Unproven entity, huh? What would you prefer - to live you're whole life with Jesus in the flesh literally looking over your shoulder every waking minute of the day? Would you believe in him then, and if so, what would that prove - that you're eyes are in working order?
Think of it this way: if you were driving on the highway with a cop right behind you and you didn't speed, would that make you a good person? Would you be disappointed if the cop didn't get out of his car and come over to you and give you a pat on the back and some sort of special recognition for not speeding while in front of him? Do you see what I'm getting at? If God was 100% "proven" then what would be the point? We may as well all be hamsters or something. God is "unproven" by necessity... it helps to separate the wheat from the chaffe... hence we have the concept of faith. But should you ever want to expand your "horizons," so to speak, you need only to open your heart
...reminds of something someone once said to some fellow named Thomas...
Are we done? You keep saying read Galations, which I have many times, but up to this point I've been fairly busy defending my existing arguments to get into that letter. Your response this time doesn't address the example I've already placed before you that runs contrary to everything you've just posted.
Originally posted by: arch_8ngel
There are numerous places where Paul suggests that converted Jews keep living like Jews, so they don't lose their significance as God's chosen.
I will take this as your counter-argument. First, Corinth was a sea port and the converts there were of varied background, which is not at all the same situation that existed in Galatians and Romans where the two churches were host to a large body of Jewish and a large body of Greek converts. Second, Paul is making a blanket statement about preachers of the gospel, there is nothing there to suggest he is specifically addressing the Jewish converts. If you look at the context of 1 Corinthians 8-10, the topics are about a few polytheistic practices and the Greek notions of love of gnosis, indicating that this is not at all a Jewish audience he is addressing.
Unproven entity, huh? What would you prefer - to live you're whole life with Jesus in the flesh literally looking over your shoulder every waking minute of the day? Would you believe in him then, and if so, what would that prove - that you're eyes are in working order?
Think of it this way: if you were driving on the highway with a cop right behind you and you didn't speed, would that make you a good person? Would you be disappointed if the cop didn't get out of his car and come over to you and give you a pat on the back and some sort of special recognition for not speeding while in front of him? Do you see what I'm getting at? If God was 100% "proven" then what would be the point? We may as well all be hamsters or something. God is "unproven" by necessity... it helps to separate the wheat from the chaffe... hence we have the concept of faith. But should you ever want to expand your "horizons," so to speak, you need only to open your heart
...reminds of something someone once said to some fellow named Thomas...
Exactly correct....faith in an unproven entity is the basis of religion. And ones perception of God is usually very personal and unique.
And it can be a curse as well.....since it seems that you "percieved" my statement to imply more than was meant.
I rather enjoyed the discussion in this thread and am hoping to bring it back to life.
What are some of your thoughts on the creation of the Universe? How do you think it happened, what caused it? Is our universe really infinite, or is it expanding, if it's expanding that implies it has boundries, what lies beyond the boundries of the universe?
What/who created life? Why is darwinism, evolution, an attack on christianity? Isn't it possible that evolution was all part of the 'intelligent design' or God's plan?
Obvioulsy we can't come up with factual or concrete answers to these questions, but I'm interested in the thoughts of both the religious and scientific minded on this site...
I don't believe the universe is infinite...there is void beyond the edge of space...it's quite literally nothing. It's a crazy concept to wrap your head around.
an 'absence' of something, is still something? does that make sense? By fact that you can describe what nothing is, means that nothing can't exist, right?
I have not read this entire threat but I have read a lot of it in the last hour or so and here is what I would like to say:
The single most troubling thing to me is the fact that there are adults in existence that believe in a religion, yet have never taken the time to make sense of it and understand it thoroughly.
Almost equally as disturbing is the fact that in all my life I have yet to meet an atheist who has come to the conclusion of atheism because he or she has thought things out systematically and can see no alternative.
Instead, all the atheists I've ever spoken to believe this way either because of some radical adversity that has led them to think 'there can't be a God because if there was, He would never have let this happen' or because of some hypocritical Christian they encountered, which caused them to stereotype all Christians as such and vow to never become one.
I am a person who would love to hear anyone's unique perspective on reality, no matter how farfetched it may seem to our societal standards, as long as they have a basis for that belief. For example, you can convince me that the moon is made of cheese, as long as you have a logical and sensible theory for why you have come to that conclusion, then I would LOVE to hear it and I would take it into deliberation.
