"Why would the bible lie?" - Um.....HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Taverner]

A week or so ago I was talking with a Bible Thumper on a plane - he saw that I was reading Dawkin's "Greatest Show on Earth" and he couldn't help but interject a "That book is all lies."

We discussed things, and on every chance to debunk Evolution he lost (Carbon Dating, Piltdown Man, Missing Links etc)

At the end he was frustrated and asked "Why would the bible lie? I trust god..."

I let him know that I don't buy the bad SciFi of Sky Beard, or any of the other fairy tales in the bible. He couldn't understand how anyone could not believe in god....

-----------------------------


I weep for this country

[no limit]

1. It's not just this country

but yeah, these people aren't used to the idea that there are people out there that dont believe what they believe and it catches them off guard each time.

[Taverner]

3. Yes, he automatically assumed that I must believe in god

Kind of like I assume logic will trump superstition

[RebelOne]

179. In my experience most people automatically assume

that you must believe in god. If they believe you should also.

[Arugula Latte]

85. My mother has a boyfriend like that.

Until he met her, he was in a religious bubble where basically everybody in his world believed in Gawd and Jebus. She doesn't, and she knows lots of people who don't, too. Every time he meets another one he's all flustered and surprised. It rocks his little world that not everybody buys into thy mythology he's invested so much time in.

[Bonobo]

2. "I trust God"

How does he know Satan didn't write it and God just signed his name?

[Taverner]

5. How does he know that it wasn't a product of Loki to keep us from thinking about Odin?

[SkyDaddy7]

93. Loki...That trouble maker!!

[nickinSTL]

174. ah, well, Loki's failed with me

Christianity is a plot by Loki to keep people from honoring the Aesir? What a devious plot :evilgrin:

I'm a proud Heathen, myself.

Hail Thor! :D

[madokie]

8. Hell I think the ole devil forged his name

hows that. I'm as far from being religious as one can get and plan to continue that way

[walldude]

4. Do they really think that God himself wrote the bible?

Damn that is one of the stupidest questions ever. "Why would the bible lie"? Well genius, it wouldn't. The bible is a book. It can't talk. It was written by men, men with an agenda, men who... lie.

[Sherman A1]

38. Yes, and comes in a variety of

editions, sizes and flavors.

Why would it lie? Well, which version is it we are discussing.....?

[Quantess]

6. The whole thing about trusting the bible's veracity

rests on a long list of assumptions, not the least of which, that God actually had a part in writing the bible.

[Taverner]

7. Yes - my favorite demonstration of the believer's lack of logic is "Kiss Hanks A**"

This morning there was a knock at my door. When I answered the door I found a well groomed, nicely dressed couple. The man spoke first:

John: "Hi! I'm John, and this is Mary."

Mary: "Hi! We're here to invite you to come kiss Hank's ass with us."

Me: "Pardon me?! What are you talking about? Who's Hank, and why would I want to kiss His ass?"

John: "If you kiss Hank's ass, He'll give you a million dollars; and if you don't, He'll kick the shit out of you."

Me: "What? Is this some sort of bizarre mob shake-down?"

John: "Hank is a billionaire philanthropist. Hank built this town. Hank owns this town. He can do whatever He wants, and what He wants is to give you a million dollars, but He can't until you kiss His ass."

Me: "That doesn't make any sense. Why..."

Mary: "Who are you to question Hank's gift? Don't you want a million dollars? Isn't it worth a little kiss on the ass?"

Me: "Well maybe, if it's legit, but..."

John: "Then come kiss Hank's ass with us."

Me: "Do you kiss Hank's ass often?"

Mary: "Oh yes, all the time..."

Me: "And has He given you a million dollars?"

John: "Well no. You don't actually get the money until you leave town."

Me: "So why don't you just leave town now?"

Mary: "You can't leave until Hank tells you to, or you don't get the money, and He kicks the shit out of you."

Me: "Do you know anyone who kissed Hank's ass, left town, and got the million dollars?"

John: "My mother kissed Hank's ass for years. She left town last year, and I'm sure she got the money."

Me: "Haven't you talked to her since then?"

John: "Of course not, Hank doesn't allow it."

Me: "So what makes you think He'll actually give you the money if you've never talked to anyone who got the money?"

Mary: "Well, He gives you a little bit before you leave. Maybe you'll get a raise, maybe you'll win a small lotto, maybe you'll just find a twenty-dollar bill on the street."

Me: "What's that got to do with Hank?"

John: "Hank has certain 'connections.'"

Me: "I'm sorry, but this sounds like some sort of bizarre con game."

John: "But it's a million dollars, can you really take the chance? And remember, if you don't kiss Hank's ass He'll kick the shit out of you."

Me: "Maybe if I could see Hank, talk to Him, get the details straight from Him..."

Mary: "No one sees Hank, no one talks to Hank."

Me: "Then how do you kiss His ass?"

John: "Sometimes we just blow Him a kiss, and think of His ass. Other times we kiss Karl's ass, and he passes it on."

Me: "Who's Karl?"

Mary: "A friend of ours. He's the one who taught us all about kissing Hank's ass. All we had to do was take him out to dinner a few times."

Me: "And you just took his word for it when he said there was a Hank, that Hank wanted you to kiss His ass, and that Hank would reward you?"

John: "Oh no! Karl has a letter he got from Hank years ago explaining the whole thing. Here's a copy; see for yourself."
From the Desk of Karl

1. Kiss Hank's ass and He'll give you a million dollars when you leave town.
2. Use alcohol in moderation.
3. Kick the shit out of people who aren't like you.
4. Eat right.
5. Hank dictated this list Himself.
6. The moon is made of green cheese.
7. Everything Hank says is right.
8. Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.
9. Don't use alcohol.
10. Eat your wieners on buns, no condiments.
11. Kiss Hank's ass or He'll kick the shit out of you.

Me: "This appears to be written on Karl's letterhead."

Mary: "Hank didn't have any paper."

Me: "I have a hunch that if we checked we'd find this is Karl's handwriting."

John: "Of course, Hank dictated it."

Me: "I thought you said no one gets to see Hank?"

Mary: "Not now, but years ago He would talk to some people."

Me: "I thought you said He was a philanthropist. What sort of philanthropist kicks the shit out of people just because they're different?"

Mary: "It's what Hank wants, and Hank's always right."

Me: "How do you figure that?"

Mary: "Item 7 says 'Everything Hank says is right.' That's good enough for me!"

Me: "Maybe your friend Karl just made the whole thing up."

