Total posts: 222
-->
@3RU7AL
if a hundred people were going to cross the border but there's a wall there, how many do you think will find a way across anyway? i assume a significant amount won't even try.
Created:
Nation's Atheists Standing Strong Despite Existence Of Bacon
U.S.—According to a recent report, the nation's atheists are still stubbornly refusing to admit the reality of God despite the fact that bacon clearly exists in our universe.Christians had anticipated that atheism would be eradicated as knowledge of bacon's existence continued to grow, but so far, it hasn't made a dent.
"It doesn't make any sense," said apologist William Lane Craig. "To hold that there is no God and yet acknowledge the reality that bacon exists is well beyond the realm of logic and reason---it takes a whole lot of faith to be an atheist."
"There's crispy bacon, soft bacon, peppered bacon, bacon jerky, bacon-wrapped foods, bacon burgers---the evidence is undeniable."
Craig often engages atheists in debate. Sometimes, he simply puts a picture of bacon up on the video projector and says, "I rest my case." Other apologists have adopted this method, but to little effect so far.
At publishing time, reports had indicated that atheists are well aware of the existence of fish tacos, and yet still somehow deny that God is real.
Created:
Posted in:
here are some orthodox schisms
so i'm not sure it's accurate to say there's no division in eastern regions like there are with catholic. from what i can see, weterns are a lot more free wheeling, but it's not like there's not division on both sides.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
so you say if the russians broke off they'd be outnumbered. so are you saying it's God's truth that the key point here is majority rule? i'm not saying it's wrong, it's just such a man made sounding concept.
i dont know the history of orthodox schisms, but i'm sure like the georgian baptists and catholics there are other examples of schismatic churches, isn't there? so how is it different than protestantism and catholic church?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
what is your view of miracles within the catholic church? personally if i had to choose between the two catholic and orthodox, i'd go orthodox. but it seems like catholics have more miracles. maybe that's just because it's a bigger church, though. id say, as jesus said, mriacles are indicators of truth. what do you think about the fact that catholics have so many miracles, if they are simply filled with error and schismatics?
i always appreciated the incorrupt bodies in both of the churches.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
is there an equivalent of protestants to orthodoxy in eastern regions? i asked at an orthodox forum and they said maybe the Georgian Baptists. do you know of any others?
i joined an orthodox forum and was bouncing around ideas with them for years. here is an example thread that i started. i think i started some interesting threads. if you are curious you can click the username and search for posts and threads by user.
do you post at orthodox websites?
Created:
Posted in:
the basics of time dilation and the relativity of light can be deduced from a thought experiment. if you are moving on a train and turn on a flashlight to a mirror and the light reflects up, it will cause a V shape to an observer off the train while being just up and down to the person on the train. the key is that light travels at the speed of light for both the person on the train and the obverver, even though for the observer light has a longer distance to travel. to deduce time dilation you just factor in time to the equation as it would pass differently for each frame of reference.
Created:
Posted in:
are non-orthodox services that try to be orthodox as the early church was, valid? why not?
what makes those protestants not part of the true church?
does it all boil down to apostolic succession?
and if it does, that leads to my last post, which groups of the orthodox represent the true church when they start ex commnicating everyone from each other?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
what is your standard of unity? if the russian orthodox church excommunicated everyone else, who is to say where the true church is? and that goes for any of the districts.
Created:
this article says they have found ways to measure how fast black holes spin.
some of them spin at 99% the speed of light. but physics says for an object to go the speed of light, it has to have infinite mass. so how can these obviously not even close to infinite mass clusters spin at almost the speed of light? does that last percent really matter that much?
Created:
-->
@Tradesecret
the bible doesn't talk about unconditional or conditional love. the most honest interpretation is conditional love. my questions are just contrasting the God of the bible with the modern understanding that God loves unconditinoally. you do good at describing protestant salvation. perhaps that is as close to getting to unconditional as you are going to get with religion.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
i put a lot of stock in near death experiences. there is a lot of science to those things. eternal view's views jive well with that stuff, and he has a lot of wisdom, so i like to listen to his views. sometimes i dont know where he gets his info, but he's good at getting the key points of all that.
how do you view near death experiences? most people find ways of getting it to fit their religion, so it doesn't really change much at the end of the day.... but some of the more conservative types reject it completely.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
as a former catholic, i view orthodoxy as something worth considering. it looks like a purer version of early christianity, without all the novelties rome eventually brought into it all.
a big issue i have with orthodoxy, is that you have to do whatever it is your priest tells you to. within reason of course. the idea of submission. but what if there were another priest who would tell you different? it's too arbitrary to submit your whole will to a person. and at the end of the day, if you can shop around with the priests, what's the point of submission to begin with?
i also try to keep an open mind about things, but orthodoxy is set in its ways.
