The Bible, Your Opinion?

70+% of all Americans classify themselves as some kind of Christian. How many on Sharenator follow this? I'm astoundingly curious.

Any discussion you wish to begin on or around the subject of the Bible, start it here.

Rules:
Be at least mildly polite.
No ad hominem attacks (personal insults used to replace arguments).
Research before you post!

Just use common sense! : ). Have fun, be at least a little nice.

You might be interested

Comments

Reply Attach
  • 8

    bible basic instructions before leaving earth tshirt p235974510063901881q68k 400

    • mienftw
    • November 27, 2009, 4:24 pm
    That's because you were an idiot.
    - Ertrov July 9, 2012, 11:23 pm
    Reply
  • 7

    That is fantastically untrue. Please provide a source.

    Reply
  • 6

    1.) The reason it's easier to believe is that it has evidentiary backing. Namely microwave radiation, an expanding universe, and light element commonality.

    2.) This is untrue. There have been a few hoaxes, but the majority of transitional fossils are quite valid scientifically.

    3.) Except the Chicxulub Crater? The most likely culprit?

    4.) The odds of having the specific atoms in their specific places in the specific pillow I am laying on in this specific place on this specific planet in this specific time period are so astronomical it is impossible to calculate them. Under the logic cited above, we must then call this event impossible. But, it is not, because of natural processes that guide/keep the atoms to/in their places. Namely the strong/weak nuclear forces, the ionic and covalent bonds between the atoms, the normal force of the pillow atoms inward on the stuffing, etc etc etc. This is the answer to your probability statement: by chance? Yes, human evolution is unlikely. Through natural selection? Not as unlikely as you might think. The chances are, in fact, 1/1, because we have never seen any possibilities. We must verify there is another possibility of life developing on Earth before we can make a probabilistic calculation. Also, no matter how improbable evolution would be under your view, it makes no difference. It is evidence and objective verification that corroborate a scientific hypothesis, jettisoning it into the status of a theory.

    5.) I think this to be a sidestepping of the question. If you do not know God and cannot grasp the concept, don't describe him. If he is beyond description, then don't describe him. If your underlying assumption is that God exists and evolution is false no matter what the evidence says or doesn't say, then there is no fruit to this discussion, and your view becomes unscientific.

    We believe in the Earth being round and other scientific findings because we can read peer-reviewed literature and see evidentiary backing for hypotheses.

    Reply
  • 5

    Please find below over 100 contradictions found within the bible, enjoy explaining them all.


    Who incited David to count the fighting men of Israel?


    (a) God did (2 Samuel 24: 1)


    (b) Satan did (I Chronicles 2 1:1)


    In that count how many fighting men were found in Israel?


    (a) Eight hundred thousand (2 Samuel 24:9)
    (b) One million, one hundred thousand (IChronicles 21:5)


    How many fighting men were found in Judah?


    (a) Five hundred thousand (2 Samuel 24:9)
    (b) Four hundred and seventy thousand (I Chronicles 21:5)



    God sent his prophet to threaten David with how many years of famine?


    (a) Seven (2 Samuel 24:13)
    (b) Three (I Chronicles 21:12)



    How old was Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem?


    (a) Twenty-two (2 Kings 8:26)
    (b) Forty-two (2 Chronicles 22:2)



    How old was Jehoiachin when he became king of Jerusalem?


    (a) Eighteen (2 Kings 24:8)
    (b) Eight (2 Chronicles 36:9)



    How long did he rule over Jerusalem?


    (a) Three months (2 Kings 24:8)
    (b) Three months and ten days (2 Chronicles 36:9)



    The chief of the mighty men of David lifted up his spear and killed how many men at one time?


    (a) Eight hundred (2 Samuel 23:8)
    (b) Three hundred (I Chronicles 11: 11)



    When did David bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem? Before defeating the Philistines or after?


    (a) After (2 Samuel 5 and 6)
    (b) Before (I Chronicles 13 and 14)



    How many pairs of clean animals did God tell Noah to take into the Ark?


    (a) Two (Genesis 6:19, 20)
    (b) Seven (Genesis 7:2). But despite this last instruction only two pairs went into the ark (Genesis 7:8-9)



    When David defeated the King of Zobah, how many horsemen did he capture?


    (a) One thousand and seven hundred (2 Samuel 8:4)
    (b) Seven thousand (I Chronicles 18:4)



    How many stalls for horses did Solomon have?


    (a) Forty thousand (I Kings 4:26)
    (b) Four thousand (2 chronicles 9:25)



    In what year of King Asa's reign did Baasha, King of Israel die?


    (a) Twenty-sixth year (I Kings 15:33 - 16:8)
    (b) Still alive in the thirty-sixth year (2 Chronicles 16:1)



    How many overseers did Solomon appoint for the work of building the temple?


    (a) Three thousand six hundred (2 Chronicles 2:2)
    (b) Three thousand three hundred (I Kings 5:16)



    Solomon built a facility containing how many baths?


    (a) Two thousand (1 Kings 7:26)
    (b) Over three thousand (2 Chronicles 4:5)



    Of the Israelites who were freed from the Babylonian captivity, how many were the children of Pahrath-Moab?


    (a) Two thousand eight hundred and twelve (Ezra 2:6)
    (b) Two thousand eight hundred and eighteen (Nehemiah 7:11)



    How many were the children of Zattu?


    (a) Nine hundred and forty-five (Ezra 2:8)
    (b) Eight hundred and forty-five (Nehemiah 7:13)



    How many were the children of Azgad?


    (a) One thousand two hundred and twenty-two (Ezra 2:12)
    (b) Two thousand three hundred and twenty-two (Nehemiah 7:17)



    How many were the children of Adin?


    (a) Four hundred and fifty-four (Ezra 2:15)
    (b) Six hundred and fifty-five (Nehemiah 7:20)



    How many were the children of Hashum?


    (a) Two hundred and twenty-three (Ezra 2:19)
    (b) Three hundred and twenty-eight (Nehemiah 7:22)



    How many were the children of Bethel and Ai?


    (a) Two hundred and twenty-three (Ezra 2:28)
    (b) One hundred and twenty-three (Nehemiah 7:32)



    Ezra 2:64 and Nehemiah 7:66 agree that the total number of the whole assembly was 42,360. Yet the numbers do not add up to anything close. The totals obtained from each book is as follows:


    (a) 29,818 (Ezra)
    (b) 31,089 (Nehemiah)



    How many singers accompanied the assembly?


    (a) Two hundred (Ezra 2:65)
    (b) Two hundred and forty-five (Nehemiah 7:67)



    What was the name of King Abijah’s mother?


    (a) Michaiah, daughter of Uriel of Gibeah (2 Chronicles 13:2)
    (b) Maachah, daughter of Absalom (2 Chronicles 11:20) But Absalom had only one daughter whose name was Tamar (2 Samuel 14:27)



    Did Joshua and the Israelites capture Jerusalem?


    (a) Yes (Joshua 10:23, 40)
    (b) No (Joshua 15:63)



    Who was the father of Joseph, husband of Mary?


    (a) Jacob (Matthew 1:16)
    (b) Hell (Luke 3:23)



    Jesus descended from which son of David?


    (a) Solomon (Matthew 1:6)
    (b) Nathan(Luke3:31)



    Who was the father of Shealtiel?


    (a) Jechoniah (Matthew 1:12)
    (b) Neri’ (Luke 3:27)



    Which son of Zerubbabel was an ancestor of Jesus Christ?


    (a) Abiud (Matthew 1: 13)
    (b) Rhesa (Luke 3:27) But the seven sons of Zerubbabel are as follows: i.Meshullam, ii. Hananiah, iii. Hashubah, iv. Ohel, v.Berechiah, vi. Hasadiah, viii. Jushabhesed (I Chronicles 3:19, 20). The names Abiud and Rhesa do not fit in anyway.




