Moved Another step towards answering the question of life's origins - religion

[Elixir]

Huh?

Poking at Learner. We are the result of 'inanimate' chemical reactions.

Sorry - I should have known. Where there is nonsense there are usually godders.

I have certainly derided your god sufficiently to show that either it doesn't intend to smite anyone, or it doesn't dare smite me.

There's another possibility: maybe his aim just really sucks.

 

[Learner]

Inanimate and animate are subjective terms at best when it comes to debate.

Clarification during a discussion is best, when using either word.

Natural 'inanimate' chemical reactions occur all the time.

So to clarify, do you mean:

Life comes from non-life material 'all the time' through chemical processes?

or

Do you mean life / living organisms produces new life/living organisms all the time, through chemical reactions?

( If life was like the flame of a candle for example, and in order to keep the flame alive. The candle has to light another candle before it burns out, which is continuously repeated in succession keeping the flame ever burning)

 

[Learner]

Huh?

Poking at Learner. We are the result of 'inanimate' chemical reactions.

Sorry - I should have known. Where there is nonsense there are usually godders.

But don't ignore the nonsense from the non-godders. We are all human after all.

I have certainly derided your god sufficiently to show that either it doesn't intend to smite anyone, or it doesn't dare smite me.

There's another possibility: maybe his aim just really sucks.

I think you maybe referring to Judgement day?
Patience fellas. Who knows it may just suddenly pop up.

 

[steve_bank]

Creationism, 2 steps forward 10 steps backwards.

 

[Learner]

Creationism, 2 steps forward 10 steps backwards.

Theist translation:

Creationist looks back taking two steps towards the scriptures of the past, ten steps back in awe while the future rapidly sneaks up behind him. Surprise I've returned sayeth the Lord!

 

[steve_bank]

The older I get the more Christianity sounds like a delusional illness.

 

[steve_bank]

Wasn't my intention, did I put the kibosh on Lerner et al?

 

[Person19960]

The older I get the more Christianity sounds like a delusional illness.

Forgiveness is no delusion. Kindness is no delusion. Perhaps you have yet to find the kind of Christianity you seek, @steve_bank . I recommend the album "Bible Belt Baby" by the effervescent, Grammy-nominated Flamy Grant.

The song "Esther, Ruth, and Rahab" is particularly important.

 

[steve_bank]

I am seeking no form of Christianity or religion.

I also pit no stock in pop music pseudo philosophy and mambo jumbo lyrics any more the Holy Babel.

Forgiveness as practiced by Christians, surely you must be joking.

One of the biggest problems with Christianity is the belief that their alleged basic principles like lke charity and forgiveness are exclusive to Christians, which they are not. Historically Christian forgiveness love, and charity are selective.

I contrast Buddhism at its core is universal empathy for all life. It has a set of clear moral and ethical conduct.Christianity has a bible of disjointed at ties contrfictory pasages that can be interpreted most any way, situtional ethics.

 

[Person19960]

It's no joke, steve.

 

[pood]

It's no joke, steve.

I was under the impression that you were an atheist.

In any event, Steve is right. Kindness and forgiveness can be practiced by anyone, with or without religion. Christianity, at least the evangelical flavor, makes kindness and forgiveness much harder to practice.

 

[Person19960]

What difference does it make what I "am" or what I believe? I'm a week away from homeless, who gives a shit.

Steve did not say that forgiveness was able to be practiced by anyone. He said "Forgiveness as practiced by Christians, surely you must be joking."

I said it was no joke.

It is slightly horriific that you can't speak to me unless I am "an atheist."

Forgiveness and kindness are taught by Christians to Christians, and practiced by Christians.

Just because some forum posters do not use the word "some" does not mean that some people do not do this, or that I am mistaken, incorrect, misleading, or wrong.

I am not the one who sees groups as monoliths. If I make a blanket assertion and you do not understand sarcasm, that's not my fault. I'd be delighted to explain.

Hi, I'm Janice, and you're wrong.

Hi, I'm Janice, and we are both wrong.

Prove me wrong. You can't. I'm right.

I learned logic and reason here on IIDB and I carry things out to their logical conclusions. Why don't you guys do that?

 

[pood]

It is slightly horriific that you can't speak to me unless I am "an atheist."

Um … did I say that I can’t speak to you unless you are an atheist? No, I did not.

Yes, some Christians practice kindness and forgiveness, some don’t. Just like everyone else.

I am sorry about the homeless bit. I’m hoping that is sarcasm or a joke of some kind.

 

[steve_bank]

It's no joke, steve.

It is important to know who I am speaking to. When I say atheist I mean atheist without equivocation.

Gay, straight, religious, atheist, man,woman, black, white or brown I do not care. What I want to know is who somebody is.

I think most of op culture is a joke. , so when you say I should listen to a song I laugh.

Life is a carnival... 'we are all in the same boat ready to float off the end of the world'. An important life changing philosophy.

 

[Wiploc]

The term used in courts for 'proof' is 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

That is for criminal cases. The "preponderance of the evidence" is the more common burden of proof.

 

[ideologyhunter]

Oddly enough, in the cockroach Bible (yes, there is one; why do you think they're always ripping and chewing paper?), The Book of Rinds and Bindings, the authors believe that the god Rachroch created the first pair of roaches from vegetable peelings. This is explained in the first book, Crawlings. Cr. 1:26: 'And Rachroch said, we shall ---crick!! -- make roach in our own image, and the roach shall have dominion -- hissss!! -- over the scraps on the floor and the damp spaces of the -- ka-rik-rik!! -- earth, and of things above, as far as they shall climb, and over -- hiss... -- most of those that creepeth upon the earth.' (KIng Germs Version) The actual creation process is described briefly in Cr. 2:7: 'And Rachroch formed roach from a dusty slice of -- rik! rik! rik!! -- pomegranate rind, and fig peelings, and spewed into his mouth parts -- Hisssss!! -- the fermented breath of life, and roach became -- kaaaa-rikkk!! -- a living soul, the eternal roach.' (KGV)
I'll admit straight off that I haven't read all of Rinds and Bindings. It is a Bible, therefore boring and full of twaddle. Also, you have to get over all those damn hissing and chirping interjections. It's a hard book to find; I found mine while I was replacing some drywall in my basement. If you skip to the last book, Roachelation, which seems to have been written by a roach that got into some super-fermented fruit juice, you'll find that they believe in an end times in which some king roach, called The Crust, is stepped on, but comes back with like a million jillion roaches, and they overpower the human world and then it's just roaches.
I should say, they're entitled to their Rinds and Bindings, I just don't want their beliefs to impinge on my life. I respect their religion, but really, they're out of their fucking cockroach minds.