Battle Royale VII Specific discussion thread
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
But my favorite part was: "Everything that happens is almost impossible."
Are you saying that the probability of an apple falling to the ground after being dropped is the same as the probability of a pile of garbage spontaneously metamorphosing into a human being?
Have the people at Nobel been notified? I think we have a winner!
Vitamin J wrote:
<BEFORE SIN:
And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed. - Genesis 2:25
AFTER SIN:
Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and
they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings.
So he said, "I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked;
and I hid myself." - Genesis 3:7&10>
It is interesting that I read these same passages and interpret them in the opposite way. It was through succumbing to Satan's temptation that Adam and Eve arrived at the conclusion that they had sinned, and now had to fear God. But if Satan is the prince of liars, and there is no truth in him, then that conclusion had to be false. But now the separation from God had begun, because you can't really love God if you fear Him.
IMO, Bob is wrong theologically as a Christian in even thinking this way, and it is depressing that Christian missionaries are hurting their own cause by introducing this issue into the gospel message. Jesus tried hard to wipe out the onerous Old Testament burden of rules and punishments, and replace it with a religion of love for one another, and communion with God. And now these evangelists are working as hard as they can to undo Jesus's work, and take us back to the old system.
Paul understood, by revelation:
"I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean."(Rom.14:14)
Now if Paul is right, these naked natives are free from sin until a missionary tells them otherwise, and then they incur a guilt, but not one of God's making.
<BEFORE SIN:
And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed. - Genesis 2:25
AFTER SIN:
Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and
they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings.
So he said, "I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked;
and I hid myself." - Genesis 3:7&10>
It is interesting that I read these same passages and interpret them in the opposite way. It was through succumbing to Satan's temptation that Adam and Eve arrived at the conclusion that they had sinned, and now had to fear God. But if Satan is the prince of liars, and there is no truth in him, then that conclusion had to be false. But now the separation from God had begun, because you can't really love God if you fear Him.
IMO, Bob is wrong theologically as a Christian in even thinking this way, and it is depressing that Christian missionaries are hurting their own cause by introducing this issue into the gospel message. Jesus tried hard to wipe out the onerous Old Testament burden of rules and punishments, and replace it with a religion of love for one another, and communion with God. And now these evangelists are working as hard as they can to undo Jesus's work, and take us back to the old system.
Paul understood, by revelation:
"I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean."(Rom.14:14)
Now if Paul is right, these naked natives are free from sin until a missionary tells them otherwise, and then they incur a guilt, but not one of God's making.
August wrote " Jesus tried hard to wipe out the onerous Old Testament burden of rules and punishments"
WRONG
Jesus said many things concerning the law. Here is a small sampling.
Mt 5:17 ¶ Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Mt 12:5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?
Mt 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Lu 16:17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.
Joh 7:19 Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me?
WRONG
Jesus said many things concerning the law. Here is a small sampling.
Mt 5:17 ¶ Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Mt 12:5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?
Mt 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Lu 16:17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.
Joh 7:19 Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me?
OK, that will be enough of that. Consider this your final warning.Originally posted by ZroKewl
Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying, schtick for brains. Idiot.
--ZK
I learned the word "schtick" from Gerald and BillyBob. I thought using the word was tolerated on this site since nobody said anything about it before. I also figured since RogerB and other Godly people have made comments implying someone didn't have any brains (ie: "ZroBrains" & "ZroBrainz" in RogerB's previous 2 posts), that it was also tolerated.
This "absolute right & wrong" thing is really baffling to me. I guess it's absolutely wrong if I say something, but not absolutely wrong if a professed Christian says it. Weird. :freak:
--ZK
Here's a leading American nudist in action. -Bob
In case the story link goes away, here's the lead:
St. Petersburg Times, 7-25-03: The former president of the nudist group that sponsored a controversial summer camp for teenagers runs a business that sells videos featuring young nude girls. Land O'Lakes resident Walt Zadanoff served as president of the American Sunbathing Association, the former name of the 50,000-member American Association for Nude Recreation based in Kissimmee. The 68-year-old nudist defends the sale of the videos, which include full-frontal shots of elementary-school-age girls at beauty pageants in Europe, as "information and entertainment for a legitimate nudist."