    Who was the father of Uzziah?


    (a) Joram (Matthew 1:8)
    (b) Amaziah (2 Chronicles 26:1)



    Who as the father of Jechoniah?


    (a) Josiah (Matthew 1:11)
    (b) Jeholakim (I Chronicles 3:16)



    How many generations were there from the Babylonian exile until Christ?


    (a) Matthew says fourteen (Matthew 1:17)
    (b) But a careful count of the generations reveals only thirteen (see Matthew 1: 12-16)



    Who was the father of Shelah?


    (a) Cainan (Luke 3:35-36)
    (b) Arphaxad (Genesis II: 12)



    Was John the Baptist Elijah who was to come?


    (a) Yes (Matthew II: 14, 17:10-13)
    (b) No(John 1:19-21)



    Would Jesus inherit David’s throne?


    (a) Yes. So said the angel (Luke 1:32)
    (b) No, since he is a descendant of Jehoiakim (see Matthew 1: I 1, I Chronicles 3:16). And Jehoiakim was cursed by God so that none of his descendants can sit upon David’s throne (Jeremiah 36:30)



    Jesus rode into Jerusalem on how many animals?


    (a) One - a colt (Mark 11:7; cf Luke 19:3 5). “And they brought the colt to Jesus and threw their garments on it; and he sat upon it.”
    (b) Two - a colt and an ass (Matthew 21:7). “They brought the ass and the colt and put their garments on them and he sat thereon.”



    How did Simon Peter find out that Jesus was the Christ?


    (a) By a revelation from heaven (Matthew 16:17)
    (b) His brother Andrew told him (John 1:41)



    Where did Jesus first meet Simon Peter and Andrew?


    (a) By the sea of Galilee (Matthew 4:18-22)
    (b) On the banks of river Jordan (John 1:42). After that, Jesus decided to go to Galilee (John 1:43)



    When Jesus met Jairus was Jairus’ daughter already dead?


    (a) Yes. Matthew 9:18 quotes him as saying, “My daughter has just died.”
    (b) No. Mark 5:23 quotes him as saying, “My little daughter is at the point of death.”


    Did Jesus allow his disciples to keep a staff on their journey?


    (a) Yes(Mark6:8)
    (b) No (Matthew 10:9; Luke 9:3)



    Did Herod think that Jesus was John the Baptist?


    (a) Yes (Matthew 14:2; Mark 6:16)
    (b) No (Luke 9:9)



    Did John the Baptist recognize Jesus before his baptism?


    (a) Yes (Matthew 3:13-14)
    (b) No (John 1:32,33)



    Did John the Baptist recognize Jesus after his baptism?


    (a) Yes (John 1:32, 33)
    (b) No (Matthew 11:2)



    According to the Gospel of John, what did Jesus say about bearing his own witness?


    (a) “If I bear witness to myself, my testimony is not true” (John 5:3 1)
    (b) “Even if I do bear witness to myself, my testimony is true” (John 8:14)



    When Jesus entered Jerusalem did he cleanse the temple that same day?


    (a) Yes (Matthew 21:12)

    (b) No. He went into the temple and looked around, but since it was very late he did nothing. Instead, he went to Bethany to spend the night and returned the next morning to cleanse the temple (Mark I 1:1- 17).



    The Gospels say that Jesus cursed a fig tree. Did the tree wither at once?


    (a) Yes. (Matthew 21:19)
    (b) No. It withered overnight (Mark II: 20)



    Did Judas kiss Jesus?


    (a) Yes (Matthew 26:48-50)
    (b) No. Judas could not get close enough to Jesus to kiss him (John 18:3-12)



    What did Jesus say about Peter’s denial?


    (a) “The cock will not crow till you have denied me three times” (John 13:38).
    (b) “Before the cock crows twice you will deny me three times” (Mark 14:30) . When the cock crowed once, the three denials were not yet complete (see Mark 14:72). Therefore prediction (a) failed.



    Did Jesus bear his own cross?


    (a) Yes (John 19:17)
    (b) No (Matthew 27:31-32)



    Did Jesus die before the curtain of the temple was torn?


    (a) Yes(Matthew27:50-5 1;MarklS:37-38)
    (b) No. After the curtain was torn, then Jesus crying with a loud voice, said, “Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit!” And having said this he breathed his last (Luke 23:45-46)



    Did Jesus say anything secretly?


    (a) No. “I have said nothing secretly” (John 18:20)
    (b) Yes. “He did not speak to them without a parable, but privately to his own disciples he explained everything” (Mark 4:34). The disciples asked him “Why do you speak to them in parables?” He said, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given” (Matthew 13: 1 0-11)



    Where was Jesus at the sixth hour on the day of the crucifixion?


    (a) On the cross (Mark 15:23)
    (b) In Pilate’s court (John 19:14)



    The gospels say that two thieves were crucified along with Jesus. Did both thieves mock Jesus?


    (a) Yes (Mark 15:32)
    (b) No. One of them mocked Jesus, the other defended Jesus (Luke 23:43)



    Did Jesus ascend to Paradise the same day of the crucifixion?


    (a) Yes. He said to the thief who defended him, “Today you will be with me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43)
    (b) No. He said to Mary Magdelene two days later, “I have not yet ascended to the Father” (John 20:17)



    When Paul was on the road to Damascus he saw a light and heard a voice. Did those who were with him hear the voice?


    (a) Yes(Acts9:7)


    (b) No(Acts22:9)



    When Paul saw the light he fell to the ground. Did his traveling companions also fall to the ground?


    (a) Yes (Acts 26:14)


    (b) No (Acts 9:7)



    Did the voice spell out on the spot what Paul’s duties were to be?


    (a) Yes (Acts 26:16-18)


    (b) No. The voice commanded Paul to go into the city of Damascus and there he will be told what he must do. (Acts9:7;22: 10)



    When the Israelites dwelt in Shittin they committed adultery with the daughters of Moab. God struck them with a plague. How many people died in that plague?


    (a) Twenty-four thousand (Numbers 25:1 and 9)


    (b) Twenty-three thousand (I Corinthians 10:8)



    How many members of the house of Jacob came to Egypt?


    (a) Seventy souls (Genesis 4&27)


    (b) Seventy-five souls (Acts 7:14)



    What did Judas do with the blood money he received for betraying Jesus?


    (a) He bought a field (Acts 1: 18)


    (b) He threw all of it into the temple and went away. The priests could not put the blood money into the temple treasury, so they used it to buy a field to bury strangers (Matthew 27:5)



    How did Judas die?


    (a) After he threw the money into the temple he went away and hanged himself (Matthew 27:5)


    (b) After he bought the field with the price of his evil deed he fell headlong and burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out (Acts 1:18)



    Why is the field called “Field of Blood”?


    (a) Because the priests bought it with the blood money (Matthew 27:8)


    (b) Because of the bloody death of Judas therein (Acts 1:19)



    Who is a ransom for whom?


    (a) “The Son of Man came...to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). “Christ Jesus who gave himself as a ransom for all... “(I Timothy 2:5-6)


    (b) “The wicked is a ransom for the righteous, and the faithless for the upright” (Proverbs 21:18)



    Is the law of Moses useful?


    (a) Yes. “All scripture is... profitable...” (2 Timothy 3:16)


    (b) No. “. . . A former commandment is set aside because of its weakness and uselessness... “(Hebrews 7:18)



    What was the exact wording on the cross?


    (a) “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (Matthew 27:37)


    (b) “The King of the Jews” (Mark 15:26)


    (c) “This is the King of the Jews” (Luke 23:38)


    (d) “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews” (John 19:19)



    Did Herod want to kill John the Baptist?


    (a) Yes (Matthew 14:5)


    (b) No. It was Herodias, the wife of Herod who wanted to kill him. But Herod knew that he was a righteous man and kept him safe (Mark 6:20)



    Who was the tenth disciple of Jesus in the list of twelve?


