The word God is nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness.

[nat turner]

Originally Posted by BX GOT EM

To me... GOD is everything.. it's life, air, noise, smell, faith, hope etc. The Bible is created by men. NOT by Jesus nor GOD. For anyone to say GOD told them to write the Bible.. i don't understand. If so. how are they not considered "crazy" for hearing voices? Bible and other books are basically legends and Lessons for the human race to abide by in efforts to control our behavior and keep faith in knowing we're here for a reason and have more to look forward too than just our struggling lives... do i believe in "GOD" yes. Do i believe in the Bible? No.

So let me ask you a question, without the Bible or any other religious text, how did you come to know this "God"?

At what point after you came out of diapers did you think, "yanno, god is great!"
  

 

[sloane kettering]

 

[sloane kettering]

 

[-Red-]

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

It is only those who believe who are trying to convince. Those of us who do not, do not need to convince anyone of anything. We do not have to disprove what has NOT been proven. Einstien made a valid point, we agree, as none has ever proven the existence of any higher deity.

So again, what proof do you have, if any, that all of this was made simply for humans? I dare any of you to cite the bible, or any of the creationist dogma that suggests that we are the only reason for the earth and universe to exist. 
  

Um... no, it's not... the existence of this thread indicates otherwise.

Neither "side" NEEDS to convince anyone of anything... people on both "sides" CHOOSE to attempt to do so.

This thread is about the comments made by Einstein, who says that the WORD God, is nothing but an expression. Those who came on claiming otherwise, need to prove that there is justification for their beliefs, as there has been no proof of any higher deity ever existing.

One does not have to disprove, what has never been proven.

It seems like you are literally incapable of any degree of perspective other than your own, which consistently comes off as extremely limited.  This is not an attack on you, personal or otherwise, and it may be an unfair characterization, but I just think that you do yourself a disservice when you fail to truly engage in discourse and only do so in a reactionary way.

Once again, no one NEEDS or HAS TO convince or prove anything to anyone.  However, this thread was created by a "non-believer" in an attempt to "disprove" the existence of a higher being by using a quote from Einstein, who people look at as a brilliant man.  No one forced him to create this thread.  So if anyone has some claims to defend in this thread, the onus would appear to be on the "non-believers."  However, in viewing these dynamics in that context, we fail to really engage in intelligent discourse where people exchange ideas and respond to one another in a way that seeks knowledge and understanding, not in a way which attempts to vilify and insult those who do not agree with us.

So once again, no one NEEDS or HAS TO convince of prove anything to anyone.  It is our own personal choice to enter these discussions, give our perspective on the topics, and learn about and question the perspectives of others.

  Please, don't try that. You fail magnificently while purporting such nonsense. Just because I refuse to acknowledge superstition as fact, does not mean that I am incapable of seeing another opinion as being plausable. Simply prove your theory by backing it up with facts, pointed facts, those that can be proven.

You are born not believing in anything but those who feed you, clothe you, then protecting you. Nnow prove that there is more than that out there.

The burden is upon those of you who believe that there is something more.

There is no "burden of proof" on anyone to prove anything.  That was my whole point... which you entirely missed, apparently... again.

Now you are simply being foolish and distracting. 

I didn't miss your point, as you are talking about this thread. However, those of us who actually live outside of niketalk, know that the burden of proof is upon those of you who do believe in the "great unseen one". 

  

No, I was talking about life in general, not just this thread.  No one HAS TO prove or convince anyone of the existence of a higher being just as no one HAS TO believe in a higher being.  Similarly, no one needs to convince anyone that a higher being doesn't exist and no one needs to NOT believe in a higher being.

What is so difficult to grasp?

 

[-Red-]

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

It is only those who believe who are trying to convince. Those of us who do not, do not need to convince anyone of anything. We do not have to disprove what has NOT been proven. Einstien made a valid point, we agree, as none has ever proven the existence of any higher deity.

So again, what proof do you have, if any, that all of this was made simply for humans? I dare any of you to cite the bible, or any of the creationist dogma that suggests that we are the only reason for the earth and universe to exist. 
  

Um... no, it's not... the existence of this thread indicates otherwise.

Neither "side" NEEDS to convince anyone of anything... people on both "sides" CHOOSE to attempt to do so.

This thread is about the comments made by Einstein, who says that the WORD God, is nothing but an expression. Those who came on claiming otherwise, need to prove that there is justification for their beliefs, as there has been no proof of any higher deity ever existing.

One does not have to disprove, what has never been proven.

It seems like you are literally incapable of any degree of perspective other than your own, which consistently comes off as extremely limited.  This is not an attack on you, personal or otherwise, and it may be an unfair characterization, but I just think that you do yourself a disservice when you fail to truly engage in discourse and only do so in a reactionary way.

Once again, no one NEEDS or HAS TO convince or prove anything to anyone.  However, this thread was created by a "non-believer" in an attempt to "disprove" the existence of a higher being by using a quote from Einstein, who people look at as a brilliant man.  No one forced him to create this thread.  So if anyone has some claims to defend in this thread, the onus would appear to be on the "non-believers."  However, in viewing these dynamics in that context, we fail to really engage in intelligent discourse where people exchange ideas and respond to one another in a way that seeks knowledge and understanding, not in a way which attempts to vilify and insult those who do not agree with us.

So once again, no one NEEDS or HAS TO convince of prove anything to anyone.  It is our own personal choice to enter these discussions, give our perspective on the topics, and learn about and question the perspectives of others.

  Please, don't try that. You fail magnificently while purporting such nonsense. Just because I refuse to acknowledge superstition as fact, does not mean that I am incapable of seeing another opinion as being plausable. Simply prove your theory by backing it up with facts, pointed facts, those that can be proven.

You are born not believing in anything but those who feed you, clothe you, then protecting you. Nnow prove that there is more than that out there.

The burden is upon those of you who believe that there is something more.

There is no "burden of proof" on anyone to prove anything.  That was my whole point... which you entirely missed, apparently... again.

Now you are simply being foolish and distracting. 

I didn't miss your point, as you are talking about this thread. However, those of us who actually live outside of niketalk, know that the burden of proof is upon those of you who do believe in the "great unseen one". 

  

No, I was talking about life in general, not just this thread.  No one HAS TO prove or convince anyone of the existence of a higher being just as no one HAS TO believe in a higher being.  Similarly, no one needs to convince anyone that a higher being doesn't exist and no one needs to NOT believe in a higher being.

What is so difficult to grasp?

 

[bx got em]

i don't believe in GOD as a "he" or w.e. which made decisions.. so i came to know this "GOD" soon as i had a heart beat.

& substitute the word GOD with another word, and every message would mean the same/. so.. in other words.. to me... "yanno, God/Life is great."

 

[bx got em]

i don't believe in GOD as a "he" or w.e. which made decisions.. so i came to know this "GOD" soon as i had a heart beat.

& substitute the word GOD with another word, and every message would mean the same/. so.. in other words.. to me... "yanno, God/Life is great."

 

[nat turner]

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

It is only those who believe who are trying to convince. Those of us who do not, do not need to convince anyone of anything. We do not have to disprove what has NOT been proven. Einstien made a valid point, we agree, as none has ever proven the existence of any higher deity.

So again, what proof do you have, if any, that all of this was made simply for humans? I dare any of you to cite the bible, or any of the creationist dogma that suggests that we are the only reason for the earth and universe to exist. 
  

Um... no, it's not... the existence of this thread indicates otherwise.

Neither "side" NEEDS to convince anyone of anything... people on both "sides" CHOOSE to attempt to do so.

This thread is about the comments made by Einstein, who says that the WORD God, is nothing but an expression. Those who came on claiming otherwise, need to prove that there is justification for their beliefs, as there has been no proof of any higher deity ever existing.

One does not have to disprove, what has never been proven.

It seems like you are literally incapable of any degree of perspective other than your own, which consistently comes off as extremely limited.  This is not an attack on you, personal or otherwise, and it may be an unfair characterization, but I just think that you do yourself a disservice when you fail to truly engage in discourse and only do so in a reactionary way.

Once again, no one NEEDS or HAS TO convince or prove anything to anyone.  However, this thread was created by a "non-believer" in an attempt to "disprove" the existence of a higher being by using a quote from Einstein, who people look at as a brilliant man.  No one forced him to create this thread.  So if anyone has some claims to defend in this thread, the onus would appear to be on the "non-believers."  However, in viewing these dynamics in that context, we fail to really engage in intelligent discourse where people exchange ideas and respond to one another in a way that seeks knowledge and understanding, not in a way which attempts to vilify and insult those who do not agree with us.

So once again, no one NEEDS or HAS TO convince of prove anything to anyone.  It is our own personal choice to enter these discussions, give our perspective on the topics, and learn about and question the perspectives of others.

  Please, don't try that. You fail magnificently while purporting such nonsense. Just because I refuse to acknowledge superstition as fact, does not mean that I am incapable of seeing another opinion as being plausable. Simply prove your theory by backing it up with facts, pointed facts, those that can be proven.

You are born not believing in anything but those who feed you, clothe you, then protecting you. Nnow prove that there is more than that out there.

The burden is upon those of you who believe that there is something more.

There is no "burden of proof" on anyone to prove anything.  That was my whole point... which you entirely missed, apparently... again.

Now you are simply being foolish and distracting. 

I didn't miss your point, as you are talking about this thread. However, those of us who actually live outside of niketalk, know that the burden of proof is upon those of you who do believe in the "great unseen one". 

  

No, I was talking about life in general, not just this thread.  No one HAS TO prove or convince anyone of the existence of a higher being just as no one HAS TO believe in a higher being.  Similarly, no one needs to convince anyone that a higher being doesn't exist and no one needs to NOT believe in a higher being.

What is so difficult to grasp?

Perhaps you need to stick to speaking about Niketalk then. You have many who are demanding that a "god" exists, then attempting to change and force goverment policy due to that belief.

Prove that "God" exists, then perhaps I will believe that homosexuality is wrong, then women should not have equal rights, and that Black people are meant to serve "white people", here, then in the socalled "hereafter".

The burden of proof is on those of YOU who believe in what amounts to a sadist, then wanting us to think as YOU do.

  

 

[nat turner]

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

It is only those who believe who are trying to convince. Those of us who do not, do not need to convince anyone of anything. We do not have to disprove what has NOT been proven. Einstien made a valid point, we agree, as none has ever proven the existence of any higher deity.

So again, what proof do you have, if any, that all of this was made simply for humans? I dare any of you to cite the bible, or any of the creationist dogma that suggests that we are the only reason for the earth and universe to exist. 
  

Um... no, it's not... the existence of this thread indicates otherwise.

Neither "side" NEEDS to convince anyone of anything... people on both "sides" CHOOSE to attempt to do so.

This thread is about the comments made by Einstein, who says that the WORD God, is nothing but an expression. Those who came on claiming otherwise, need to prove that there is justification for their beliefs, as there has been no proof of any higher deity ever existing.

One does not have to disprove, what has never been proven.

It seems like you are literally incapable of any degree of perspective other than your own, which consistently comes off as extremely limited.  This is not an attack on you, personal or otherwise, and it may be an unfair characterization, but I just think that you do yourself a disservice when you fail to truly engage in discourse and only do so in a reactionary way.

Once again, no one NEEDS or HAS TO convince or prove anything to anyone.  However, this thread was created by a "non-believer" in an attempt to "disprove" the existence of a higher being by using a quote from Einstein, who people look at as a brilliant man.  No one forced him to create this thread.  So if anyone has some claims to defend in this thread, the onus would appear to be on the "non-believers."  However, in viewing these dynamics in that context, we fail to really engage in intelligent discourse where people exchange ideas and respond to one another in a way that seeks knowledge and understanding, not in a way which attempts to vilify and insult those who do not agree with us.

So once again, no one NEEDS or HAS TO convince of prove anything to anyone.  It is our own personal choice to enter these discussions, give our perspective on the topics, and learn about and question the perspectives of others.

  Please, don't try that. You fail magnificently while purporting such nonsense. Just because I refuse to acknowledge superstition as fact, does not mean that I am incapable of seeing another opinion as being plausable. Simply prove your theory by backing it up with facts, pointed facts, those that can be proven.

You are born not believing in anything but those who feed you, clothe you, then protecting you. Nnow prove that there is more than that out there.

The burden is upon those of you who believe that there is something more.

There is no "burden of proof" on anyone to prove anything.  That was my whole point... which you entirely missed, apparently... again.

Now you are simply being foolish and distracting. 

I didn't miss your point, as you are talking about this thread. However, those of us who actually live outside of niketalk, know that the burden of proof is upon those of you who do believe in the "great unseen one". 

  

No, I was talking about life in general, not just this thread.  No one HAS TO prove or convince anyone of the existence of a higher being just as no one HAS TO believe in a higher being.  Similarly, no one needs to convince anyone that a higher being doesn't exist and no one needs to NOT believe in a higher being.

What is so difficult to grasp?

Perhaps you need to stick to speaking about Niketalk then. You have many who are demanding that a "god" exists, then attempting to change and force goverment policy due to that belief.

Prove that "God" exists, then perhaps I will believe that homosexuality is wrong, then women should not have equal rights, and that Black people are meant to serve "white people", here, then in the socalled "hereafter".

The burden of proof is on those of YOU who believe in what amounts to a sadist, then wanting us to think as YOU do.

  

 

[pusha c]

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by PUSHA C

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by 360wavesandxbox

Im surprised this thread has been going strong all week...In actuality no side will be able to convince the other of anything. What people don't understand is even scientists that come up with these scientifically proven "Facts" about creation, evolution and what-not are having a war among themselves over who is right. I read in an article once that scientists are assuming that creation by a higher power being based off myth and miracle, while they draw upon the same myth and miracle to convince people that we were once monkeys, then before that rodents, and before that some shapeless matter with the POTENTIAL to become something living.

And its not that far fetched that the earth was placed here for man to live on. Yes there were living beings on earth before man, but how many were given the brain and survival instincts that we have? And if you look at almost everything man created, it is mimicked from Nature. The cameras we use are mimicked from the eyeball, wetsuits work like skin, certain structures we revere were built and designed from looking at nature, planes were modeled after birds etc.

If the earth was moved 1 inch closer to the sun in orbit we would be torched. If it was moved 1 inch away we would be frozen. The axis of the earth allows for 4 seasons, days that allow us to recharge, and all varieties of climates..its hard to say all of this was mere chance in my eyes. Just because you can't see something doesn't mean it isn't there. A scientist didnt have to tell me that the wind blows, and I have never seen WIND in my entire life, jjust the SIGNS and RESULTS of wind, but that doesn't mean I can say it doesn't exist.

It is only those who believe who are trying to convince. Those of us who do not, do not need to convince anyone of anything. We do not have to disprove what has NOT been proven. Einstien made a valid point, we agree, as none has ever proven the existence of any higher deity.

So again, what proof do you have, if any, that all of this was made simply for humans? I dare any of you to cite the bible, or any of the creationist dogma that suggests that we are the only reason for the earth and universe to exist. 
  

Um... no, it's not... the existence of this thread indicates otherwise.

Neither "side" NEEDS to convince anyone of anything... people on both "sides" CHOOSE to attempt to do so.

This thread is about the comments made by Einstein, who says that the WORD God, is nothing but an expression. Those who came on claiming otherwise, need to prove that there is justification for their beliefs, as there has been no proof of any higher deity ever existing.

One does not have to disprove, what has never been proven.

blanket statements like this kill me lol. there has been proof... its personal though. YOU haven't had any proof but I DEFINITELY have had proof that you will scoff at because you don't/won't believe since you think you have everything figured out "logically."

at the end of the day... i'd rather be wrong in hoping for something better than this hell that we are in than be right and have no hope in anything.

You do realize that what you've stated is not proof, right? You could be lying, so if you have no proof of what you claim to know is real, why should anyone believe you, just because you say so? How does that make you more credible than someone like...EINSTIEN?

Also, as per your quote, you consider this life to be hell? Well perhaps if you tried to actually change the condition of your life, instead of sitting there "praying" on something, perhaps you'd have a better outlook on things. 

The "Pie in the sky" thing has worked wonders on people....especially supporting the cause of American slavery:

The law in Williamsburg, which was later embraced throughout the colonies (slavery, in 1667, was not only a southern phenomenon), meant that the body of Christ now encompassed both slave-owners and their slaves. How could these people still be said to be "one body" or "all one in Christ Jesus"? Something had to give. The behavior and lifestyle of colonial Christians was in conflict with Christian teaching. They would either have to change their behavior, or change the teaching. Guess which seemed easier?

The Great American solution to the conflict between slavery and Christianity was a shifting of focus from this world to the next. American Christianity became wholly otherworldly, preoccupied with heaven and unconcerned with earth. All questions of justice became purely eschatological. The sin of slavery produced the heresy of "pie in the sky when you die." ... This otherworldly focus continues today as it began -- as an excuse for injustice. In the centuries since Williamsburg passed its law it has become more refined. It's most popular -- and complex -- form today is the apocalyptic premillennial dispensationalism described in the "Left Behind" novels of Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins.   


EVERY TIME i make a comment in this thread you suck me in with your stupidity.

you really just don't get it

for the record, MY life is AMAZING right now. i was talking about life in general in this world of sin. sorry to assume you could comprehend that minor detail

when you say things like this

Prove that "God" exists, then perhaps I will believe that homosexuality is wrong, then women should not have equal rights, and that Black people are meant to serve "white people", here, then in the socalled "hereafter".


then you just don't grasp the concept of the Bible as instructions for living life. homosexuality is CLEARLY wrong but you probably have a couple gay friends who probably have your back (pun intended) as is slavery and of course women SHOULD have equal rights. you're being a d***head and picking out minor details (which you CLEARLY can't comprehend as shown in my couple sentences above) that support your argument from a book that has thousands of pages which preach of how to be a good person.

i don't believe you've ever read the Bible

 

[pusha c]

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by PUSHA C

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by 360wavesandxbox

Im surprised this thread has been going strong all week...In actuality no side will be able to convince the other of anything. What people don't understand is even scientists that come up with these scientifically proven "Facts" about creation, evolution and what-not are having a war among themselves over who is right. I read in an article once that scientists are assuming that creation by a higher power being based off myth and miracle, while they draw upon the same myth and miracle to convince people that we were once monkeys, then before that rodents, and before that some shapeless matter with the POTENTIAL to become something living.

And its not that far fetched that the earth was placed here for man to live on. Yes there were living beings on earth before man, but how many were given the brain and survival instincts that we have? And if you look at almost everything man created, it is mimicked from Nature. The cameras we use are mimicked from the eyeball, wetsuits work like skin, certain structures we revere were built and designed from looking at nature, planes were modeled after birds etc.

If the earth was moved 1 inch closer to the sun in orbit we would be torched. If it was moved 1 inch away we would be frozen. The axis of the earth allows for 4 seasons, days that allow us to recharge, and all varieties of climates..its hard to say all of this was mere chance in my eyes. Just because you can't see something doesn't mean it isn't there. A scientist didnt have to tell me that the wind blows, and I have never seen WIND in my entire life, jjust the SIGNS and RESULTS of wind, but that doesn't mean I can say it doesn't exist.

It is only those who believe who are trying to convince. Those of us who do not, do not need to convince anyone of anything. We do not have to disprove what has NOT been proven. Einstien made a valid point, we agree, as none has ever proven the existence of any higher deity.

So again, what proof do you have, if any, that all of this was made simply for humans? I dare any of you to cite the bible, or any of the creationist dogma that suggests that we are the only reason for the earth and universe to exist. 
  

Um... no, it's not... the existence of this thread indicates otherwise.

Neither "side" NEEDS to convince anyone of anything... people on both "sides" CHOOSE to attempt to do so.

This thread is about the comments made by Einstein, who says that the WORD God, is nothing but an expression. Those who came on claiming otherwise, need to prove that there is justification for their beliefs, as there has been no proof of any higher deity ever existing.

One does not have to disprove, what has never been proven.

blanket statements like this kill me lol. there has been proof... its personal though. YOU haven't had any proof but I DEFINITELY have had proof that you will scoff at because you don't/won't believe since you think you have everything figured out "logically."

at the end of the day... i'd rather be wrong in hoping for something better than this hell that we are in than be right and have no hope in anything.

You do realize that what you've stated is not proof, right? You could be lying, so if you have no proof of what you claim to know is real, why should anyone believe you, just because you say so? How does that make you more credible than someone like...EINSTIEN?

Also, as per your quote, you consider this life to be hell? Well perhaps if you tried to actually change the condition of your life, instead of sitting there "praying" on something, perhaps you'd have a better outlook on things. 

The "Pie in the sky" thing has worked wonders on people....especially supporting the cause of American slavery:

The law in Williamsburg, which was later embraced throughout the colonies (slavery, in 1667, was not only a southern phenomenon), meant that the body of Christ now encompassed both slave-owners and their slaves. How could these people still be said to be "one body" or "all one in Christ Jesus"? Something had to give. The behavior and lifestyle of colonial Christians was in conflict with Christian teaching. They would either have to change their behavior, or change the teaching. Guess which seemed easier?

The Great American solution to the conflict between slavery and Christianity was a shifting of focus from this world to the next. American Christianity became wholly otherworldly, preoccupied with heaven and unconcerned with earth. All questions of justice became purely eschatological. The sin of slavery produced the heresy of "pie in the sky when you die." ... This otherworldly focus continues today as it began -- as an excuse for injustice. In the centuries since Williamsburg passed its law it has become more refined. It's most popular -- and complex -- form today is the apocalyptic premillennial dispensationalism described in the "Left Behind" novels of Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins.   


EVERY TIME i make a comment in this thread you suck me in with your stupidity.

you really just don't get it

for the record, MY life is AMAZING right now. i was talking about life in general in this world of sin. sorry to assume you could comprehend that minor detail

when you say things like this

Prove that "God" exists, then perhaps I will believe that homosexuality is wrong, then women should not have equal rights, and that Black people are meant to serve "white people", here, then in the socalled "hereafter".


then you just don't grasp the concept of the Bible as instructions for living life. homosexuality is CLEARLY wrong but you probably have a couple gay friends who probably have your back (pun intended) as is slavery and of course women SHOULD have equal rights. you're being a d***head and picking out minor details (which you CLEARLY can't comprehend as shown in my couple sentences above) that support your argument from a book that has thousands of pages which preach of how to be a good person.

i don't believe you've ever read the Bible

 

[nat turner]

Originally Posted by PUSHA C

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by PUSHA C

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by 360wavesandxbox

Im surprised this thread has been going strong all week...In actuality no side will be able to convince the other of anything. What people don't understand is even scientists that come up with these scientifically proven "Facts" about creation, evolution and what-not are having a war among themselves over who is right. I read in an article once that scientists are assuming that creation by a higher power being based off myth and miracle, while they draw upon the same myth and miracle to convince people that we were once monkeys, then before that rodents, and before that some shapeless matter with the POTENTIAL to become something living.

And its not that far fetched that the earth was placed here for man to live on. Yes there were living beings on earth before man, but how many were given the brain and survival instincts that we have? And if you look at almost everything man created, it is mimicked from Nature. The cameras we use are mimicked from the eyeball, wetsuits work like skin, certain structures we revere were built and designed from looking at nature, planes were modeled after birds etc.

If the earth was moved 1 inch closer to the sun in orbit we would be torched. If it was moved 1 inch away we would be frozen. The axis of the earth allows for 4 seasons, days that allow us to recharge, and all varieties of climates..its hard to say all of this was mere chance in my eyes. Just because you can't see something doesn't mean it isn't there. A scientist didnt have to tell me that the wind blows, and I have never seen WIND in my entire life, jjust the SIGNS and RESULTS of wind, but that doesn't mean I can say it doesn't exist.

It is only those who believe who are trying to convince. Those of us who do not, do not need to convince anyone of anything. We do not have to disprove what has NOT been proven. Einstien made a valid point, we agree, as none has ever proven the existence of any higher deity.

So again, what proof do you have, if any, that all of this was made simply for humans? I dare any of you to cite the bible, or any of the creationist dogma that suggests that we are the only reason for the earth and universe to exist. 
  

Um... no, it's not... the existence of this thread indicates otherwise.

Neither "side" NEEDS to convince anyone of anything... people on both "sides" CHOOSE to attempt to do so.

This thread is about the comments made by Einstein, who says that the WORD God, is nothing but an expression. Those who came on claiming otherwise, need to prove that there is justification for their beliefs, as there has been no proof of any higher deity ever existing.

One does not have to disprove, what has never been proven.

blanket statements like this kill me lol. there has been proof... its personal though. YOU haven't had any proof but I DEFINITELY have had proof that you will scoff at because you don't/won't believe since you think you have everything figured out "logically."

at the end of the day... i'd rather be wrong in hoping for something better than this hell that we are in than be right and have no hope in anything.

You do realize that what you've stated is not proof, right? You could be lying, so if you have no proof of what you claim to know is real, why should anyone believe you, just because you say so? How does that make you more credible than someone like...EINSTIEN?

Also, as per your quote, you consider this life to be hell? Well perhaps if you tried to actually change the condition of your life, instead of sitting there "praying" on something, perhaps you'd have a better outlook on things. 

The "Pie in the sky" thing has worked wonders on people....especially supporting the cause of American slavery:

The law in Williamsburg, which was later embraced throughout the colonies (slavery, in 1667, was not only a southern phenomenon), meant that the body of Christ now encompassed both slave-owners and their slaves. How could these people still be said to be "one body" or "all one in Christ Jesus"? Something had to give. The behavior and lifestyle of colonial Christians was in conflict with Christian teaching. They would either have to change their behavior, or change the teaching. Guess which seemed easier?

The Great American solution to the conflict between slavery and Christianity was a shifting of focus from this world to the next. American Christianity became wholly otherworldly, preoccupied with heaven and unconcerned with earth. All questions of justice became purely eschatological. The sin of slavery produced the heresy of "pie in the sky when you die." ... This otherworldly focus continues today as it began -- as an excuse for injustice. In the centuries since Williamsburg passed its law it has become more refined. It's most popular -- and complex -- form today is the apocalyptic premillennial dispensationalism described in the "Left Behind" novels of Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins.   

EVERY TIME i make a comment in this thread you suck me in with your stupidity.

you really just don't get it

for the record, MY life is AMAZING right now. i was talking about life in general in this world of sin. sorry to assume you could comprehend that minor detail

when you say things like this

Prove that "God" exists, then perhaps I will believe that homosexuality is wrong, then women should not have equal rights, and that Black people are meant to serve "white people", here, then in the socalled "hereafter".


then you just don't grasp the concept of the Bible as instructions for living life. homosexuality is CLEARLY wrong but you probably have a couple gay friends who probably have your back (pun intended) as is slavery and of course women SHOULD have equal rights. you're being a dickhead and picking out minor details (which you CLEARLY can't comprehend in my couple sentences above) that support your argument from a book that has thousands of pages which preach of how to be a good person.

i don't believe you've ever read the Bible



   I've read the bible in three different languages, which is the reason I understand it so well. However, I want you to read what I've highlighted, your words, not mine.