In case the story link goes away, here's the lead:
St. Petersburg Times, 7-25-03: The former president of the nudist group that sponsored a controversial summer camp for teenagers runs a business that sells videos featuring young nude girls. Land O'Lakes resident Walt Zadanoff served as president of the American Sunbathing Association, the former name of the 50,000-member American Association for Nude Recreation based in Kissimmee. The 68-year-old nudist defends the sale of the videos, which include full-frontal shots of elementary-school-age girls at beauty pageants in Europe, as "information and entertainment for a legitimate nudist."
cheeezywheeezy
New member
It appear as if Zakath is using the ol'...
"But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."
...before posting his next response.
"But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."
...before posting his next response.
mighty_duck
New member
On the contrary, nothing can be easier than imagining some all-powerful guy snapping his fingers and having a begining to all time and matter. In fact, it was tailor made to fit mankind's limited perception of the concepts of infinity, space and time. I can easily imagine creation, but that doesn't help convince me it's true.
Hawking doesn't exclude the possibility of an oscillating universe (big bang-big crunch-big bang etc.), he merely states that the big bang can viewed as a beginning point for all intents and purposes, since we have no remnants of the universe before the event.
He uses imaginary time mostly to explain events happening at, or around, the big bang, in which our known physical laws break down.
Furthermore, I see no reason for personal attacks. It is not shameful to post a scientific theory (It isn't mine), even if it happens to conflict with the way you perceive things. Hawking's book is not the bible, questioning it, or any other theory is not blasphemy. I do not require that there be no beginning of time, but I do acknowledge the possibility.
Last edited:
mighty_duck
New member
What are you trying to say here that in any way concerns Battle Royale VII? That one nudist seems to behave without a conscience, therefore all nudists are damaged goods, therefore nudists can't be used to counter your "all humans naturaly are against nudity" argument?
In case the story link goes away, here's an important part Bob missed:
The American Association for Nude Recreation disavows the video sales. After inquiries from the Times, the nudist group asked Zadanoff Thursday to remove a link from his Web site to its site.
American nudist resorts don't hold beauty pageants for nude children, association marketing official Debra Peterson said.
And I thought Land O'Lakes was just butter! :doh:
1Way
+OL remote satellite affiliate
Attention and mighty_duck –
Time is required to “do” anything. No event can ever happen without time.
You can try to deny that truth claim, but I wager that you could only misconstrue or misunderstand it, but you could not demonstrate that it is wrong. Even if we say that something “happened” “instantly”, we do not mean that the event took no time at all, every event takes at least some time.
Consider the following contradictory idea,
time could have been “created”.
Any event of creation, no matter who “does” it, is self evidently - an event, and any event requires time to occur, or that event simply can not happen.
I believe that God can do what is impossible for man and mice to do, but consider the following also.
God cannot do what is simply impossible, for example:
1 - He cannot make Himself to have never existed, nor can the nonexistent create itself.
2 - He can not make evil, good, nor good evil.
3 - and He can not make something that’s true, false, nor something that is false, true.
These are logical impossibilities and so is “doing something” when time does not exist to do it.
Time is required for every event so it is elementary that time has always existed. Consider the alternative. If “no time” ever existed, then there would always be no time, because the time that would be necessary to create the beginning of time would never be found. For the event of the supposed creation of time to happen, you need time for that event to happen, if you allocate no time for that to happen, then it can not happen. So the idea of “creating” “time” is a direct contradiction and can not be true.
Here is what I think is easily imaginable, that time is much like truth and love and righteousness and the laws of nature, time is an aspect of reality, so time has existed from eternity past and finds it’s existence in reality, it was not created, you just discover or understand it from reality, all of which comes from our “eternal” and “living” God.
