Ali#1, you were right about Arizona.

[rwm1273]

Originally Posted by fish gunner

Perhaps close ,cause he's not visable 13 billion yrs in any direction. Sooo we start down the road of alternative dimensions to find a place for god dude to exist.

Do you believe in ghosts? Or miracles? Or divine intervention? Or is it all just luck?

[ali#1]

Originally Posted by rwm1273

No, because the earth has been proven to be round.

God has not been proven to be non existent. There are some things that just can't be explained, and that is where faith comes in.

Really because the church said for thousands of years the earth was flat.

[Donkey Oatey]

Originally Posted by rwm1273

I am sure that if a Jewish family came in, which I doubt would happen unless he baked his cakes in a kosher way, then I am sure he would have an issue with doing a proper job for them. However since Jesus was a Jew, I suspect the baker would not have that much of an issue baking a cake for a Jewish ceremony.

Your suggestion of linking the religious issues to hunting issues is without merit.

Now it is written in several sections of the bible as well as the Qur'an and numerous other religious books that homosexuality is a sin, so that is the issue for the baker. I never said I had an issue with gays, I just understand the baker's religious rights.

Baking a cake is not a protected religious right. I get and accept that gays can't marry in a church. I don't agree with churches or religion but that was clear earlier. That is a protected religious right. I don't accept that gays wanting to be married by a public official are being denied. Its that whole separation of church and state that happens here. The state can't discriminate and those that work for the state can't discriminate.

My point is that if you are denied service for your beliefs wouldn't you push that agenda to stop from being ostracized or discriminated? I would. That is what happened here.

They are not looking for more rights they are asking for the same rights as everyone else. The right to be married, benefits etc. They are fighting against discrimination. They are fighting against bullying and physical violence against gays. I am all for it.

Round and round we go. I have stated I think it was the right decision to strike down this asinine Jim Crowesque law.

[ali#1]

Originally Posted by rwm1273

What you still can't grasp is the fact that we have religious rights in this country that are enshrined in law. It makes no difference if I believe in religion or not.

Religious laws don't trump other laws.

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by rwm1273

Do you believe in ghosts? Or miracles? Or divine intervention? Or is it all just luck?

Sorry no on ghosts , no on miracles definitely not for divine intervention. Popes all believe very strongly 99.9% of all pope's are dead. Seen stuff others call miraculous imo eh nope buddy hit a moose in a car between kmat &terrace . Moose took exception and kicked the chit out of him . His mom says miracle, I call miracle of modern medicine. Perfectly explainable and rational.

[KegRiver]

Originally Posted by ali#1

Religious laws don't trump other laws.

They do if one is a Muslim.

Try denying a Muslim the right to pray in school and see how far you get.

[canadiantdi]

Originally Posted by KegRiver

They do if one is a Muslim.

Try denying a Muslim the right to pray in school and see how far you get.

You can only push around the peaceful and tolerant.

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by ali#1

Do you believe Jesus is a white male as he is portrayed ?

No, but what does that have to do with anything?

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by ali#1

I'm the one arguing from am position that doesn't require the suspension of belief. You claimed that the world is 10000 years old.

No you are just arguing!

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by ali#1

So if the earth is 10000 years old you believe people were murdering as raping and killing each other freely before Jesus came along ?. 8000 of indifference toward humans ?.

Why are you always suggesting what others believe.

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by ali#1

Too bad god didn't tell is disease came from germs could have saved billions of lives from then til the early 1900's.

Maybe those billions of lives that would have been saved would have reproduced and we would be way way over populated

Did you know that death is not the opposite of life? The opposite of death is birth. Both birth and death are part of life. Death will come with or without germs. Maybe no death because of fixing your germ thing may be more of a curse than a blessing?


Is the only way you would accept that there is a God is to have everything handed to you on a silver platter and to have life without risks and challenges? Get over it buttercup!

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by ali#1

Wanting to believe is partially the want to be a slave.

WOW!! THAT IS DEEP!!!

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

Ali

Exodus 20:4

4 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 5 You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing steadfast love to thousands[a] of those who love me and keep my commandments.

If you read past the initial verse containing the second commandment, I think you'll clearly see the intent.

I don't believe that this commandment was given to stop people from making dolls, or toy horses etc. Verse 5 clearly mentions why making "carved images" can be a fault. We are not to bow down to them and serve them.

As for a cross or other Christian item, I would think that as long as you aren't praying to it, or idolizing it, then there wouldn't be a problem. Some people wear them as a reminder, others maybe as a sign to others that they are Christian. I can't see that being an issue, but I could be wrong.

Jesus is depicted upon the cross in many of the churches I have been to. When one enters church, they bow and anoint(right word?) themselves with holy water themselves before Jesus on the cross. Jesus who is in heaven. When you pray in church, you bow your heads, with Jesus on the cross up on the dais in the center for all to see. There is also much talk about service to christ/god/church.

Is there not also a passage where Christ says not to build temples to worship him in? Now you may counter and say you don't worship Christ, but you worship god, who is Christ.

Originally Posted by 30Cal

Do you know what I meant by sounds familiar or did you assume that you know what I'm thinking?

I don't see ambiguity as an enemy, more a part of our design. Variables allow us to explore.

Giving in marriage can mean a lot of things.

A large part of the argument of the faithful is that the unbelievers are taking passages out of context. Hence ambiguity is your enemy.

Originally Posted by rwm1273

That rule prevented me from hunting on Sundays too. I now hunt as often as I can and most of those days are Sundays.

My issue goes back to the issue of this thread. That being does a person have a right to not provide services to people which would violate their religious rights.

The two most interesting arguments on the subject are the case of the baker and the case of the barber. One was a Christian, the other a Muslim. Both were in a bind due to their religious convictions. One was taken to court and forced to bake a cake for a gay marriage, and the other was taken to a tribunal because he was forbidden to cut the hair of a woman, and luckily for him, there was a resolution, but I suspect that was due more to the complainant willing to accept a solution.

Now if this bill had passed and not been veto'd, then neither the baker nor the barber would have been faced with court and unnecessary expenses to defend their religious rights.

If this bill had not been vetoed it would give the right of a Muslim loan manager to not charge interest to another Muslim, but all infidels would be charged interest. You see this is something you're not seeing, there are many beliefs in the world with many different moral guidelines and laws and traditions.

Would you think it right if a Muslim woman was divorced in Arizona on grounds of Adultery to be stoned to death afterwords? Sharia law is part of there moral and religious tradition and teaching.

This law was a bag of what flies feed off of.

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

Faith is just putting complete trust in something or someone. We all need different levels of "proof" to have faith, I suppose.

We are definitely living in the "pics or it didn't happen" age.

There have been non believers all through out time. a 1000 years ago, how many of the 1 billion people on the planet could read or write and pass on their belief, during a time when not believing in the right god meant some unpleasant death, or persecution?

Originally Posted by stemorholake

So what are we going to evolve into next??

What ever is most likely to have sex, pass on its genes and survive the environment it lives in.

Is god going to create anything ever again?

Originally Posted by connexion123

Peers....hmmm.

What about darwin? He's been proven wrong too many times.

too many times? do tell please. His basic premise has proven to be true repeatedly, some of the specifics were beyond his understanding and parts of his theory have been amended to INCLUDE new observations and data.

When has a new gospel been included to any religious text?

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

Or who was more sure about their beliefs? I don't think that you experience atheism in the same way that you experience God. A persons faith in God can grow to an unbreakable strength. Can a persons faith in a lack of God do the same?

Studies have shown that people experiencing profound moments of faith(reading religious texts, hearing sermons, singing hymns)exhibit the same physical signs as people on certain mind altering chemicals, and engaged in other activities not linked to religious belief at all.

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

No, that's not what I mean't at all..

I was just trying to point out that it is strange to care more about gay people being offended in America, than families getting slaughtered abroad because of their faith.

Thread titles are important, but this has been covered.

Originally Posted by connexion123

Proof...right...

What good proof they have.

What a joke

You appear to be just as ignorant to the beliefs of Ali as he appears to you on your beliefs.

Originally Posted by rwm1273

Really? You want to use that as an argument? Pathetic.

All 3 are considered gods, or were for centuries so I don't think the argument is pathetic. I believe that one of the gods of Asgard also followed the virgin birth, death for 3 days, and resurrection myth of Christ. So did Ra of Ancient Egypt, and Krishna and countless other gods from old.

There is evidence of this however, all one must do is watch the heavens after the winter solstice and the position of the sun rising in the sign of The Maiden as it starts it movement to the south and bringing life and renewal of spring. after pausing for 3 days in its track to the north and the bringing of death of the fall crops and hardships of winter.

Of course this is only evident in the Northern Hemisphere. Faiths from the southern Hemisphere are different for some reason. Oh ya, winter wasn't much of an issue down there.

Originally Posted by connexion123

And what makes that the accurate way of dating?

Do you trust the time on your cell phone or computer? both are connected to atomic clocks that measure time using the EXACT SAME method used to date old rocks. So if you don't believe in the possibility of rocks being older then 10000 years... you better get a spring wound watch to keep time for you.

Originally Posted by rwm1273

Again you still can't get it through your thick head. It is not an issue of not liking gay people, it is an issue of deciding if their rights trump a person's religious rights.

Does christian beliefs say you should not engage in commerce with homosexuals?

I know it says it's an abomination, because it defeats the purpose of sex which is to procreate, which some how makes it a sin, though there are some "sins" in the bible that many Christians choose not to avoid.

But does it say that you shouldn't sell to or buy from them?

Originally Posted by rwm1273

One was taken to court and ordered to violate his religious morals in support of a gay marriage. The other risked having his business shut down.

So does that not appear to be risking your rights? Their religious rights were trumped over the rights of a woman wanting to get her hair cut, and a gay couple having a cake baked.

What religious right was trumped? What passage says do not sell your goods to a homosexual? Which verse says do not provide a service to a woman if you are a man?

Originally Posted by rwm1273

Yes. They were forced to violate their religious beliefs. One person because a gay couple wanted a gay marriage cake depicting an act that the baker felt was illegal according to his religious beliefs, and the other because a woman demanded he cut her hair.

Both the gay couple and the woman could have gone anywhere else for their services, but they demanded to force others to violate their religious tenants. So in my opinion it was the woman and the gay couple who were forcing their rights at the expense of the other's religious rights. How much longer will it be before other people's rights get trumped over someone else's selfish demands?

You see, you must expand the application of this law beyond the scope of the two complaints. This law would have allowed people to refuse to provide service based on religious belief, outside of a religious institution. How much of a leap would it be to say people should be able to offer serviced based upon their religious belief. That's an opening to allow the practice of religious law within a secular legal system. Consider the financial laws of Sharia as exampled above. It was giving religious people, of all religions, more rights then those who do not practice, or who live contrary to religious beliefs.

Plus the baker could have baked the cake but said I'm not going to decorate it as such. If you want that you'll have to find someone else to do it. He would have not refused service, just limited the contract for service. no discrimination and no violation of religious beliefs.

Conviction doesn't leave much room for negotiation and compromise.

[Mistagin]

Originally Posted by Donkey Oatey

All the uproar about the Higgs-Boson particle or also know as the God Particle and yet we haven't collapsed yet.

How about artificially create life? Haven't done it but have created amino acids, building blocks of life have been.

How about life on another planet? Would that change your mind? We are looking. Found almost 2000 planets. Many of which are in the goldie locks zone.

On and on, just like science. Always looking outward, reaching, learning.

Science is moving forward, outward, religion is oppressing and regressive. Again, the book has all the answers.

Where exactly does the book (I assume you mean the Bible) say it has all the answers? C'mon prove what you say!

[Mistagin]

Originally Posted by ali#1

Maybe I got confused I am talking to 3 or 4 people at the same time.

Oh you are confused all right! And confusing too.