At some point in life, I would love to sit down and talk to a living Sigmund Freud who can explain to me that there is no God and make impeccable sense of it. Yet even Sigmund Freud discarded all religion without seriously examining its augments. I love hearing others' theories as much as I love telling my own. Minds are constantly molded by other minds, and countless great thoughts are generated by combining and considering different thoughts conceived by numerous and various people.
It's ok if you're a child and you believe in God just because mom and dad said so, but it's NOT ok if you're out of high school and that is the only basis for your belief. I hear many people utter that they don't have time to think about it right now, and that they are to busy, which is absolutely tragic. It's really sad to try and figure out where finding the truth about religion and spirituality lies on the priority lists of so many people today. In the great scheme of things you would think that nothing is more important than figuring out how exactly you came into existence or the reason you came into existence. Is living an unbothered and simple daily life more important then that? I believe in God not because mom and dad told me he existed, which they did, but because it makes sense to me.
If you believe in God then you must ask yourself numerous questions. For example, is God all powerful and all loving? If He is all powerful then you might say He is the creator of sin (albeit by indirect means) and that if sin didn't ultimately come from God then He can't be all powerful. If God created sin (by way of creating beings who had the choice to sin, knowing that eventually they would choose to do so) and is all powerful then you would think that He couldn't possibly be a loving God. For sin, which He knew would follow his creations and therefore indirectly formed, is the source of all the horrific, repugnant measures imaginable, which you wouldn't think a loving, all powerful God would allow, let alone create. Well, I actually think God is all powerful, and all loving, and the creator of sin (by way of the indirect method I just mentioned). And, I think it is even possible to understand the reasoning of God, by simply using mere, basic logic, which every living human is capable of using (with an IQ above 70).
Allow me to explain by using a story that was told to me. Imagine you have two dogs, a robotic dog and a normal dog. The robotic dog is only programmed to love you. You can beat it, kick it, burn it, starve it, and it'll still love you because that is all it knows; that's its sole function. Then you also have a real dog that knows both love and hate. So you come home from a long day at work, and meeting you at your front door are your two dogs. The real dog and robotic dog are both jumping all over you, so happy you're home. Which one's love means more to you? The real dog that has the choice of hating you yet chooses to love you; or the robotic dog that doesn't know anything else but to love you? To me the real dog's love obviously would mean more because it had the choice yet still loved me. Honestly would we really know what love is if love was all there was?
No, the only way we know love is because we know hate. Just like night and day: if it's always day then we don't know its day. You must have the knowledge of night to appreciate day just like you need to know hate to truly know and appreciate love.
So let's say God created sin (or allowed sin to be possible, by giving His creations free will) so we all would truly know what love is, and in doing so He would save us from all becoming robotic "dogs," because if the possibility for sin did not exist, that is exactly what we would be, robots. So, just like you wouldn't appreciate the love of a robotic dog that is programmed to do only that, I'm sure God doesn't want the love of a programmed human either, who had no choice but to love Him.
i believe in theories presented by handicapped people, especially those named stephen hawking! we just so happened to evolve on a planet that was the perfect distance from a heat source to sustain life. there are millions of other "solar systems" out there like ours, so there is definitely life elsewhere, IMO! i wont be alive when we find it (or it finds us), but i believe that it is out there somewhere!
i believe in theories presented by handicapped people, especially those named stephen hawking! we just so happened to evolve on a planet that was the perfect distance from a heat source to sustain life. there are millions of other "solar systems" out there like ours, so there is definitely life elsewhere, IMO! i wont be alive when we find it (or it finds us), but i believe that it is out there somewhere!
I agree with you, there must be life out there somewhere... there has to be another solar system with a planet equal distance from the sun as we are, but the sun 'as you state' is a perfect distance from the earth to sustain life, the sun did NOT creat life though, so what did...
great question... what created the beginning of time? the bible says God created man in his image, blah blah blah, on the planet earth, then he created everything else and all that good stuff. however, i believe in the big bang theory. i also can believe that God created eeeeeeeverything in the beginning and then over time, the single celled organisms grew to what we are today. its a stretch to believe that we could evolve from a little amoeba but that seems more logical to me than david blane snapping his fingers and a man appearing, then reaching into that mans body, pulling out a rib, and making another person, this time without a penis. the only thing that matters to any single person in this world is what THAT PERSON believes. i hate when other people try to preach what they believe to others to try to make them change their minds. personally, i dont care about any religions, but i respect them all. if one person believes in vishnu, one believes in jesus, and one believes in zeus, i say they are all right and will all go to heaven (or the equivalent) when they pass on. as long as they dont go around killing people and all that, of course. i believe in an afterlife, cuz if you dont, then what the fuck is the point of life? i work 80 hour weeks so that i can retire at the age of 45 and see the world, but after i die, i hope there is some other existence after this. heaven, hell, wherever... but in 100 years, i know exactly where i will be... buried 6 feet in the ground!!!