After reading your own words, I want you to try and come at me with that "comprehension" comment again.

Do you have any knowledge on Human behaviour OUTSIDE of what the bible suggests? If that is your only resource, then I can understand your lacking of sophistication.

 

[nat turner]

Originally Posted by PUSHA C

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by PUSHA C

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by 360wavesandxbox

Im surprised this thread has been going strong all week...In actuality no side will be able to convince the other of anything. What people don't understand is even scientists that come up with these scientifically proven "Facts" about creation, evolution and what-not are having a war among themselves over who is right. I read in an article once that scientists are assuming that creation by a higher power being based off myth and miracle, while they draw upon the same myth and miracle to convince people that we were once monkeys, then before that rodents, and before that some shapeless matter with the POTENTIAL to become something living.

And its not that far fetched that the earth was placed here for man to live on. Yes there were living beings on earth before man, but how many were given the brain and survival instincts that we have? And if you look at almost everything man created, it is mimicked from Nature. The cameras we use are mimicked from the eyeball, wetsuits work like skin, certain structures we revere were built and designed from looking at nature, planes were modeled after birds etc.

If the earth was moved 1 inch closer to the sun in orbit we would be torched. If it was moved 1 inch away we would be frozen. The axis of the earth allows for 4 seasons, days that allow us to recharge, and all varieties of climates..its hard to say all of this was mere chance in my eyes. Just because you can't see something doesn't mean it isn't there. A scientist didnt have to tell me that the wind blows, and I have never seen WIND in my entire life, jjust the SIGNS and RESULTS of wind, but that doesn't mean I can say it doesn't exist.

It is only those who believe who are trying to convince. Those of us who do not, do not need to convince anyone of anything. We do not have to disprove what has NOT been proven. Einstien made a valid point, we agree, as none has ever proven the existence of any higher deity.

So again, what proof do you have, if any, that all of this was made simply for humans? I dare any of you to cite the bible, or any of the creationist dogma that suggests that we are the only reason for the earth and universe to exist. 
  

Um... no, it's not... the existence of this thread indicates otherwise.

Neither "side" NEEDS to convince anyone of anything... people on both "sides" CHOOSE to attempt to do so.

This thread is about the comments made by Einstein, who says that the WORD God, is nothing but an expression. Those who came on claiming otherwise, need to prove that there is justification for their beliefs, as there has been no proof of any higher deity ever existing.

One does not have to disprove, what has never been proven.

blanket statements like this kill me lol. there has been proof... its personal though. YOU haven't had any proof but I DEFINITELY have had proof that you will scoff at because you don't/won't believe since you think you have everything figured out "logically."

at the end of the day... i'd rather be wrong in hoping for something better than this hell that we are in than be right and have no hope in anything.

You do realize that what you've stated is not proof, right? You could be lying, so if you have no proof of what you claim to know is real, why should anyone believe you, just because you say so? How does that make you more credible than someone like...EINSTIEN?

Also, as per your quote, you consider this life to be hell? Well perhaps if you tried to actually change the condition of your life, instead of sitting there "praying" on something, perhaps you'd have a better outlook on things. 

The "Pie in the sky" thing has worked wonders on people....especially supporting the cause of American slavery:

The law in Williamsburg, which was later embraced throughout the colonies (slavery, in 1667, was not only a southern phenomenon), meant that the body of Christ now encompassed both slave-owners and their slaves. How could these people still be said to be "one body" or "all one in Christ Jesus"? Something had to give. The behavior and lifestyle of colonial Christians was in conflict with Christian teaching. They would either have to change their behavior, or change the teaching. Guess which seemed easier?

The Great American solution to the conflict between slavery and Christianity was a shifting of focus from this world to the next. American Christianity became wholly otherworldly, preoccupied with heaven and unconcerned with earth. All questions of justice became purely eschatological. The sin of slavery produced the heresy of "pie in the sky when you die." ... This otherworldly focus continues today as it began -- as an excuse for injustice. In the centuries since Williamsburg passed its law it has become more refined. It's most popular -- and complex -- form today is the apocalyptic premillennial dispensationalism described in the "Left Behind" novels of Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins.   

