Satenza

Im sad to see these two go as well, im glad both had a long and successful life and making films that i certainly enjoyed time and time again.

The "large white object" is a doorway someone chose to put in a few hundred years later. The one posted in a tapestry version of the painting which is almost exactly the same in terms of where everyone and everything is positioned the only difference is that it's tapestry and the fact there is no doorway in the middle since it was done before the doorway was put in. There is another version which is another replica but done in oi.l paint also done before the doorway was added. But then there also differences in the real paining beacuse of the restoration it has undergone Anyway this is the real version;

It goes with the territory. You just have to balance everything out and make sure decisions are made for a reason which you can make fully aware. People will still argue with you sure but at least members who are mature (ie, most clan leaders) can respect your decisions and not start to vacate the boards again because of them.

Completely and utterly ignore them, then they'll love you :wink: I was talking about this thread mainly haha. None of the girls have said "How sweet, but we're just humans :)". They've all taken the pro-prejudice route against him which is kind of sad.

Treat them bad, they hate you, treat them as angels they hate you. Theres no winning.

Well it is a Da Vinci work he was known to have had relationships with his pupils and to have been homosexual, as well as Michelangelo (more overtly) which i always find ironic. The Pope, below the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel which shows his love of the male body as greater than the female body and even angered some of the people who worked there.

There are many versions of Da Vinci's work since it has been through various restorations through the past. Since it started to deteriorate as little as 10 years after DaVinci even painted it, he liked to experiment a lot. What you're seeing is the image flipped over and made more transparent i really don't see how this is encouraging much conspiracy talk. Apparently the two guys on the right become knights when this is flipped and the woman to the left is creadling a baby possibly Chrisits but its waaaay to much of a stretch. I find DaVinci's lost murial a lot more interesting, his painting of the "Battle of Anghiari" was lost because again DaVinci experimented and the paints leaked and ran. The only version we have of it is a replica of it painted by another man. It's interesting because Michelangelo was also paining a murial of the same victory opposite of him, Michelangelo's was destroyed 5 or so years after it went up. A hundred years later (i think) someone was called in to do a new murial and he was always beleived to have painited over DaVinci's but recently people have been investigating it and they beleive that a wall is now in place of where the murial was and has a 3cm gap between the wall and where the murial would be making it look like the murial is intact and still behind the wall. Hopefully they recover it soon, since it was supposed to be DaVinci's masterpeice, even greater than the Mona Lisa.

So whats the foundation for beleiving in the Christian God before taking that leap of faith?

Well, im not a scientist nor am i an evolutionist so i'll leave the evolution defence to those who know more about science and the subject than me.

These statistics have absolutely no impact on the core beliefs of Christianity, and as a result they can have plenty of minor errors. The author was human, and was documenting things he believed was divine. There is plenty of room for such human error, it isn't the same as if God himself wrote it and made spelling mistakes. Deception is the manipulation of peoples' thoughts and feelings. What Paul did is put Jesus' teaching into his own words and speak it as he believed was accurate. What else can he do, memorize every word in Jesus' life? In any case, Paul did not benefit from his actions, and would have no need for so-called "deception". In addition, Paul's words never deviated from Jesus' message, so where was the harm done? And since when did Christians base our lives around the exact time in which Jesus entered Peter's house? And remember that these are different authors, and would have recalled the order of things with slight variances. And when I said "anyone's guess", I was referring to whether Mathew or Mark was more accurate in the timing. In any case, it would not effect the reliability of the book, since it does not address anything about our Christian beliefs. If a numbers wrong, then wording and meanings from those wordings can be wrong. Numbers are shown to be wrong since they're objective it's easy to compare them. Wording and messages are different since we can't know whats right and wrong in the book without comparing it to another source of the same event. All i am saying is that we can see they got numbers wrong which also means they probably got events wrong as well. Since it's written by humans it's falliable. And why would Paul put an event into his own words? To get his own opinions across to make people beleive them. How can it be anything but a work of man? It was written by men, read by men, and otherwise used by men. It cannot, by our own definition, be perfect. On the other hand, we believe it is divine, because we believe the words in it, although physically recorded by Man, reflects the will of God, and is thus divinely inspired. And you don't seem to know the very core tenets of Christianity, since we do NOT rely solely rely on empiricism. A common Christian saying is "we walk by Faith and not by sight", showing that God does not prove himself nonexistent. And it is your logic, that apparently doesn't make room for religion, not mine. Of course, believing in God is entirely up to you, and I won't press it on you. I already addressed some of that in above postings. But the word faith really just annoys me. Perhaps you can describe exactly what faith is for me since i hardly ever get a straight answer.

No, they concluded it's more reasonable to assume intelligent design possibly because of gaps in the evolution argument at the moment. So they may just be escaping to God in order to fill the gaps that science may later fill. Also they only conclude intelligent design, i was specifically talking about the Christian God. What other than the Bible ( a book full of error ) has he left to show us his presence in creating everything that ever existed. I mean, intelligent design usually rests on the watchmaker argument and even a watchmaker leaves a name or a symbol that he was the designer. Oh, and if the big bang was the start of time then that does not come from eternity either. I don't know why you need to personaify "God" in order to escape the infinite regress.