First off I admit I haven't read through this thread. I kind of skimmed through it.
I'm an atheist, always have been and always will be. One of my "policies" is to not talk about religion with friends, especially over the internet, I consider you all my friends. When we do things just get out of hand, it turns into an argument and we end up hating each other. To be honest I don't think it should be this way, I think we should be able to talk about it as if it were science, but people seem to be very touchy about religion. I am extremely interested in Life, the universe and everything. I've read two great books that maybe some of you should read, Bill Bryson's 'A short History Of Nearly Everything' and Richard Dawkins 'The God Delusion'. That's my two cents.
Zach
oh and has anyone said the answer is 42 yet? that always gets said in one of these threads.
The big bang is an interesting theory, it seems arbitrary and random though... Every thing we know on our planet can be explained through causality (or scientists try... to explain everything through 'cause' 'effect' and for most everything we know there is sufficient evidence to support 'causality' but not the big bang. The 'effect' is obviously our known universe, but what was the 'cause' ?
First off I admit I haven't read through this thread. I kind of skimmed through it.
I'm an atheist, always have been and always will be. One of my "policies" is to not talk about religion with friends, especially over the internet, I consider you all my friends. When we do things just get out of hand, it turns into an argument and we end up hating each other. To be honest I don't think it should be this way, I think we should be able to talk about it as if it were science, but people seem to be very touchy about religion. I am extremely interested in Life, the universe and everything. I've read two great books that maybe some of you should read, Bill Bryson's 'A short History Of Nearly Everything' and Richard Dawkins 'The God Delusion'. That's my two cents.
Zach
oh and has anyone said the answer is 42 yet? that always gets said in one of these threads.
I agree it's hard to talk about these things with friends / family ect becuase it always ends in a flame fest, but i have faith that here at NA we can be the exception, not the rule... I love talking about these things because the universe fascinates me as well, i have no agenda or religion I wish to push down anyones throat, i just want to hear everyones opinion.
Heres my question, if a heaven exists, what would one even spend an eternity doing there??? Certainly can't be that exciting , although i guess existing in some form is beter than not existing at all...
Heres my question, if a heaven exists, what would one even spend an eternity doing there??? Certainly can't be that exciting , although i guess existing in some form is beter than not existing at all...
i can't even contemplate what an eternity is, let alone how i would occupy one...
gimmick, you are an idiot! dont you realize that in heaven, there is an unlimited supply of mr gimmick carts!!! you could spend an eternity building a house out of gimmick carts, building a garage out of carts, sculpting a 50 foot tall gimmick statue out of carts, anything you want!!! heaven will be awesome!!!
Was shooting towards the getting laid by endless suplies of hot chicks scenario, but gimmick carts are ok too
But what if you die impotent, and your impotence carries over to eternity? There will be an endless willing supply of hot females that you can't touch..
seth in the bible (i believe adam and eve's 3rd son) lived to be like 900 years old and he had tons of kids. gimmick, you have no worries. even way back in the beginning of time, there was some form of viagra. if an 850 year old dude can get it up and have kids, i dont think you will have any problems; however, you are in college... hint hint. use your time in college wisely. i regret my college days... i was more focused on working out and playing basketball than women back in those days. now i have let myself go, am out of shape, and focusing on the women! haha!
The big bang is an interesting theory, it seems arbitrary and random though... Every thing we know on our planet can be explained through causality (or scientists try... to explain everything through 'cause' 'effect' and for most everything we know there is sufficient evidence to support 'causality' but not the big bang. The 'effect' is obviously our known universe, but what was the 'cause' ?
Scientists have proven that the universe is not static, it's expanding. Some say it's actually accelerating in its expansion, but that's still up for debate. But there's provable evidence that it's larger each day than it was the previous day. I've described details of the "red shift" phenomena elsewhere, but this is their main proof.