John: "No way! Item 5 says 'Hank dictated this list himself.' Besides, item 2 says 'Use alcohol in moderation,' Item 4 says 'Eat right,' and item 8 says 'Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.' Everyone knows those things are right, so the rest must be true, too."

Me: "But 9 says 'Don't use alcohol.' which doesn't quite go with item 2, and 6 says 'The moon is made of green cheese,' which is just plain wrong."

John: "There's no contradiction between 9 and 2, 9 just clarifies 2. As far as 6 goes, you've never been to the moon, so you can't say for sure."

Me: "Scientists have pretty firmly established that the moon is made of rock..."

Mary: "But they don't know if the rock came from the Earth, or from out of space, so it could just as easily be green cheese."

Me: "I'm not really an expert, but I think the theory that the Moon was somehow 'captured' by the Earth has been discounted*. Besides, not knowing where the rock came from doesn't make it cheese."

John: "Ha! You just admitted that scientists make mistakes, but we know Hank is always right!"

Me: "We do?"

Mary: "Of course we do, Item 7 says so."

Me: "You're saying Hank's always right because the list says so, the list is right because Hank dictated it, and we know that Hank dictated it because the list says so. That's circular logic, no different than saying 'Hank's right because He says He's right.'"

John: "Now you're getting it! It's so rewarding to see someone come around to Hank's way of thinking."

Me: "But...oh, never mind. What's the deal with wieners?"

Mary: She blushes.

John: "Wieners, in buns, no condiments. It's Hank's way. Anything else is wrong."

Me: "What if I don't have a bun?"

John: "No bun, no wiener. A wiener without a bun is wrong."

Me: "No relish? No Mustard?"

Mary: She looks positively stricken.

John: He's shouting. "There's no need for such language! Condiments of any kind are wrong!"

Me: "So a big pile of sauerkraut with some wieners chopped up in it would be out of the question?"

Mary: Sticks her fingers in her ears."I am not listening to this. La la la, la la, la la la."

John: "That's disgusting. Only some sort of evil deviant would eat that..."

Me: "It's good! I eat it all the time."

Mary: She faints.

John: He catches Mary. "Well, if I'd known you were one of those I wouldn't have wasted my time. When Hank kicks the shit out of you I'll be there, counting my money and laughing. I'll kiss Hank's ass for you, you bunless cut-wienered kraut-eater."

With this, John dragged Mary to their waiting car, and sped off.

[dalaigh lllama]

21. That's great! Did you write that?

[Taverner]

29. I didn't write it - its a classic from the Atheist library

[A HERETIC I AM]

45. In case you hadn't seen it, here it is as a short video vignette;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDp7pkEcJVQ

[ixion]

22. excellent

very nicely done. :applause:

[WillyT]

30. LOL !!!

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

Perfect!

:applause:

[donco6]

34. That's brilliant

And expresses my thoughts exactly.

[Soylent Brice]

67. !!!!!!!

:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:

[no limit]

91. Lol. Awesome!

[lib_wit_it]

100. LOL! Excellent.

[dschis]

147. Hank doesn't need his ass kissed

[BurtWorm]

153. But God does?

[dschis]

154. Well the way I read it

He equated "Hank' with God....so no

[BurtWorm]

156. The way you put it makes it sound like you think Hank may not need his ass kissed, but God does.

Personally I don't believe in Hank. Or God. The way the Bible presents God, however, it seems he does need his ass kissed--or else. That's the point of the Hank analogy, anyway, to point out the absurdity of the Holy Book. It does that very well.

[dschis]

161. God doesn't need His Butt kissed

[BurtWorm]

162. God has a butt?

Or should I say Butt?

[dschis]

164. Figuratively

[Taverner]

193. What would you call prayer? Hymns? Psalms?

At least I would call that *ass kissing*

[Razoor]

9. good for you

dont understand why people get upset when they find out your a non-believer or believe the way they do.
also whats with the unrec?

[Taverner]

10. That damn Loki again :)

[La Lioness Priyanka]

11. i find with religious people its best not to criticize the existence of god

but point out, that at the end of the day, a human wrote and translated the bible.

[Quantess]

17. As an agnostic, I appreciate that, too.

I happen to believe that there is a "god" (whatever that means), but that all religions are merely human inventions intended to explain the unknown.

I don't think anyone can know for sure whether a "god" exists, but, it's pretty well known that humans wrote and translated the bible.

[Hosnon]

58. And that evolution and God/creation are not mutually exclusive.

Although the "POOF: Poodles" version in the Bible is.

[raccoon]

181. But they were divinely inspired, doncha know!

:sarcasm:

:sarcasm:

:sarcasm:

:sarcasm:

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

12. .

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Taverner]

14. +100

[MNDemNY]

48. fer christ sake?????

what the fuck?

[spoony]

52. Why would a poster lie?

Make up a story, brag about it online...I dunno. By the way we have a R/T forum here, but I guess not enough people would see it if you posted it in its proper place, eh?

[yellowcanine]

15. The Bible is a collection of books. Books don't lie but people who write books do. And they get

things wrong. And they write books for one purpose and people take the books and use them for something else entirely. And the books get mistranslated and misinterpreted.

[MNDemNY]

16. AND, the biggie: THERE IS NO GOD !!

[yellowcanine]

43. And even if there is, she did not write the Bible. People (mostly men) wrote it.

And as with all men in all places, they had various reasons for the writing, sometimes noble, sometimes not.

[ismnotwasm]

18. And then there are those historical printing errors

Which I get a big kick out of.

You'd think God would take more care with his perfect book.

Here's a pretty good article.
(I don't know which is my favorite, "sin on more" or "Thou shalt commit adultery" Or The parable of the Vinegar"

"With all the revisions made to this translation over the centuries, printer’s errors were bound to creep in. Even though the goal was to eradicate all mistakes, every printing of the KJV added more!

For example, in 1611 the so-called ‘Judas Bible’ was printed: In Matt 26.36, the KJV says that Judas came with his disciples to a place called Gethsemane—even though Judas had already hanged himself in the previous chapter!

The very first edition of the Authorized Version is the ‘Basketball Bible’ because it speaks of ‘hoopes’ instead of ‘hookes’ used in the construction of the Tabernacle.

A 1716 edition has Jesus say in John 5.14 “sin on more” instead of “sin no more”!

The next year, the famous ‘Vinegar Bible’ appeared; this name was attached to this printing because the chapter title to Luke 20 was “The Parable of the Vinegar” instead of the “Parable of the Vineyard.”

