The egg came first. The chicken is the mutant offspring of whatever laid the egg (feathered dinosaur?).
The person walking away didn't actually get struck by lightning. The headache comes from the pressure shockwave produced by rapid heating and ionization of the surrounding air when the lightning struck very close to the person. While the nearby surrounding air is ionized, the ionized particles, instead of the person, became the path of least resistance for the lightning. In a properly operated electric chair, the electricity travels directly through the person, else the person still remains painfully alive.
----
(yes i am nots good at this english part, LOL) i didnt say the person was missed by a close lightning bolt strike, i said he was litterly hit by a lightning bolt. hence the fried egg part. haha.
Can you really reconcile that with your assertion?
Psalms 148:7
Even the dragons praise the Lord.
19:4-6
The sun moves around the earth.
----
here is the problem with you thinking there are errors in the bible.... if you take ever line litterly speaking by Your Knowledge of the world you would be correct in saying there where no dragons praising the lord. however when the bible was written the ''termanology'' they had back then was not what you use now. this science is also is not the same either. if you where never told the earth moves around the sun and you seen the sun move across the sky, whos to tell what one is moving and what one is standing still, without a point of refferance.
here is the one thing that i probably will never understand. how can christians, muslims, budhists, ect. say that their religion is correct and the others are wrong. WTF!? haha. I would think if your going down the religion aspect of life/existance then its impossible to determine what is the ''correct'' religion. They say that good always wins over evil. well thats because the good get to write the history books and the evil dont, LOL!
It actually says sea monsters, sea beasts, sea creatures, or dragons in Psalms 148:7, varying on translations. Pretty sure dragon is just a reference to monstrous ocean life, taking it pretty out of context there.
As far as the sun orbiting the earth in Psalms 19:4-6, it actually just says the sun goes across the sky. Every analogy falls apart if you dissect it to death in any arena. Say the expansion of the universe being related to filling a balloon with air, if you don't think about it too hard it can make sense, everything is moving away from the center fairly equally. This however doesn't quite work out in the brain so good if you wonder what color the balloon is, how does the little knot get tied up every time to not result in sudden mass shrinking, are comets the spit/breath that occurs from a person breathing in the balloon, is it a person or a machine breathing into the balloon, what alternate universe is the balloon pumper in, etc.
Anyways by all means counter-debate those who think I'm full of hot air, just try to keep it civil :)
First... who says dragons never existed, actually there is quite a bit of evidence that they possibly did exist, the only problems science has with them is that they cant find any remains, If they were HUGE flying creatures, They could have had no bone structure what so ever, OR maybe they did like elephants and all went to one place to die, in the ocean perhaps.
They didnt think the giant squid existed until they caught one of the huge bastards, its completely possible that dragons exist.
Think about it, EVERY Civilization has had some mention of dragons... up until around the 12th Century... SO the question is.. where did they go if they were here...
First... who says dragons never existed, actually there is quite a bit of evidence that they possibly did exist, the only problems science has with them is that they cant find any remains, If they were HUGE flying creatures, They could have had no bone structure what so ever, OR maybe they did like elephants and all went to one place to die, in the ocean perhaps.
You need to be banned from threads that require a semblance of thought before you ruin this one with your utter homeschooled nonsense, just like the last one.
It actually says sea monsters, sea beasts, sea creatures, or dragons in Psalms 148:7, varying on translations. Pretty sure dragon is just a reference to monstrous ocean life, taking it pretty out of context there.
As far as the sun orbiting the earth in Psalms 19:4-6, it actually just says the sun goes across the sky. Every analogy falls apart if you dissect it to death in any arena. Say the expansion of the universe being related to filling a balloon with air, if you don't think about it too hard it can make sense, everything is moving away from the center fairly equally. This however doesn't quite work out in the brain so good if you wonder what color the balloon is, how does the little knot get tied up every time to not result in sudden mass shrinking, are comets the spit/breath that occurs from a person breathing in the balloon, is it a person or a machine breathing into the balloon, what alternate universe is the balloon pumper in, etc.
Anyways by all means counter-debate those who think I'm full of hot air, just try to keep it civil :)
Ricky Gervais puts this best.
"You can't do it with a maths book, why can you do it with the word of god?"
You don't get to make your own personal bible edits. Either the King James is the word of god, or it's not. If, as you say, it's not, then don't attempt to defend the assertion.
No child should be told that they'll burn in hell forever if they don't believe.
Speaking of hell, one reason why i refuse to accept most modern religions, is because of the afterlife "punishment side", I mean, what crime could possibly be bad enough so that they will be tortured forever (and ever)?
"You can't do it with a maths book, why can you do it with the word of god?"
You don't get to make your own personal bible edits. Either the King James is the word of god, or it's not. If, as you say, it's not, then don't attempt to defend the assertion.
Wait, what? You're saying that there's only one possible translation of every age-old original transcript we have and that everything in it is meant completely literally or is otherwise completely false?
Wait, what? You're saying that there's only one possible translation of every age-old original transcript we have and that everything in it is meant completely literally or is otherwise completely false?
