages in the NIV translation--biblegateway.com is a great site for translations and everything.

Also, I do not just pick and chose passages, I've also been cross-referencing them, and checking their context, which are key when you interpret scriptures.

That's okay, Airbozo, I took too quickly to offense. I too took many classes about Religion, I have taken Sunday School, went to a Christian Grade School, a Prep high school whose purpose is training for the ministry, where I got Bible History training, Bible Literature and Doctrine, and currently at my College I have learned the same things again, so that I may have this knowledge as I teach in a Christian school some day.

I do not know how these Jesuit Professors could say what they may have said. I'm surprised, since they have had generous training in the Scriptures. However, I kind of not surprised, since my synod is different from Catholicism, and we have more conservative beliefs then the Catholics.

If any of you guys are Catholic, I am not flaming, I am just stating that we are different. I say this only because I witnessed a topic like this go real bad in a different forum, and I don't want to see that happen.

[Zephik]

jaxspades, if you don't mind answering, I have a question for you. You've peaked my interested to be honest. I knew a man who is like you. When I had conversations with this him I would just assume with what he told me to be very well educated. As he was in many aspects. I think, if only in your faith, you are similar. So here is my question. Why do you believe in God?

[jaxspades]

I heard the word, and the Holy Spirit worked faith in me, through the power of Baptism, and through His continuing sanctifying work through my scriptural studies, and Holy Communion.

Also, I have realized again and again, that I am not in control, God has helped me through many hardships, depression, and just every day life.

I look at nature and I see Him in it, not that nature is Him or He is nature, but I see His work in it.

I just take comfort in the knowledge of His presence. I know this may sound like a joke to some, but I seriously know that things do not just fall into place.

[public_eyesore]

If god could somehow prove to me of his existence and then tell me that I should follow this or that in this or that way. I would "obey" him. Not because he told me to, but because if my blood father asked me to do something, I would do it out of the love for my father. If not for him, I would not exist. So it would be no different for my "heavenly" father who created myself as well as my father. If god does exist that is, which I have yet to discover. Thats how I feel at least.


Don't want to get too into this debate, but couldn't let this one slip by.

If God proved that he existed then there would be no point to faith. Everybody would follow him out of fear because they knew that they would go to hell, and would be more like slaves than children. This way without knowing you are tested by God for your faith in him.

[Zephik]

Don't want to get too into this debate, but couldn't let this one slip by.

If God proved that he existed then there would be no point to faith. Everybody would follow him out of fear because they knew that they would go to hell, and would be more like slaves than children. This way without knowing you are tested by God for your faith in him.

You know, I think you are right public_eyesore. So I guess the question now is, what reason is there to have faith in his existence? I can't willingly believe in something without some reason or another to. "If you jump off this cliff, you will live". Everything that I know, points to me believing that if I jumped off that cliff, I would die.

[public_eyesore]

i'm not gonna get into this discussion, but just wanted to point out that that was an easy question that just slipped past. If you know God exists, then you know if you don't repent you will go to hell, thus you are controlled by fear and not by free will and faith.

[DaveW]

I know this may sound like a joke to some

I think everyone here has enough enough respect for other cultures and ways not consider it a joke. I'd never scorn another's beliefs, even the African tribes who thought the sky would fall on them if they cut down the tall trees.


"If you jump off this cliff, you will live". Everything that I know, points to me believing that if I jumped off that cliff, I would die.

Totally different situation. There is scientific proof that if you jumped off that cliff you would die. There is no scientific evidence that proves god's existence, and none that disproves it. Did you know that Einstein believed in the afterlife, because knowing that energy could only be transfered, he believed that your soul (or even 'brain energy' i think he called it) could never be destroyed?

-Dave

[Slug Toy]

Did you know that Einstein believed in the afterlife, because knowing that energy could only be transfered, he believed that your soul (or even 'brain energy' i think he called it) could never be destroyed?

i suppose its possible. i mean, if you were to die and just be buried directly in the ground, you would decompose and the materials in your body would join up with the dirt. you would be spread out through the soil by water and insects and all that... and you would be sucked up by plants as nutrients. eventually you would be spread out over many square kilometers and be part of many organisms. not that you've been reincarnated, but your matter has contributed to other organisms.

haha, actually that reminds me of a good line from blackadder goes forth: "the standard procedure, when stepping on a land mine, is to jump 200 feet in the air and spread yourself out over as large an area as possible."

[Zephik]

What exactly is Reincarnation?



haha, actually that reminds me of a good line from blackadder goes forth: "the standard procedure, when stepping on a land mine, is to jump 200 feet in the air and spread yourself out over as large an area as possible."

LoL That was a good one.

[jaxspades]

As far as I know, it's when your soul, after you die, comes back in a newborn animal or human--the animal or human depends on whether your Karma(record of doings) was good or bad.

So, someone who is bad would be reincarnated in a lesser animal like an insect--someone with great Karma might be reincarnated as a cow, or even a baby--but this transfer happens I'm guessing at conception, so basically, reincarnation is like the recycling of souls.