In 1792, Philip, rather than Peter, denied his Lord three times in Luke 22.34.

Three years later the ‘Murderer’s Bible’ was printed: It was called this because in Mark 7.27 Jesus reportedly told the Syro-Phoenician woman, “Let the children first be killed” instead of “Let the children first be filled”!

In 1807 an Oxford edition has Heb 9.14 say, “Purge your conscience from good works” instead of “Purge your conscience from dead works.”

A printing of the KJV in 1964 said that women were to “adorn themselves in modern apparel” instead of “modest apparel” in 1 Tim 2.9.

But none of these printing mistakes can equal the Bibles of 1653 or 1631. These are the two ‘Evil Bibles’ of the King James history, for they both left out the word ‘not’ at key junctures. The 1653 edition—known as the ‘Unrighteous Bible’—said “the unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of God” in 1 Cor 6.9. And the 1631 edition, the infamous ‘Wicked Bible,’ wrote the seventh of the ten commandments as “Thou shalt commit adultery”!

The Wicked Bible was such an embarrassment to the Anglican Church that the archbishop ordered the Bibles to be burned, and he fined the printer, Robert Barker, 300 pounds—no small sum in those days. Barker, who had been the king’s printer since the Authorized Version came out, died fourteen years later in debtor’s prison.

Not only have there been these occasional but bizarre printing mistakes, but several errors in the 1611 edition have never been changed. For example, in both Acts 7.45 and Heb 4.8 the name “Jesus” appears when Joshua is actually meant! Hebrews 4.8 in the Authorized Version says, “For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.” The passage is saying that although Joshua brought his people into the promised land, he could not give them the eternal rest that they needed. But by having “Jesus” here, the KJV is thus saying that Jesus was inadequate, that he was not able to save his people from their sins. In Greek, both ‘Joshua’ and ‘Jesus’ are written the same way— jIhsou'". The issue is not one of textual variant, but of inattention to the details of the interpretation of the text.

Or consider Matt 23.24 the Authorized Version reads, “Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.” The Greek text here means to “strain out a gnat”—not “at a gnat.” Jesus’ point is the same as what he says in Luke 6.41— “Why do you see the speck in your neighbor’s eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye?” The religious leaders focused on the tiny problems of others without taking care of the big issues in their own lives.15

Now, please understand: I am not listing these errors to make fun of the KJB! But I also don’t want anyone to have the illusion that it is a perfect translation. No translation is perfect—not the KJV, not the RSV, not the NIV, not the NET Bible.

In fact, just to play fair, allow me to mention an error that made its way into the second printing of the NET Bible, New Testament, in 1998. This translation has more notes in it than any other Bible in history. There are half a million words of notes for the New Testament alone! And at one of them, the typist accidentally hit a second ‘s’ when he wrote the conjunction ‘as.’ I won’t spell it out for you, but you can well imagine the name this edition of the NET Bible would be called! Not only this, but as the senior New Testament editor of the NET Bible, I have to take full responsibility for this note. Besides, I was the one who actually typed in this word!







http://bible.org/seriespage/part-ii-reign-king-james-era-elegance

[cynatnite]

19. It's probably safe to assume he hadn't read Dawkins' book...

most of that type won't dare allow themselves to think by reading anything that disputes religious belief.

[jobycom]

20. It's not as well documented as "The Greatest Show on Earth," that's for sure.

The Bible isn't even a book, it's a collection of histories, folktales, sex poems, philosophy, advice columns, and other letters over a six hundred year period for audiences ranging from the nomadic herder Israelites to the civilized Romans and Greeks. Whether "the Bible" lies or not is a silly question. It is a product of its time and knowledge, and was written by people of an earlier era, many of whom were writing metaphorically anyway.

What do you think of Dawkins's book, anyway? I loved it.

[Hosnon]

23. I'm in the process of reading it as well. What do you think so far?

This is my first Dawkin book and so far I like it. He does a pretty good job of walking the line between speaking to a scientist and to a layman (but I have found that he goes too far either way on occasion).

[Rob H.]

39. "...he goes too far either way on occasion"

I noticed that in the chapter on carbon dating--after awhile my brain started to kind of glaze over because he went into so much detail about exactly how it works. I'm not someone who doesn't believe carbon dating is effective and accurate, so I skipped to the end of the chapter and continued on from there.

Apart from that I'm enjoying it so far. :thumbsup:

[Hosnon]

57. The part about the E. Coli was a bit too scientific for me. Although he did preface the discussion

with a warning that it would be so.

On the flip side, I found the discussion on plate tectonics to be a bit too watered down.

So far, the most valuable nugget I've received has been an understanding why we don't have crocoducks, etc. I liked his explanation of evolution as a looooong line of grandmothers, mothers, and daughters.

[Taverner]

59. Yes the e.coli part was tough

But the Carbon Dating? I loved it because the fundies latch onto Carbon dating so much...

[Hosnon]

81. I didn't mind the carbon dating part. In fact, I thought he explained it quite well.

Have you read any of his other books?

[Taverner]

82. I've only read "The God Delusion" and loved it

He has such an approachable style of writing - almost as good as Carl Sagan

[Hosnon]

83. That's the one I plan to read next (as it seems to be his "signature" book).

And I agree about his writing style. Based on his reputation (warranted or not), I expected his style to be more condescending and "assholey".

[Taverner]

87. "The Greatest Story on Earth" will convince you of Evolution

"The God Delusion" Will convince you there is no god

:)

[Lost-in-FL]

128. The "Selfish Gene" is an excellent book too. nt

[el_bryanto]

24. Well you don't seem capable of understanding how anyone could believe in God

without being mentally challenged. So you were well matched.

Bryant

[Warren DeMontague]

26. The doofus started it. If you start an argument about how the Earth is flat

and then are presented irrefutable evidence and subsequently lose that argument, don't go crying an bleating about how you were picked on.

Don't try to peddle bullshit in the arena of science. Keep the arks and magical doves in Sunday School, and you won't have this problem.

[el_bryanto]

31. I do agree that he blew it debating - you can't argue someone into believing

If there is a divine, it is something that must be experienced to be believed. And you can't argue someone into having that experience.

That said, I obviously disagree with the theory that it's ok to have faith so long as you leave it at Church.

Bryant

[Taverner]

35. Faith makes men fly planes into buildings to reach heaven

Faith makes men kill other men for not believing what they believe

Faith is 'belief without evidence'

I think we've seen where faith gets us...