[Gade81]

wow, just read through all this. Gotta hand it to ali, you don't mind coming across as a simpleton. You sound like my kids sometimes with your arguments. Not the first thread that you do so, but certainly one of the most extreme. Sometimes I wonder how old you are

[ali#1]

Originally Posted by Gade81

wow, just read through all this. Gotta hand it to ali, you don't mind coming across as a simpleton. You sound like my kids sometimes with your arguments. Not the first thread that you do so, but certainly one of the most extreme. Sometimes I wonder how old you are

And here comes the guys who don't have the stones to argue or debate, they just leave their little hit pieces and run away.

[ali#1]

Originally Posted by KegRiver

They do if one is a Muslim.

Try denying a Muslim the right to pray in school and see how far you get.

You have any references to this or is it just a feeling ?

[CNP]

Originally Posted by ehntr

We know how you take it. Who worships a cross? It is a symbol of sacrifice. No one bows down to or serves a cross. Jesus is worshiped because He is God. Christians do not carve images of "anything" in the heavens above........and bow to them or worship them. God is not a thing and a good example of "anything" is the sun.

Give us another one to ponder......

Originally Posted by ali#1

Do you believe Jesus is in heaven ?

Jesus is not a thing. The commandment is to not make an image of "anything" or to worship "them". Your understanding is lacking. Your continued distortation of this, in the face of an explanation, shows how obstinate you are.

[Boots270]

Originally Posted by ehntr

Jesus is not a thing. The commandment is to not make an image of "anything" or to worship "them". Your understanding is lacking. Your continued distortation of this, in the face of an explanation, shows how obstinate you are.

Jesus is a thing.
In fact he was an actual living breathing human being.
His story became legendary to the point of religion.
Most if not all the characters in the Bible are/were real people.
God is a different animal altogether.

[Gade81]

Originally Posted by ali#1

And here comes the guys who don't have the stones to argue or debate, they just leave their little hit pieces and run away.

Lol, I don't argue with my kids either

[rwm1273]

A couple people feel this Bill would have been a throwback to Jim Crow. Perhaps it could have been worded better, but the way the current laws are, is that it gives on group more rights than another.

Wild& Free has brought up some very valid arguments against the bill. You ask What verse prevents a man from cutting a woman's hair, and it appears you assume this was a Christian man that refused to cut a woman's hair, but it was a Muslim, and there are many tenants of their religion that prevents intermingling of unrelated men and women.

What the big issue is with this Bill, is how to ensure everyone is entitled to protect their rights. And under what context can someone else's rights trump another person's rights?

I know that in certain circumstances, those who are prevented from eating cloven hoofed animals can eat such animals if you are starving. So is there a way to bend other rules to protect one's rights?

Now Wild&Free also suggested that the baker could have baked the cake but not decorated it. Perhaps this would have been a better solution, but do you think the gay couple would have still had an issue with this? I do, and I think he still would have been dragged to court. So for me, the bottom line is some such as the gay couple or the woman who wanted her hair cut(who just so happens to also be gay), will push their rights to an extreme, where as most others wouldn't. Why didn't the gay couple go find a baker who would have been happy to bake them a cake for their special occasion? I know I would have, and I think most reasonable people would have as well.

So perhaps the question to be asked then, is it possible that some gay people push their rights to an extreme? Do they get into situations that cause conflict? And would a regular person push their demands to an extreme like the gay couple or the lesbian woman that caused these two specific conflicts? Who is next?

We have a thread where a guy who can't pass the Engineering exam gets a pass from the Human Rights Commission. And there is a thread where a guy who left work without permission and then didn't show up to work takes the owner to the Human Rights Commission, and claims it was racism. So perhaps the big issue is not to pass new laws to enshrine religious rights, but perhaps it should have been a Bill to end the Human Rights Commissions, since it is run by a bunch of idiots who find asinine ways to punish regular folks over nothing.