[nil8]

The ideas of karma and dharma are part of a select group of eastern religions. Most people focus on Buddhism, but miss Hinduism and Sihkism.
Others have worded the idea of Karma for these religions much better than I can.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism#Karma
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma_in_Hinduism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikhism#Pursuing_salvation

Westerners don't often understand the full implications of karma. They see it as a reward and punishment system in a spiritual sense, similar to the way heaven and hell works, just with many, many more steps and rules. For some sects, it is this way. For many it isn't. The philosophical ideal I've learned from the few real Buddhists I've talked to explain it more as the definition of dharma with humans. Coming to have peace and understanding with others. Not acceptance, but peaceful acknowledgment of their existance, personality and actions.

Many different groups believe in reincarnation. Some believe reincarnation in a physical sense, some believe it to be in a spiritual sense. Some even believe it can happen in the same lifetime. A good example of this is Aleister Crowley and Jack Parsons. One is an infamous occultist and the other isn't well known except in occult and aerospace circles.
Both claimed to be the bringers of the new AEon, just in different ways, and both were successful in their own views of the world. The basic idea here is a direct manipulation of the soul and the interaction of the soul with their physical existence. This is a form of reincarnation.

Building upon the ideas of the book of revelations and both utilizing the methods of goetia and the books of Enoch, both men decided to change their basic understanding of world. Crowley formed an organizations called the OTO and Parsons started writing a memoir detailing this transformation.

There are still many other groups that believe in reincarnation. Most shamanic religions believe in some sense of the soul becoming part of the land, or of the creatures that inhabit the land, or the sky. In certain pagan sects, the idea of souls creating their own constructs of existence and choosing to be born into physical form.

More often than not, the new age belief of the collective unconscious mixes with the ideas of reincarnation. Deepak Chopra mentions reincarnation in some of his works, specifically dealing with similar veins of thought as those of the pagan groups above, that a soul will choose to live a mortal life again and then attach itself to a living form that is unborn.

Wikipedia's entry on reincarnation is very generalized and isn't a great description of the real meat and potatoes on specific groups. Take it with a grain of salt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma

Occult studies is something I do quite often and take a certain pride in my knowledge in because so few people are willing to try to understand what it's actually about. They take things at face value and what media and others have told them. As a result of the lack of real knowledge, I'm leaving an open invitation to everyone on this forum. If you have a question that is often classified as occult, wiccan, pagan, satantic, etc please ask. PM me, ask in this thread, shoot me an email. I've been learning and practicing for a little over 5 years now and I will try to answer your questions truthfully and honestly.

I'm going to leave this long, drawn out post with two quotes, and the way I feel about the idea of an afterlife and about religion/spirituality as a whole.
"One man's theology is another man's belly laugh." -Robert Heinlein
"There is no conclusive evidence of life after death. But there is no evidence of any sort against it. Soon enough you will know. So why fret about it?" -Robert Heinlein

[jaxspades]

Much better answer nil8--I only knew the very basics, I guess. Wow. A discussion on the Satanic would be interesting--I study it, but more as a defensive measure--you know, the whole, "To know your enemy is to know his strengths and weaknesses".

It would be interesting to see what you know on the occult.

[Zephik]

Much better answer nil8--I only knew the very basics, I guess. Wow. A discussion on the Satanic would be interesting--I study it, but more as a defensive measure--you know, the whole, "To know your enemy is to know his strengths and weaknesses".

It would be interesting to see what you know on the occult.

I thought the Satanic religion didn't have anything to do with Satan?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanic_Bible
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Szandor_LaVey
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Satan

[jaxspades]

Yeah, it's the worship of Satan.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/satanism

Plus, etymologically, it makes sense.

Satanism involves more than just Satan--but Satan is still at the root of all of its beliefs.

I recently bought a book on Satanism, and it contains many of the Satanic beliefs--I'll get a title up tomorrow, after the 6 hour drive back to school....school:dead:

Also, I have another book called Angels and Demons--not Dan Brown's novel, this is a non-fiction book (non-fiction to me at least...depends on your stand with whether the bible is fiction or not), which explains angels and demons through scripture. Again, I'll get a title and author up tomorrow, if you are interested. It also spends several chapters on the Satanic and the Occult.

Hey, nil8, have you ever heard of the book, The Wizards That Peep?

I have heard about it, and I have been looking a while for it--it's apparently an entire book devoted to the studies of the Occult--again from the defensive standpoint.

Well, those are the only books I know of on the subject. I'd be interested in any titles you guys have read about it.

[Zephik]

This religion recognizes Satan, generally as a life principle. Followers are usually serious adults, although a few are mature teenagers. Of the many main traditions which exist, the Church of Satan (http://www.religioustolerance.org/satanis1.htm) is by far the largest. Other Satanic groups currently exist and have existed in the recent past. Many are short-lived; their web sites often come and go within a few months. According to Statistic Canada, the 1991 census found only 335 Canadians who identified themselves as Satanists. This would imply that there may be on the order of 3,500 Satanists in the U.S. The actual number is probably significantly larger. A US Department of the Army pamphlet #165-13 estimated that there were 10 to 20 thousand members of the Church of Satan (http://www.religioustolerance.org/satanis1.htm) in the US during the late 1970's. 1,2 Accurate data for this movement is impossible to estimate, since the largest group (the Church of Satan) does not release its membership totals.