EVERY TIME i make a comment in this thread you suck me in with your stupidity.

you really just don't get it

for the record, MY life is AMAZING right now. i was talking about life in general in this world of sin. sorry to assume you could comprehend that minor detail

when you say things like this

Prove that "God" exists, then perhaps I will believe that homosexuality is wrong, then women should not have equal rights, and that Black people are meant to serve "white people", here, then in the socalled "hereafter".


then you just don't grasp the concept of the Bible as instructions for living life. homosexuality is CLEARLY wrong but you probably have a couple gay friends who probably have your back (pun intended) as is slavery and of course women SHOULD have equal rights. you're being a dickhead and picking out minor details (which you CLEARLY can't comprehend in my couple sentences above) that support your argument from a book that has thousands of pages which preach of how to be a good person.

i don't believe you've ever read the Bible



   I've read the bible in three different languages, which is the reason I understand it so well. However, I want you to read what I've highlighted, your words, not mine.

After reading your own words, I want you to try and come at me with that "comprehension" comment again.

Do you have any knowledge on Human behaviour OUTSIDE of what the bible suggests? If that is your only resource, then I can understand your lacking of sophistication.

 

[pusha c]

Do you have any knowledge on Human behaviour OUTSIDE of what the bible suggests?


yeah, we're wired to procreate with the parts we have and you can't tell me otherwise... are you gay son?

 

[pusha c]

Do you have any knowledge on Human behaviour OUTSIDE of what the bible suggests?


yeah, we're wired to procreate with the parts we have and you can't tell me otherwise... are you gay son?

 

[nat turner]

Originally Posted by PUSHA C

Do you have any knowledge on Human behaviour OUTSIDE of what the bible suggests?

yeah, we're wired to procreate with the parts we have and you can't tell me otherwise... are you gay son?
In spite of what you've stated then asked, I am going to be civil with you. 

No, I am not homosexual. However, I do know that due to the nature versus nurture debate, then whether or not homosexuality is wrong or right, it is a bit more complicated, as all things are, than what the bible suggests.

You have some people due to some traumatic situations, may prefer the company of the same sex as companion. Then you have others who may be born with an identity issue, or simply prefering the company of the same sex as companion or sexual partner.

This has been around since before the stories of the Bible, as even during Grecian times, homosexuality was an accepted practice in order to promote faithful behaviour between married couples of the opposite sex.

As a reference guide, the bible has been debunked by even the most unintelligent of scholars in this sort of discussion.

Why is that so hard for someone who is as supposedly intelligent as you to comprehend?

Perhaps you are dealing with an identity issue of your own?

Your turn.
  

 

[nat turner]

Originally Posted by PUSHA C

Do you have any knowledge on Human behaviour OUTSIDE of what the bible suggests?

yeah, we're wired to procreate with the parts we have and you can't tell me otherwise... are you gay son?
In spite of what you've stated then asked, I am going to be civil with you. 

No, I am not homosexual. However, I do know that due to the nature versus nurture debate, then whether or not homosexuality is wrong or right, it is a bit more complicated, as all things are, than what the bible suggests.

You have some people due to some traumatic situations, may prefer the company of the same sex as companion. Then you have others who may be born with an identity issue, or simply prefering the company of the same sex as companion or sexual partner.

This has been around since before the stories of the Bible, as even during Grecian times, homosexuality was an accepted practice in order to promote faithful behaviour between married couples of the opposite sex.

As a reference guide, the bible has been debunked by even the most unintelligent of scholars in this sort of discussion.

Why is that so hard for someone who is as supposedly intelligent as you to comprehend?

Perhaps you are dealing with an identity issue of your own?

Your turn.
  

 

[pusha c]

nah i'm cool on this never ending cycle (far from a discussion or debate, its just banter).

maybe monday when i'm at work though lol. i got a show tonight i gotta get ready for

 

[pusha c]

nah i'm cool on this never ending cycle (far from a discussion or debate, its just banter).

maybe monday when i'm at work though lol. i got a show tonight i gotta get ready for

 

[nat turner]

Originally Posted by PUSHA C

nah i'm cool on this never ending cycle (far from a discussion or debate, its just banter).

maybe monday when i'm at work though lol. i got a show tonight i gotta get ready for

No gumption, nor sophistication. Horrible combination.

Good luck.




  

 

[nat turner]

Originally Posted by PUSHA C

nah i'm cool on this never ending cycle (far from a discussion or debate, its just banter).

maybe monday when i'm at work though lol. i got a show tonight i gotta get ready for

No gumption, nor sophistication. Horrible combination.

Good luck.




  

 

[pusha c]

 

[pusha c]

 

[pusha c]

 

[pusha c]