    (a) Thaddaeus (Matthew 10: 1-4; Mark 3:13 -19)


    (b) Judas son of James is the corresponding name in Luke’s gospel (Luke 6:12-16)



    Jesus saw a man sitat the tax collector’s office and called him to be his disciple. What was his name?


    (a) Matthew (Matthew 9:9)


    (b) Levi (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27)



    Was Jesus crucified on the daytime before the Passover meal or the daytime after?


    (a) After (Mark 14:12-17)


    (b) Before. Before the feast of the Passover (John 1) Judas went out at night (John 13:30). The other disciples thought he was going out to buy supplies to prepare for the Passover meal (John 13:29). When Jesus was arrested, the Jews did not enter Pilate’s judgment hail because they wanted to stay clean to eat the Passover (John 18:28). When the judgment was pronounced against Jesus, it was about the sixth hour on the day of Preparation for the Passover (John 19:14)



    Did Jesus pray to The Father to prevent the crucifixion?


    (a) Yes. (Matthew 26:39; Mark 14:36; Luke 22:42)


    (b) No. (John 12:27)



    In the gospels which say that Jesus prayed to avoid the cross, how many times did ‘he move away from his disciples to pray?


    (a) Three (Matthew 26:36-46 and Mark 14:32-42)


    (b) One. No opening is left for another two times. (Luke 22:39-46)



    Matthew and Mark agree that Jesus went away and prayed three times. What were the words of the second prayer?


    (a) Mark does not give the words but he says that the words were the same as the first prayer (Mark 14:3 9)


    (b) Matthew gives us the words, and we can see that they are not the same as in the first (Matthew 26:42)



    What did the centurion say when Jesus dies?


    (a) “Certainly this man was innocent” (Luke 23:47)


    (b) “Truly this man was the Son of God” (Mark 15:39)



    When Jesus said “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken Me ? ” in what language did he speak?


    (a) Hebrew: the words are “Eloi, Eloi …..“(Matthew 27:46)


    (b) Aramaic: the words are “Eloi, Eloi ….. “(Mark 15:34)


    According to the gospels, what were the last words of Jesus before he died?


    (a) “Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit!” (Luke 23:46)


    (b) "It is finished" (John 19:30).


    When Jesus entered Capernaum he healed the slave of a centurion. Did the centurion come personally to request Jesus for this?


    (a) Yes (Matthew 8:5)


    (b) No. He sent some elders of the Jews and his friends (Luke 7:3,6)

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


    (a) Adam was told that if and when he eats the forbidden fruit he would die the same day (Genesis 2:17)


    (b) Adam ate the fruit and went on to live to a ripe old age of 930 years (Genesis 5:5)

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


    (a) God decided that the life-span of humans will be limited to 120 years (Genesis 6:3)


    (b) Many people born after that lived longer than 120. Arpachshad lived 438 years. His son Shelah lived 433 years. His son Eber lived 464 years, etc. (Genesis 11:12-16)



    Apart from Jesus did anyone else ascend to heaven?


    (a) No (John 3:13)


    (b) Yes. “And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven” (2 Kings 2:11)



    Who was high priest when David went into the house of God and ate the consecrated bread?


    (a) Abiathar (Mark 2:26)


    (b) Ahimelech, the father of Abiathar (I Samuel 1:1; 22:20)



    Was Jesus’ body wrapped in spices before burial in accordance with Jewish burial customs?


    (a) Yes and his female disciples witnessed his burial (John 19:39-40)


    (b) No. Jesus was simply wrapped in a linen shroud. Then the women bought and prepared spices “so that they may go and anoint him [Jesus)” (Mark 16: 1)



    When did the women buy the spices?


    (a) After “the Sabbath was past” (Mark 16:1)


    (b) Before the Sabbath. The women “prepared spices and ointments.” Then, “on the Sabbath they rested according to the commandment” (Luke 23:55 to 24:1)


    At what time of day did the women visit the tomb?


    (a) “Toward the dawn” (Matthew 28: 1)


    (b) “When the sun had risen” (Mark 16:2)


    What was the purpose for which the women went to the tomb?


    (a) To anoint Jesus’ body with spices (Mark 16: 1; Luke 23:55 to 24: 1)


    (b) To see the tomb. Nothing about spices here (Matthew 28: 1)


    (c) For no specified reason. In this gospel the wrapping with spices had been done before the Sabbath (John 20: 1)


    A large stone was placed at the entrance of the tomb. Where was the stone when the women arrived?


    (a) They saw that the stone was “Rolled back” (Mark 16:4) They found the stone “rolled away from the tomb” (Luke 24:2) They saw that “the stone had been taken away from the tomb” (John 20:1)


    (b) As the women approached, an angel descended from heaven, rolled away the stone, and conversed with the women. Matthew made the women witness the spectacular rolling away of the stone (Matthew 28:1-6)


    Did anyone tell the women what happened to Jesus’ body?


    (a) Yes. “A young man in a white robe” (Mark 16:5). “Two men ... in dazzling apparel” later described as angels (Luke 24:4 and 24:23). An angel - the one who rolled back the stone (Matthew 16:2). In each case the women were told that Jesus had risen from the dead (Matthew 28:7; Mark 16:6; Luke 24:5 footnote)


    (b) No. Mary met no one and returned saying, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him” (John 20:2)


    When did Mary Magdelene first meet the resurrected Jesus? And how did she react?


    (a) Mary and the other women met Jesus on their way back from their first and only visit to the tomb. They took hold of his feet and worshipped him (Matthew 28:9)


    (b) On her second visit to the tomb Mary met Jesus just outside the tomb. When she saw Jesus she did not recognize him. She mistook him for the gardener. She still thinks that Jesus’ body is laid to rest somewhere and she demands to know where. But when Jesus said her name she at once recognized him and called him “Teacher.” Jesus said to her, “Do not hold me...” (John 20:11 to 17)


    What was Jesus’ instruction for his disciples?


    (a) “Tell my brethren to go to Galilee, and there they will see me” (Matthew 2 8: 10)


    (b) “Go to my brethren and say to them, I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God” (John 20:17)


    When did the disciples return to Galilee?


    (a) Immediately, because when they saw Jesus in Galilee “some doubted” (Matthew 28:17). This period of uncertainty should not persist


    (b) After at least 40 days. That evening the disciples were still in Jerusalem (Luke 24:3 3). Jesus appeared to them there and told them, stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high” (Luke 24:49). He was appearing to them “during forty days” (Acts 1:3), and “charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise ... “(Acts 1:4)


    To whom did the Midianites sell Joseph?


    (a) “To the Ishmaelites” (Genesis 37:28)


    (b) “To Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh” (Genesis 37:36)


    Who brought Joseph to Egypt?


    (a) The Ishmaelites bought Joseph and then “took Joseph to Egypt” (Genesis 37:28)


    (b) “The Midianites had sold him in Egypt” (Genesis 37:36)


    (c) Joseph said to his brothers “I am your brother, Joseph, whom you sold into Egypt” (Genesis 45:4)


    Does God change his mind?


    (a) Yes. “The word of the Lord came to Samuel: “I repent that I have made Saul King...” (I Samuel 15:10 to 11)


    (b) No. God “will not lie or repent; for he is not a man, that he should repent” (I Samuel 15:29)


    (c) Yes. “And the Lord repented that he had made Saul King over Israel” (I Samuel 15:35). Notice that the above three quotes are all from the same chapter of the same book! In addition, the Bible shows that God repented on several other occasions:

    i. “The Lord was sorry that he made man” (Genesis 6:6)

    “I am sorry that I have made them” (Genesis 6:7)

    ii. “And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do to his people” (Exodus 32:14).

    iii. (Lots of other such references).