1Way
Time is required to “do” anything. No event can ever happen without time.
You can try to deny that truth claim, but I wager that you could only misconstrue or misunderstand it, but you could not demonstrate that it is wrong. Even if we say that something “happened” “instantly”, we do not mean that the event took no time at all, every event takes at least some time.
Consider the following contradictory idea,
time could have been “created”.
Any event of creation, no matter who “does” it, is self evidently - an event, and any event requires time to occur, or that event simply can not happen.
I believe that God can do what is impossible for man and mice to do, but consider the following also.
God cannot do what is simply impossible, for example:
1 - He cannot make Himself to have never existed, nor can the nonexistent create itself.
2 - He can not make evil, good, nor good evil.
3 - and He can not make something that’s true, false, nor something that is false, true.
These are logical impossibilities and so is “doing something” when time does not exist to do it.
Time is required for every event so it is elementary that time has always existed. Consider the alternative. If “no time” ever existed, then there would always be no time, because the time that would be necessary to create the beginning of time would never be found. For the event of the supposed creation of time to happen, you need time for that event to happen, if you allocate no time for that to happen, then it can not happen. So the idea of “creating” “time” is a direct contradiction and can not be true.
Here is what I think is easily imaginable, that time is much like truth and love and righteousness and the laws of nature, time is an aspect of reality, so time has existed from eternity past and finds it’s existence in reality, it was not created, you just discover or understand it from reality, all of which comes from our “eternal” and “living” God.
1Way
Zakath? ...
Zakath? ...
Knight has kindly declared a 7-day ceasefire in Battle Royale VII and I hope Zakath can take advantage of that and then conclude his last two posts. As for me, I am happy to be flexible to work with Knight and Zakath toward that end with whatever adjustments may be necessary. Also of course, I hope Zakath is well and that nothing more serious than a major time constraint has befallen him. Prior to this debate beginning, Knight asked and Zakath gave his consent that both of the opponents, Zakath and Enyart, would have the full right to publish the proceedings on their own, apart from any control by or obligation to the other. Of course, I viewed a robust debate with an atheist as a matter of record of some worth that would be of interest to a wider audience. But I would like to say that right now, personal concern for Zakath takes precedence over that interest.
Sincerely, -Bob Enyart
Zakath? ...
Knight has kindly declared a 7-day ceasefire in Battle Royale VII and I hope Zakath can take advantage of that and then conclude his last two posts. As for me, I am happy to be flexible to work with Knight and Zakath toward that end with whatever adjustments may be necessary. Also of course, I hope Zakath is well and that nothing more serious than a major time constraint has befallen him. Prior to this debate beginning, Knight asked and Zakath gave his consent that both of the opponents, Zakath and Enyart, would have the full right to publish the proceedings on their own, apart from any control by or obligation to the other. Of course, I viewed a robust debate with an atheist as a matter of record of some worth that would be of interest to a wider audience. But I would like to say that right now, personal concern for Zakath takes precedence over that interest.
Sincerely, -Bob Enyart
attention
New member
Yeah. I fully agree on what you say.
And when you have this contradictionary situation then, that God would be an actor outside of space, time and matter, while such is an impossibility, cause even God can not do something without time, what conclusion do you draw then?
Let us try to explain the reasoning process here again:
1. We think that all of matter, time and space could have started at some point.
2. Since nothing can not start itself, we need the help of a 'creator' then.
3. This 'creator' would have to reside then outside space, time and matter
4. It is even impossible for a creator to do something outside of time
5. Therefore we have to rethink our first assumption, about the beginning of time
6. The only possible explenation comes out: time,space and matter have always existed
So, God has been put into the equations, and reasoned out of it again, leaving the world as something that does not include God. What occured was that God only served as a step in our thinking process itself. A concept of mind.
And that is what God is: a concept of the mind.
- Status