Only their religeons made them to, To die for Christianity was free will eg islam, they are commanded to kill ANYONE who will not convert to muslim. Lucky us they are now quite weak in their faith huh (no pun intended) No they don't what about the buddhist monks who set themselves on fire protesting against the Vietnamese government? If God makes descissions he cannot be an event. However, if the Big Bang happened what came before it? Some will say the big crunch. But where did that come from? in the end we edn up with either infinite regress or ... nothingness... But where did that come from? The exact same can be said for God as well, which is why i also said this argument is also sort of logically inept as well. How do you know the universe's creation was a "decision", and even if it was how would you conclude that decision came from the Christian God. There is a difference between Christianity and other religeons. In many religeons we find multiple man-like charachters, the gods. Nothing points to monotheism as to being more logically sound than polytheism. And why is that? Maybe because all religions are product of human thought. Well for an all perfect God he did awful job of it. Lets take it he is real, what has he left here to show us this? Not much really.

That word has no meaning if the Bible isn't true, kind of circular reasoning there. So have thousands of others for different religions. I do love Thomas Aquinas, and this argument shows only that it is illogical to have an infinite regress, nothing more. That uncaused first cause can be the Big Bang maybe? God could be an event rather than a supernatural being. Same as above, I have no problem with this argument other than when people then take what the see as "God" and apply charactaristics to it. Aquinas beleived in two forms of finding truth, empiricism and supernatural revelation. These arguments show only the need logically for an uncaused first cause (which is kind of logically inept anyway) and still relied on supernatural revelation for his belief in a specific God with characteristics. I disagree completley since this already assumes evolution is incorrect and creation is correct. I can imagine my oerfect house, my perfect partner and my perfect anything. Perfection apparently entails existance and so therefore these things must exist. But they don't because existance isn't a property of perfection. Aquinas never explained what he was refering to i don't think. However he also didn't explain why order or intelligence can't come about by chance. Which is why I am agnostic, however I assert no one can know what Gods characteristics are.

My old highschool didn't have stairs. So if someone asked a direction we used to say up the stairs. Haha, highschool rocked!

Why is it 90% of these so called "biblical contradictions" are statistical? Honestly, does it really matter if there were 14 or 13 generations? In any case, looks like the number 14 is wrong, and if counted it turns out to be 13. It may be a mistake on the author's part, but it isn't that serious. Yes, because if one thing is in doubt then the whole thing becomes doubtful as to whether one passage is correct or just another blip in wording or something. If thats wrong other things can be wrong and essentially literalists are therefore following and believing something that is wrong. I don't really understand the basis of this one. Does it say "because it isn't written so, Jesus never said it"? That, is anyone's guess, but not enough to say "It isn't written, therefore it never happened." Regardless, it could also be a paraphrasing, since much of Jesus' ministries revolved around generosity and that kind of thing. It most definitely is not "deception". How is this not deception, Jesus didn't (apparently) say this so Paul therefore contructed it himself and is passing it off as Jesus' words (therefore GODS word) rather than his mortal, falliable own. This one is odd. :-k It's not much of a contradiction, seeing that neither account refutes the other. It's just the order of events which results in some logical incompatibility. Seeing that the gospel of Mark is supposedly older than Mathew, it may be more accurate. But that's anyone's guess. "Anyones guess", how reliable for a book in which people base their life around. That doesn't matter 600 errors proves the Bible is nothing but work of man, not divine or perfect and so all of it comes into question as to whether its Gods commandment or not. Error has no place if this was the product of perfection the one book in which he can communicate with man. Tell me, this is Gods chance to really convey himself to us and show us we must believe. If this is correct then why has the Christian God become such a paradoxical mess that the majority of people do not beleive in him, and why the hell did he choose to become such a logical absurdity (assuming he is perfect). I mean its quite funny really, since he created the world and humans he also created empiricism and logic the two things that show him to be nothing more than a fairytale.

Lol, looks like a nice place with friendly people. What dies the mussel king do?

Mossel = Mussel in English ;)

A heart attack at 15? Thats rough.

I liked the colours on that one, the rest were to bright.

Survival is in our nature, that doesn't make us void of all other feelings in subordinance to that. Also animals don't just act on instinct i think people here have been through that many, many times before. We are the most intelligent animal in existance i don't see why that neccessarily concludes to a God needing to have created us. Just the same way a fly is less intelligent than a chimp, we are more intelligent than a chimp.

We already went through this about 4 pages ago.

Haha, well. I don't speak like that since i don't live in those areas of Manchester :P It's only being reconsidered cos' places like Blackpool are complaining about it. Screw them, i want a nice place to waste my money.

Ugh. I hate people who get offended so easily. If you don't want your profession brought into the forums then don't make posts which involve it. I thought it was more of a compliment if anything. Oh and I am pretty sure most people would agree that taking legal action against children for something as insignificant as this (and maybe destroying their life) is being childish since this is hardly equal footing to destroying their hopes of a good job in the future.

Then you're acting worse than that child. Congratulations.

Of course it's wasting time and possibly destroying someones life, and all for that? It's a school matter for example over here if people are play fighting in school and one gets injured you can't press charges since it's defined as 'horseplay". I mean kids will be kids and it's school. All this crap just makes people into mindless robots where everythings illegal. It's ridiculous really and you're being ridiculous for saying you'd possibly destroy a 13 year olds life for being a child. Especially since you're a psychatrist or whatever and know how children behave.