[el_bryanto]

36. Faith also inspired Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi. n/t

[Taverner]

37. Yes but they are a drop in the bucket, compared to others who did or supported horrible things

IN the name of their faith

And in honesty, I think Gandhi was an Atheist.

[el_bryanto]

40. Fair enough.

I suppose I would point to the millions of believers who's faith informed their lives but they didn't happen to do anything flashy or newsworthy, but you could counter that Atheists are perfectly capable of living happy moral lives without God, and they don't go around murdering or killing.

Are believers by their nature immoral? Or lacking?

Bryant

[Taverner]

41. I don't think either...

Crime rates, marriage success, raising good kids - none of that has anything to do with whether you believe in something or not

Faith, however, can make perfectly rational people do hideous things

Many people did horrible things to their fellow citizens in the USSR because faith told them it was good for the country...so its not always about god(s)

[MNDemNY]

49. Not "immoral" but "lacking", yes, lacking logic and reason.

No way around that.

[el_bryanto]

55. I suppose both sides of this argument are long practiced at looking down at each other

Bryant

[MNDemNY]

56. One can not argue "facts" with "faith"

There are not to sides two the truth. Sorry.

[el_bryanto]

60. I totally agree with that.

I just happen to believe that I have the truth, and, not to put too fine a point on it, you do not.

Bryant

[Taverner]

61. Can you back that up with evidence though?

And not anecdotal evidence, but actual empirical data?

[MNDemNY]

63. Of course not!!!

just his "belief" But he's quite sure! :rofl:

[el_bryanto]

66. It will not shock you to find that I do not have empirical data.

I have anecdotal evidence - in that I have prayed and felt God's presence, but that is not (and should not be) convincing to someone other than myself.

Bryant

[Taverner]

71. People feel, see and hear things that aren't there all the time

And given that some forms of prayer can induce trance like experiences, are you sure it wasn't the result of that?

I have seen lots of things that weren't there - some of them when I was stone cold sober.

The human brain looks for patterns, and if there is none it will try and create one - how are you sure its not that?

[el_bryanto]

74. Yes I'm sure - but thank you for asking. n/t

[Taverner]

76. So why are you sure?

What makes your experience true - and my experience not (I know my experience is not true because there are no gnomes in this world)

[MNDemNY]

79. 'cuz the bible tells him so!!!!

[el_bryanto]

84. I don't have a good answer for that

The traditional answer is that if you wanted to and were willing to pray with an honest heart you could have the same experience I have had.

I'm not as comfortable with that answer as I used to be; because it implies that if you pray and don't feel anything you must not have an honest heart. Which is kind of a nasty thing to say.

One answer is that as long as I don't try to legislate my beliefs it doesn't matter that much. My religion informs my life; you have a philosophy or set of ethics that informs yours. As long as they are generally compatible ("Be Honest. Be Nice to people. Don't be a jackass" for example), does it matter whether or not I base my ethics on Christ or Mao?

Obviously if I try to legislate my beliefs, that creates problems - I am pretty concerned over the Dominionists although they don't seem as powerful as they used to be (since Bush got out of the office). But doubtless they are still working on their vision of America.

Another answer is that this is the way things are. I can't deny my experience because it would be more convenient for you for me to do so. By the same token I wouldn't expect you to pretend to believe things you don't. We are at an impasse on this question, and barring new experiences it seems unlikely that we can get past it. So the proper thing to do is to agree where we do agree and respect our disagreements.

But obviously that may not be palatable to you - certainly your compatriot MNDemNY isn't interested in any type of detente.

Bryant

[Taverner]

88. My only suggestion is give the critical treatment to everything

If you believe something, ask yourself "why" and make sure you have an airtight answer

[el_bryanto]

89. I do have an "airtight" answer - just not one that is airtight for you. n/t

[MNDemNY]

95. Lying to ones self is quite the skill.

:o

[MNDemNY]

92. There is no "Detente", You have only "beliefs" no "facts".

I have science and facts. Should we also have "detente" with those who would say Blacks are inferior? Or women should obey men? .... Oh ya, those are both tenets of "religions" now aren't they?How about the mambla guys? they "really believe" in their position. Detente with them, too?:P

[el_bryanto]

94. Very childish - you just get worse and worse, don't you? n/t

[MNDemNY]

96. Waaaaaaaa.

:nopity:

[el_bryanto]

97. I'm starting to think you lack the mental rigor to be a throughgoing atheist

is it possible this is just a stance you are affecting because you want an excuse to be a jackass?

Bryant

[MNDemNY]

98. No, I'm quite sure I am correct.

religion is a lie, worse, it is a lie used by men to perpetrate crimes against man kind. There are NOT "two sides" only the truth, and lies. There are NO "good" religions, only some that are less "bad" than others. They all serve to keep man down. Do you make your living from "the offering plate"?? That would go a long way to explain your POV. Short of that, how can you justify your need to suppress reason in order to perpetuate your belief?

[el_bryanto]

99. You really are just like a dominionist.

"So you don't see things the way I do. Well you must be ignorant, mentally deficient, or corrupt. I've run through ignorant and mentally deficient, that just leaves corruption."

Sorry to burst your bubble, but know I am not a paid clergyman. My religion doesn't have paid clergy except at the top.

I don't need to suppress my reason to perpetuate my belief; if you paid attention for even a moment you would note that I have had an experience which leads me to believe in God. I don't expect you to change you beliefs to account for my experience with God, but neither should you expect me to change my beliefs to account for your lack of this experience.

Bryant

[MNDemNY]

151. You are confusing "the way I see things" with actual facts.

[el_bryanto]

152. Ah back to mentally deficient. n/t

[dschis]

155. Thank you for your eloquence

[MNDemNY]

158. Well, shoes that fit, and all.

[dschis]

103. Tell me what dark matter really is

Not theory, but what it really is. You can't but you don't know.

That part of your brain is obviously turned off.

It's never been said 'blacks'(whatever that means) are inferior. Read Mark a little more about how women are to be treated, not what Paul said but from Jesus.

As far facts go you just don't have them all. I personally don't see the big conflict.

I hate people who try to impose their belief systems on me when you can absolutely prove to me your theories with pictures and signed statements from the principles involved then we might talk

[darkstar3]

114. False, that's what dark matter really is.

It was a false supposition put forward to explain a model of the universe that is now no longer current.

If you think that religions have never called blacks inferior, you've never read anything about Christians in the antebellum south.

Nice try on claiming that Mark has the authority over Paul, but too many mainstream religions disagree with you for your interpretive point to be valid.