It is important to realize that the Satan that they recognize has few if any points of similarity with the historical Muslim or Christian concept of Satan (http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_sat1.htm). The Satanists' concept of Satan is pre-Christian, and derived from the Pagan image of power, virility, sexuality and sensuality. To almost religious Satanists, Satan is a force of nature, not a living quasi-deity. Their Satan has nothing to do with Hell, demons, pitchforks, sadistic torture, buying people's souls, demonic possession, performing miracles, human sacrifices, cannibalism, and profoundly evil deeds.

Maybe there is more than one Satanic religion? Just like there is many different versions of Christianity. For example, the Christan God and the Mormon God ARE different as my old youth pastor stressed to point out to me when we were in Salt Lake City.

What do you know of this nil8?



Also, I have another book called Angels and Demons--not Dan Brown's novel, this is a non-fiction book (non-fiction to me at least...depends on your stand with whether the bible is fiction or not), which explains angels and demons through scripture. Again, I'll get a title and author up tomorrow, if you are interested. It also spends several chapters on the Satanic and the Occult.


I think I have that book? I'll have to see if I can find it under my bed somewhere. lol thats usually where everything ends up. ><

Is it worth the read jaxspades?

[jaxspades]

So far it was to me...But it explains the Satanic and Occult that worships Satan, not a force of nature.

Oh!
Author is a Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod Pastor named Pastor Scheutze. It was published by Northwestern House recently--like maybe around 2003?

It is part of the "People's Bible Learning Series", an off shoot of the People's Bible Series--The former is subject oriented, things like Prayer, Christian Freedom, Sanctification, Baptism, etc., where the latter is a commentary on the NIV bible, and generally explains an entire book of the Bible in one of its books in the series--very in depth commentary, but it gets expensive as there's 50+ books in the series at about 15-20 bucks.....yeah...

Sorry, back on track, I thought it was worth the read, it teaches about Archangels, The Angel of the Lord in the Old Testament, angels in general, and also covers the fallen angels, the Occult, and I think something like attacks on Christianity--not in those words, but something like that--stuff like Ouija board (I know what you are thinking, "That Milton Bradley game!?!" It has it's tracings way back in the Occult, and I guess it is still used by Mediums today...also, If I remember right it was kind of blamed for a demon possession of a young boy who's story inspired the popular Horror film, The Exorcist.) and Witchcraft and many other things I think--I haven't quite finished it yet.

Man, I need to organize my thoughts better--I hate ADD.

[nil8]

The typical idea of a Satanist is more closely defined as a Luciferianism. It is the worship of Lucifer as defined by Christianity. This group is notoriously hard to find and they have no organization associated with them. I've met one and I've been actively seeking them for almost 3 years.

LeVeyan Satanism & Setian Satanism doesn't. Both of these focus more around the idea of embracing the part of each one of us that we hide or loathe. The murderer, the rapist, the sociopath. To understand our internal beast and to make it work in the way we want instead of repression or denial.
Every human is capable of horrific and unthinkable acts. To let the beast inside of them run the show. If there is no control of this aspect of ourselves, then when it does occur, we have no control over our actions. The idea of modern Satanism is control and manipulation through ritual and deconstruction of the concept of self. Most methods utilize the left hand path and either goetia, neoreichan technique or sigil work. Some use all three.

A large focus of this is to understand the nature of humans through the idea of herd mentality. Some people are sheep, some are there to move the sheep. What the herders move the sheep to is the herders choice. The sheep follow and do so willingly.

It is highly sociopathic and can cause large amounts of disdain compared to the 'every human is unique and wonderful like a snowflake' concept that is taught from a young age and has become imbedded in the bright side of new age philosophy.
If it's wrong or not is a question of personal morality and something an individual has to decide.

The quote I love to summarize this into a statement is by Nietzsche.
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."

[Edit]
3 posts by the time I had this one drafted and posted. Alright...

There are multiple sects of Satanism, but most have nothing to do with each other with one glaring exception, LaVeyan and Setian.

I have not heard of the book and I would be interested in getting my hands on the book about Satanism. If it's The Satanic Bible or The Satanic Witch by LaVey, be prepared for long dissertations. I an intimately familiar with both books.

Occult just means hidden. Nothing more. It's not a group, club, methodology, existence, organization, belief system or other organized unit. It is just a word that means hidden. In it's common usage, any religion that doesn't follow the mainstream methods of Christianity, Judaism, or Islam in a western society are called occult. Even some specific sects of Christianity are considered occult because of their uses and practices of magic and spell casting. The main one is Rosicrucianism, which helped spawn the Knights Templar and the Order of the Golden Dawn.