[Mistagin]

Ali, here's another archaeology article for ya, I just got it today: http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/d...ampaign=E4B303

[ali#1]

Originally Posted by ehntr

Jesus is not a thing. The commandment is to not make an image of "anything" or to worship "them". Your understanding is lacking. Your continued distortation of this, in the face of an explanation, shows how obstinate you are.

No images of heaven above seems pretty straight forward to me.

[ali#1]

Originally Posted by Gade81

Lol, I don't argue with my kids either

Your just going to keep insulting an adding nothing to the conversation ?

[ali#1]

Originally Posted by Mistagin

Ali, here's another archaeology article for ya, I just got it today: http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/d...ampaign=E4B303

Biblical archeology ? Come on man can you find a more bias source ?

[Mistagin]

Originally Posted by ali#1

Biblical archeology ? Come on man can you find a more bias source ?

No more biased than Hitchens and his opinions on God.

Did you read the article? Or do you not just because of the name of the organization producing the findings?

Just because most of the archaeologists that work for BA are Christian or Jewish it doesn't mean they aren't using credible scientific methodologies for the work they do. It stands to reason that you should be curious about their work and findings precisely because you've been asking for proofs - and that's exactly what they are trying to do - prove what the Bible is saying from a historical perspective using the science of archaeology to do it. Yet when they do just that you 'pooh-pooh' their findings because of their basis for engaging in the work they do! Tell us: would it give the exact same findings any more credibility if they were discovered by atheist secularist humanists?

Maybe you ought to open up your mind a little more and see what believers working in the field have to say before dissing their work. Now that would be applying those critical thinking skills you hold so highly

[Stinky Buffalo]

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

Do you trust the time on your cell phone or computer? both are connected to atomic clocks that measure time using the EXACT SAME method used to date old rocks. So if you don't believe in the possibility of rocks being older then 10000 years... you better get a spring wound watch to keep time for you.

Meh, look at it this way... The baseline for an atomic clock only has to refer to observable rates of radiographic decay... That is to say, we have had the technology to measure this for long enough of a period that we can have confidence in the accuracy of our estimations, and therefore we can have assurance that it provides a viable measurement of time.

Now, when estimating the age of something that existed a few million years ago, there's some guesstimation that needs to happen... For instance, when dating a fossil, there are some basic inferences that are made from the surrounding strata wherein the object is found. That widens the margin for error, especially if the referential specimens in that strata are not restricted to a specific archaelogical era (e.g. trilobites).

See the difference? Science is about prediction, testing, measurement and observation. I can say with absolute confidence that my dog is five years old. Why? Because I saw it being born and have observed it throughout its entire lifetime.

Something that cannot be observed (i.e., lack of sufficent data) relies on predictive evaluation - which then requires an estimative qualifier. For instance, if I were to say "this rock is four million years old" I am doing science a disservice. It is more correct to state: "I estimate this rock to be four million years old."

Suffice to say, I don't have a huge amount of confidence in the accuracy of radiocarbon dating for the analysis of artifacts aged in millions of years.

Will I lose sleep based on whether something predating human existence is ten thousand years old or ten million years old?

Nope!

Will I lose sleep when someone is forcing me and my family to go against our moral convictions?

Guess.

[CNP]

Originally Posted by Boots270

Jesus is a thing.
In fact he was an actual living breathing human being.
His story became legendary to the point of religion.
Most if not all the characters in the Bible are/were real people.
God is a different animal altogether.

Hey Boots. I'm a Christian. People are not things. Jesus is not a thing. I am not a thing. You are not a thing. What are your trying to over analyse?

[CNP]

Originally Posted by ali#1

No images of heaven above seems pretty straight forward to me.

This is absurd. Anything in heaven refers to the sun, stars, planets, moon, etcs................the stuff people create images of today....to worship. It is absurd to say that God forbids an image of Jesus and to bow down to Him and worship Him. There is no Christian that would agree to that. A person who understands words and the context that they were written in should be able to understand the commandment. You have an agenda to distort, confuse and refuse to accept that the writer means something different that you interpret. In fact, you know the truth of that commandment, it has been revealed to you.....yet you remain obstinate.