951. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #163529 by Frankus1122 on April 18, 2008 at 1:15 pm

Cooler than Jesus. Even gay Jesus.

To suggest that Jesus was gay is blasphemous.
Just because he had long flowing hair and a moustache and beard and was all about peace and love (besides that one hissy fit he had when he threw the money-changers out of the temple) and hung out with a bunch of other guys all the time...wait a minute.

Jesus was gay.
Which just goes to show that the God of the OT is not the God of the NT. Another proof of the truth of the Bible.

952. Flea of the week

Comment #163488 by Frankus1122 on April 18, 2008 at 12:10 pm

Comment #163479 by Jack Rawlinson

I do wish these people would bother to read the rebuttals to their tired, dogmatic pet "arguments".

But that would be too much like science. Why you want to try to disprove your pet theory in order to make it stronger?

No, no, no. All you need to do is look in the Bible and ALL the answers to life's questions will be answered. Any 'rebuttal' MUST be wrong because it is anti-Biblical. Jeesh!


Back to normal:


It really does seem to be that the atheist position has the advantage of at least having the knowledge of possible rebuttals to its arguments. Although not always true, we are not ignorant of the objections raised by theists to the atheist position.

953. Flea of the week

Comment #163461 by Frankus1122 on April 18, 2008 at 11:32 am

well, it becomes rather impossible to
shut the fuck up
about it.

Where have I heard that before?

954. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #163357 by Frankus1122 on April 18, 2008 at 8:32 am

I am wondering about the emotional need for community and belonging and how that affects our decisions. I posted some info yesterday about research on the brain and how what we think are purely rational and reasonable decisions are often affected by our emotional states.
The story of Phineas Gage and his brain damage was alluded to by Al.
I am not suggesting that people who find community in religion have brain damage but I am just wondering aloud if neurology has any insights.
I think it was Michael Persinger who developed a 'God helmut'. He has been able to induce the feeling of the presence of God in some people by using magnets to stimulate a certain region of the brain.
Is there a suseptibilty for this region being stimulated in some and not others?

955. Sexpelled: No Intercourse Allowed

Comment #162926 by Frankus1122 on April 17, 2008 at 5:10 pm

Inferno

Is there just one stork or many storks?

This is a tough one. There is only one stork, indivisible.
But, there are three storks in that one.

956. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162920 by Frankus1122 on April 17, 2008 at 4:55 pm

Diacanu,

PM for you in a minute.

957. Sexpelled: No Intercourse Allowed

Comment #162905 by Frankus1122 on April 17, 2008 at 4:39 pm

That's not MY stork you are talking about.

958. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162851 by Frankus1122 on April 17, 2008 at 2:58 pm

fdi150,
Thanks for the question.
I have a link here that may be of some help.



The link is for a page titled:
29 Evidences for Macroevolution
The Scientific Case for Common Descent

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

Please read it and let me know if it does help.

959. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162761 by Frankus1122 on April 17, 2008 at 12:20 pm

gr8hands,
I am going from memory here but I think there are problems with peoples' decisions if they have damage to the prefrontal lobes of the brain. They lack an emotional connection to the world around them because of brain damage and as a result make sometimes horrible decisons; decisions that a person with a properly functioning brain would not make.

I'll read up on it when I get home if I can find the books.

Live long and prosper.

960. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162745 by Frankus1122 on April 17, 2008 at 11:47 am

gr8hands

A person usually uses reason to include emotional responses/reactions such as "love". Adding emotions to the equation does not make it less reasonable. (In fact, ignoring emotions would not be reasonable.) It is when emotions over-rule reason that problems occur.

The work of Antonio Damasio, which I mentioned above, would suggest (from what I can remember) that
our rationality is ruled by our emotions; at least under certain circumstances. The everyday decisions we make are certainly stemming from the emotional centres of our brains.

961. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162682 by Frankus1122 on April 17, 2008 at 8:25 am

2146. Comment #162669 by epeeist -
Where else could you easily have access to physicists, biologists, engineers, mathematicians, philosophers, Arabic scholars, historians all from different countries with different backgrounds.

And there is a lot of humour here too.
I learn so much and get challenged and change my views because of what I read, but I often find myself laughing.
I like it here.

962. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162680 by Frankus1122 on April 17, 2008 at 8:19 am

The Brother John and Quetz and phatbat comments are all along the lines of what I was trying to say earlier.
Brother John seems to feel that Love is the ultimate power we can have.
Quetz has proposed a balance of reason, empathy and love.
I think I agree with phatbat that we ultimately use reason to assess how we behave. The reason may be flawed but we rarely act without any reason whatsoever; even if we decide to abandon reason for some, well, reason.
Hence the wrangling. It is what we do. There do not seem to be abolute answers to these questions.
I think religious people feel that ultimate answers are in the holy books. That is of some comfort. But as it has been pointed out again and again here, the answers are really ones that we provide.