Created:
-->
@EtrnlVw
what are your views of this? id guess you agree with me. god is unconditinoal love, but that doesn't mean there aren't consequences to your actions, and temporary prisons in the afterlife. the bible was written by man and is an imperfect reflection of God's radical love.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
everybody knows trump is the one calling the shots. but even if we focused on congress, it's still the republicans who are causing a problem. the president and republicans can't just shut down the government when they really want something. that's no way to run a government. but that's what you guys are promoting. would you like it if president sanders shut down the government with the democrats, to get healthcare for all, or to force a repeal of the second amendment?
Created:
so what ya'll are advocating is that anytime a president really wants something, all he has to do is shut down the government to get his way? that's no way to run a government, but it's what you guys are essentially promoting.
Created:
-->
@Swagnarok
why should the opposition just give in to trump's demand for a wall? he's in the minority in wanting a wall, and he's had two years of government control to get it done but he hasn't
Created:
-->
@Mopac
i like your views, but does all that square with an honest depiction of the bible? the most straightforward view of the bible as depicted by the bible and traditional christianity is that God loves us with conditions
Created:
the precedent he is setting is that for anything a president wants, all he has to do is shut the government down until he gets his way.
i support the wall but not the way he is doing it.
he had control of all three branches of government and still couldn't get the wall, plus the pro wall view is a minority position. sometimes things don't work the way you want... that's life.
Created:
OBVIOUSLY a border wall will greatly reduce the amount of foot traffic across the border, and make those who do cross over it easier to track and catch because it will greatly slow them down. obviously the wall would need border patrol and technology too. with no wall people can and will just run right through.
Here is an unintentionally funny article from a Harvard halfwit who is doing his best to say that border walls don’t work, while describing how well they work.
the thing that is all the craze amongst liberals is simply to state that most illegal immigration comes from places other than illegal crossing, although they usually just ignore that that doesn't mean we can't greatly limit the illegal crossings too. liberals say we can use alternative methods to a wall, although they ignore none of the alternatives can do what a simple wall would do- limit people from just running across.
Created:
is it really conditionally unconditional love? which is really conditional love.
is it just unconditional if you are a christian? how far would that go? supposedly you can't slip up if you are a christian, but then again if you started sinning seriously people would say you were never saved to begin with. so whether you look at this from catholic or protestant type thinking, there are things that can cause you to lose God's favor.
even if it was unconditional as a christian, it's still conditional on having the proper faith in Jesus.
is God's love based on whether you are good or bad?
my personal stance is God loves unconditionally, but that the bible does not truly reflect that in an ideal way. i think you can salvage the bad depiction from the bible, by saying God loves us unconditinally, but that doesn't man there aren't consequences to our actions.
Created:
-->
@ronjs
the opening post is full of things that should have happened if there was a world wide flood. where is the geological evidence of water everywhere? where are the masses of fossils that would have occurred? why isn't there only one lineage of people since the flood happened in recent history and humans supposedly only came from one incest family? the holes are endless.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
do you think there are or will be intelligent life outside of human beings in the universe?
do our eternal selves ever become anything than human?
do our eternal souls or selves have an appearance or image?
what do souls generally look like?
Created:
-->
@EtrnlVw
this thread is for those who think the bible has no errors in it, or that the story of noah is literal. that's what i'm arguing against. i'm fine with taking the story as metaphorical, but the people in the bible, even in the new testament, took the story as literal. it looks like even jesus did, but definiitely his apostles. that means we can't just say it's not literal so not an error. it's an error, period.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
do the orthodox take the bible as inerrant? i think i heard once they take the bible and at least some of the councils as 'inspired' but not necessarily inerrant. is that correct?
why do you or don't you acknowledge that the story of noah is an error in the bible?
Created:
-->
@janesix
i guess you could say the moral of the story is bad things happen when you don't obey god. i dont know if the story has a meaning though.
the point i'm making in this thread is that it's obvious this is a glaring error in the bible. the bible treated the story as literal when it's obvious it's not literal and false. if you strive for truth at all costs, it's contemptable to say the bible has no errors in it.
Created:
why is there no evidence of a flood everywhere, when there would be if it actually happened?
i could go on and on with the holes in the story.