Yup... your just mad because you cannot prove it wrong, same reason you just posted Incorrect on Mozareds statement... because when you cant find the answer you just attack whoever your debating with... sad sad little 4 ft korean troll
and as for your other statement in reply to deadzergling, if you knew anything other then trolling and blabbing your mouth you would know that there are several different versions of the bible that are accepted by different churches.... and the king James version... it is only one of the possible translations... learn history, it was first translated into Greek, then Latin, and finally old English... So there is a possibility that it has a few mistakes here and there.
Yup... your just mad because you cannot prove it wrong, same reason you just posted Incorrect on Mozareds statement... because when you cant find the answer you just attack whoever your debating with... sad sad little 4 ft korean troll
Think before you troll.
/quote You don't get to make your own personal bible edits. Either the King James is the word of god, or it's not. If, as you say, it's not, then don't attempt to defend the assertion. /end quote
You seem to be a fairly intelligent person, so surely you must appreciate the fact that accounts will vary, terminology and meanings will change (e.g. 'wicked' ) and human error will lead to mistakes / inconsistencies in the various transcripts. That being said, I think - in regards to your initial rebuke regarding the point that the Bible is factually and historically correct - you are being pedantic and trying to pick him apart due to him seemingly implying the Bible's accuracy as an absolute. It's important to apply common sense as well as an academically educated mind in this debate.
/quote Been through most of the other religions. Done enough research to come to the conclusion that the bible is factually and historically correct. /end quote
If we are to be reasonable and understanding - as should be the case here - appreciate the fact that it's his own personal conclusion, he only needs to convince himself through his research and that - as you've pointed out - due to the fact we can neither prove nor disprove the existence of the various happenings in the Bible, not to rule them out quite yet. By all means, if science enables us to refute the various grandiose claims in the Bible, then I shall accept the new discoveries with a tip of my hat, until then, don't admonish him based on the seeming incredulity of various stories that have undoubtedly been twisted through human tongue and ear. Again, common sense will serve us well in this debate.
All that being said however, in regards to the original question, has anyone here seen the benefits of organised religion? Whilst I fully appreciate its business like properties, we cannot deny that in many countries around the world people are for the most part better off due to an organised, social focus. For example, I spent many months doing anti-poaching work in Zambia, during this time, I noticed a massive increase in the number of Jehovah's Witness churches. Soon after, in every community where these churches sprung up, crime, STI's and AIDs / HIV numbers dropped, community schools were formed and basic facilities such as clean drinking water were put in place. Whilst we can debate whether or not religion and imposed religion is an honest and respectable thing, we must see the benefits of having what is essentially a spirituality based charity force.
Can't let this one slip by. It's easy to be sarcastic as an atheist towards such a statement; I'm really not trying to.
Do you really, actually believe that? That there are really no historical or factual errors in the bible?
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/science/long.html
Can you really reconcile that with your assertion?
Psalms 148:7
Even the dragons praise the Lord.
19:4-6
The sun moves around the earth.
@Eiviyn: Go
Woah woah woah.... Dragons, come on those are like unicorns maybe they did exsist. I'd like to think so.
@JacktheArcher: Go
Religious beliefs are basically just untested hypotheses and guesses that people make up to explain the environment, their emotions, and other events.
@FDFederation: Go
Yea thats kinda how I see it but you can never be too sure. It's the same deal with indian folk tales explaining why the sky is blue etc.
Quote from FDFederation:
@tdhsst: Go
The egg came first. The chicken is the mutant offspring of whatever laid the egg (feathered dinosaur?).
The person walking away didn't actually get struck by lightning. The headache comes from the pressure shockwave produced by rapid heating and ionization of the surrounding air when the lightning struck very close to the person. While the nearby surrounding air is ionized, the ionized particles, instead of the person, became the path of least resistance for the lightning. In a properly operated electric chair, the electricity travels directly through the person, else the person still remains painfully alive.
----
(yes i am nots good at this english part, LOL) i didnt say the person was missed by a close lightning bolt strike, i said he was litterly hit by a lightning bolt. hence the fried egg part. haha.
Quote from Eiviyn:
Quote from EternalWraith: Go
Been through most of the other religions. Done enough research to come to the conclusion that the bible is factually and historically correct.
Can't let this one slip by. It's easy to be sarcastic as an atheist towards such a statement; I'm really not trying to.
Do you really, actually believe that? That there are really no historical or factual errors in the bible?
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/science/long.html
Can you really reconcile that with your assertion?
Psalms 148:7
Even the dragons praise the Lord.
19:4-6
The sun moves around the earth.
----
here is the problem with you thinking there are errors in the bible.... if you take ever line litterly speaking by Your Knowledge of the world you would be correct in saying there where no dragons praising the lord. however when the bible was written the ''termanology'' they had back then was not what you use now. this science is also is not the same either. if you where never told the earth moves around the sun and you seen the sun move across the sky, whos to tell what one is moving and what one is standing still, without a point of refferance.
here is the one thing that i probably will never understand. how can christians, muslims, budhists, ect. say that their religion is correct and the others are wrong. WTF!? haha. I would think if your going down the religion aspect of life/existance then its impossible to determine what is the ''correct'' religion. They say that good always wins over evil. well thats because the good get to write the history books and the evil dont, LOL!
