Zone1 The Great Difficulty Of Being Religious.....

[The Sage of Main Street]

You're an atheist, right?

Promethean, But Only Metaphorically

 

[PoliticalChic]

JWST just got it righter than Hubble.

Science (Hubble) never established a beginning.

Behave politely or we're finished.

Dumbo, you syphlitic idioit (hoping this triggers your threat)....imbeciles like you write books claiming to be scientists, but state that the universe came from noting.


according to Liberal scientists.


...... the Leftist astrophysicists will make the absurd claim.


There is prominent scientist, Lawrence Krauss, "... an American theoretical physicist andcosmologist...known as an advocate of the public understanding of science, ...and works to reduce the impact of superstition and religious dogma in pop culture. He is also the author of several bestselling books, includingThe Physics of Star Trek and A Universe from Nothing."
Lawrence M. Krauss - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


Krauss has said "we all, literally, emerged from quantum nothingness..."
Clearly an attempt to avoid the central question of where did the universe come from. Where are the quantum rules that imply a universe that must appear out of the void? Can any come up with a few examples where something has come from nothing?

And, from reviews of Krauss' book, " A Universe From Nothing,"...

"....at the end of the book he he has given up trying to explain his hypothesis. Throughout the book he admits that Something can come from Nothing only if there is Something inherent in the Nothingness.

...Krauss claims that "in quantum gravity, universes can, and indeed always will, spontaneously appear from nothing" This is yet again another fabrication,....

Krauss mixes opinion with pseudo-science to fool his cult that the universe popped into existence from nowhere with no cause (the epitome pseudo-science, anti-science and religious belief)."



Of course, the ancient Greek, Parmenides, was correct: nihil fit ex nihilo... "out of nothing, nothing [be]comes."



The fake science dunces are willing to accept anything...even things that obviate all of real science.




Nothing frightens Leftists more than religon.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

While you may be legitimately unaware that


the puny attempt Stop the bluster. It's unbecoming. A legitimate gripe, I am happy to discuss, but not sour grapes.

Using the Cross as a Billyclub

There you go again, starting out reasonable and inevitably swerving into bossiness to prove how superior you are because you believe in a Supreme Being.

Playground insults are childish, a sign that you desperately need an imaginary infallible father figure.

 

[Donald H]

Dumbo, you syphlitic idioit (hoping this triggers your threat)....imbeciles like you write books claiming to be scientists, but state that the universe came from noting.

And we're finished. You know what it will take to get me back. Behave like an adult!

Nothing frightens Leftists more than religon.

for the benefit of others, I left that in because there is some truth in it.

The greatest threat of nuclear Armageddon is the deviant behaviour of religions. Rightists too need to be frightened.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

No Animal has done more to harm their species and other species than man.
Can you envision a species that would intentionally destroy tens of millions of its own kind?

But we are superior….we have God

Perversion Incites Conversion

That disgusting and insulting vision makes Theists look good. Anti-human Liberals like you are their best missionaries.

 

[Donald H]

Using the Cross as a Billyclub

There you go again, starting out reasonable and inevitably swerving into bossiness to prove how superior you are because you believe in a Supreme Being.

Playground insults are childish, a sign that you desperately need an imaginary infallible father figure.

Meriweather needs to be spurred on to being abusive, insulting, etc.

I would suggest you give her a chance to behave decently and appropriately for this section of the forum.

Regardless of which side of the debate we choose to take, we should all be critical of everyone's bad behaviour.

This is something the moderators could help us with. More stringent rules without any bias.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

In your worldview that's not wrong. Who cares? We're just floating on a space rock, created randomly, and headed for individual destruction.

Crucifying Strawmen

The Christofascists' selected opponents are their best allies. Being motivated by illogical imagination is as harmful as never being motivated to do anything at all.

 

[Meriweather]

All this touchy-feely pose covering up your covens' inevitable history of totalitarian tyranny.

Your issue is with human establishments and institutions. Let's take public schools. One might decry the way the institution is run, but no one is against a student using one to gain an education.

In the Catholic faith, their is one Priest, and that Priest is Jesus Christ. Billions have followed him and his teachings in living their individual lives to the fullest capacity. This is not a totalitarian tyranny. Even had their been such a thing in the past (and there wasn't) Church and State have not been together as an entity for centuries and the Church has been better for leaving government to itself.

Christ's teachings are anything but your derogatory "touchy-feely" denigration. However, without having followed his teachings, any assessment from you has no foundation.

 

[Meriweather]

There you go again, starting out reasonable

Keep in mind, I wasn't the one attempting to take a club to cardinal sins. I simply removed it. Why not present a a reasonable reason for attacking cardinal sins? It has been my experience one has no support to offer to the discussion, the frustration drives them to attack the poster.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And we're finished. You know what it will take to get me back. Behave like an adult!

for the benefit of others, I left that in because there is some truth in it.

The greatest threat of nuclear Armageddon is the deviant behaviour of religions. Rightists too need to be frightened.

I used to do that when I was a little kid.....

...oh, wait....I still do it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Your issue is with human establishments and institutions. Let's take public schools. One might decry the way the institution is run, but no one is against a student using one to gain an education.

In the Catholic faith, their is one Priest, and that Priest is Jesus Christ. Billions have followed him and his teachings in living their individual lives to the fullest capacity. This is not a totalitarian tyranny. Even had their been such a thing in the past (and there wasn't) Church and State have not been together as an entity for centuries and the Church has been better for leaving government to itself.

Christ's teachings are anything but your derogatory "touchy-feely" denigration. However, without having followed his teachings, any assessment from you has no foundation.

May I post a question.

Jewish folks deny Chris being the Messiah, and base that denial on the test for the Messiah's Divity found in Isaiah....


"He will judge between the nations and will settle disputes for many peoples. They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore."

• Verse: Isaiah 2:4

Tough one to answer, huh?

 

[Woodznutz]

The most difficult thing about being religious is expecting grown adults to believe in fairy tales

And then believing your fairy tales are more believable than others.

Nowaitaminute. I believe in those "fairy tales" but I don't expect others to.

 

[Woodznutz]

To be religious today, as per the Bible, one must do their own thinking and reading.

Amen!

 

[Z99]

You could do that. Let me know what you're going to name it?

Faith?

The Bible says that we are saved by faith but that our ability to believe in and follow Jesus is given by the Father, God. God permits who he will to believe and follow. Apparently some are permitted from the time they're a little child while others must wait until after death.

 

[Meriweather]

May I post a question.

Jewish folks deny Chris being the Messiah, and base that denial on the test for the Messiah's Divity found in Isaiah....


"He will judge between the nations and will settle disputes for many peoples. They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore."

• Verse: Isaiah 2:4

Tough one to answer, huh?

I don't see it as tough, which means you will find people from all sides disagreeing with me--which is fair.

I start with what Jesus said about himself--that he was not the Messiah Jews were expecting. Let's look first at what Jews were expecting. Isaiah 1 tells us that the glory days of the great Kings of Judah were over, and that Jerusalem was not the city it once was, it was far from being a city of God. The rich looked after themselves and ignored the plight of the poor. They ignored God's commands.

Isaiah saw the handwriting on the wall, that such a city would fall into the hands of its enemies--and it did. But Isaiah also saw what could happen, what would happen, if the people of God returned to their senses and to God. There again would be a king who, like Solomon, would have great people of other nations come to him seeking just judgment of their own issues. Their disputes would be settled, and there would be no need for war. Isaiah lived through King Ahaz, who turned to idolatry, the worship of Baal, and child sacrifice. His son, King Hezekiah, restored worship to God and drove Assyrians from Jerusalem. Hezekiah was considered a great king, perhaps the most righteous of the Jewish kings.

Jews, of course, faced more trials but throughout the decades, centuries they looked for a King, like David, who would be a renown Jewish king, and who would have the wisdom of Solomon.

Jesus' focus was not on the kings of Jerusalem. He pointed to the passage in Exodus where Moses said there would be one like him, but greater. The Gospel of John takes Jesus back to Genesis. The point is that Jesus did not come to correct the mistakes of kings and their kingdoms, to rescue Jerusalem, but to correct the mistake of all of mankind which took place in the Garden of Eden.

Some seem to think that the story of end times began with Jesus. Instead, that story was already alive and well long before Jesus. That story predicted there would be a great king, but in the end, the great king would pass on, and the world would return to the state it had been in before his reign. Their conclusion: It would take God, Himself, to rule the Earth for the Earth to have an everlasting peace because such an everlasting peace was impossible when left to mankind.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I don't see it as tough, which means you will find people from all sides disagreeing with me--which is fair.

I start with what Jesus said about himself--that he was not the Messiah Jews were expecting. Let's look first at what Jews were expecting. Isaiah 1 tells us that the glory days of the great Kings of Judah were over, and that Jerusalem was not the city it once was, it was far from being a city of God. The rich looked after themselves and ignored the plight of the poor. They ignored God's commands.

Isaiah saw the handwriting on the wall, that such a city would fall into the hands of its enemies--and it did. But Isaiah also saw what could happen, what would happen, if the people of God returned to their senses and to God. There again would be a king who, like Solomon, would have great people of other nations come to him seeking just judgment of their own issues. Their disputes would be settled, and there would be no need for war. Isaiah lived through King Ahaz, who turned to idolatry, the worship of Baal, and child sacrifice. His son, King Hezekiah, restored worship to God and drove Assyrians from Jerusalem. Hezekiah was considered a great king, perhaps the most righteous of the Jewish kings.

Jews, of course, faced more trials but throughout the decades, centuries they looked for a King, like David, who would be a renown Jewish king, and who would have the wisdom of Solomon.

Jesus' focus was not on the kings of Jerusalem. He pointed to the passage in Exodus where Moses said there would be one like him, but greater. The Gospel of John takes Jesus back to Genesis. The point is that Jesus did not come to correct the mistakes of kings and their kingdoms, to rescue Jerusalem, but to correct the mistake of all of mankind which took place in the Garden of Eden.

Some seem to think that the story of end times began with Jesus. Instead, that story was already alive and well long before Jesus. That story predicted there would be a great king, but in the end, the great king would pass on, and the world would return to the state it had been in before his reign. Their conclusion: It would take God, Himself, to rule the Earth for the Earth to have an everlasting peace because such an everlasting peace was impossible when left to mankind.

How about some biblical quotes to back that up....

Isaiah is the law of the prophets.....how is it fulfilled?

Matthew 5:17 NIV - The Fulfillment of the Law - “Do not​

The Fulfillment of the Law. 17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

 

[Woodznutz]

The Bible says that we are saved by faith but that our ability to believe in and follow Jesus is given by the Father, God. God permits who he will to believe and follow. Apparently some are permitted from the time they're a little child while others must wait until after death.

True. I became a believer at age 3 or 4 when my mother gave me a religious coloring book. However, I didn't become a Christian until I was 30.

 

[Donald H]

I used to do that when I was a little kid.....

...oh, wait....I still do it.

Noted. There will be a probationary period. It doesn't have to be for long..

 

[Meriweather]

Isaiah is the law of the prophets.....how is it fulfilled?

Jesus taught obedience was by discerning the will of God and following it. Again, this goes back to Genesis where the will of God was for mankind not to eat the fruit on the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

 

[Donald H]

Jesus taught obedience was by discerning the will of God and following it. Again, this goes back to Genesis where the will of God was for mankind not to eat the fruit on the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Each mention of the tree needs to contain information on it being not a literal tree, but the accepted meaning is allegorical.

Eating the tree's fruit can't possibly mean anything explaining the difference between good and evil.

Allegorical references maybe can to only the above average in intelligence.