Created:
just because the bible says so, and God can do anything?
when miracles occur, i believe there is evidence for it. with the story of noah, it's not just the lack of evidence, but evidence exists that actively discredits the story.
if the story of noah occurred within recent history or thousands of years, how are there so many cultures who look like they evolved over hundreds of thousands of years, when supposedly they were all wiped out recently?
how did all the fresh water fish and life survive when all the water combined with the ocean?
how did kangaroos and island animals get to the ark?
why isn't there any fossils of the mass casualties of life on earth?
why wasn't there any imbreeding with only one of each animal?
how did they fit so many animals on one boat?
is it all just because the bible says it, and God can do anything, that we should take it as true? the new testament does talk about noah as if it was a literal story, so at least if you believe the bible is the word of God, you can't just say the story was a metaphor.
i believe when miracles occur, there is evidence for them. it's understandable when a christian doesn't think much about these things and takes the story as true. but for those who have studied or should know better, it stands as contemptable the disdain for truth that those literalist christians have.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
not many i'd guess, but i have no idea.
don't you think if you had bump stocks everywhere and readily available, that all the mass shooters we see would have used them? the fact they dont shows they weren't going out of their way to but it's obvious they would have if it was right in front of them. maybe, just maybe, putting obstacles in front of people will hinder them. maybe, just maybe, having mass killing devices just laying around might affect people's behavior.
Created:
Posted in:
the people who say bump stock bans will have no effect on people turning rifles into machine guns, sound like people who say a wall on the mexican border will have no effect. of course both measure will have an effect. it's like thinking a condom does nothing to prevent birth, to say otherwise.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
i'm just going by stats that were given to me by dylan here. based on that, illegals do commit less than the average usa citizen, but that's only because the black population brings the rate of crime up for the general population, plus mexican usa citizens are higher than whites too. the only thing i know for sure in this is that blacks commit more crime. in fact, they commit half the murder while being only fraction of the population.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
the fact checkers always say they don't use many resources. im sure there's some truth that they do, but i would expect it's just local governmentts footing those bills, so who cares what they spend their money on?
also, it would be better to say "we should stop spending money on illegal immigrants" than to say we should build a wall, if that's the case.
i actually was against the wall until i saw the crime statistics. but i just take it to the logical conclusion and say we should limit legal immigration too based on race and geographical region.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
not really. why do you ask?
Created:
Posted in:
the main reason to build a wall is because mexicans commit twice as much crime as white people. the thing is, that statistic is the same for both legal and illegal immigration. so, isn't it necessary logically that you would limit legal immigration if you are willing to build a wall?
i dont view the job stealing and drug things as practically good factors in building the wall. if we really wanted to top illegals from stealing jobs, we would just enforce the rule against employers who hire them. drugs will find a way to get into the country around the wall or smuggled in theorugh legal ports. in fact, eighty percent of drugs come through those ports and it would only take around a hundred million to implement scanners to catch much of those drugs. a far cry from the billions necessary for a wall.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
why build a wall then?
the only reason i can see to build one is because illegals commit more crime than whites. i dont see the job stealing as a reason cause we can just enforce making employers check citizen status, and drugs are too easy to find alternative ways to get them in here or they could invest a fraction on drug scanners, i think i heard a hundred million would help with the eighty percent of drugs that come through legal ports of entry.
if you are being consistent it's either a wall and limiting immigration based on skin color, or no wall and not limiting based on skin color.
or, why build a wall then?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
if illegal and legal mexicans or blacks commit the same amount of crime, isn't it logically necessary that if you're building a wall to stop the illegal ones, that you should also limit legal immigration from those same groups? how is that not the same thing?
plus even if some mexicans or blacks seem like they might be cool, their whole demographic is tainted and their offspring might not act right.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dylancatlow
well you are convincing me we want a wall at a higher price. but do you acknowledge that the logical extension of what you are saying is, that if illegal mexicans commit crime at the rate of legal mexicans, and the crime thing is the only thing we can say isnt an overblown reason in building hte wall..... then we also should try not getting legal mexicans either? i know mainstream politics is not okay with that and would use this to point to an underlying racism in trump's thought. but im convinced we want fewer mexicans and espeically blacks for this reason. knowing some of your racial views, you might feel that way too.
