Plectrum

Interesting :-k. I need to remember to talk to my accounting professor about this when I return to school Monday.

Very cool program :) . I got to the point in c++ that I could make a calculator program similar to the microsoft program, only better. I never got around to it, therefore I lost all my knowledge of c++ :(. How many programming classes have you had?

You are just as bad as the people in that messed up baptist church. Your generalizations don't do anyone good, they only make you look ignorant. "These" people? Is that some sort of prejudice bash against all people who have faith? I would definitely care if you burned in hell, does that some how make me a bad person? The people from this church are bad people. That doesn't some how make all Christian morals bad. Is someone disagreeing with you? Why do you feel the need to state this? Obviously it's our business. Though, it is also your friend's business if they decide they hate their life enough to end it. Does that mean you are not entitled to care and maybe try to encourage them to live? If not, you are just as evil as the people from this baptist church picketing for the most absurd cause. These people don't care if you go to hell. They just hate people enough to tell them they are going to hell, which may or may not be the case. Many people, including myself, would think its not the case. Regardless, a minority as small as 100 people in the millions of people on this earth show that their thinking may not be up to par with the human race. If there was a group of a 100 people picketing against the use of pencils for standardized tests, with no reason other than "Pencils are dangerous" or "I hate the USA", would there cause ever be fulfilled? How is this topic encouraging constructive discussion?

Gravity is a theory?

@ The Religious Bashers: An insane man cut off his hand... This proves nothing. Dear Lord, the ignorance on this forum is stiffly. @ The Christians: Do you realize what some of you are saying? The Bible isn't meant to be taken literally? Are you kidding me? What about "Loving thy neighbor as thy self"? The Bible is full of symbols. If you are too ignorant to realize this you are too ignorant to hold an intelligent conversation.

Well, then I must be pretty foolish for sitting on something I don't think will hold me up. Your point is... Look at some of my analogies and you will understand why you can't rule out evidence. Ignorance of evidence does not deny it's existence. It only shows that we are ignorant. True God may not exists and true the evidence may not exist but there are no finites to post-discovery and definitely not to the unknown or unknowable. Only if you don't see the evidence. Correct, but who is to say that there is no evidence of God?

[/hide] Yes, but that analogy has absolutely nothing to do with faith. Faith is belief in spite of a lack of evidence, or a hole in the evidence- what you explained was a proper understanding the structure of a chair, past experience of sitting in similiar such chairs, and logical conclusion making based on knowledge of what constitutes a stable and unstable chair. That... really has nothing to do with faith whatsoever. It's actually kind of the exact opposite of faith- instead of just "believing" the chair would hold you up, you analyze every aspect of it before deciding it's good enough to sit on. You're actually making an argument against the logic of faith with that, not for it :lol: . Faith is belief in revelation. I had a revelation when I saw someone sit in a chair, before that I was doubtful (disregarding the curiosity I had when I was a child. If it makes it easier pretend you are caveman that saw someone sit in a chair for the first time). Revelation is not a lack of evidence, revelation is an acceptance of evidence as proof from an external or internal source (depending on your view point). My faith in the craftsmanship of my chair does not have a hole in the evidence. All of the evidence is there, regardless if I think it will hold me up or not. Just because I think it will hold me up is not proof that it will hold me up. Talk about judging a book by it's cover :boohoo: .. Explain this please. I don't understand how my simple explanation of faith being logical is refuted by this. Just because it's taught at an institution does not prove to anyone its validity. Maybe you could share with me the argument your teachers used to convince you that faith is illogical? [hide] [/hide] Excuse me? When did I argue the implied meaning of my argument? By this logic, every post in this topic thus far is arguing semantics, which may very well be the case but completely irrelevant (yet very important to realize if that were the case). We are arguing the merit of faith at this very moment. This refutes your entire last paragraph.