If the universe is expanding, then if you rewind the clock, a day ago it was smaller. And a week before that, even smaller. All the way back to a point when the universe would become more hot, more dense, more compact. At a point, atomic structure would break down and the component particles would be packed densely, electrons out of their stable orbits and into a soup.
Even more dense, and the electrons, protons and neutrons themselves break down into their component quarks. We don't know how small quarks are in relation to their subatomic particles, but we do know that an atomic nucleus is so small in relation to the total atom's diameter, that the distance between a nucleus and the outermost electron in a gold atom would be scale-comparable to the distance between the Sun and Pluto.
What this means it: it can compact. A lot.
It's estimated that as these sub-subatomic particles (and whatever comprises them - currently scientists think small wavelike vibrations called "strings" may comprise quarks) approach infinite density, the entire universe could be compacted into a sphere the size of a beach ball.
At this moment, the universe would literally be this ball, and the space surrounding it that's affected by its gravitation.
Arch mentioned the void beyond the matter which comprises the universe - Einstein postulated that the matter defines the universe. The fabric of space-time itself is not just affected by the gravitation of the matter within it, but is DEFINED by it. This is substantiated by the discovery of the red-shift.
Since the universe expands WITH the matter, the very light wavelengths travelling through it expand as well. There would be no point that you could travel to tangentally to the edge of the universe - if you had unlimited time, speed and resources, you'd only ever succeed in circumnavigating it, not exceeding its boundary.
Of course this is all theoretical based on evidence at hand - which many believers in various religions also claim about their beliefs! People who feel the spirit of god flowing through them during a powerful sermon base their beliefs on direct personal experience, and observation of others around them.
I listed to scientists and read current scientific news, others listen to priests and read ancient holy documents. There's absolutely no difference, really, since I personally can't prove any of it's true, and neither can the religious person.
Damnit I hate typing lots of text. I hope I kept those bites brief enough to win at least one reader
Comments
it is still a perception of an unproven entity...
Unproven entity, huh? What would you prefer - to live you're whole life with Jesus in the flesh literally looking over your shoulder every waking minute of the day? Would you believe in him then, and if so, what would that prove - that you're eyes are in working order?
Think of it this way: if you were driving on the highway with a cop right behind you and you didn't speed, would that make you a good person? Would you be disappointed if the cop didn't get out of his car and come over to you and give you a pat on the back and some sort of special recognition for not speeding while in front of him? Do you see what I'm getting at? If God was 100% "proven" then what would be the point? We may as well all be hamsters or something. God is "unproven" by necessity... it helps to separate the wheat from the chaffe... hence we have the concept of faith. But should you ever want to expand your "horizons," so to speak, you need only to open your heart
...reminds of something someone once said to some fellow named Thomas...
Are we done? You keep saying read Galations, which I have many times, but up to this point I've been fairly busy defending my existing arguments to get into that letter. Your response this time doesn't address the example I've already placed before you that runs contrary to everything you've just posted.
There are numerous places where Paul suggests that converted Jews keep living like Jews, so they don't lose their significance as God's chosen.
I will take this as your counter-argument. First, Corinth was a sea port and the converts there were of varied background, which is not at all the same situation that existed in Galatians and Romans where the two churches were host to a large body of Jewish and a large body of Greek converts. Second, Paul is making a blanket statement about preachers of the gospel, there is nothing there to suggest he is specifically addressing the Jewish converts. If you look at the context of 1 Corinthians 8-10, the topics are about a few polytheistic practices and the Greek notions of love of gnosis, indicating that this is not at all a Jewish audience he is addressing.
it is still a perception of an unproven entity...
Unproven entity, huh? What would you prefer - to live you're whole life with Jesus in the flesh literally looking over your shoulder every waking minute of the day? Would you believe in him then, and if so, what would that prove - that you're eyes are in working order?
Think of it this way: if you were driving on the highway with a cop right behind you and you didn't speed, would that make you a good person? Would you be disappointed if the cop didn't get out of his car and come over to you and give you a pat on the back and some sort of special recognition for not speeding while in front of him? Do you see what I'm getting at? If God was 100% "proven" then what would be the point? We may as well all be hamsters or something. God is "unproven" by necessity... it helps to separate the wheat from the chaffe... hence we have the concept of faith. But should you ever want to expand your "horizons," so to speak, you need only to open your heart
...reminds of something someone once said to some fellow named Thomas...
Exactly correct....faith in an unproven entity is the basis of religion. And ones perception of God is usually very personal and unique.
And it can be a curse as well.....since it seems that you "percieved" my statement to imply more than was meant.
I rather enjoyed the discussion in this thread and am hoping to bring it back to life.
What are some of your thoughts on the creation of the Universe? How do you think it happened, what caused it? Is our universe really infinite, or is it expanding, if it's expanding that implies it has boundries, what lies beyond the boundries of the universe?
What/who created life? Why is darwinism, evolution, an attack on christianity? Isn't it possible that evolution was all part of the 'intelligent design' or God's plan?
Obvioulsy we can't come up with factual or concrete answers to these questions, but I'm interested in the thoughts of both the religious and scientific minded on this site...
The single most troubling thing to me is the fact that there are adults in existence that believe in a religion, yet have never taken the time to make sense of it and understand it thoroughly.
Almost equally as disturbing is the fact that in all my life I have yet to meet an atheist who has come to the conclusion of atheism because he or she has thought things out systematically and can see no alternative.
Instead, all the atheists I've ever spoken to believe this way either because of some radical adversity that has led them to think 'there can't be a God because if there was, He would never have let this happen' or because of some hypocritical Christian they encountered, which caused them to stereotype all Christians as such and vow to never become one.
I am a person who would love to hear anyone's unique perspective on reality, no matter how farfetched it may seem to our societal standards, as long as they have a basis for that belief. For example, you can convince me that the moon is made of cheese, as long as you have a logical and sensible theory for why you have come to that conclusion, then I would LOVE to hear it and I would take it into deliberation.
At some point in life, I would love to sit down and talk to a living Sigmund Freud who can explain to me that there is no God and make impeccable sense of it. Yet even Sigmund Freud discarded all religion without seriously examining its augments. I love hearing others' theories as much as I love telling my own. Minds are constantly molded by other minds, and countless great thoughts are generated by combining and considering different thoughts conceived by numerous and various people.
It's ok if you're a child and you believe in God just because mom and dad said so, but it's NOT ok if you're out of high school and that is the only basis for your belief. I hear many people utter that they don't have time to think about it right now, and that they are to busy, which is absolutely tragic. It's really sad to try and figure out where finding the truth about religion and spirituality lies on the priority lists of so many people today. In the great scheme of things you would think that nothing is more important than figuring out how exactly you came into existence or the reason you came into existence. Is living an unbothered and simple daily life more important then that? I believe in God not because mom and dad told me he existed, which they did, but because it makes sense to me.
If you believe in God then you must ask yourself numerous questions. For example, is God all powerful and all loving? If He is all powerful then you might say He is the creator of sin (albeit by indirect means) and that if sin didn't ultimately come from God then He can't be all powerful. If God created sin (by way of creating beings who had the choice to sin, knowing that eventually they would choose to do so) and is all powerful then you would think that He couldn't possibly be a loving God. For sin, which He knew would follow his creations and therefore indirectly formed, is the source of all the horrific, repugnant measures imaginable, which you wouldn't think a loving, all powerful God would allow, let alone create. Well, I actually think God is all powerful, and all loving, and the creator of sin (by way of the indirect method I just mentioned). And, I think it is even possible to understand the reasoning of God, by simply using mere, basic logic, which every living human is capable of using (with an IQ above 70).
Allow me to explain by using a story that was told to me. Imagine you have two dogs, a robotic dog and a normal dog. The robotic dog is only programmed to love you. You can beat it, kick it, burn it, starve it, and it'll still love you because that is all it knows; that's its sole function. Then you also have a real dog that knows both love and hate. So you come home from a long day at work, and meeting you at your front door are your two dogs. The real dog and robotic dog are both jumping all over you, so happy you're home. Which one's love means more to you? The real dog that has the choice of hating you yet chooses to love you; or the robotic dog that doesn't know anything else but to love you? To me the real dog's love obviously would mean more because it had the choice yet still loved me. Honestly would we really know what love is if love was all there was?
No, the only way we know love is because we know hate. Just like night and day: if it's always day then we don't know its day. You must have the knowledge of night to appreciate day just like you need to know hate to truly know and appreciate love.