Created:
Posted in:
i enjoy the smell of gasoline and cow manure and second hand smoke
Created:
Posted in:
on the campaign finance point. i think the precise issue is whether cohen at trump's direction made an illegal campaign contribution. but i think it's too vague of a law if what he did could be called that. he didn't intend to make a contribution, he intended to help trump avoid scandal.
i also think the obstruction of justice claims are probably too vague to be constitutional.
witness tampering with mueller might be viable.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
you keep saying the number of guns has gone up, but you keep ignoring that the percent of people owning them has gone down. that correlates with the declining murder rate and is more relevant. i trust a literature review from harvard researchers who explain the majority view, over a bunch of dudes on the internet who can't keep their statistics straight.
so you still have no explanation for why the nongun murder rate is within the normal range while the gun murder rate is wildly out of whack? you can't just point to the fact people would choose guns over no guns to murder, because if this was an evil person problem the nongun murder rate would not be within the normal range and would be wildly out of whack too.
you need to put the serial killer numbers into perspective. like the rate of serial killers we have compared to other developed countries. plus, i googled it, and some experts on serial killers think the problem isn't as much that we have excessive serial killers, but that we have a system that is better able to capture them and that causes our numbers of killers to go up.
also you just keep ignoring all the long line of science i keep pointing to that shows the precense of a gun correlates to murders and other problems. i might understand that one shred of science might not be conclusive, but taken as a whole is pretty overwhelming.
what i meant by 'normal' people. it's very relevant. you keep saying that a gun doesn't give people inclinations to kill someone if it's present v if it's not. but i dont know about you but most people would say criminals are more likely to kill if there's a gun present. so why can't we just say generally everyone is sometimes more likely to kill? 'normal' people turn into criminals all the time. you can't just define yourself into being right by saying if htey use they gun they are criminals cause then you are just using artificial definitions to define yourself into being right. the world isn't magically split into criminals v normal people, it's much more fluid than that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
that's the best attempt at explaining it, the idea that people choose to use guns for their efficiency, but it falls short. if people in the usa were just more evil, there would be a wildly out of proportion number of non-gun murders too.
i think the number of people owning guns has gone down because we live in a highly developed country, not as much a wild west type country.
i think if fewer people own guns, they aren't as likely to kill someone. this is backed up by loads of science and common sense.
women are more likely to die if there's a gun around, police are more likely to be shot, there are more likley to be murders in general, police are more likely to shoot people, the non-gun murders are not out of whack but gun murders are, you aren't more likely to be mugged in the usa but are more likely to be mugged and shot. the science goes on and on.
ive seen with my own eyes situations escalate when a gun was there that wouldn't have escalted if the gun wasn't there. people know that criminals are more likely to kill if htey have a gun, so why aren't normal people sometimes more likely? the world isn't magically split between criminals and noncriminals.
Created:
Posted in:
nobody can explain why non gun homicides are within normal territory, but gun homicides are wildly out of whack. it's obvious it's more than just bad people, but a gun problem too.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
"so explain to me this gun problem that the ownership and sales have skyrocketed hit all time highs by a large amount and yet the murder rate goes down, circle that square if you please."
the number of guns have gone up, but the number of people owning them has gone down. that's the number that is more crucial in how many people end up shooting people.
Created:
maybe not everyone, but most people or even by far most people? there are a lot of trump supporters here, so maybe you can chime in if you think he lies a lot, or even more important, chime in if you think he doesn't lie a lot.
i remember when the election for president was going on it was at least debateable whether trump or hilary lied more, but after he won the office, his lying went into overdrive.
politifact type sites rates him as the politician with the most and highest rate of lies.
Created:
Posted in:
here is a graph that shows non gun homicides compared to gun homicides, in all the developed countries we usually compare to.
https://www.reddit.com/r/gunpolitics/comments/71n1u2/gunnongun_homicide_rates_in_oecd_countries_for/
the thing is, you might be able to argue causation v correlation with something like gun precense, but not here: that is, people who are more violent might get guns and cause the correlation to go up, but that doesn't necessarily mean that people getting guns causes murder to go up. but, in this situation, we see that non gun murders are roughly the same as every other country, which means people aren't just evil and wildly killing people. only when you look at gun homicides do you see wildly high murder rates. i understand the gun is the weapon of choice if you are going to kill someone so that could throw of the gun homicide part, the problem is that the non-gun homicide part isn't wildly out of whack.
again, this isn't just a bad person problem, it's a gun problem.
Created:
plus plisken acknowledges he was talking about the same woman. dred just has a problem figuring things out.
Created:
"wtf do you even mean by an absolute right and where did I say any such thing? "
you said with the exact words that she had an absolute right to kill him in post 64
i dont know what we are even arguing about at this point cause we both think she's justified, you just can't figure out how much she was justified.
Created:
-->
@Plisken
so you're calling plisken a quack? or is he a leftist? his response is the same as mine. you also act like i didn't say the woman was legally justified.
but i think you aren't as big of an absolute right person here either, because you're talking about response time and stuff like that. that's what i'd be arguing makes her justified.... it's too much to expect someone to make the right decision under those conditions. you should be arguing she could have time to step back and consider the situation, and kill the dude anyway, because you think it's an absolute right, or so you claim is your response.
Created: