Saru Inc

You can't have the opinion that something is testable, really. You can think it is, but if there's no tests that prove it, it's not testable. No, it's my opinion he can't be tested by YOUR standards.

Didn't I just say it was an opinion? Yes, I did.

I work at Panchero's it's an upscale fast food joint. A bit pricey, all a la carte, and is a subway version of taco bell basically. I work 35 hour weeks, along with clubs and school (with 1 ap class I didn't have time for any more) andI think I'm going to be promoted, we all started off at $6.55 (min wage for VA) and I was the only one promoted to $7 eevryone else is at $6.75. But I don't know if it's worth it.

There's a book called "Mathematics is God being silent." I want to read it, it's on my list of books. And also, I've been over this, but meh. God is testable, andcan be with empiracle evidence, but it's really hard to explain, and I don't think I even fully understand it. And to the quoted poster, God does follow science. In the Bible it says "It is God's glory to hide somwething, and man's glory to discover it." Which is why some Christians are evolutionists, they think that;s what GOd hid. But what I think he means in there, is, he hides ways for us to know he is there, empiracle ways for exmaple. And it glorifies us to find it, because then we can tell others. I also, think that God does use science, but not in the way we think. Note, this is all a personal opinion, but I think that it is ignorant to think this isthe most advanced form of science. Maybe in 100 years or so, we will discover scientifically, a way to prove God. That explains the Big Bang, Evolution, everything. But yes, even I do not know why the Universe is expanding, it does point to the Big Bang Theory, but I'm not sure....

Or the Ba'aath party for that matter. (I believe there was a section for kids, am I right?)

Innie.

I know. I can't believe a democrat actually won on the internet! Those dirty liberals and their technology! Us farmers down here in Alabama don't need no darn computers to get the truth. We either read the paper and are misinformed or don't read the paper and are uninformed! What does Alabama have to do with anything? Would you be surprised if John McCain won the talk radio poll? I was just responding to your irony with more irony. The Democrats typically are more active on the internet because they live in cities or more urban areas. Total stereotype, I know, but I can't be bothered to care right now. Dude, he was being sarcastic, everyone online is liberal atheistic and democrat. :P

Actually, not so. I believe the blacks supported Repubs. until around good ole FDR. But, who wouldn't support FDR. I agreee with you dude, it is unacceptable. Also, I may be ignorant in this subject, I'm not sure, beucase my gov't teacher says my city is 'ahead of everyone else' in that there's virtually no racism here. Well, as in whites racists to blacks, so unless I'm unaware of a huge problem, people (blacks, asians even whites in some cases) need to get over themselves, racism is effectivly over, as far as I know. On the flip side, that's very true James, when I was watching the news, and WVA went McCain the anchor said "that's no surprise" but everyone at my workj, everyone, whites or black, said they were voting for Obama cause he was black. I was like "lol who cares what color he is, it's his policies that matter." And they called me a racist. #-o

So... People are actually debating whether or not Jesus actually existed? He did. Good luck proving he didn't. Is flinging the burden of proof onto people the only debating tactic you know of? Funny thing, is that the people who deny Jesus existed is going to not only refute almost every reputed historian, since the consensus amongst them is that Jesus existed, but also play a game of "fill in the blanks" which is inevitably going to lead to big, giant, gaping holes. I don't fling the burden of proof anywhere, since there's nothing left to prove as it's already been proven. Why reinvent the wheel when it's already been invented? The assertion that Jesus did not exist is a fringe belief. Jesus' existence is accepted by almost all historians, and the reason is that there is PLENTY of evidence. A religion that claimed him as its founder was spread all over the Roman Empire within 20 years of his death, and, while there is no contemporary evidence of him, there is much contemporary evidence of those who knew him, including his brother. In fact, those who knew him not only talked about him, they were killed for talking about him. The reason "Jesus did not exist" is not a proposition that is taken seriously by historians is because the only alternative to his existence is the biggest and stupidest conspiracy theory you ever heard. "There is no contemporary writing" is the TOTAL argument of the "Jesus did not exist" crowd. There is nothing else, as all other evidence says he existed. Again, there was the church that claimed him as its founder only 20 years later and there is contemporary evidence of his friends and family. For example, Paul wrote that he went to Jerusalem to see James, the Lord's brother. So, what's YOUR theory? Was Paul lying about going to see James, or was James lying about having a brother? Because if there was no Jesus, those are your only two alternatives. All in all, either you accept that: 1.) Peter, James and John got together and said, "I know! Let's make up a religion about a fake person who's supposed to be the Messiah and gets nailed to a cross! That'll go over big!" And, then, of course, they got NOTHING from this bizarre hoax-- Which they kept up for DECADES-- Except for poverty, beatings, exile and execution. Yet they kept it up for 50 years anyway. Or: 2.) A guy named Jesus lived in Galilee 2000 years ago, and his followers started a religion about him after he died. Gee, that's a tough call. Yea, 90% of historians, atheist or not KNOW Jesus existed, but the Atheists or muslims or w\e say he was just a person.

Dude, everyone knows Jesus exists, only naive people deny it.

Nothing really. What does your post have to do with anything?

My motto is: hang with em but don't bang with em.

Oh, don't start about Physics, I studied 4 hours for a test, had all 15 formulas memorized, and could recite in a heartbeat, and on the test he didn't ask for a single one, of the use of one, it was stuff like "what does the slope of a velocity time graph mean" ugh.

I think I posted this earlier, I forget. But this phone is so epic, I love it, it's old, but still new, if you know what I mean. You can get it relatively cheap, but it has awesome features, the camera has still and video, and is epic nice, I can shoot up to 3 hours of video (no joke) the music is awesome, kind of. It's really the only drawback, you have to buy in iTunes, burn to CD, then burn to Yahoo! Music then upload to phone. Also, when you upload, you can't really use an album name, cause Yahoo! Music sucks, but you can still get song name and artist. Takes a while, but it';s so worth it. The speakers are loud and clear; and texting is the best and easiest it can get without a QWERTY keyboard. Another drawback is, the screen breaks often. You can buy a new one on e-bay for around $25, but, if you buy a crystal case, the screen will never break basically. The alarm clock is awesome, and you can set any song you on the phone to it, and as a ring tone, it has a thing called 'voice note' where you can record yourself talking and send to a friend, it's faster than texting. I rate it a 12\10.

First off: Kirk Cameron is [developmentally delayed]. Second: lol. I have to admit, some Christians have really stupid theories about why god exists. Kinda like, someone may have a theory about why gravity exists, gravity is there, but their theory is [developmentally delayed]ed.

Nope. I was just saying, we believe Gays should have the term 'marriage.' though they can use 'civil union' we don't care. But that's OUR morals. And if Atheists Morals are that they should be married (just like Christians think all babies SHOULD live) then aren't they forcing that on us?

And that is what we are doing by debating. Logical fallacies are used to ensure that we do so in a reasonable and logical manner. Eh, I guess we just have to agree to disagree. I find it illogical to bind your life to the logic of dead men who, in turn, wanted us to explore and find our own logic. Not just decide, "Well, I've looked at theirs, and it's pretty good." K, we get your point about the proof. I don't think anyone is denying that. And on logical fallacies - why do you say things like "illogical to bind your life to the logic of dead men.." If someone points out a logical fallacy it is just to save them time, so that they do not have to go through an entire argument and show someone why it is wrong. The idea is that there are several tactics/traits employed in arguments continuously and therefore to make it easier, we prove why it is wrong, GIVE IT A NAME, and then refer to that fallacy when someone tries it again. Do you really expect people to constantly explain these things over and over? If I say "I think drugs should be legalised" and John McCain says "You want children to take crack!" do I really need to constantly explain again and again why that is a ridiculous conclusion? Or instead, can I not just give said fallacy a name and then tell someone "oh, you're using that same strawman coupled with appealing to emotion on the "children" part to make it easier for you to throw down my argument." and be on with my day. And this burden of proof argument is just ridiculous. Saying that God does not exist is different to saying that God does exist because we assume things to not exist until we have evidence that they do. and in actuality the phrase "does not exist" actually means "does not exist beyond any reasonable doubt" as it is obvious that you cannot disprove something's existence 100% conclusively. In my opinion there is absolutely no evidence of God existing therefore I say God does not exist. There is no evidence for a small African beetle with divine intelligence living on a planet named Shibbity in the Constellation Lyra but saying that it is hypocritical to say that it does not exist is just stupid. Sure, God could exist. The African beetle could exist. But to me, it is in the same realm as a talking pickle, santa claus, unicorns etc, so for the sake of our [bleep] sanity we just say that it doesn't! Why must you drag everything into the realm of semantics?! I have looked at the situation and the only evidence Christians provide is 1. The Bible (and I've read a lot about whether the Bible can be trusted, and although Sly Wizard will disagree, I think the answer is, for metaphysical claims, absolutely NO. 2. Prayer, or a feeling - various experiments have shown that prayer does nothing and the feeling is psychosomatic + influences in group psychology. 3. Stupid creationist evidence like "Look how easily a banana fits into a man's hand. It must have been designed!." 4. "Look around you at the world, don't you think it is cleary designed?" No, the world appears exactly as if a God does not exist. Sure, believe what you want, you're entitled to it, but don't force it into the system of law and don't oppress people otherwise we'll start fighting back and that's exactly what is going to happen now that the Christian majority in the USA has decided that it is going to start (not really start, they've been doing this for centuries) denying freedoms to certain people with genetic differences. Lol at your post. Also, aren't Atheists forcing their morals on US by letting gays marry? Think about it.