The Ouija board was not linked to the young man in the 40's whose story was the basis for The Exorcist. He was raised in a strict Catholic family that wouldn't have allowed such things.
Realistically, there is nothing supernatural about a Ouija board or the way it's used. Any good skeptic can explain that the movement isn't from the dead, it's from ideomotor action. The brain doesn't think the muscles are preforming the act basically. Get multiple people to move a small object across a table that seems like the dead are speaking. In reality, it's a neat parlor trick. Never pay for it and don't believe a word of it. It's another form of cold reading. Just like psychics. This is just my opinion, take it with a grain of salt.

The Ouija board came into popularity during the mid-to-late 1800's and early 1900's in part thanks to a woman named Blavatsky. She was one of the first people associated with the 'occult' and spread a lot of eastern european tradition into America. The Nazi message was influenced by Blavatsky, and is the reason that the Swastika became the chosen symbol. Outside of that society, the swastika often means tranquility, peace, or harmony. It has also been utilized as a balance in existance, or the wheel of life.

Almost any fundamentalist Christian book published between 1978 and 1990 dealing with the occult or satanism points towards the now debunked idea of "Satantic Ritual Abuse". An unfounded portrayal that Satanists are murders and rapists. Not a single case has ever been proven to occur. This came as a backlash to LaVey's Church of Satan and the US gov't recognizing it as a religious institution and the benefits that come with.

Demonology is an old, old study and I'm not as well versed as some of the people I know, so I will probably ask them over the next few days if any questions arise dealing with it.

The ideas of Enochian deal heavily with angels, specifically 4 Archangels to represent the 4 sides of the Enochain alter. Enochian is said to be the written language of the angels. I am no expert and know far too little on the subject to go into detail about it. Enochian is often dealt with around the same time as goetia, which I am familiar with.

Man, that's a lot of stuff.

[jaxspades]

I like that Nietzsche quote--very true. If you let your "sinful flesh" run rampant like that, then you're only going to become a monster(I hope I interpreted that correctly nil8...).

To me, even if the Church of Satan, or other Satanists for that matter, do not speak about him, or openly worship him, these kind of actions are just what he wants--an open door to the monster within. That's kind of scary to me--I don't like that part of me, and I would rather be rid of it then to use it.

nil8--why do they use words that have their roots (Satanism, Satanic) in Satan's name, if they do not follow him--as they put it?

another thing nil8--I once saw a video of a seminar on Satanism, or Luciferianism as you put it.

The guy talking had at one time been a high priest in the Church of Satan. He did worship Satan, and many other demons such as Ashteroth.

He left the Church of Satan after he had summoned Ashteroth to do their bidding against an old lady who was bothering one of his members in their local gathering. He said that Ashteroth came screaming and cursing back, yelling at them as to why they would be stupid enough to send him after a Christian woman...This priest thought, "hey, I thought Satan held power here...." and converted to Christianity. I'm not sure of his motives though...I mean looking for the more powerful being...? Not a good motive to me, but whatever...anywho, I need to find the title of that video for you.

[Slug Toy]

"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."

do you place particular importance on this quote as well, nil8? it seems to me you have admitted to being a loner and a very obscure person. its kind of coincidental that you also spend a lot of time researching these "fringe" philosophical ideas.


nil8--why do they use words that have their roots (Satanism, Satanic) in Satan's name, if they do not follow him--as they put it?

not that i know a lot about this stuff, but perhaps the word satan has another meaning aside from a designated name. perhaps satan in another language means something not so evil...

[jaxspades]

The word Satan is Hebrew in origin and means "accuser".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan

In arabic, it means to be hostile or accuse....

etc....it's all in the wiki-post.

[Commando]

Whoaa,

It is so easy to leave this thread alone. But what a great group of well educated folks to talk logically about this kinda stuff.

I won't mention names but be careful saying you don't believe in god. Hear me out. That sounds a little absolute. I've been called a laid back when it comes to religion. That can be interpreted however you like. But most would say, open minded.

Having been put in lots of extreme situations where logical good vs evil didn't seem to prevail or pan out the way I thought it should, would make anybody's faith shaky.

But the fact remains even the most critical views of science can get so close and then what? It's called theory. Which sounds a lot like faith. We can scientifically explain the beginning of the universe about 30 seconds after the big bang. Ok, scientific method. What happened 30 seconds prior to that? It's called faith.

I think Noahs Ark is the same. An interpretation. If you live on a continent and your continent starts to flood. Your like wow, the whole earth is flooding. Because that is all you know or see.

All I'm saying is extreme views of religion or science don't lend themselves to finding out the truth. Which is a personal journey for the individual trying to find it.

[nil8]

Interpretation depends on the person. The way I have always interpreted the quote is that to understand monsters, you must become one. The other is that after you stare into the abyss, you keep it with you. Everything you focus your attention towards becomes part of your existence. There are certain acts you do or see that you can't remove from yourself. Some are happy and joyful, some aren't. It's a matter of what you choose to ignore instead of dealing with. Society does a decent job helping people cope with the more mainstream ones and has a tendency to turn a blind eye to the ones that are disturbing or harmful.