On another track, I think it was Antonio Damasio who has suggested that our reasoning or decision making, in large part, comes from the emotional centres of our brain.
Just another wrinkle to wrangle about I suppose.

As for the poster who suggested that my life has no ultimate meaning - whatever. I am having some meaningful life now. I'll be dead for a really long time (although not to me), so I'll make the best of what I have. It is not ultimate or absolute but it is to me.

963. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162624 by Frankus1122 on April 17, 2008 at 6:37 am

Steve and Energizer Bonzai

I also don't have a lot of time but will do a hit and run post.

Is it a problem of absolutes?
For some people smoking causes no discernable harm.
For some people a belief in god makes their lives measurably better.
I tell my children that they can't watch tv during the week. But if there is a good show on we do.
As Bonzai said the world is not bianry. Things are not black and white.
However, some things are true and others are not.
There is a balance between absolutism and complete relativism that is hard to find sometimes.
We seem to want things to be absolute.
I am not sure what I am trying to say, absolutely.

I think conversation, trying to determine what is right in particular circumstances using principles to guide us is the best we can do.
Can the wiser-than-me offer their insight?

964. Teacher Expelled Over Religion

Comment #162368 by Frankus1122 on April 16, 2008 at 6:56 pm

I found this at the Discovery Institute website:


http://www.discovery.org/a/2640


PEER-REVIEWED & PEER-EDITED SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS SUPPORTING THE THEORY OF INTELLIGENT DESIGN (ANNOTATED)
By: Staff
Discovery Institute
July 1, 2008

Note the date. (?)
Perhaps the 23 or so articles listed are ones from the future.
I did not read the articles; I did not even read the titles of all of them.
I am lazy.
But we can no longer claim that the ID does not publish in scientific journals.
They have almost 30 (!) articles.
The evidence is overwhelming.
Or not.

965. Victims: Pope Benedict Protects Accused Pedophile Bishops

Comment #162363 by Frankus1122 on April 16, 2008 at 6:33 pm

Yes, Cartomancer, I laughed out loud.
When my six year old son asked me what I was laughing at I replied:
The stream of consciousness of a very witty man on cold medication.

What does that mean?

It means we should play a game of chess.

I beat him soundly. He is only six.

966. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162343 by Frankus1122 on April 16, 2008 at 5:02 pm

I think you guys are getting a bit nutty with your "theories" about RM.

Don't stop, mind you.

It's kind of fun to read.

967. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162312 by Frankus1122 on April 16, 2008 at 2:48 pm

You know the thing about RM is curious. It may be a personal thing with him but he seemed like an intelligent guy.
How can he all of a sudden throw out all the objections that he previously had?
He sort of dealt with this in his post but I find it strange. Are the objections no longer valid?
Truth is truth. No?

968. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162311 by Frankus1122 on April 16, 2008 at 2:42 pm

gr8hands,
Thanks. That was it!

Even though not technically a PhD she is still an amazing person. I looked her up on her website.

How would you like to look into your past lives? Or if that is not up your alley you could get your future told using numerology and clairvoyance. Perhaps you would like your aura read or a simple Tarot card reading.

Grrrrr.... It was a good thing I was not there.

I spent the day in the forest with my class. It was sunny and warm after a brutal winter here. We created artworks ala Andy Goldsworthy.
http://tinyurl.com/6cdys4

I think I had the better day.

969. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162292 by Frankus1122 on April 16, 2008 at 2:10 pm

mesomodel,
Thanks but I don't think that is it. I saw a copy of her book before she presented and I think it means pending. But I can't quite remember.
Anyway, it is a PhD in something like hypnotherapy.
Maybe it means charlatan.

970. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162290 by Frankus1122 on April 16, 2008 at 2:05 pm

BTW did you know that if you touch your knuckle and look at the ceiling while thinking of a negative thought it will vanish?
But you need to have your peripheral vision on.
And you can't wear glasses.
And it only works if you really want it to.
On Tuesdays and Thursdays.

971. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162289 by Frankus1122 on April 16, 2008 at 2:01 pm

Way off topic but I can't find the info anywhere and I thought smart people here might know:
What does Phd (c) mean?
What is the "c"?
Someone presented some Neuro Linguistic Programming type stuff to our staff today.
Thankfully I was not at work today.
Some people came to tell my about the session. The person presenting had a PhD (c) after her name.

972. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161820 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 6:19 pm

Even with the most compelling of scientific evidence presented, one must still exercise faith in some fashion in order to accept it as truth.

Yes. I have faith that the evidence presented, the evidence that fits into everything else I know about the world, is true.
I mean science explains how the world works and it is provable. That is the thing about scientific evidence - you can prove it. The 'theory' of evolution is a set of facts that can be proven. The facts are testable and the set of facts together that make up the theory is predictive.
That is to say that the theory postulates that certain things should be true if the theory is correct. The theory of evolution predicts that certain types of fossils should be found that have particular morphologies. Fossil evidence supports the theory.
The theory of evolution also makes predictions on a molecular biological level that turn out to be correct as well.
(I am a bit out of my depth here but I am sure someone will correct me if I make an error.)
The ID theory does not do this. It does not make predictions. In this sense it is not science. It is an idea about the natural processes of evolution. It postulates that there is intent behind the random mutations and the slow grinding force of natural selection.
How does one go about proving this intent?
You could try to show that there are some organisms that could not have come about through random mutation and natural selection. You could try to show that there are some organisms that are "irreducible complex". Because of this there must be a designer that has an end in mind for the organism.
This is a good way to go. You would need to try to prove your idea. This has been done.
Unfortunately the science has been shown to be wrong. It does not withstand the scrutiny of peer review.
Is this part of the conspiracy to keep ID out of the science curriculum? Do you really think that if there was evidence of Intelligent Design that it would be rejected because the majority of scientists do not believe in an Intelligent Designer?

Then we have the problem of the Intelligent Designer designing so many things so badly. I can point to the eye as one example that I know of. If we look at the natural world we would be forced to conclude that we have a Not-So-Intelligent-Designer. Evolution seems to work more like my son with finger paints. A lot of it is crappy but occasionally he makes something that looks like a frog or a cat, so I keep those ones.
That's not a very good analogy. It makes my son look stupid and it makes me look like God doing the selecting. Sorry, I am getting tired. I might need to pull a number 10 and go to bed soon.

I hope this helps you see things more clearly if that is what you truly wish to do.

973. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161805 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 5:39 pm

But, that is not the line of this thread either. Is there an answer to the original question founded on facts available?

Try here for some evidence:

www.expelledexposed.com

I just tried the link and it does not seem to be working right now.
Sorry.

974. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161795 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 5:19 pm

Yes, you got that out before I finished typing.

I am very impressed.


Edit:

I showed

1559. Comment #161510 by Diacanu

to a guy I work with. We had a good laugh.

You are a judicious F-bomber.
Double O Diacanu.

975. Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss

Comment #161793 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 5:17 pm

Goldy,
I also have a predilection for self-worship.
I think it is my humility that most impresses me about me.

976. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161784 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 4:52 pm

BIH4U, I will get to your comments in a moment.

To regular posters here: Please play nice.


Comment #161771 by bringingithome4u

If science and the scientific theory of investigation are to be accurately applied in order to "discover" truth, it must be done with equal measure and always with an eye to keep open speculation on every possibility until such time as one theory is determined by proven facts to be the truth.

I think you will find that the 'theory' of evolution is a fact just as the theory of gravity is a fact.
If you have read through this thread I think you will find that what the ID people do not do is put forth any evidence of their claims. There is a mountain of evidence to support evolution from a number of different scientific areas. Scientists do research, write up papers, submit those papers for peer review, and then they are published in science journals for the scientific community to comment on.

The ID people do not generally take part in this process. They don't publish papers or do much research. They have no evidence to support their claims. This is not the case with evolution.

That's it for now. You may get other responses from those more knowledgeable than myself.

Thanks for contributing your questions.

977. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161761 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 4:09 pm

Diacnu wrote:

Heh, the women are great too.
All cuties, and best of all, anti-bimbos, every single one.

Don't tell her, but I have a mind-crush on Benway.
She makes my neurons go 'Schwing'!

978. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161745 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 3:30 pm

Comment #161721 by al-rawandi

Dude. It was a race of interstellar masturbator donkeys that flew on their dildo shaped space ships to earth and germinated the place

Isn't that what Dawkins proposed in Expelled?

I think it was. It must be true.
The great man said it.

979. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161707 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 2:17 pm

al rawandi,
No dictionary, just what I believe the word means. Just as you believe cotton is itchy:)

To take the point a bit further: It could be the case that God is using evolution for some purpose. God created the universe and the notion of allowing random mutations to occur so that a process of evolution can happen was developed by Him. Okay. It could be true. It could also be true that there are pink unicorns, fairies, etc.
There are lots of things that could be true but we don't believe they are true. And it is not without good reason that we do not believe in these things.
It is not sensible to believe that random mutations are part of a grand plan.

980. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161693 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 2:08 pm

I am saying that it is not logical to suggest that randomness implies lack of purpose.

I think you are wrong.
Doesn't random mean without purpose?

981. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161677 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 1:52 pm

The fact that mutations are random, or even the likely randomness of natural disasters, do not in any way imply that the process of evolution cannot serve some larger purpose.

But why would you assume otherwise? The randomness does suggest there is no purpose. Random, arbitrary, purposeless.
To suggest random mutation implies a larger purpose seems to me completely without foundation.

Sorry this is not on reincarnation but there are no posts here on that topic. Perhaps in another life?

982. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161634 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 1:13 pm

Evidence that all atheists are not alike:
I don't get Radiohead.
I have some on my iPod and whenever it comes on I get annoyed. I look to see what it is I am listening to and feel disappointed that I don't get it. I know Radiohead is big with a lot of people and it may just be me not listening carefully but it does not do it for me.

Other than that I am a nice guy.

983. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161619 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 1:03 pm

al rawandi and his concept of purity does not make sense.
Cotton = itchy?
You are obviously not talking about MY cotton.
Maybe you are wearing one of those banned (Leviticus) blended fiber pieces of clothing.

984. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161610 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 12:57 pm

Okay, why is everything suddenly in boldface?

I thought it was just my computer and then just as I read your post it went away.
A miracle!

Edit:
I hit submit and it is boldface again.
Sorry, no miracle.

985. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161603 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 12:50 pm

What is the smallest fraction?

What is the biggest number?

I am beginning to suspect that you might be a stoner.

That made me laugh as much as this:

"Dash those piffling theists".

And then there is this:

And God Bless ALL of you! Someday, when each of you begins to turn back towards God, he WILL accept you and bring you home! See ya there!!!!!

With 5 exclamation points!!!!!

Somebody is high. High on Jesus, man.

986. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161587 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 12:32 pm

What if your wrong?

What if my wrong what?

What if you're wrong?

987. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161572 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 12:14 pm

Flipping heck

Steve, I am shocked and dismayed at such language. We have standards. I may have to mark that comment as offensive.




BTW :)

988. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161560 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 12:08 pm

Hey navyjake95,

Just a guess here as to where you are going with this but:

Does your notion of purity include homosexuals?
What about wearing clothes of mixed fibers?

989. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161539 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 11:43 am

You really think an omniscient all-seeing Gawd would be fooled by G-d and @sshole?

Exactly!

It is so silly.

I can't understand how one could get to this point in their life. Or, if once there, not take a step back and look at what they are doing. At that point, if they don't come up with a giant "WTF was I thinking?", well, then we part ways. You have left the rational behind.

990. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161516 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 11:05 am

From Strength:

Show some respect is all I'm saying

Beneath contempt.

991. School bars same-sex partners at formals

Comment #161473 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 10:30 am

Although I am not entirely in favour of same sex I really have no option. I try new things but my wife keeps asking me what I think I am doing. *Sigh*

Seriously, we had a situation like this in Ontario a few years ago.
I just looked it up. It was in 2002.
Here is a link:
http://www.samesexmarriage.ca/advocacy/marc_hall.htm
It makes for interesting reading.

EDIT:
http://www.samesexmarriage.ca/advocacy/marc_hall_injunction_decision.htm

The decision was the boy could go to the dance with his partner. The judges decision is again, interesting reading.

992. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161460 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 10:10 am

Quine

Yes, there are Jewish law restrictions about this.

Whenever you are not allowed by God or G-d or your holy book to do certain things that would otherwise be okay you have a problem.
Although it is sort of a silly reason, having to wear certain headgear or clothing because it is part of your religion, got me turned off the whole notion of religion.
Why would God care what I wear?
Of course moderates would not say that you have to wear certain articles of clothing to get in His good books but there are many people who believe this. I had a neighbour whose son could not believe that my daughter was a girl because she wore pants.
Once you start down the road of believing things that are contrary to the rest of the world as you know it, then almost anything can be accepted.

993. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161435 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 9:41 am

Strength,
It is unfortunate that you do not know the love of Jesus.
You have a lot of hate there.
Maybe the Buddhist way should be explored by you.
May the love of our common humanity be with you all the days of your life.

994. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161427 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 9:32 am

kardashovel,
I skimmed through your posts on this thread to figure out what you were trying to talk about. Was this the topic?:

Has the topic of Dr. Ian Stevenson's research into reincarnation ever been discussed in this forum?