    The Bible says that for each miracle Moses and Aaron demonstrated the magicians did the same by their secret arts. Then comes the following feat:


    (a) Moses and Aaron converted all the available water into blood (Exodus 7:20-21)


    (b) The magicians did the same (Exodus 7:22). This is impossible, since there would have been no water left to convert into blood.


    Who killed Goliath?


    (a) David (I Samuel 17:23, 50)


    (b) Elhanan (2 Samuel 21:19)


    Who killed Saul?


    (a) “Saul took his own sword and fell upon it.... Thus Saul died... (I Samuel 31:4-6)


    (b) An Amalekite slew him (2 Samuel 1:1- 16)


    Does every man sin?


    (a) Yes. “There is no man who does not sin” (I Kings 8:46; see also 2 Chronicles 6:36; Proverbs 20:9; Ecclesiastes 7:20; and I John 1:810)


    (b) No. True Christians cannot possibly sin, because they are the children of God. “Every one who believes that Jesus is the Christ is a child of God.. (I John 5:1). “We should be called children of God; and so we are” (I John 3: 1). “He who loves is born of God” (I John 4:7). “No one born of God commits sin; for God’s nature abides in him, and he cannot sin because he is born of God” (I John 3:9). But, then again, Yes! “If we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (I John 1:8)


    Who will bear whose burden?


    (a) “Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ” (Galatians 6:2)


    (b) “Each man will have to bear his own load” (Galatians 6:5)


    How many disciples did Jesus appear to after his resurrection?


    (a) Twelve (I Corinthians 15:5)


    (b) Eleven (Matthew 27:3-5 and Acts 1:9-26, see also Matthew 28:16; Mark 16:14 footnote; Luke 24:9; Luke 24:3 3)


    Where was Jesus three days after his baptism?


    (a) After his baptism, “the spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. And he was in the wilderness forty days ... (Mark 1:12-13)


    (b) Next day after the baptism, Jesus selected two disciples. Second day: Jesus went to Galilee - two more disciples. Third day: Jesus was at a wedding feast in Cana in Galilee (see John 1:35; 1:43; 2:1-11)


    Was baby Jesus’ life threatened in Jerusalem?


    (a) Yes, so Joseph fled with him to Egypt and stayed there until Herod died (Matthew 2:13 23)


    (b) No. The family fled nowhere. They calmly presented the child at the Jerusalem temple according to the Jewish customs and returned to Galilee (Luke 2:21-40)


    When Jesus walked on water how did the disciples respond?


    (a) They worshipped him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God” (Matthew 14:33)


    (b) “They were utterly astounded, for they did not understand about the loaves, but their hearts were hardened” (Mark 6:51-52)

    • Dannyl
    • November 27, 2009, 4:45 am
    Reply
  • 5

    1.) The Big Bang Theory does not state that something comes from nothing. It doesn't speak to the Universe's origin, just it's formation at 10^-43 seconds after the initial spacetime expansion and beyond. The origin of the Universe is a much more murky question. There are many possibilities, the most corroborated one being matter arising from fluctuations in vacuum energy. Since massenergy can never be created or destroyed, we can extrapolate that massenergy has been available in some form for eternity [or before time (our time at least) existed, before the big bang] until evidence suggests otherwise. From that, we can assume that the Big Bang was simply the fluctuation that caused energy to condense, coalescing into the matter we see today.
    One possibility.

    2.) We have found no "missing links" because once they are found, they are no longer called missing links. They are called transitional fossils, and are well-documented and abundant in nature and the fossil record. This includes Australopithecus, Ardipithicus, Darwinius, Apidium, Dorudon, Anchiornis, Eryops, and many more. If you want a full list or a specific tree in bilogony elaborated upon, let me know.

    3.) The generally accepted theory of dinosaur extinction involves a meteor impact and global climate change resulting in unsuitable living conditions. And moisture is replenished through the water cycle. The flood is simply not corroborated.

    4.) I've not heard any evidence for ID that is valid, if you could provide some I will have the utmost respect for you and your researching capabilities : ). I will assess it as objectively as possible, just as you promised. I appreciate that conviction!

    5.) Omnipotence and omniscience are mutually exclusive because:
    An omniscient being knows past, present and future. Thus, said being knows when she would intervene in history. Knowing that, it becomes impossible for the deity to change the timeline, because she already knows how she will intervene. If she cannot change the time of her intervention, she is not omnipotent. If she can, her initial knowledge was flawed, and thus she was not fully omniscient.

    Captured in prose:
    Can an omniscient God, who knows the future, find,
    The omnipotence to change his future mind?
    -Karen Owens

    I was so totally talking out of my ass.
    - Ertrov July 8, 2012, 5:05 am
    X D
    - Logos385 July 8, 2012, 8:12 am
    Reply
  • 5

    THE BIBLE: ONE WOMANS LIE ABOUT AN AFFAIR THAT GOT WAYYYYYY OUT OF HAND!

    • Math
    • December 23, 2009, 10:59 pm
    Reply
  • 4

    Well, as you already know, I believe in the Bible. There is no way to prove that it is true, it has to do with faith.

    Well, just to have a little fun, there was this kid at our school that said the zombie apocalypse was a prophecy in the Bible. I asked him where it was and he said it was in invisible ink in the blank pages at the end......epic fail...

    no proof of what there is proof in history biblical events happened
    - The32March July 7, 2012, 11:52 pm
    nevermind i guess this was bumped up i thought this was a new post -_-
    - The32March July 7, 2012, 11:52 pm
    Meh, I'm still here. What proof? : ).
    - Logos385 July 8, 2012, 8:11 am
    Reply
  • 4

    I prefer Roald Dahl's fairy tales.

    • grunt
    • November 27, 2009, 4:05 am
    Reply
  • 4

    because there is no proof that god realy exists so it is based on beliefs just like santa clase its a story based down that ppl have to believe

    • mit8818
    • November 27, 2009, 1:24 pm
    Reply
  • 4

    Well, this is kind of off topic but, religion has gone overboard and this is how I see it. Religion is a title. God will not send you to hell because you are Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, Pentecostal, etc. God will send you to hell if you do not do what his word tells you to do. God doesn't want a religion, he wants a relationship.

    And don't flame just because you don't believe in God.

    Romans 1:20
    For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
    - tbart2010 February 21, 2011, 10:48 am
    Reply
  • 4

    You mean he's going to send us Television?

    • Dannyl
    • January 21, 2010, 11:10 pm
    Reply
  • 3

    it is the best fictonal tale ever

    • mit8818
    • November 26, 2009, 7:11 pm
    "because there is no proof that god realy exists" The evidence is all around you.
    - tbart2010 January 26, 2011, 4:24 am
    i have yet to see any physical evidence that a god exists... just like all magical creatures they are just based on stories
    - mit8818 January 26, 2011, 3:55 pm
    I don't think you understood what I was saying; I meant that the ENTIRE world, nature, is evidence of Him.
    - tbart2010 January 26, 2011, 4:27 pm
    how is nature proof of him? please tell me! because as far as i can see there is no proof that he put them there!
    - mit8818 February 6, 2011, 6:07 pm
    *Him
    **He
    I'm not going to get in a debate with you if you're just going to trash my beliefs. Goodbye!
    - tbart2010 February 6, 2011, 6:49 pm
    *God
    - tbart2010 February 6, 2011, 6:49 pm
    and your trashing my beliefs... i have nothing against people who believe in god i just need physical proof of him
    - mit8818 February 20, 2011, 11:17 pm
    I just read through my comments and saw nowhere where I was "trashing your beliefs". As for your second part, I don't understand why we always need "physical proof" of something in order for it to be real. Can you hold and feel and see an atom in your hand? Yet do you still believe that atoms exist?

    Or how about the wind? You know it's there because you can feel it and see how it affects the world around it, yet you can't see it. I honestly wish I was further advanced spiritually so I could explain just what it feels like to have God in your life.

    Also:
    *And
    *you're
    *I
    *God
    *I
    *Him
    - tbart2010 February 21, 2011, 3:36 am
    Romans 1:20. Refer to my comment in the section above if you're confused as to what I'm getting at.
    - tbart2010 February 21, 2011, 10:50 am
    I'm actually replying to your comment below, but this is the only place I could reply. "Physical proof" doesn't just mean being able to hold/feel something, it means that it has evidence in the physical plane of existence. In other words, "physical" proof means any form of evidence confirming something in physical existence. Atomic theory has mountains of physical evidence. As does wind...

    To say that everything around us is evidence of a god is to say nothing scientifically or rationally viable. In order to make this claim you would have to first prove the existence of a god. It's a circular argument, thus, untenable.
    - Logos385 July 7, 2012, 12:03 pm
    Wow I forgot about this post haha
    I've found all these religious 'debates' on this site to be very discouraging and rife with hate. It's just not worth the time or spiritual drainage for me.
    - tbart2010 July 7, 2012, 11:49 pm
    This is a reply to that post above. I think it would be a good experience then to discuss some of this with me. I promise I don't hate, I am just very rational. And if something is the most important part of your life, what else could be more worth your time?
    - Logos385 July 8, 2012, 12:50 am
    Was I really this dumb? Holy crap.
    - Ertrov July 8, 2012, 5:08 am
    I do agree with you - this (Christianity and God) are the most important things in my life. However, I've found in my experience with evangelism that cold turkey evangelism is the least effective. Cold turkey evangelism being many things, like me and group of people splitting up and asking people for a little bit of their time to talk about spiritual things which lasts for however long the person wants it to, and then we both go our separate ways, never to see each other again. We may have a huge impact in their walk with God or none at all. There's zero gain or loss for me, the person evangelist. Now, it's much easier to do in person than on the internet because you can see them face to face and react to their emotions. This is kind of like cold turkey evangelism. Mind you, this is all my personal opinion and not all Christians may agree with me. I just don't like having a discussion about it over the internet.

    You've really made me think, and I think I'll discuss things with you. Feel free to reply here or email me: t_bart2010@yahoo.com
    - tbart2010 July 9, 2012, 9:58 pm
    Reply
  • 3

    So evolution and science are out the door and the fact it was written by men that stole some of their ideas from other religions and beliefs means nothing to you... wow why do you even bother to use the internet?

    Reply
  • 3

    God: An imaginary friend for adults.

    One of the definitions of insanity is believing in things that do not exist, there is no proof that god exists. If somebody believed a kettle created the earth, there is no way to prove or disprove it, but he'd still end up locked away as a nut. But because there are lots of crazy people in the world who are able to convince their children that the god (kettle) is fact then somehow it's ok.

    I have nothing against religions, they generally promote good acts. The above is just my belief.

    • Dannyl
    • November 27, 2009, 4:52 am
    Personally, I think of it This way:
    Assuming that evolution is true( which it would seem it is)a lion evolves from other creatures. However, if this process of evolution was "God's will" how is that different than simply saying that "God created a Lion".

    When Man built the space shuttle, he didn't simply think "space shuttle" and have it appear. It was made through a process.

    When reading the Bible, you have to take into account the effect of language on it. People read "God made man" and assume: "poof, then there were people"

    With that said, I believe that the aspects of the Bible that have to do with morals are most likely to be accurate. But information like precicely how God created certain creatures was most likely passed down in simplified terms.

    One of the most influential people in Christian Theology was St. Augistine. He is the one who came up with the idea that original sin is passed on through intercourse as well as many other aspects of Christianity. He came up with these ideas hundreds of years after Jesus by applying what he knew about the natural world at the time to the scriptures. Maybe it is time to do the same thing again with current science.
    - BobTheJanitor October 28, 2010, 6:19 am
    Your interpretation of the Bible is interesting, and I believe fairly common. However, I disagree that the moral aspects of the Bible are accurate, and I disagree that it is time to once again attempt a unification of the Bible and science. It seems to be impossible nowadays.

    Pi will just never, ever equal 3 : P.
    - Logos385 October 30, 2010, 9:59 pm
    Thank you for responding, most of what goes on in my head would be classified as "interesting".

    1)What I meant about the moral aspects being accurate is that they are accurate in terms of Judo-Christianity. Whether or not they ARE what is actually right or wrong will depend more on what you believe than what can be reasoned.

    2)Why disagree with attempting to unify the two? I mean, I could understand having doubts about how well it would work, or how to go about doing it(which is maybe what you meant to say). But why Disagree about trying?

    3)Pi is a number used to represent aspects of a circle. Currently we use the base 10 system, meaning that pi is the # 3.14 etc. If the unit system used in Solomon's time was all weirded out then it could be possible for pi in that system to equal an even three. Or it could be possible that the people who translated the Old Testament into Arabic (who came up with the base 10 system)simply didn't know or care enough about mathematics to translate it properly, and simply rounded it off to 3. Its not like the Bible says pi is 87 or anything, a difference of 0.14... isn't that huge considering the amount of languages the Bible has been through. Furthermore, considering that the primary purpose of the Bible is to be a moral guide instead of a mathamatic or scientific one, I'm not suprised that those types of things weren't given the priority by translators or teachers of the time period.

    bonus fun fact: the Vatican has joined in on the search for alien life in the universe.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/6536400/The-Vatican-joins-the-search-for-alien-life.html
    - BobTheJanitor November 2, 2010, 8:50 am
    Reply
  • 3

    I am using "proof" in both the scientific and colloquial sense. Meaning, being 99% sure of something. The 1% comes from being unsure that reality is reality.

    Evolution is both fact and theory, depending on the definition used.
    Fact of Evolution: "The change in allelic frequency in a population over time due to natural selection and genetic drift." Evolution happens and has been directly observed.
    Theory of Evolution: The model (Natural Selection, Punc Ec, etc) that explains the observed mechanism.

    "Theory" in this case does not mean educated guess or idea, it means well-substantiated working explicatory model of an observed fact set. For an idea to become a "theory" in the scientific sense, it must have an evidentiary mountain to back it up.

    Other theories:
    Germ Theory
    Atomic Theory
    The Theory of Gravity
    The Theory of Plate Tectonics

    Reply
  • 3

    Dude you didn't know? God is going to send down the disease that will turn people into mindless corpses that will terrorfy the world for a thousand years...

    Seriously, send that kid to a wack shack.

    Reply
  • 3

    A man sacrificing himself for billions of people who he never met. Then soon became a Jewish zombie who can make you live forever after you died by symbolically drinking his blood and eating his flesh and telepathically accept him as your master, so he can remove and evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a woman made from a man's rib was convinced by a talking snake to eat an apple from a magical tree. It seems a little far fetched to me.

    • mienftw
    • January 22, 2010, 5:56 pm
    Reply
  • 2

    This children is what we call 'biting off more than you can chew'

    • Dannyl
    • November 27, 2009, 4:35 am
    Reply
  • 2

    Can't wait...

    • Dannyl
    • November 27, 2009, 10:19 am
    Reply
  • 2

    Just to give an opinion here. I'm not a religeous person. Period. I do not believe in any manner of organized religion. I think it's gone so far overboard that it's no longer a benefit to society. Most religeon has never really done the world that much good and those that do are the ones that preach non conflict. Not peace, every religeon preaches peace, but actually not to involve yourself in conflict.

    As far as the Bible. Again it's a personal opinion so no offence meant to anyone... I just can't see it. I was raised christian and I have read it front to back, 3 versions to be exact. In each, I find flaws, who doesn't? There are bound to be some, we're talking about a book which was scribed originally several years after the fact after being picked apart and selectively chosen by a court of scholars and royals in the at the time, roman empire. Before that it was individual scriptures, scribed by greeks translated from Hebrew into Arabic and then to the greek alphabet. And at that we don't even know if it was the apostles themselves who spoke it to the scribes. I cannot bring myself to believe it as "the word of god" as some would say. I also cannot believe in or follow a book which at one time preaches about forgiveness and equalities, then turns around and punches you in the face by saying you are the greatest sinner and worst being ever. Sure you need something to guide you and set you straight but the rediculous shift is unnecessary and I cannot take that as anything more than religeous controllers trying to keep hold over a captive audience by fearing them into belief. But it just doesn't add up to be something more than words on paper to me. And words on paper are ink and quill. I so no god creation there, just a story.

    Reply
  • 2

    I have read the Bible 10 times, and see many contradictions... but I'll let you, Ertrov, chug through that gigantic list before saying anything on that front.

    As to Evolution...

    What holes? Give me one and we can discuss, for while there are some things we have yet to understand, there don't seem to be any "holes."

    The Big Bang has an amazing amount of evidentiary backing, intelligent design has none. If you would like me to elaborate I will.

    Also, omniscience and omnipotence are mutually exclusive qualities: a logical impossibility.

    Reply
  • 2

    I think it's right on topic Ghettoshen, and I appreciate your opinion. It's important to remember to think for yourself, and you are advocating that at least within the confines of biblical literalism, which is quite admirable.

    Although, I would also say to you that while religion isn't necessary for a relationship with the divine, maybe a relationship with the divine is just as unnecessary?

    Reply
  • 2

    It was written by 40 people from different cultures and time periods. So your comment should not speak as if it was written by a singular entity.

    And once again, lets stick to facts. Your opinion doesnt matter, Nor does it change reality.

    Reply
  • 2

    Where did you get the idea that most mutations are harmful? The vast majority of mutations are completely neutral.

    This is far, far off-base. Evolution says nothing about personal philosophy. Reciprocative tendencies are, in fact, selected for: http://weber.ucsd.edu/~jmoore/publications/Recip.html.

    Following your above logic, this means that "Gravityists" would not have planes or Gymnastics. Humans have evolved to intrinsically possess an aversion to murder, harming others, and cheating others. Why do I not murder? It makes me sick: there is no way my brain or body will ever let me. This is because of biology.

    Finally, even if the majority of mutations were harmful to an organism, it would create a form of super-evolution. Let's say, to use an extreme, 99% of mutations are fatal, none are neutral, and 50% of a population mutate every generation. If the 1% of mutations that is beneficial has some effect on helping an organism survive the next generation, we have super evolution. This means, 50% of the population will mutate, but only 1% of 50% will mutate beneficially. .5% of the population will survive with a beneficial mutation, 49.5% will die due to mutation, and 50% will not mutate. The next go around, that .5% will survive, along with another .5%. The population with the beneficial mutation grows radically fast as opposed to the kind of evolution that is seen in nature.

    Reply
  • 2

    Please read the title of the post before you state my opinion doesn't matter, fool.

    • Dannyl
    • December 15, 2009, 6:41 am
    Reply
  • 2

    Still waiting...

    • Dannyl
    • December 15, 2009, 6:42 am
    Reply
  • 2

    Evolution has nothing to do with faith, it is unequivocally fact.

    Reply
  • 2

    I would just like to say this is a nice debate.

    I am a Christian. Now here's the funny part. I would have to say that I do believe in evolution. Many critisizers of me say that how can you do that but take the bible litterally? It's really quite simple. To the all-knowing, super powerfull god how long is a day? The seven days of creation to god could have reallly been 4.5 million years.

    Reply
  • 2

    But I do have my doubts. I am not really sure. I don't think I'll ever know. Note that in my earlier I said I would have to say I beleive in evolution. I'm not 100% sure if it.

    Reply
  • 2

    It's a good book of stories to help you live your life as a better person. That's my opinion on the bible.

    Reply
  • 2

    I think the bible is a load of rubbish
    it was a mafia scam years ago ( a get rich quick method)
    and science has explained everything that was "made" by "god"

    Reply
  • 2

    live your life by the golden rule."do onto others" Pslams has some good words of wisdom.

    Reply
  • 2

    I don't know dude. I've never read the whole thing, just passages.

    Reply
  • 2

    Wow i'm pretty surprised that there is so much discussion on this topic usually people are to scared or arrogant to post anything about there religion or somebody else but not this time bravo everybody :p

    Reply
  • 2

    Woot : ).

    Reply
  • 2

    The Bible was written by a bunch of homophobic, racist, sexcist men. Science is the only true religion, as every theory has all evidence for it and none against it.

    If you discard evolution as a "theory" and think theories are jokes. Well, think again. Do you beleive that gravity is real? Guess what, gravity is a THEORY, with all evidence for it, and not against it. Everything that surrounds us and is part of education, science, planets, ect, are all theories. And so is evolution.

    I believe that religion is something that should be taught to teach morals and how society works, with rules and such. But never tought in schools, such as "creationism". Science should always come before religion due to the fact that we rely on scientist everyday, why put them aside for something that is SO FAR proven 100%?

    Reply
  • 2

    Interesting. Care to post some of your progress?

    Reply
  • 2

    Still waiting, for the record xD

    • Dannyl
    • January 18, 2010, 4:36 am
    Reply
  • 2

    In simple terms yeah, you're completely correct and if you think I'm crazy for believing, who gives a shit, I guess we'll figure out in the end, right? :)

    Reply
  • 2

    I don't really believe in anything else, just a Heaven. I don't even know if it could be called Heaven. I think it's a place that separates the good people from the bad, but if they can change, they can come to the better side. I believe that someone or something will judge everyone when they die, but I don't really know if it could be a god, or Jesus, or Yahweh, or anything really. The other thing I believe in is that there may be reincarnation, by choice.

    These are just my opinions, no one elses. I mean no offense to anyone by saying this stuff, it's just my beliefs.

    You know what? I cahnge my mind. I believe in the Almighty Flying Spaghetti Monster. All worship his noodlyness, and hope that he will bless you by touching you with one of his noodly appendages. :)

    • Kojira
    • January 23, 2010, 2:26 pm
    Reply
  • 2

    Something for you all to look at


    untitled - the bible, your opinion?

    • Dannyl
    • January 26, 2010, 5:21 am
    Reply
  • 2

    I'm agnostic. I don't care what you are, as long as you keep it to what religion should be: a private and personal practice.

    Reply
  • 2

    my personal opinion is that there are some very important and valuable life lessons and morals in the bible, but it really just doesn't need the whole delusional backdrop of god and the afterlife

    Reply
  • 2

    Wow, I used to be an idiot. Alright, to catch up, for the record, I no longer believe the bible to be anything more than a misguided attempt by ancient humans to explain what they couldn't yet understand.

    • Ertrov
    • July 8, 2012, 5:19 am
    At least it's fun to look back on. : ).
    - Logos385 July 8, 2012, 8:16 am
    Reply
  • 1

    First off, the bible is not all of the religious texts dealing with Christianity/Judaism, but rather only the books deemed fit by the Catholic church to be put into the Cannon. I am a Christian, so i think the bible is awesome, but sometimes you need to take it with a grain of salt.

    Reply
  • 1

    I have faith that God inspired the council to choose the correct books. I don't think he would give us the wrong stuff.

    • Ertrov
    • November 26, 2009, 9:32 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Why on earth would you use an imperfect organ such as the human eye to try and proove the existence of god? It is true that the 'Human version' of the human eye is probably one of the best evolved aspects of our bodies, you need only count just how many other species have evolved with very similar forms. But other species have beaten us in the same environments and others are completley different, suiting their needs better. From here I ask you if God intentially gave us a blind spot? And if so, why?

    Reply
  • 1

    This is one of the best replies I have seen on Sharenator.

    Reply
  • 1

    Reply
  • 1

    Why thank you

    • Dannyl
    • November 27, 2009, 5:23 am
    Reply
  • 1

    Because it is an imperfect and cursed world, due to our sin. And as to the 100 "contradictions". Keep checking back, I'll answer them all.

    • Ertrov
    • November 27, 2009, 10:15 am
    Reply
  • 1

    i think it was a book someone just wrote about jesus(new testament) and a book someone just began to write on their own beliefs and it just BLEW UP and everyone liked his idea... (old testament)

    • Stoy
    • November 27, 2009, 10:21 am
    Reply
  • 1

    Not neccessarily seconding you, I'm not a religeous person. But I would like to point out on the whole "big bang" thing. If you tie scripture into what we percive as time. God created the earth and up to man in 7 days... The earth's evolution happened in periods, each one being X millions of years... If you devide them by 7, each period took an exactly equal set of years up to what we believe is the evolution of man... Forgot the years and the math, I'll try and find that resource. Just a curious fact I found one day...

    Reply
  • 1

    Now, I don't have a problem with someone disagreeing with me, but I don't think I said anything offensive, so why give me a "-" on my post?

    • Ertrov
    • November 27, 2009, 6:45 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    I like it :)

    • Ertrov
    • November 27, 2009, 6:46 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    For one, the idea of everything coming from nothing. "Scientifically", that's impossible. Also, we haven't found any "missing links". Also, fossilized fish. Fish bones deteriorate in water, unless they are instantly buried. So why do we find fossilized fish all around the world at roughly the same level? Maybe a worldwide flood? Which would explain the extinction of the dinosaurs. If it rained for the first time, the sky would become permanently less moist, which some reptilian species couldn't adapt to. So don't say there is no evidence for intelligent design, because there is plenty. I just scratched the surface. But if you wish to elaborate, I'll consider your evidence without bias. Also, how is it impossible to be all-powerful, and all-knowing? Those aren't mutually exclusive.

    • Ertrov
    • November 27, 2009, 6:56 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    1. I don't see how that is any easier to believe than a creator. I'll go more into that if you wish.
    2. Many have been proven to be fake or just a coincidence.
    3. Evidence shows that there is no crater large enough to prove such a meteor existed.
    4. The complexity of everything down to it's atomic level shows the odds are for intelligent design. The odds of everything evolving are many many more than a trillion trillion times smaller than the odds of throwing all the separate components of a computer into a box and shaking it, and it becoming a computer.
    5. The reason they don't contradict each other is because we don't fully understand how God works. We don't know how he can be both, but we have to trust that he is. It's interesting that we believe it when a scientist tells us the earth is round, yet when God says something we don't understand, we assume it's false. (For the record, I do believe the earth is round) Our human intellect isn't capable of grasping the concept of God.

    • Ertrov
    • November 27, 2009, 7:44 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Great argument.

    Reply
  • 1

    I apologize that I don't have time to discuss this debate in its entirety at the moment, I'll try to later, but as to describing God, you're right, we can't. But we are commanded to praise His greatness to the best of our ability.

    • Ertrov
    • November 27, 2009, 9:12 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Thank you, Ghettoshen, for addressing this point. I agree, religion is unnecessary. I am not part of a religion. I do attend a Baptist Church as I still want to obey God's command to have fellowship with other believers, but I am not a Baptist. I am a follower of Christ. And Logos, it is necessary, because to not have a relationship with God would be ungrateful to Him for the gift of life. The least we can do s serve Him, and seek to know Him better.

    • Ertrov
    • November 27, 2009, 9:17 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Thank you, Ghettoshen. I love the debates on this site, they're very intelligent.

    • Ertrov
    • November 27, 2009, 9:18 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Alright. My points will of course remain above for you or anyone else to comment on.

    And I would respectfully disagree : ).

    Reply
  • 1

    so, due to our sin, god gave us a blind spot? He does indeed work in mysterious ways

    Reply
  • 1

    The least we can do in my mind is scrutinize the evidence for his existence or nonexistence. Thinking that, if he was truly there, he would have created a world in which we could find him.

    As it stands, it's not there, thus I give the Universe its well-earned respect for housing humanity.

    Reply
  • 1

    And because he created a world where we cannot find him, he gave every man a measure of faith. So we can believe and not see.

    Reply
  • 1

    Yet, the problem is that there is no way to know that. Why not Hinduism, Mormonism, Shintoism, Zoroastrianism, Scientology, or Pastafarianism for that matter. After all, if it's all faith, don't all of these have equal probability of being valid?

    Reply
  • 1

    They all do, it just depends on what you believe. More plainly spoken, you have to have faith in your faith.

    Reply
  • 1

    Alright. So, if you were born in India, you admit you would be Hindu (most likely)?

    Reply
  • 1

    Yes, most likely, and I would also believe that Hindu would be the right way to go. Just like I was born into a country with a Christian majority, and I am a Christian as a result. I believe that Christianity is the right way to go and that other religions are ignorant, if I was any other religion or atheist I would believe Christians were ignorant.

    Reply
  • 1

    Then how do you believe? If every religion would have persuaded you just as much, why is Christianity the only not ignorant religion? This shows to me that your faith is based on nothing... Simply geographical coincidence. Don't you agree that this is a very bad reason to make a foundational assumption about the Universe?

    Reply
  • 1

    No, my faith in God tells me that I am correct. This sounds very naive but thats how faith works, you believe and you don't stop believing until you have a very good reason to, and that reason has not come to me yet.

    Reply
  • 1

    Alright. Interesting.

    Do you take the Bible literally?

    Reply
  • 1

    Yes. All in context of course.

    Reply
  • 1

    Of course in context, nothing lacks context : ).

    As per good reason not too though, ignoring the many, many scientific objections (which you should definitely not), I think advocacy of slavery is a good reason to reject a source as morally sound:

    "However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way." (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

    There are many more passages in a similar vein.

    Reply
  • 1

    Slavery as Americans know it is not what it was in the Biblical Era. The Bible says to treat your slaves justly and fairly as shown in this passage.

    "Masters, be just and fair to your slaves. Remember that you also have a Master in heaven." (Colossians 4: 1 NLT)

    Reply
  • 1

    Well, That is a marathon of statements, so I Only am going to reply to one.(At least for right now), I find no need to go through everything because you will still either choose to believe the bible or not, regardless of the facts.

    Who was the father of Joseph, husband of Mary?
    (a) Jacob (Matthew 1:16)
    (b) Hell (Luke 3:23)

    Response: This does seem like a contradiction at first glance, however, you are not taking into consideration the Jewish laws at the time. Both Heli (Not Hell), and Jacob were the father of Joseph. If you read closely in Matthew 1:16 - notice it uses the word Begat, which means that he was the child's biological father. However, Mary was was married prior to that. Her first Husband was Heli. Heli had passed away making Mary a widow, and by Jewish law, the closest male family member on the mans side that is willing to take on the responsibility of taking care of the widow is to marry her. Now Jacob did this, being closely related, and Mary had a son with him named Joseph. Now Jacob fathered the Child, but legally, Heli is still the father. So although at first glance it seems as a contradiction, both verses are correct. :)

    Reply
  • 1

    I will give you one:

    Mutations: This is the driving force for evolution. Evolution cannot happen unless there are changes in the Genetic make-up of an organism. (AKA: Mutations) However, The vast majority of Mutations are harmful and usually kill off the organisms. How then, is life so successful as we see it today?

    Also, if we run strictly off of evolutionary teaching, then society would look completely different. We would not have organizations to help the poor and needy. This is because the stronger Humans would prevail, and look out for their own good, leaving the poor and weak to die off. In that mindset, What adolf Hitler did deserves the nobel prize for the speeding up the evolutionary process.

    Reply
  • 1

    But, keeping your logic, why do less than 5 of the rest of the names match up?

    Reply
  • 1

    Yet, if the Bible is the literal word of God, societal conception has no place in our interpretation.

    If, however, it is written by men and not the divine, and just a statement of philosophy, your answer is more than enough explanation.