Which brings us the the point of no proper evidence existing as to the existence of a supernatural being. If there was logical, definite proof of a specific god, then there would be room for debate. There just... isn't any. Faith is illogical. Intelligient debate is based on logic. Broken record, it's futile. I'll start with your last paragraph, regarding faith. First of all, faith is not illogical at all. All faith is based off of logic. This chair is holding me up because I have faith in the craftsmanship. I have faith in the craftsmanship because from what I can determine the chair is sturdy. It has four thick legs, making it balanced; it has a thick seat, making it strong; it has no rotting wood, making it solid. Regarding your thoughts on needed proof. If I'm ignorant that lightning is electrical but I see proof that it is electrical when I see it hit a generator and causes power to come out of the generator and light up the light bulbs of a house but remain ignorant that lightning is electrical, does that change the fact that I just saw evidence of lightning being electrical? No. Regardless of ignorance evidence remains evidence. Proof on the other hand, is only evidence that you accept. Therefore, if there was a supernatural being and it did create all matter and non-matter, being ignorant of the fact that physical matter would be evidence of its existence does not prove anything. Furthermore, being ignorant of evidence does not mean it is erroneous. It simply means you are ignorant. Pretend you are in a time before the science of static electrify was discovered and understood. You can experience static electricity when you touch someone, you get zapped. The zap is evidence of static electricity but that doesn't prove static electricity. You are only ignorant of static electricity.

Which brings us the the point of no proper evidence existing as to the existence of a supernatural being. If there was logical, definite proof of a specific god, then there would be room for debate. There just... isn't any. Faith is illogical. Intelligient debate is based on logic. Broken record, it's futile. [/hide] WTFMATE? When did warrior ever say he had all the answers? And what does that have to do with this topic at all? Sorry, I withdraw what I said. What I meant was that Warrior was making logical conclusions about his experiences. The problem is that if there were a God it doesn't matter how we think God should act because God would be acting how God would be acting.

Or it could be futile if neither side has any proof for it's opinion, nor any proof against the other's opinion. A negative can never be proven, and thusfar physical evidence for a supernatural being is nonexistent. It's futile. It's a matter of faith, either you got it or you don't. Unless there is a supernatural being that created all matter and non-matter. If this was true then all physical matter is physical evidence that it was created, therefore physical evidence of a creator or supernatural being. The evidence could be under our noses but we don't have the capacity to fully comprehend it if it were true. And no its not only faith. Christian thought comes from revelation not faith. Faith comes from belief. Belief comes from revelation.

[/hide] I'd tend to agree with this view somewhat. I personally rather respect, reward or condemn people based on their actions, not their beliefs. I don't give a toss whether you believe x, y, or z. I don't think it's sensible to judge and reward or punish people on that and neglect their actions. (see John 3:18, Ephesians 2:8-9) I'm also perplexed by the whole infinite punishment for finite sins thing. I don't think that's fair. I mean, imagine being a good person by anyone's measure your whole life, giving to charity, raising a good family, failing to accept Jesus and earning everlasting fire. :? (see John 15:6, Matt 25:41) You realize that God doesn't exist to you because of your logic, right? Think about it. If you have all of the answer there wouldn't be a God. Therefore, you have all the answers and there is no God. Even you have to admit that you don't have all the answers. You don't have to admit that God is real, but to be part of an intellectual conversation you have to admit that you don't have all of the answers.

Its your own insecuritys that are making u feel like that... like you said she Drank and Talked to her ex-boyfriend!! So what i talk to my ex's all the time it makes no difference because it would never go further than that. I know my girlfriend and i love her dearly. Fair enough she lied about it being a girls night out but apart from that she has done nothing wrong u should forgive and forget because trust me the best times you spend together and the times actually spent apart... for example going to a party and not even saying a word to each other all night because you know she is coming home with you and that ull have her all to your self then... A relationship is NOTHING without trust... OT: I got mad when my girlfriend tried to fry chicken and cheese together :s and called it chicken in cheese sauce i meen wtf is that!! \ apart from that we get on really well all the time ^^ -Levi Not every relationship is the same chief. Yes I realize my feelings come from my insecurities, but that doesn't change my principles and belief system. Regardless of how messed up my emotions make my head is not an excuse to disregard situations that bother me. @ your party comment: I don't want a part-time girlfriend. Full-time for me. And anyone in a relationship realizes trust is everything. But not the only thing. If you don't share common principles your relationship has a greater chance of not lasting.