So let's say God created sin (or allowed sin to be possible, by giving His creations free will) so we all would truly know what love is, and in doing so He would save us from all becoming robotic "dogs," because if the possibility for sin did not exist, that is exactly what we would be, robots. So, just like you wouldn't appreciate the love of a robotic dog that is programmed to do only that, I'm sure God doesn't want the love of a programmed human either, who had no choice but to love Him.
feedback encouraged
This topic was better off 20 pages back.
agreed
i believe in theories presented by handicapped people, especially those named stephen hawking! we just so happened to evolve on a planet that was the perfect distance from a heat source to sustain life. there are millions of other "solar systems" out there like ours, so there is definitely life elsewhere, IMO! i wont be alive when we find it (or it finds us), but i believe that it is out there somewhere!
I agree with you, there must be life out there somewhere... there has to be another solar system with a planet equal distance from the sun as we are, but the sun 'as you state' is a perfect distance from the earth to sustain life, the sun did NOT creat life though, so what did...
I'm an atheist, always have been and always will be. One of my "policies" is to not talk about religion with friends, especially over the internet, I consider you all my friends. When we do things just get out of hand, it turns into an argument and we end up hating each other.
Zach
oh and has anyone said the answer is 42 yet? that always gets said in one of these threads.
First off I admit I haven't read through this thread.
I'm an atheist, always have been and always will be. One of my "policies" is to not talk about religion with friends, especially over the internet, I consider you all my friends. When we do things just get out of hand, it turns into an argument and we end up hating each other.
Zach
oh and has anyone said the answer is 42 yet? that always gets said in one of these threads.
Heres my question, if a heaven exists, what would one even spend an eternity doing there??? Certainly can't be that exciting
i can't even contemplate what an eternity is, let alone how i would occupy one...
Was shooting towards the getting laid by endless suplies of hot chicks scenario, but gimmick carts are ok too
hahahah thats what this planet is for, my boy!
I had a feeling that would be your response
Was shooting towards the getting laid by endless suplies of hot chicks scenario, but gimmick carts are ok too
But what if you die impotent, and your impotence carries over to eternity? There will be an endless willing supply of hot females that you can't touch..
The big bang is an interesting theory, it seems arbitrary and random though... Every thing we know on our planet can be explained through causality (or scientists try... to explain everything through 'cause' 'effect' and for most everything we know there is sufficient evidence to support 'causality' but not the big bang. The 'effect' is obviously our known universe, but what was the 'cause' ?
Scientists have proven that the universe is not static, it's expanding. Some say it's actually accelerating in its expansion, but that's still up for debate. But there's provable evidence that it's larger each day than it was the previous day. I've described details of the "red shift" phenomena elsewhere, but this is their main proof.
If the universe is expanding, then if you rewind the clock, a day ago it was smaller. And a week before that, even smaller. All the way back to a point when the universe would become more hot, more dense, more compact. At a point, atomic structure would break down and the component particles would be packed densely, electrons out of their stable orbits and into a soup.
Even more dense, and the electrons, protons and neutrons themselves break down into their component quarks. We don't know how small quarks are in relation to their subatomic particles, but we do know that an atomic nucleus is so small in relation to the total atom's diameter, that the distance between a nucleus and the outermost electron in a gold atom would be scale-comparable to the distance between the Sun and Pluto.
What this means it: it can compact. A lot.
It's estimated that as these sub-subatomic particles (and whatever comprises them - currently scientists think small wavelike vibrations called "strings" may comprise quarks) approach infinite density, the entire universe could be compacted into a sphere the size of a beach ball.
At this moment, the universe would literally be this ball, and the space surrounding it that's affected by its gravitation.
Arch mentioned the void beyond the matter which comprises the universe - Einstein postulated that the matter defines the universe. The fabric of space-time itself is not just affected by the gravitation of the matter within it, but is DEFINED by it. This is substantiated by the discovery of the red-shift.
Since the universe expands WITH the matter, the very light wavelengths travelling through it expand as well. There would be no point that you could travel to tangentally to the edge of the universe - if you had unlimited time, speed and resources, you'd only ever succeed in circumnavigating it, not exceeding its boundary.
Of course this is all theoretical based on evidence at hand - which many believers in various religions also claim about their beliefs!
I listed to scientists and read current scientific news, others listen to priests and read ancient holy documents. There's absolutely no difference, really, since I personally can't prove any of it's true, and neither can the religious person.
Damnit I hate typing lots of text. I hope I kept those bites brief enough to win at least one reader
Was hoping youd get back into the discussion!
this is prob a dumb question, but how do you qoute different senteces of a post as apposed to the whole damn post?
coolpapa, you press the "quote" thing and then just delete whatever you dont want in your post
^^ boy im a dumbass, thanks tho