LaVeyan Satanism focuses the idea of learning to manage and control the aspects of humanity that traditional Christianity rejects. Sexuality, drug use to expand the mind, the ability to understand and control the horrific parts of ourselves instead of rejecting them.

The reason Satanists use the name of Satan is for filtration. Close minded people often don't understand the real intent of these groups and take the name at face value. It's part of the shock value. Another reason is because almost all of the groups have spawned in the face of Christianity, which is the major religion of the nation, and is often dealing with the rejection of the ideals of fundamental Christianity. Some take it far into Christian dogma, some don't.

I've never heard of the video, but I am interested. People come into these groups with preconceived notions of what to expect and if one specific example tried something and got different results than expected, then so be it. I personally don't have faith in the ideas of demons, angels, god, or satan. Once again, I don't know demonology that much. It's never been a real interest of mine. I will ask my friend about Ashteroth.

Slug, you seem to be hinting at the fact that I have all this knowledge and it's probably not for anthropological means. As for the quote itself, not specifically. I get into this debate from time to time and it's a good closing statement to reflect on some of the basic concepts I try to express. There are many more important ones to me, but I like quotes. It's an easy method to model complex ideas into simple metaphors that can be remembered.

I also research mainstream philosophy. The big why questions are important to me. Have been since I was 19. Part of what makes me a loner is that I rarely connect with people my age. They like partying, or reading Harry Potter or dancing, or drugs. I'm interested in thinking. I live to think.

The complexity of existence is beautiful and one way I love to waste my time. I have no illusions about this matter. I will not become a great thinker of my time. I won't figure out the questions that have slipped man's minds for his entire existence. It's all about love of the game and self growth. The more I figure out for myself, the more I understand about my nature as a human.

I am a loner, I spend large amounts of my time studying different things. Last night I listened to an lecture series on Don Quixote and the social implications of the time period that the novel was published. I have an extreme thirst for knowledge that I haven't been able to quench yet and doubt if I will be able to in a lifetime. The only way to become smarter is to learn and the more knowledge I have the more I can throw into those big why questions.

[Airbozo]

Ok, Couldn't let the mention of a Ouija board go by without a little story;

When I was about 12-14 I had a friend a little older than me with a kind of freaky mother (all the women in his family have some mental issues), and she scared him art an early age with religion and demons and such. One day he was complaining of having bad dreams for a while and we found a Ouija board in his closet. We started playing with it and his mom burst in screaming about demons and devils and how that game would send us to hell. It really freaked him out so he packed up the game and threw it outside. Another friend and I picked up the Ouija board and snuck it into his room again, placing in under his bed where he would find it. Well this went on for a couple of months where he would throw it away and one of us or one of his sister's would pull it out of the trash and put it back somewhere in his room without him knowing....

After about 2 months he had enough and started getting really freaky about scouring his room for that evil Ouija board before he could go to sleep. We even snuck it in his room after he fell asleep putting it on his shoes or school books so he would find it easy. After all this he refused to sleep in his room anymore and started sleeping on his sisters bedroom floor. She was in on it, so we were able to even get the Ouija board into her room and tucked under his arms while he was sleeping. That was enough. He started screaming when he woke up and we all though maybe we had gone too far. The next day at school he was ranting how the devil was after him (thanks to his mom), and he was cursed, and was actually talking about getting an exorcism. We broke down and told him that it was us and his sister, but he refused to believe us. It took us several weeks to convince him we were the ones that put the Ouija board into his room. I had always thought we scarred him for life with that thing, but he turned out ok. I got to see him a couple of years ago at a family gathering (his older brother married my sister and had 2 kids), and we had a great laugh about it.

Yes I do have an evil streak in me. Embrace the monster to control the monster. Wasn't that something from the HULK?

[nil8]

But the fact remains even the most critical views of science can get so close and then what? It's called theory. Which sounds a lot like faith. We can scientifically explain the beginning of the universe about 30 seconds after the big bang. Ok, scientific method. What happened 30 seconds prior to that? It's called faith.

All I'm saying is extreme views of religion or science don't lend themselves to finding out the truth. Which is a personal journey for the individual trying to find it.

This mistake is common of people who don't understand what theory means in science. Scientific theory doesn't turn into scientific fact. It's often used incorrectly dealing with the idea of Creationism vs Evolution. A theory in science doesn't mean a speculation or idea that's unfounded or plucked from thin air.
Scientific theory means observation, hypothesis, testing, and debate. It is a system that changes as new data sheds light upon it.
Quantum theory will never become quantum fact. Hell, the basic concept of gravity is still a scientific theory. It is an integral part of the function of the universe and in our daily lives and it will never become the fact of gravity.