@venomai: I replied to your question on page 37.

But would you sacrifice your self for someone? A friend, family member, or stranger? And if you did wouldn't you feel that you were entitled to endure it? Wouldn't it be your privilege as a person of society to sacrifice yourself for someone else? Sorry, to clarify I meant suffering of innocents brought on by an external and unwanted source. :) PS: Hey, you never answered my question about that baker comment... :P I was just making a point that physical suffering isn't always caused by external and unwanted sources. Suffering can also come from principle values. Which can be good. Sorry, I didn't check to see if you responded to the comment about the baker, I forgot about it. I read your response and all I'm going to do is switch examples. I could use the baker example but I have a feeling it will just make this argument go in a circle. Warning labels. Warning labels on any product is trusted. If the label says "don't ingest" chances are after reading it you will decide against ingesting it. Why? Because it can physically harm you. If it can physically harm you why not trust it? Why not believe in it? You lose nothing when you decide to not ingest rat poison. No need to investigate if it will actually harm you because you have nothing to gain from eating rat poison. Hell. Hell is not a physical place. Often the Bible makes Hell feel physical because pain is often associated with the body. And since the Bible refers to Hell as a place of pain and suffering it seems physical. The problem is that it can't be physical because our bodies are already dead. Hell can only be a non-physical experience. This is why a lot of people doubt (including Christians) if Hell (and God) are real. There aren't any direct physical benefits from choosing to believe or not believe in the Bible. This is why the scriptures are questioned. Because your physical body is not in danger if you don't listen to its teachings. My point is belief. You believe in rat poison warnings but you don't believe in God. I understand that the option to investigate rat poison warnings exists but that doesn't change the fact that you trust someone else's word. Just like I trust someone else's word.

I could easily eat an entire pizza if I didn't focus on how bad it was for me. If I physically forced my self I could probably get 2-3 large pizzas down. But usually I eat 5-7 slices. During the winter when I don't work outside that much I stick with 2-3. My metabolism is really bad in the winter :x .

But would you sacrifice your self for someone? A friend, family member, or stranger? And if you did wouldn't you feel that you were entitled to endure it? Wouldn't it be your privilege as a person of society to sacrifice yourself for someone else?

Zealot, has your fiance ever lied to you?

Yea I'm still with her. I have no idea what to do. Talking is out the window because she doesn't think she did anything wrong. She told me she wish she could take it back, but thats only because it upsets me and not because she thinks its wrong. She didn't cheat on me, but the problem is she lied to me but she doesn't think she did. Anyways. Whenever I hear the phrase "girls night out" by anyone it pisses me off and gets me in a bad mood. For the most part I try to not let it effect my relationship with my g/f. Like I said, I found out about this 9 months after it happened. But what made it worse was that a week before she was on a week long cruise and when she came back she told me that she "danced" with some boys on the cruise. I really didn't care, I was just glad that she was back because I missed her. Later I found out that "dancing" meant "grinding". Yeehaw!! I still find it hard to trust her. Even though its been 9 months since then. When ever I hear dance music I wonder if that was the song that she grinded with that boy to. Needless to say, dancing, cruises, and "girls night out" all piss me off. Easy solution. Tell her your going on a lads night out, and going drinking with your ex girlfriends, see how she likes that ;) If that fails just man slap her :lol: Haha. You have no idea how tempted I have been for the past 9 months to do that. Every time I get mad I think I should do that. The great thing is it solves both situations, the cruise and the party with the ex's. Because my ex lives 5 states away (thats another story altogether :-$ ) and I would have to fly out and I would be gone for a week. But she definitely wouldn't see it as 'equal' because 1 month is a lot different than 18 months. :roll: . But then I remember I'm bigger than that. Besides, leading people on is my pet peeve. And I could almost guarantee that my ex would fall for me again. I couldn't do that to her. I'm too nice of a guy. But the plus side... revenge :twisted: . One part of me thinks this would be good for our relationship and another tells me it wouldn't be.