Well, I'm pretty sure some theists say that their subjective evidence is hardcore too. Try as I might, I have never seen a theist express any proof besides: *a holy text *anecdotal comments *a feeling (I recognize none of these as persuasive evidence) Casting doubt on science, making arguments from ignorance, and pointing to the God of The Gaps is what I often see. If any theist will show me any evidence besides this, I'd be glad to hear it :) I just don't think any actually exists. Then try to prove to me that Jesus existed historically. To be the son of God and worthy of worship, the first hurdle is to actually exist, no? There is a HUGE amount of evidence against a global flood. Where did the water come from? A firmament of water? Where did the water go to? How can you explain the age of mountains? Why aren't Sierra Nevada's eroded as much as the Appalachians at the time as the flood? If a flood actually happened, many ice caps could not have formed, such as the Greenland Ice Cap; it could not have grown under the environmental conditions of the last 10k years. Why did the Flood not leave traces on the sea floors? A year long flood should be recognizable in sea bottom cores by (1) an uncharacteristic amount of detritus, (2) different grain size distributions in the sediment, (3) a shift in oxygen isotope ratios (rain has a different isotopic composition from seawater), (4) a massive amount of extinction, and other characters. Why do none of these show up? Why is there no evidence of a flood in tree ring dating? Tree ring records go back more than 10,000 years, with no evidence of a catastrophe during that time. I won't even go into the impossibility of Noah fitting that many animals into an ark that size, the contradiction in genesis of either 2 or 7 animals of each kind, why there isn't an ENORMOUS blip in population factors, etc, etc, etc. I could go on for days. Well, obviously, some parts of the flood are spiritual, that we do not have evidence for, such as, as you said where did the water come from, and go? Well, I'm not denying there's no evidence for that. But I saw a really good link for explaining the flood, let me try and find it, I'll post it when I do. And I mean, with the ark, I've noticed that myself, we weren't there, so we don't know how it fit in. Found one: Not the same, but still very very good. http://www.ucgstp.org/lit/gn/gn046/noahsflood.htm And sorry, but lol Lent, owned.

It's quotes like these that make me realize that the phrase "All men are created equal" is meaningless. The seperation of church and state was abandoned long ago, and it's a damn shame. It's kind of funny. Nations with official churches have more separation of church and state than the United States; the US, a country founded on the ideal. Just a side note: Separation of church and state was written in a private letter, it is in no part of the law, anywhere. As too Cheeseme666, I agree with you. However, everyone at school (except my friends and teachers and such) think I am gay, simply because I have a deep, yet feminine voice. So even though I am entirely straight, hanging out with my gay friends doesn't help the situation. Also, I've bad experiences, many of my Gay friends hit on me, it's caused many fights. But I'm nowhere near homophobia, but a little bit close I guess, I've ended many friendships when I found out they were Gay, because I felt extremely uncomfortable.

Good thing I never ever get these e-mails. Ever. :lol: Cause if so I'd prolly click it, and post sarcastic crap like "Zez for Pres" meanwhile giving away my pword accidentally. :wall:

To that vid posted: 1) Because amputations aren't life threatening, like Cancer, God 90% of thei time follows the laws of science and such. But not always, OR, (I don't know this, it's a guess) BUT maybe God uses parts of the body to perform miracles, or science, like a dead person touching something like am metal pipe and the static shock puts the heart back in motion, or white blood cell count raises for some reason and kills the cancer.You never know. 2)Because God holds us accountable for our decisions, which (I know this is off-topic) is why I think the Holocaust happened. He let it happen so we realize we f'd up, and we don't let it happen again. Same thing with hunger. This can also be applied to the flood and such, he warned us, but we did not listen, so he let it happen. Also, don't you think, that if God was God, he could answer more than one prayer at a time. :wall: =D> #-o 3)As someone earlier posted, those our all verses from the Old testament, God back then was not the one we knew today. He had a loving side, of course, but also, a vengeful side. If someone did not follow the rules, they sinned, thus THEY WERE NOT INNOCENT in the eyes of God, it doesn't matter what we thought, but what he thought. To think we can influence him like that is ignorant and selfish. Naturally, when Jesus came, he mede the bridge, and HE died for ALL of our sins, Atheist and Christian, so we did not have to die for then, If Jesus never came, I suspect Gays would still be killed, as along with 80% of the Teenager population. Still, Atheists will still go to hell, because Jesus died for our sins on Earth, not in Heaven. 4)It doesn't list any examples. So how can we be sure. Second, though, there is evidence of a flood, and many stories in many culture and many languages about the flood. Also, it ignores a SECTION of science, not science itself. I hate all those ignorant people who say that. Who says he doesn't follow it? Maybe he follows in a way, we'll never know, but is still scientific. Don't forget, we have no skeleton of Adam to look at, so how can we tell if he wasn't created by dust? We can't. Naturally, people will say 'well how do you know he WAS?' Well, the Bible. 5)Because, they were beaten in battle, back then, what you did was made them slaves. They didn't go on slave raiding parties, but took the defeated enemies. 6) Why do good things happen to bad people? And as Lent said, Go doesn't interfere, quite a weak argument actually. 7) There is, you see them everyday, but simply ignore them. Also, some of the evidence can be explained by science, but once again, you ignore them. 8) Lent's quite wrong, he's not dead. And it's so ignorant and naive to take it to a personal level. How do YOU know whether or not Jesus appeared to me? You don't, and you never will. Also, maybe Jesus won't appear physically, but mentally, if you're in an extremely panicked state, and our near hysteria, and you pray for God, and instantly a real calming emotion comes over you, who's to say it isn't Jesus? 9) I must say "lol" at this so: Lol. :lol: :lol: :lol: :wall: Are you serious? It is all symbolism, he doesn't actually mean that, while some believe in transubstantiation, (the bread and wine becomes Jesus' body and blood as soon as you consume it) it is a symbol, of you becoming close with Jesus, and destroying the distance that separates you. 10) Who says Christians are perfect? Dang it, no one says we're Jesus. Jesus is Jesus because he NEVER sinned. We just believe Jesus is God, and real, even to this day. We never said we were him in any way. Also, Many Atheists call themselves Christians in polls and such, simply because they aren't pagan. As Lent said, quite ignorant. It is quite funny, when I skimmed the 'answers' most said "because God is imaginary." Wow, see you put a lot of thought into that one. And Venomai, I'm quite aware of that, and that he does not believe in the Christian God. Just saying he thinks one exists or existed. Also, I know about the Burden of proof, I was just wondering if that's where you guys all got it from, and how the guy who talks about it changed his mind.

Some food for thought: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6688917/ And it's Msnbc, which I know all of you guys love. Burden of proof anyone? Also, I love how everything you guys are saying can be turned around directly. And people still don't realize that science isn't correct for all things, and that Evolution, Big Bang AND Religion is an opinion, but of different sorts.

That's a very gross oversimplification, and it's wrong. Both atheists and Christians can accept evolution and the big bang. Take these Gallup polls, for example. [1] Even though Americans are around 75-80% Christian [2], around 50% of them accept evolution, be it with or without the aid of god. What you described is the current scientific understanding of how we got here; it's not an atheist creed. It just so happens that many atheists, having no fundamental contradictory religious beliefs, see it as the most logical explanation to how we got here. Here's the thing, Christians CAN'T accept Big Bang or Evolution, the Bible leaves no room for it. And in this case, your logic is an opinion. Everyone has their opinion of how we got here. For Atheists: science or whatever. Christians: God. It's facts to both sides, but still an opinion.

Well, here's the thing, there are facts for both side. You just have to figure out which hold more validity. Athestic side: Evolution Big Bang And "Logic" While on the Christian side, we believe that the Bible holds all the facts we need, but you can find them out other ways. On another note, my dad is going to bring home a book from his work about the worlds leading Atheist who became a Christian. (I don't know who, but I can't wait to read.)

Warrior, as I said, miscarriage is accidental, abortion is deliberate.