You're a horrible person Airbozo. Although, I think the kids parents are worse for the repression and headgames that started those problems. Convincing children that Satan will take your soul if you use a piece of cardboard with letters on it is foolish, at best and a boogeyman that can cause real mental damage at worst. As for the statement, I'm pretty sure Nietzsche said it first. ;)

As for the origins of the universe or how it will end or what happens after we die. I think these questions will always be asked and no one will have a definitive answer. The only reason I tend to learn towards science is because they're trying to figure it out logically, with a methodology that adapts to new data, and really understand and know these things. Religion is rigid in its statements, it requires faith, and never tries to seek different answers or explain itself without going back to supernatural means.

I've recently cracked "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins. Good book for atheists or skeptics. So far, it seems to be well composed and lays out some of the basic differences in religion.

I do have to give everyone who has participated in this thread kudos. We've remained civil and had actual discussion, instead of flaming or other childish acts. I've seen many groups of adults try to do this in person with very bad results, and I know that some of you are still in high school. Great maturity and discourse has occurred throughout this thread and I hope it continues. Kudos.

[Airbozo]

You're a horrible person Airbozo. Although, I think the kids parents are worse for the repression and headgames that started those problems. Convincing children that Satan will take your soul if you use a piece of cardboard with letters on it is foolish, at best and a boogeyman that can cause real mental damage at worst. As for the statement, I'm pretty sure Nietzsche said it first. ;)

Hehe I was a horrible kid I give you that. I learned from many of my, uh er, mistakes, that messing with people heads too much causes more harm than physical abuse does. I am so much better at practical jokes now that I "think" before I tease...

I do have to give everyone who has participated in this thread kudos. We've remained civil and had actual discussion, instead of flaming or other childish acts. I've seen many groups of adults try to do this in person with very bad results, and I know that some of you are still in high school. Great maturity and discourse has occurred throughout this thread and I hope it continues. Kudos.

I agree with you on this. We as a group behave better in this thread than most adults I know. Religion is one of those "taboo" subjects that will cause great harm to friendships if it gets out of control. Well done everyone!



...

[jaxspades]

Well, I still will not touch it. I did once, and it scared the living daylights out of me. Neither of us were moving it, and it guessed things about me that the other person didn't even know.

My dad said it did the same to him.

I know, this sounds like BS, but I won't touch it--It's someone out there talking, whether you think it's Satan or a demon (I do), or a ghost, a poltergeist, or whatever--it doesn't matter--it's creepy.

That's just mean Airbozo--but I got a laugh out of it. :rolleyes: pranks are funny at times......

I gotta laugh too at the progression of the post--Noah/Geology to Christianity to Existence of God to Satan to Ouija Board. Crazy convo we have going on here.

Right--the book on Satanism--I have yet to read it, I'll tell you about someday....if procrastination doesn't eat me alive.

How to respond to Satanism by Bruce G. Frederickson.

Quote on the front:
"Until Christ returns, Satan will continue to scheme...to plan ways to lead people away from Christ."

Interesting...Hope I read it and give you guys the review--we'll see how much time I have this semester.

[nil8]

Ouija boards can't guess anything. They're cardboard.
I'm hard nosed about Ouija boards because they're a toy. The way it tricks you can be explained. It's been tested. Mentally, think of it more like a mirror or a placebo. You see what you want to see and believe what you want to believe. There's nothing supernatural about a Ouija board. Never has been, never will be.

Other people's pain is funny. Always has been. The only time it isn't is when it's happening to you or they die or suffer severe damage.

I have many books I can recommend, but I highly doubt if anyone will actually pick them up and read them.

There are a couple of discussions I would love to have with some of the users on this forum, but Cana got banned for a week over one and the other is against the rules, so I will leave them on the other forums.

[Slug Toy]

There are a couple of discussions I would love to have with some of the users on this forum, but Cana got banned for a week over one and the other is against the rules, so I will leave them on the other forums.

well you could always send us some PM's or contact us by email.

[Airbozo]

well you could always send us some PM's or contact us by email.

I agree...

[nil8]

But then they aren't a public discussion. I prefer to have large opinions on topics. It allows for more trains of thoughts and varying opinions and the motivations, which makes for better debate.

As for books, pick up "The Simpsons and philosophy" for a fun light educational read.

[DaveW]

If you want to know what you can and cannot discuss on the boards, there's an easy way to figure it out.

This is Paul's business. What you guys discuss, then reflects on him. When you guys are discussing religion in a mature manner, it's fine. When you guys talk about Piracy, drug use, making bombs and other crap, it reflects badly on the TBCS name.

Therefore expect us, at the very least, to smack you in the chops if you're out of line. Some people have lifetime bans for doing the above. Paul's right to protect his brand name, and as long as nothing you guys are doing will put it at risk, we don't mind you discussing it.

If you still don't get it, ask yourself if you'd walk into a Wallmart and start talking about it. If you'll get into trouble for doing it in there, then you'll damn well get into trouble for doing it here.

-Dave

[Zephik]

So we can't talk about the use of illegal immigrants to run a business?

Just kidding. I've been smacked a few times, but I learn.

nil8: Is that a book about the cartoon "The Simpsons"? lol That might be a dumb question, but I thought I would give it a shoot anyways.

I have a question about the Ouija board. When you are in large groups, how does it still feel like no one is controlling it? I can understand one or maybe two people... but you think with more than two people it wouldn't work as well?

[nil8]

Yes, it is Snow. Very funny book.

As for the Ouija board, actually it makes it easier to blame on 'unseen' forces. The more people you have, the less amount of force that's required. Since no one thinks it is them pushing it, no claims responsibility for the movement. Often questions asked to Ouija boards are specific to the room, house, area & someone knows some history or are open-ended and have general yes/no answers.

I understand Dave, but I'm the bastard that will start telling dead baby jokes next to the family with a baby or scream various sexual terms in a parking lot for a laugh. I know what should and shouldn't be discussed here.

[Airbozo]

....
If you still don't get it, ask yourself if you'd walk into a Wallmart and start talking about it. If you'll get into trouble for doing it in there, then you'll damn well get into trouble for doing it here.

-Dave

Hehe, Guess I better stop posting then, since I would _never_ walk into a walmart and start a conversation...:D I must say that the people on this forum conduct themselves better than most people I know. If I could rep all of you at once I would!


.
I understand Dave, but I'm the bastard that will start telling dead baby jokes next to the family with a baby or scream various sexual terms in a parking lot for a laugh. I know what should and shouldn't be discussed here.

I was in the Navy with a guy that would pretend to have Turrets Syndrome, just to see peoples reactions. He went back to college after the service to become a Psychologist...

[nil8]

Study what you know, and it sounds like that guy is crazy. It's funny, I'm working towards a degree in psych myself. I want to work with either drug addiction or sexual deviance.
We're the most fun to be around in nervous situations though, we will either make fun of it or embarrass everyone and take the attention off the stressful problem.

We try to stay fairly civil on this forum. There are a few people who haven't who aren't allowed back and I think that helps.

I was somewhat surprised this thread didn't lean towards pagan or shamanic practices, but we did mostly stay on a Christian-based vein.

[Airbozo]

...
We're the most fun to be around in nervous situations though, we will either make fun of it or embarrass everyone and take the attention off the stressful problem.

...

When I was in Culinary School, I was assigned to cater a luncheon for one of the local psychiatric groups. Rudest, least respectful group of people I have ever had to deal with. Several of them even threw food at one of my waitresses and we are talking about adults in their 40's and 50's. No sense of humor at all! Several of them yelled at us because there were only 3 bathrooms, 1 male 1 female and 1 co-ed. There were only 15 or so of them. They complained about everything including the height of the grass outside... I was so happy when that lunch was done... Felt at the time like a "Hell's Kitchen" episode, but that was not even on the air yet.

They asked at the end of the event if we had any dates open for an upcoming conference and the instructor says no. They pushed her on it and she actually told them they were not welcome back to the school after their behavior. I love it when people actually tell customer's the truth.

[Slug Toy]

I was somewhat surprised this thread didn't lean towards pagan or shamanic practices, but we did mostly stay on a Christian-based vein.

dont be. as you said, study what you know. a lot of people on the forums are from the US. the US has a christian majority, therefore people know christianity best. ill now refer you to the transitive property...

[nil8]

That's uncalled for. Nothing wrong with a dose of reality. They got what they deserved.

I've learned just how ****ty most service jobs are, so I try to be respectful to everyone who deals with me in a professional manner if possible. I'm as nice to the janitors as I am to the person serving my food to the person that works behind the counter at a business I might be at. No reason to act like a spoiled ass or idiot. If you treat them with respect and like humans you will get a lot farther along with what you need from them, rather than yelling or being an asshole. It's not a hard concept and works most of the time.

You were in culinary school? What was your specialty? What do you enjoy cooking to this day?

[Airbozo]

That's uncalled for. Nothing wrong with a dose of reality. They got what they deserved.

I've learned just how ****ty most service jobs are, ..... ..... It's not a hard concept and works most of the time.

You were in culinary school? What was your specialty? What do you enjoy cooking to this day?

Yes, most humans need to be "dosed" with reality quite often lest they become too big for their breeches.

Service jobs are one of the least respected and most important jobs. The world would be a dirty place without them. All it takes is a smile to make your waitresses day.

I went through one of the local Community Colleges for culinary school. (Cabrillo College in Santa Cruz) Excellent instructors. Mind you it is no "Le Cordon Bleu", but most instructors have been through the big schools and have direct experience in the field. For instance, the Catering Teacher actually runs her own catering business, so she was able to provide real world experiences in the starting of her shop.

I went for my Bakers certificate. I had the notion I was going to start my own bakery. It is still a thought, but it is taking more research than I expected. I love making desserts and have become the unofficial Birthday cake provider for my local family and friends. I also am the main cook for my house and since my wife is a vegetarian I end up creating two main dishes (I am a carnivore). I can also whip up a mean Souffle without any kind of recipe and it _always_ comes out great! I am a personal chef for a relative right now, helping with weekly meals and planning. Only takes a couple hours a week to prepare meals for the entire week (4 days of lunches and 5 nights of dinners) (this is one of the reasons my mods take so long).

Back to the canyon thread (kinda);

It was a vacation in the south of France that got my interest sparked in a bakery. We stayed in this old town that is perched on the side of the canyon, with a beautiful view through a magnificent canyon, down to another town, where we went every morning to get our pastry and breads. The people running the Bakery knew how much to make every day so they had minimal leftovers. We (a group of 8 of us) threw off their numbers and made extra work for them until we pre-ordered.

Talk about some beautiful canyons, it was all canyons and plateaus for many many miles. Just wonderful!
View from our room...
http://www.lotechdesigns.com/host/images/6289134046988.jpg

View of the place we stayed (reverse view of above);
http://www.lotechdesigns.com/host/images/6326270499356.jpg

[Zephik]

Wow, you lucky devil! That is beautiful... How much did that vacation cost?

lol I have another question about the crazy board. How does it spell things out? I can understand it drifting from here to there, but it goes from letter to letter?

Would this board still work if everyone closed there eyes? *of course have one person observe and take notes.

Hmmm, what about if it was a bunch of Americans playing on a Chinese board that they couldn't make head or tails out of?

[nil8]

Actually, it doesn't work if people close their eyes. They go to where they think the letters are, proving that it occurs from within the mind, not by outside influence.
A camera works better for observing and is more difficult to tamper with than someone lying, or wanting to believe.

Always be nice to the people who serve you and get paid **** doing it. Unless they're really, really bad.
A baker, eh? Do you make breads often or are you more of a dessert man?

Those are beautiful shots.

[Slug Toy]

yes, nice shots... perhaps southern france?

ok, speaking of all the religious stuff flying around here, its such a huge and amusing coincidence that i happened to find this little speel in my english course pack of reading material. check this out.

The Adman's 23rd

The Adman is my shepherd;
I shall ever want.
He maketh me to walk a mile for Camel;
He leadeth me beside Crystal Waters in the high Country of Coors
He restoreth my soul with Perrier
He guideth me in Marlboro Country
For Mammon's sake
Yea, though I walk through the Valley of the Jolly Green Giant,
In the shadow of B.O., halitosis, indigestion, headache pain, and hemorhoidal tissue,
I will fear no evil,
For I am in Good Hands with Allstate;
Thy Arid, Scope, Tums, Tylenol, and Preparation H-
They comfort me.
Stouffer's preparest a table before the TV
In the presence of all my appetites;
Thou anointest my head with Brylcream;
My Decaffeinated Cup runneth over.
Surely surfeit and security shall follow me
All the days of Metropolitan Life,
And I shall swell in a Continental Home
With a mortgage forever and ever

Amen.


man did i get a huge kick out of that when i read it the first time. swelling in a continental home!

what is this copying? i recognize the valley in the shadow of death part, but i dont know my scriptures and gospel...

[Zephik]

LoL

Nice...

I don't know if they took that from any particular scripture, they might of just made it up as they went along. The valley of death part is from Psalm 23:4, look at Psalm 23 for the full passage. That was some pretty funny stuff though, thanks for sharing!

I love writing funnies in text books, its like your passing down your cure of class room boredom for generations to come. The ones that I despise though go a little something like this...

turn to page 67
turn to page 231
turn to page 48
turn to page 523
turn to page 53
turn to page 1
turn to page 32
turn to page 1
turn to page 32
turn to page 1
turn to page 32

...then after like twenty minutes of that you realize that you are possibly the stupidest human being alive. But at least by the time you realize it, the class is over.

[DaveW]

...then after like twenty minutes of that you realize that you are possibly the stupidest human being alive.

Wow, you're an idiot! Kidding. Sometimes you get good funnies. The best ones i find are the ones on the exam desks and Glasgow Uni. People who waste exam time writing on the desks usually have something very, very, worthwhile to say.

-Dave

[Airbozo]

...
A baker, eh? Do you make breads often or are you more of a dessert man?

I love baking bread. I am working with a woman every other week who is teaching me how to perfect my Baguettes. The thing I find the most difficult so far is determining the moisture content of the air and how much water to add to the dough. She laughs at me because I approach bread making as a science and my engineering background causes me to take an analytical view of the process. Her comment: "You will figure it out after a hundred loaves..."
I also love making desserts. Usually something odd or different. I have been on a croissant kick lately. fill them with a tablespoon of chocolate or peanut butter, roll and bake....MMMMMMMM!
Those are beautiful shots.
Thanks! I have 8 rolls from that trip, one of them from the cheese caves...

yes, nice shots... perhaps southern france?
Yes, one of the most beautiful places on earth...

...
He leadeth me beside Crystal Waters in the high Country of Coors


I used to play in those waters and let me tell you they are far from "Crystal".

Anyone remember the sign at the local pool:

Welcome to our swimming ool. Notice there is no "P" in our ool, lets keep it that way...

[MrClean]

A quick google says 4000 million years old.