No one has all of the facts. That's a given. The human mind is incapable of processing ALL of the facts. But lack of facts is a Mississippi river length away from any support of a supreme being, and the facts that we DO have debunk God every time. There is a big conflict between science and faith, because as I have said before, they are diametric opposites.

Your final sentence is highly hypocritical for one who just stated that another person's brain was "turned off".

[dschis]

137. No

It's me throwing rocks at the proverbial glass of our knowledge. We as a species have done pretty well with the facts that we know.

You have basic beliefs based on your experience and I have mine based on my experiences.

I grew up in the South and was raised with those beliefs. That might be why I rejected those original "Christian" tenants.

[darkstar3]

173. I'm sorry, were you talking to me?

It seems that in your haste to answer you forgot to actually address any of the points made in my post. :shrug:

[rd_kent]

163. You sure it wasn't that bean burrito and not gods presence?

[MNDemNY]

62. But your "truth" has only your "faith" to confirm it.

Your "belief" does not make it true.But logic is not high on your list, is it? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[el_bryanto]

65. What I think is that believers are going to have to live with atheists for a long time

So it's best to develop a language that accords respect to both sides of the equation. By the same token, I've had to live with faiths other than my own my whole life, yet I've learned to treat practitioners of other faiths with respect.

That strikes me as a wise way to live ones life - perhaps you disagree?

Bryant

[MNDemNY]

68. Yes, I do.

"religions" in human kind are on a whole so detrimental to the long term survival that it they must be removed from society. I know that this will take some time( lot's of time) but I will not sit silent, but point out the fallacy and destructivness of ALL religion at ever chance.

[el_bryanto]

69. Well I won't wish you luck, as I hope you will utterly fail

But I will wish you happiness in your chosen way of living - although bashing others and attacking their heartfelt beliefs does not strike me as a very happy way to live.

Bryant

[MNDemNY]

70. Say hi to hanks ass for me.

[dschis]

104. Kiss it yourself

Shakes sandals. And you guys wonder why the right hates your guts

[MNDemNY]

159. I don't wonder, it's 'cause they hate the truth.

Deists can't take the truth either.

[Silent3]

157. I would say that believers are lacking... lacking a useful degree of skepticism.

They either don't challenge their own comfort zones about the nature of the world enough, or they put too much emphasis on "experiences", not understanding how easily humans let their hopes and fears influence what they think they know about the world.

If everyone who had some deep, moving, "Oh, I can't possibly tell you what it's like! Words are not enough!" experience came away saying the same things about what they learned and understood via such "experiences", that might at least elevate the significance of these events a little. That doesn't happen, however. The "revealed truths" from these so-called "experiences" is varied, and often contradictory.

Yes, I'm sure you can come up with explanations for that, but the ones I've heard are all poor explanations, special pleading, invocations of terribly weak epistemologies very few of us would ever accept in any area of life not labeled "religious" or "spiritual".

[PassingFair]

196. I don't think Gandhi was an atheist....

But Nehru was, as were many of this other associates like Rabindranath Tagore.

This is a very interesting read, if you haven't come
across it yet:

http://www.positiveatheism.org/india/gora12.htm

Gandhi clashed with people like Babaseheb Ambedkar,
who pretty much wrote India's Constitution by himself.
My favorite Indian hero, he turned to Buddhism as
an ethical stance, and 500,000 Hindu's converted with
him on the spot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._R._Ambedkar

[dschis]

106. Misplaced Faith

To an angel to masquerading as the real thing.

[Warren DeMontague]

101. My "theory" isn't "it's ok to have faith so long as you leave it at Church"

My POINT is, don't try to drag un-scientific gibberish into a SCIENTIFIC discussion.

People can have all the faith they want, they can have big buckets of sticky pink faith pouring out of the yin-yang for all I fucking care- but what they CAN'T do is bring the Bible into a scientific discussion about the 4.7 Billion Year old evolutionary history of life on Earth and say "This book scientificamally proves that the Earth is 6,000 years old, and the grand canyon was created during Noah's Flood".

THAT sort of crap belongs in Sunday School- not, say, public school science class.

[dschis]

113. And it's ok in a forum like this

Well probably not you guys. I was looking for a liberal type Christian Forum. Atheists are just as bad as the fundies.

Doesn't matter to me. I know what I know

[darkstar3]

117. You know nothing. You believe something. n/t

[dschis]

133. You know the keyboard is in front of you, right

That's the way that I know. As I've posted before things have been shown to me that came true. No logic or happenstance could explain them.

[darkstar3]

134. So you're a legitimate prophet? n/t

[dschis]

135. I'd rather not think so

Yeesshhh! If you and I were sitting across the table from each I would probably tell you. I'm too shy to even type this stuff out. I mean Logic tells me it can't be, but then Descartes comes to mind.

So I don't think so. I don't even understand half of it at the time or it's awww shit I need to get some whatever.

I'm just an old retired Army that had a second career as a Microsoft networking geek

[dschis]

136. I can tell you that the the Christian and Islams fundies

aren't of God. The 'Repukes' don't have mankind's interest at heart. There are others that have taken selfishness to new levels and are only interested in power over their fellows. I just try to let people know they make the Pharisees look like a bunch of nice guys.

The Muslims well they were blood-thirsty from their beginning

[darkstar3]

139. I find that revelations that instill fear are generally not divinely inspired. n/t

[dschis]

145. They weren't like that.

I'm not fearful and I didn't mean to impart that, by no means. I just don't understand a lot of it. The only way I might be is if I'm supposed to do something with it. Maybe tell someone....

Hey, I got banned from GLP for telling them what Barack really means and telling them about the Crash (there's more to come BTW). It might have been some the fundies over there couldn't stand be called out for being called out as Pharisees and as part of the TPTB. As you know, they are struggling to regain power by any means necessary.

Watch New York too, I think... not good.

[rd_kent]

166. WHAT the fuck are you talking about? Really? What?

Are you typing in tongues?

[dschis]

177. That's why I don't tell

Guys or gals like you or look at you sort of weird

[rd_kent]

183. Can you blame us?

Without proof, you sound delusional.

[dschis]

150. Ok I'll tell you one more

In the spring of 1988 while I was stationed at Ft Belvoir. VA. I told about 4 people that our next cold war or wars would be with 'stan'. That is the muslim countries around Central Asia. If the guy who was in charge of publications for the post is here or my First Sergeant or CO for that matter. Take it for it's worth.