If so, it has certainly strayed.
I am trying not to be rude. Disrespectful? I just can't understand how a seemingly intelligent person can believe what you do. I don't think that is being disrespectful.
I am trying to step inside your head to try to understand what you believe. I think I get it intellectually but I don't believe it.
That is why I bring up the Scientology analogy. It makes sense from within the confines of its worldview. But if you step outside and compare the beliefs to the rest of what you know/believe to be true about the world you realize that it doesn't match up. There are contradictions.
In some ways it is a simple 'if this is true, then this cannot be true' type argument.

Sorry, I may have to pull a number 10. Lunch hour is over.

995. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161405 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 8:59 am

From strength:

Atheists and darwinists are whinning like a bunch of little hoes because a good quality film has been released which exposes their baseless hatred and arrogance. All of you atheists are just bitter, angry, narrow minded @ss holes

Thank you for your post.
I am convinced.
Where do I sign up for the ID?

996. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161403 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 8:56 am

Frankus thinks I'm trying to start the next Scientology and trolling for converts.

No. I was just making a comparison between the fantasy of Hubbard and yours.
I don't mean to demean but because you will not share what exactly the voice said to you that you could not have otherwise known we have no reason to believe that your voice was anything other than you. The reason I believe this are for reasons that Tyler stated in an earlier post.

Is it possible that the reasons for your voice are the ones we suggested? I know you are committed to believing that it was actually God that spoke to you but can you admit the possiblity that you are wrong?

997. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161340 by Frankus1122 on April 15, 2008 at 7:26 am

Hi Kardashovel,
I will second Irate's post 1465.

I understand (sort of) what you believe about God. You must be able to understand that the majority of people here think you have created a fantasy and taken it for the real thing.
In a way this is what L. Ron Hubbard did. Although I am not sure he actually believed what his followers came to believe. For him it was all part of a science fiction story he created and then others (perhaps at his prompting or because of his manipulations) came to believe the fantasy as reality.
I hope you understand how we, or at least I, believe in regard to your beliefs. We/I regard your beliefs as fantasy. Do you have any evidence other than your voice (which again, you have to admit is not convincing to us/me because of the reasons stated many times) that would be convincing to a skeptical person.
I think you know we are willing to be convinced but we require something more.

998. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160698 by Frankus1122 on April 14, 2008 at 9:45 am

Kardashovel,
Don't go.
I am nearing the end of my lunch hour so I don't have much time but reading through the last few pages of posts I am struck by something.
I was listening to a radio program that was talking about the Dali Lama. He said he did not want people to convert to Buddhism. He felt people should explore what is good in their own religious cultural traditions. He read Biblical scripture to a group of Christians and tears welled up in his eyes as he read some of the more beautiful passages that explored compassion. He is a defender of the goodness that can be found in Islam. He is a supporter of science and has participated in scientific investigation into the benefits of meditation.
I kind of like him more after hearing this radio program. He is a vegetarian who ocassionally eats meat. He likes to laugh and joke around a lot. I get the sense that all the mystical stuff that is associated with Buddhism is not all that important to him. What is important is that we treat each other decently.
What do we mean by "decent"? What is right and what is wrong? How do we determine this without God? Dr. Benway has suggested that we already do this without God. If you need God to help you figure this out, well, okay. We are all at different points in our development and understanding.
I think what worries a lot of people on this site is the fact that many people believe they do have absolute answers when the evidence proves otherwise.
Sorry, I have to go now.
I did not express myself very well but it is all I can do for now.
You can be good without God.

999. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #159899 by Frankus1122 on April 13, 2008 at 11:18 am

Comment #159893 by Corylus

I have noticed myself throwing out the odd 'get of jail free' card to people when I feel sorry for them - or I think they are being swamped. Anyway, I always test out ideas by looking into the opposite position. *shrugs*

I too feel this is a good habit to get into. If you ask how a person could believe what they believe you can sometimes get deep into the thought process and get to the real nub of the problem.

1000. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #159896 by Frankus1122 on April 13, 2008 at 11:11 am

But then only idiots would think a hack and a tenth rate writer like Ayn Rand was a genius.

I find a lot of people go through an Ayn Rand phase but get older and grow out of it.

As Diacanu said:

No man is an island.

Humans are social animals, and to fight against that is the definition of sociopathy.

As for government, when you start with the philosophy that government can do nothing but evil, government is never going to work.

As you live more life you begin to see the intricacies of social interactions. Black and white one-size-fits-all philosophies do not work.

Societies are hugely malleable. As societies we are very much followers of the established norm. The established norm can be the result of the efforts of a few individuals.