Yea I'm still with her. I have no idea what to do. Talking is out the window because she doesn't think she did anything wrong. She told me she wish she could take it back, but thats only because it upsets me and not because she thinks its wrong. She didn't cheat on me, but the problem is she lied to me but she doesn't think she did. Anyways. Whenever I hear the phrase "girls night out" by anyone it pisses me off and gets me in a bad mood. For the most part I try to not let it effect my relationship with my g/f. Like I said, I found out about this 9 months after it happened. But what made it worse was that a week before she was on a week long cruise and when she came back she told me that she "danced" with some boys on the cruise. I really didn't care, I was just glad that she was back because I missed her. Later I found out that "dancing" meant "grinding". Yeehaw!! I still find it hard to trust her. Even though its been 9 months since then. When ever I hear dance music I wonder if that was the song that she grinded with that boy to. Needless to say, dancing, cruises, and "girls night out" all piss me off.

After a month of dating my gf (this month is the 18th month of our relationship) she said she couldn't hang out with me because it was a "girls night out". I was like cool, w/e. At like midnight she came to my house with her friend drunk. I was like w/e, girls are weird like that. About 9 months later I found out the "girls night out" was a party at an ex-boyfriends house. It just so happens she talked and drank with two of her ex-boyfriends. I was PISSED. I don't know if I'm mad anymore or not. But for the rest of eternity the phrase "girls night out" will always be a hypocritical statement and an excuse to make me feel like a tool. Whenever she says shes going to hang out with her friends I get mad. And I guess its because of that. But w/e. Maybe I'll grow up one day.

I agree that people have very little self-control over their sexual orientation. But different people lack self-control in different areas. Bisexuals have an easy time choosing an orientation than a gay person and a straight person has a harder time choosing orientation than a bisexual person. But lack of self-control is not an excuse in society. Even people who 'hate' homosexuals could use the same argument. Hatred is a biological component that some people have very little self-control over. With this argument hating homosexuals should be accepted just as much as being homosexual should be accepted. This is why 'less self-control' can't be an excuse. Sexual orientation cannot be compared to skin color. Skin color is aesthetic, sexual orientation isn't.

Religious fanatics who enforce their views upon others are no different than people who force any other view upon another person. For example gay rights people. That being said. Most people in the Christian religion aren't fanatic. A small percentage may be, but thats besides the point. Congrats on the religious bashing. Makes you look really sharp =D> .

Did he? Really? Well in that case, damn, you've got us there. Hundreds of years of gay rights activism knocked back because people still believe in the inerrancy of Genesis. The inerrancy of the Bible has nothing to do with what you quoted from Flame. Bravo on bashing people who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, though. =D> I don't understand why people who believe that homosexuality is immoral get bashed. If people are entitled to their own opinions that homosexuality is ok, people are entitled to the opinions that it is immoral. It's is extremely hypocritical to say that people should be more accepting of homosexuals. When people say this they are not being accepting of peoples choices at all. That being said. I accept that people are homosexual. But I don't accept gay marriage. I feel its immoral. That's my opinion, accept it. I don't bash homosexuals. I don't think I'm better. And I don't try to 'fix' them. I treat them like any other human. Maybe a little biased because I'm not homosexual. But still, I feel its immoral.

Instead of this being a full 20 years it should be a contest. See who can stay in the room the longest without going insane. I'd do that.

ms.Finerran... :-k I'm not really seeing the "sexy".