If you want to look at Christianity at it early days (before the Romans and others started censoring) check out the Codex Sinaiticus. It's worth a read

[rd_kent]

167. Because you kept up with current events, you know the future?

Dude, seek some help, seriously....

[dschis]

176. It was before the first Gulf War Dummy

Read the post

[darkstar3]

180. Then your prediction was wrong, because our next war

was with a country that had "stan" NOWHERE in the name.

Aside from that, I was a child in 1988 and even I knew that we would be going to war with Iraq soon, so you might want to be careful about throwing around the word "dummy".

[dschis]

184. DS I is just a point in time before all of it started happening

You're pretty good if you knew in 1988 that we would repelling an invasion that happened in 1990. Saddam was worrisome, but there were things going on (he was seen as a counter to Iran). Matter of fact the original conversion I said was actually centering around intel about the Middle East. At the time I knew a little more about was going on then you did (I wasn't a kid and it was part of the job) I'll say no more about that.

As big as Iraq is it doesn't have the potential that Central Asia does. At the time, I did include Iran in the map we were looking at.

In a nutshell, Afghanistan was no where on the radar screen and Pakistan was supposedly a pretty solid state. Matter of fact, the Taliban were some of the good guys. I told the persons 'it' was going to be the next BIG thing at the same level as the Cold War which was obviously winding down at the time. I did include the former SSRs that are in the region and I hope I'm wrong because the story isn't over there.

As for the veracity and accuracy I'm just saying the way it was shown to me.

BTW sorry about the dummy remark.

I'll shut up now and be careful


PS I don't know why I set myself out there to get beat up like this

[rd_kent]

182. Hey, Claire Voyant, it did not take a genius to se where the next conflict would be.

Anyone who was keeping up with current events at the time knew it. We also knew that the iron curtain was about to fall. My point is that your "predictions" hardly seem insightful. And regardless, if you think THAT was god talking to you, again, I say please seek help.

Unless you can prove any of this, it didn't really happen. You are either one of two things: A guy posting anonymously on the internet fabricated tales or else you REALLY think you were given prophecy and that you are a prophet. If you are the first, well, you are just an ass. If you really think you are some kind of prophet, then without proof, you are just delusional. Hey, I WANT to believe you, but unless you have proof, well......

[dschis]

185. I can't for a lot of reasons

Although it was a long time ago. I swore an oath and won't say> I'm obviously wasting yours and my time

[rd_kent]

186. Obviously....

Swore an oath? Gimme a break. Then what the fuck did you bring it up for?

[dschis]

188. Goodbye

[rd_kent]

190. C'ya!

[Warren DeMontague]

144. Are you trying to say something with that post? If so, what?

:shrug:

[dschis]

146. It's too late I'll reply tommorrow

I'm sort of surprised in a religion forum to have to defend my faith and knowledge with a bunch atheists, but then you're right it's a belief system too. Goodnight and best to you

[Warren DeMontague]

148. Did you read the post you were responding to?

I'm an Atheist (technically, although semantic categories are nothing if not self-limiting) but I'm not really interested in anyone "defending" their faith.

If you want to respond specifically to what I wrote, I encourage you to do that. It wasn't about expecting people to 'defend their faith'. That wasn't it at all.

[dschis]

149. Sorry

After some of the posts around here. I might not agree with your position (I don't know you personally), but you would think there would a safe place around in this forum to discuss liberal Christianity without being virtually attacked.

Some of these guys aren't doing the liberal cause any favors by attacking people's faith. We agree to a lot how we get there....

Sorry, I didn't mean to offend, but there should be somewhere around here that you can discuss liberal theology without all of the noise. I can't find any in the local neighborhood

[rd_kent]

165. This is NOT a christian forum, so you were mistaken from the start.

[MNDemNY]

168. You "know what you know" ...

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: That's it??? Just faith, then? sheesh you got nuttin'

[gratuitous]

27. The story should have been set differently

I'm thinking two fifth graders on a short bus. The rest flows pretty naturally from there.

[Goblinmonger]

44. I don't believe he ever said "mentally challenged"

Someone said "ignorant" at one point, but that's pretty different.

[MNDemNY]

50. Not really.

[Goblinmonger]

175. Sorry I didn't see this yesterday.

But words do have unique meanings and I don't really think that you feel "mentally challenged" = "ignorant." Mentally challenged would mean that there is some mental deficiency. Ignorant means that you have not had the opportunity to understand something. Now, you might argue that one isn't ignorant if they have a belief in god, but certainly you can understand that those two aren't the same.

[MNDemNY]

46. They can not, the belief in god is a mental deficiency, in and of itself.

[Warren DeMontague]

25. Because it's trying to get into your pants.

BTW, that Dawkins book is great. I'm in the middle of it right now, too.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. Because the supposed author's agent said it needed more sex & violence to spice it up and sell.

"The Bible is a book with some beautiful poetry, a blood stained history,a wealth of obscenity, and upwards of 10,000 lies." Mark Twain

[unpossibles]

32. my favorite encounter this year was a lady outside of the grocery store

she asked if I wanted a gospel tract. I politely said, no thanks. She then said, "it's about Jesus," perhaps as if I had not figured that part out, or maybe I somehow missed hearing the story of this Jesus person despite it being completely saturated in our culture and history. Being a smartass, I almost turned around and said "WHO?" with a quizzical look on my face, but then decided I did not want to encourage her.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[spanone]

42. sky beard....bwahahahahaa

:thumbsup:

[misanthrope]

47. Yet he sat on a craft designed, built and maintained...

...by a thorough understanding and exercise of the very science he decried.

Why didn't God just fly him to wherever he was bound?

[Orsino]

51. He's deifying a book...

...by assuming its inerrancy.

But he needs to realize that a book needn't "lie" to be incorrect. Does he think phlogiston was a lie, too? Would he trust a three-thousand-year-old treatise on subatomic physics? Does he revere the dietary restrictions of the Old Testament?

[DireStrike]

53. The relevant quote to tell him would be: Christians dismiss every other religion;

Atheists just dismiss one more.

This was a teachable moment and you mocked him. The root of his irrationality was there and you didn't press further. I don't think I would have gotten as far as you did, but if I did, I would have gone into the nature of the bible, how and when it was put together, books cut out and put in.... why is it the book of god? Because it says so? So do a thousand other books. etc...

[dysfunctional press]

54. i can't understand how anyone COULD believe in a god...

at least not an adult of normal intelligence, capable of reasoning.

i can understand WHY some people would WANT to believe- but it really doesn't take too much intelligence or reasoning to see what utter bullshit the story sold by any particular religion really is.

[MNDemNY]

64. In reality, they can't...

That is why they fight so hard to try and convince others (and themselves) that they do "really" believe"

[Taverner]

72. I will bet dollars to donuts that all the 9/11 Hijackers had serious doubts in their lives

About the existence of Allah and what not - and what better way to solidify your seat in heaven but with a Jihadi Martyrdom?

[MNDemNY]

75. No doubt.

But i can't say "ignorant"???:shrug: Is there a better word?

[A HERETIC I AM]

73. THAT is truly the key.

That is why they fight so hard to try and convince others (and themselves) that they do "really" believe"

It's the old "strength in numbers" idea.

"If so many others believe what I believe then it MUST be right."

That explains perfectly why heresy and different points of view on religious matters have been so harshly received or even punished over the centuries and why something as simple as a billboard today saying "There probably is no god" is greeted with such vehement push-back.

As it says in my sig line below,

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false and by the rulers as useful".

(For the record, I've found that quote can not be directly attributed to Seneca the Younger, so I will modify that when I decide on an appropriate way to word it.)

[MNDemNY]

77. .

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[montanto]

78. I hear that.

My SIL says "I have to believe all of it if I'm going to believe any of it." And I'm like, "Well, don't believe any of it then."

[MNDemNY]

80. There you go with that "logic" thingy!

Place your fingers in your ears, say "La-La-La-La-La" until you can reach your bible!

[Arugula Latte]

90. I think you're right.

A LOT of religious people try to overcompensate for those doubts that eat away at their "faith" (the definition of which, according to Mark Twain, is believing what you know ain't so.) Someone expressing disbelief is a threat to them, and they have to fight off those "emperor has no clothes" moments, and a lot of them go way overboard in overcompensating.

[dschis]

138. Personally I don't care

No human leads me by the nose. I go by experience and what my senses tel me

[darkstar3]

140. Some quotes:

"Your eyes can deceive you, don't trust them." Obi-Wan was wise.

"Why do you doubt your senses, Ebenezer?"
"Because a little thing can upset them. You may be a bit of undigested beef."
Apropos, since we're heading into the holiday season, to quote from A Christmas Carol.

This is why we have scientific and philosophic principles of uncertainty. To put it another way, anecdotes do not equal evidence.

[dschis]

142. Yea I agree

You see though the basic problem that atheism doesn't address at least without years of meditation that Christianity and Buddhism address is the little tendency of people to be jealous and envious.

If you look at it without an unbiased eye you'll find it everywhere. Atheism in and of itself actually lauds this behavior. After all how can one progress if you're not striving for something?
People that don't try to improve sort of die. If you go from the 5 senses there are more, but for the sake of argument everyone has a tendency to get what his neighbor or what he thinks he might have. If you don't achieve that goal you have a tendency to beat up on yourself and eventually you might even take from your neighbor or you will wind up doing anything to get what your neighbor has.

Such is the state of humanity more so now as there more humans. Christianity gives us a different goal one to strive to be like Christ and the promise of a paradise of sorts. Hell is secondary the bible spends a lot of time there, but people seem to dwell on the negative (Apostles included). That's a big reason why we are more "Human" it discourages the acquisition of this world's goodies, but encourages good behavior which helps us here and in the next life.

In it's own way Buddha does the same by discouraging the grasping or desires of the body, That's the basic way one becomes enlightened.

The world would be lot better in so many ways if we all Incorporated this into their daily lives.

Basic questions one could ask "How much is enough?" "How can I help?" "How can I be a better person?". If meant in sincerity these are the basis of most all the good things that have come about.

Funny how those ancient beliefs taught this thousands of years ago and we are 'rediscovering'
them now.

It would help out the planet and in our dealings with each other. Time for this old man to bed

[darkstar3]

172. Actually, the basic problem that you are talking about is not addressed in religion.

You see, religion doesn't address greed at all, but rather focuses that greed onto ethereal objects and places. Some of the greediest fucks I know today are hardcore Christians, and while their ultimate goal may be paradise, the sickness of greed is no less vile in them than anyone else.

Atheism, on the other hand, leaves the mind open to realize that {THIS} is it. This world, these friends and family, this earth is all we'll ever have, and so we should find a way to make the best of it. For some people, that means following their greed, but for many it means finding a way to live well, and to coexist, and to help their fellow man make it through this life.

Religions, especially the Abrahamic ones, offer nothing new in the way of bettering our human nature.

[dschis]

194. I call those greedy ones

2 things, Pharisees and 'professed ones'. Christ didn't have a lot of good things to say about them. He addressed those: Love your enemies, it's easier to put a camel through the eye of a needle than to get a rich man to heaven as well as others.

That's why I came to DU, I think you guys are wrong about non-belief, but at least 99% of the time you guys do care about your fellow man. So all of you follow one of two greatest commandments, you're actually closer than you think

BTW, I broke a rule of mine that I wouldn't post in this forum, but it was you

[darkstar3]

195. What you call them is irrelevant. n/t

ETA: How many times now have you said that you are leaving the thread? I'm not sure what you were trying to say with your truncated final sentence, but you can't blame me for your posts here. I can't force you to do anything anymore than God can.

[DFW]

86. The usual fallacy of the weak of spirit

The Bible doesn't lie or tell the truth, and God didn't write it.

It's a collection of mythology and philosophy, garnered from various sources over centuries (hence
the contradictions), and written, assembled and translated from one language to another by HUMANS.

Belief and faith are fine and dandy, but willful ignorance and glorified stupidity are not.

(Odin and Zoroaster both told me THE REAL TRUTH the last time I went to have a conversation with a burning bush.)

[dschis]

107. That's funny I used to be atheist

That we personally were in fact just dust in the wind striving to make our world a better place through logic. We as a species might one evolve to point that we could be gods (whatever that meant).

It wasn't until I started 'seeing' (and you won't know what I mean unless you have been there) things that came true. I would be working, driving, whatever, but not meditating (I don't do that). I won't say what they were, but they were major.

I was drawn into my particular belief system or I should say IT picked me. I sympathize with the logic argument fully.

I don't believe I know.

[darkstar3]

108. Yes...

and if I look really hard for it I can see the penis on the original cover art of The Little Mermaid. If I listen really hard I can hear Apu say "Oh SHIT" in the middle of the lava scene in Aladdin. These myths and many more about how dirty Disney really is can be found all over the internet.

Yes, perhaps it was a weird segue, but I do have a point:

There is a reason why the bible says "Seek, and ye shall find." If you really want to find something badly enough, you'll see it even if it's not there.

[dschis]

110. Ahh no

That isn't the way it happened

[darkstar3]

111. Yeah, sure. n/t

[dschis]

115. And you are as close minded as the fundies aren't you?

[darkstar3]

118. How original! An ad hom "fundie" attack!

Compare me to Stalin and then say I'll just never understand until I "open my heart". Go ahead, hit the godbag trifecta, I dare ya!

[dschis]

HUH!!!

Stalin will have answer for himself. I don't care what the fundies say they are just as bad in their own way.

If you think it's all random electrochemical reactions that's your business. I can only tell yopu what I know.

I used to be an atheist BTW

[darkstar3]

120. I don't care what you used to be, it has no bearing on this argument.

And you're not telling me what you know. You're telling me what you believe.

[dschis]

123. Says you, you weren't there

After years of being a hard core evolutionist (I kind of still am) Tell a couple of friends about what you 'see' and have it come true and they start backing away.

Ok genius, look at the topic of the forum that's why I crashed the party and that note I'll leave. Don't bother to reply I'm shaking my figurative sandals, but I still wish you well

[darkstar3]

124. Oh, and now the parting shot, how perfectly formulaic. n/t

[dschis]

112. Really

Not that I cared for that junk about Aladdin. I recorded it on Blue ray from the old VCR tape and I had heard, but I don't look for that sort of junk

[darkstar3]

116. Way to miss the point

It was an example, genius.

[dschis]

121. Sorry about the swipe, I was making fun of you

More to the point I was really looking for the 'truth' as another poster suggested. My favorite saying at the time was you make your own luck.

[darkstar3]

122. So let's see, you jump to make fun of those who disagree with you,

and then you call other people "close minded" and fundies?

(It's "closed-minded" BTW, but your grammatical prowess is really beside the point.)

[dschis]

125. I was hoping to be on friendlier terms

Didn't mean to offend

[darkstar3]

126. Since your very first post on this thread you have been antagonistic, at best,

so you'll pardon me if I say "HA" to your claim of "didn't mean to offend".

[dschis]

132. Sorry I didn't mean to be

Frankly, I was thinking the same of you at first.

[MNDemNY]

160. I don't care if I offend someone here. grow some skin or goaway.

[darkstar3]

171. reply to wrong poster, perhaps?

:shrug:

[lib_wit_it]

102. Brainwashed. Religious people's beliefs are not influenced by logic. When you can give the answer,

"god works in mysterious ways" to any question and accept that answer as legitimate and explanatory, then you can "successfully" defend and disprove any refutation of your belief.

My sister told me a story about a man she knew who had his car break down on his way to the twin towers on 9/11. Obviously, miraculously, she said, a merciful god wanted her friend's car to break down to save him.

"Yeah, too bad," I said "that the same god also apparently wanted the planes to crash into the twin towers that same day."

Ans anyone who would ask the question, "Why would the Bible lie?" is so far into Fantasy Forest that rescue is hopeless

Maybe there's some sort of god-type something or other out there, but, whateveritis, no way the Christian or Muslim or Jewish or any other deity being sold to the world today is the real deal.

[dschis]

105. Free will buddy

There was a reason. Just because we try to mess it up doesn't mean God won't intercede. How about those other folks that crashed that plane in Pennsylvania.

Fact is my friend you are in your own fantasy

[lib_wit_it]

141. Say what? Your post makes no sense.

[dschis]

143. Sorry wrong thread and oops forum!

[MNDemNY]

169. Did "god " do that? nope it was humans.

sorry, still nuttin'.

[dschis]

109. We seem to have done pretty well for ourselves

None of us have absolute proof as to what happened. I can't debunk what happened and the exact sequence and timeline I wasn't there.

For me to explain to you how I came to my conclusions would be a waste of mine and your time. You are as closeminded as the 'fundies'

And no Dawkin doesn't have all of the answers either.

[darkstar3]

119. Oi...See #114 and #118. n/t

[dschis]

127. I like you

You're pretty hard-headed as am I. I like that though.

BTW, I'll run the spell check time. I've never been grammatically correct even in English. So I need the correction.

Oh I had to use the bathroom.

[dschis]

129. Are a Linux type

If so could you suggest a decent home system? I've tried Ubantu which I like , but I like some of the applications that Suse has.

I know it's off topic, but just curious. That is if you don't mind.

[darkstar3]

130. The best thing to do is just to try a few out, frankly.

You see, every flavor is different with regard to default packages and management utilities...some are designed to make networking easier between several computers, some are designed for standalone game systems (yes, gaming on linux).

Usually, the list goes something like this:

Red Hat Enterprise for production servers, and also for the "just make it work" mentality.
Ubuntu for more bleeding edge hardware support combined with a user-oriented environment.
Mandrake if you never intend to touch the admin files on your system and don't do much with networking.
Suse if you want Red Hat like capabilities but have a grudge against Red Hat.
Gentoo if you're a psychotic system tweaker and customizer. (like me)
And last but certainly not least, Debian stable. Incredibly well managed and with the largest package list, it has a whole bunch of dedicated followers. (just not me).

[dschis]

131. Great! Thank you I've tried a few of those and couple of others

I think I'll try the Gentoo, never heard of it, and that intel on Debian is really useful I appreciate that.


Shall we continue with the debate?

[MNDemNY]

170. You came to "your conclusions" with shit you made up out of whole cloth in your own mind.

Nuttin', again.

[dschis]

178. Your loss

[rd_kent]

187. Yes, its our loss of time, wasted on your delusions.

You bring up this crap that you were "shown" something, by god apparently, then you refuse to go all the way and explain what the fuck you are talking about. You are right about one thing, this was a complete waste of time. Good job. Mission Accomplished.

[dschis]

189. I don't why either

I was going to hopefully provide a little insight about some possibilities (because we ultimately have free will). I have an obligation to tell some people and the LAST time I will come to this forum. Now I know how others with vision must have felt.

And ... yes it's God

[rd_kent]

191. No, you know how others with delusions felt.

And...no, its not god.

Good luck, friend, I mean that. I really hate to see what appear to be intelligent, rational people pulled into the delusion that is god and religion.

[PassingFair]

197. Maybe he was hit by the "pink ray"....

:rofl:

One of my favorite books, by the way.

[Taverner]

192. The difference between Science and Religion is that Science makes no claim to have all the answers

religion does