@Eiviyn: Go
It actually says sea monsters, sea beasts, sea creatures, or dragons in Psalms 148:7, varying on translations. Pretty sure dragon is just a reference to monstrous ocean life, taking it pretty out of context there.
As far as the sun orbiting the earth in Psalms 19:4-6, it actually just says the sun goes across the sky. Every analogy falls apart if you dissect it to death in any arena. Say the expansion of the universe being related to filling a balloon with air, if you don't think about it too hard it can make sense, everything is moving away from the center fairly equally. This however doesn't quite work out in the brain so good if you wonder what color the balloon is, how does the little knot get tied up every time to not result in sudden mass shrinking, are comets the spit/breath that occurs from a person breathing in the balloon, is it a person or a machine breathing into the balloon, what alternate universe is the balloon pumper in, etc.
Anyways by all means counter-debate those who think I'm full of hot air, just try to keep it civil :)
@Deadzergling: Go And analogies will also make true every word what Nostradamus said.
@Hookah604: Go
First... who says dragons never existed, actually there is quite a bit of evidence that they possibly did exist, the only problems science has with them is that they cant find any remains, If they were HUGE flying creatures, They could have had no bone structure what so ever, OR maybe they did like elephants and all went to one place to die, in the ocean perhaps.
They didnt think the giant squid existed until they caught one of the huge bastards, its completely possible that dragons exist. Think about it, EVERY Civilization has had some mention of dragons... up until around the 12th Century... SO the question is.. where did they go if they were here...
I find it incredibly disconcerting that the majority of the most ludicrous and laughable comments come from users who are from the United States...
You need to be banned from threads that require a semblance of thought before you ruin this one with your utter homeschooled nonsense, just like the last one.
Ricky Gervais puts this best.
"You can't do it with a maths book, why can you do it with the word of god?"
You don't get to make your own personal bible edits. Either the King James is the word of god, or it's not. If, as you say, it's not, then don't attempt to defend the assertion.
Speaking of hell, one reason why i refuse to accept most modern religions, is because of the afterlife "punishment side", I mean, what crime could possibly be bad enough so that they will be tortured forever (and ever)?
Wait, what? You're saying that there's only one possible translation of every age-old original transcript we have and that everything in it is meant completely literally or is otherwise completely false?
Incorrect.
You haven't been much around on the net. Its not the only page where this phenomenon exists.
@FDFederation: Go
Says the guy from the united states...
@Eiviyn: Go
Yup... your just mad because you cannot prove it wrong, same reason you just posted Incorrect on Mozareds statement... because when you cant find the answer you just attack whoever your debating with... sad sad little 4 ft korean troll
and as for your other statement in reply to deadzergling, if you knew anything other then trolling and blabbing your mouth you would know that there are several different versions of the bible that are accepted by different churches.... and the king James version... it is only one of the possible translations... learn history, it was first translated into Greek, then Latin, and finally old English... So there is a possibility that it has a few mistakes here and there.
Think before you troll.
@Eiviyn: Go
/quote You don't get to make your own personal bible edits. Either the King James is the word of god, or it's not. If, as you say, it's not, then don't attempt to defend the assertion. /end quote
You seem to be a fairly intelligent person, so surely you must appreciate the fact that accounts will vary, terminology and meanings will change (e.g. 'wicked' ) and human error will lead to mistakes / inconsistencies in the various transcripts. That being said, I think - in regards to your initial rebuke regarding the point that the Bible is factually and historically correct - you are being pedantic and trying to pick him apart due to him seemingly implying the Bible's accuracy as an absolute. It's important to apply common sense as well as an academically educated mind in this debate.
/quote Been through most of the other religions. Done enough research to come to the conclusion that the bible is factually and historically correct. /end quote
If we are to be reasonable and understanding - as should be the case here - appreciate the fact that it's his own personal conclusion, he only needs to convince himself through his research and that - as you've pointed out - due to the fact we can neither prove nor disprove the existence of the various happenings in the Bible, not to rule them out quite yet. By all means, if science enables us to refute the various grandiose claims in the Bible, then I shall accept the new discoveries with a tip of my hat, until then, don't admonish him based on the seeming incredulity of various stories that have undoubtedly been twisted through human tongue and ear. Again, common sense will serve us well in this debate.
All that being said however, in regards to the original question, has anyone here seen the benefits of organised religion? Whilst I fully appreciate its business like properties, we cannot deny that in many countries around the world people are for the most part better off due to an organised, social focus. For example, I spent many months doing anti-poaching work in Zambia, during this time, I noticed a massive increase in the number of Jehovah's Witness churches. Soon after, in every community where these churches sprung up, crime, STI's and AIDs / HIV numbers dropped, community schools were formed and basic facilities such as clean drinking water were put in place. Whilst we can debate whether or not religion and imposed religion is an honest and respectable thing, we must see the benefits of having what is essentially a spirituality based charity force.