    Reply
  • 1

    Hmmm....I don't really understand your question. Reword please.

    Reply
  • 1

    If I understood you correctly, your response to the Bible's acceptance of slavery was that, since biblical times were completely different, that it's good because the Bible at least says to treat (some) slaves well.

    My response to that is you cannot use societal circumstances to justify things in the Bible unless you agree that the Bible isn't the word of God. If the perfect creator of the Universe wrote the Bible, then what society thought at the time should have no bearing on what's in the Bible.

    If, however, the Bible was simply a collection of philosophical stories, then you can use societal circumstance to justify advocacy for slavery.

    Two options:
    1-Bible does not advocate slavery and was written by men
    2-Bible advocates slavery and is written by God

    Those are your possibilities.

    Reply
  • 1

    Honestly, That made no sense. Give me examples of beneficial mutations. Lets Not Forget such illness's as Cancer.... thats a mutation. :)

    Reply
  • 1

    1. The mutations necessary to progress a single photo-sensitive patch of tissue to a full-fledged eye.
    2. Development and improvement of wings in the avian population.
    3. Improvement of antibodies.
    4. The development of Nylonase.
    5. Sexual reproduction.
    6. Larger brain.
    7. Opposable thumbs.
    8. Inner ear liquid to guide balance.
    9. Self-healing processes.
    10. Fins for the aquatic population.

    And countless more. Now please answer my objections instead of ignoring them. Namely the first three paragraphs. Thanks.

    Reply
  • 1

    Umm... How are we supposed to answer them? They are just statements :) not queries. Are these for or against creationism?

    • Dannyl
    • December 15, 2009, 6:40 am
    Reply
  • 1

    To clarify: The above list was in response to Bobbifer's request for examples of beneficial mutation.

    The "objections" I wish to be answered are far above, in a former conversation Bobbifer and I were having.

    I am unquestionably against Creationism and its unscientific foundation : ).

    Sorry if I was confusing.

    Reply
  • 1

    Mutations is the ONLY way in biology that new alleles can enter into a population. Your giving examples of evolutionary processes. But Evolution does not take place during the lifetime of an individual. A mutation occurs when there is a change in the DNA and only take place during reproduction. Usually sexual reproduction as asexual has only one parent and makes replica's of itself. I want examples of beneficial mutations during reproduction considering, if this does not happen, then evolution in the since of macro evolution does not. I am not ignoring anything you have posted by the way. :)

    Reply
  • 1

    I repeat:
    1. The mutations necessary to progress a single photo-sensitive patch of tissue to a full-fledged eye.
    2. Development and improvement of wings in the avian population.
    3. Improvement of antibodies.
    4. The development of Nylonase.
    5. Sexual reproduction.
    6. Larger brain.
    7. Opposable thumbs.
    8. Inner ear liquid to guide balance.
    9. Self-healing processes.
    10. Fins for the aquatic population.

    All of the above are beneficial mutations that occur at the time of reproduction for individual organisms. I am fully aware that DNA does not mutate (in any kind of... normal circumstance) during the lifetime of an organism. I do not understand how my above list does not answer your query. These, above, are examples of mutations bringing new alleles into a population through a change in DNA that takes place during reproduction.

    For a more in-depth explanation of Nylonase specifically: http://ncse.com/cej/5/2/new-proteins-without-gods-help

    As to something else: Micro and Macro evolution are the exact same thing. The exact same process. It's either all or nothing in the evolution regard : ).

    Reply
  • 1

    Because I have a life.... (therefore, it will take me a while to have the time to go through all of these)

    • Ertrov
    • December 20, 2009, 2:09 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Yes, you have a life, but seem to be spending plenty of time on here. Why not make a post or two, even if it's not in response to the list of contradictions. There are many other points that need addressing if I'm not mistaken : ).

    Reply
  • 1

    1. We have no real idea about who wrote what books of the Bible.

    2. None of the writers seem to have been contemporaneous to the life of Jesus, giving them next to no credence regarding historicity.

    Reply
  • 1

    Fair. I'm curious: what moral lessons do you take from it? : ).

    Reply
  • 1

    Ah. Are there any moral lessons you take from the Bible that were originated by the Bible? Because the golden rule did not start from Jesus, and only appears very late in the Bible, contradicted by much of what is written beforehand.

    Reply
  • 1

    in ancient caves in mexico, there are geckos that were recorded over 500 years ago to have eyes, and many of them were living in and around the caves. Now, they have lost their eyes. Where their eyes used to be, their is now only sockets that have been sealed off with skin. Why? Because they completely receded into the cave, and it is so dark in the cave that they couldn't see so they lost the use of their eyes and eventually just lost their eyes.

    • cary139
    • December 24, 2009, 12:48 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Ah. I've gone ten times through : ).

    I just don't think it has many good moral lessons. So I was curious as to your take, that's all.

    Reply
  • 1

    Evolution is not fact, it is a theory. You seem big on proof, yet there is no proof that evolution is true. Only evidence.

    • Ertrov
    • December 24, 2009, 3:14 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    I must admit, that was funny, lol.

    • Ertrov
    • December 24, 2009, 3:15 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    That is the magic of internet land at work.

    • Ertrov
    • December 24, 2009, 3:16 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    WTF are you talking about. You are truely stupid.

    Reply
  • 1

    I believe it's a nod to his name. GangsterMonkey. He's saying he knows the secret scams of the mafia everywhere he can.

    Am I right?

    Reply
  • 1

    Well he's a retard.

    Reply
  • 1

    I wouldn't go that far, or use that derogatory of a description. Especially when it's derogatory to a third party...

    I would just say it's confusing to many, and sometimes it's hard to tell the wackjobs from the jokesters in life.

    Reply
  • 1

    Yeah you prolly are right but I just don't like how we were having a mature intelligent debate and he inrerupted with his unessecary jabber.

    Reply
  • 1

    Can't a person believe in a mix of both?

    Reply
  • 1

    Well, not Young Earth Creationism and something else, which is what is being discussed.

    But if you reject a literal biblical interpretation, and treat the 6 days as... well... not 6 days, you could reconcile the two. Yes : ).

    Reply
  • 1

    Agreed. But I also don't like derogatory terms. He's gone now though! : P.

    Reply
  • 1

    One thing to keep mind is that the old testament is primarily just for prophecy. At least where I go to church.

    Reply
  • 1

    @ dannyl I was only stating my beliefs.

    Reply
  • 1

    Got'cha.

    Reply
  • 1

    But he's right. They were working with the Martians and Elvis in Atlantis.

    • Ertrov
    • January 17, 2010, 7:35 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    I can just say I believe in a Heaven.

    Some people can be overly-religious... when my friend said he was going to be Buddhist, and still in a Catholic private school, my friends tried to convince him otherwise. When he walked up to them, they would start praying, thinking that it would help somehow. I ended up apologizing for them, and then left them... I had to explain to them that they really can't change someones mind by force, and that they should have just accepted it.

    Don't be overly religious. I believe in a Heaven, nothing else.

    • Kojira
    • January 17, 2010, 7:37 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Don't forget about the Invisible Pink Unicorn!

    Reply
  • 1

    What do you mean nothing else? I'm curious. How about in Yahweh? Hell? Personal salvation? Jesus? I would like to hear more : ).

    Reply
  • 1

    The discussion was suppose to be about the Bible. Everyone knows there is a Bible and in reading these different ideas they seem to be discussing God the existence of God and the possibility that God created everything. To believe in God doesn't mean that a person must be able to explain God for God is a matter of faith. We all have been given certain gifts and certain freedoms. Governments, Religions, Educational institutions and other powers that exist in this world will restrict our freedoms and oppose the idea of a God that sets us free to create and enjoy life, free from this world. There are many that deny God that think that is an educated view or think that denying God show other that they are enlightened when nothing could be further from the truth. Science has so many questions that are unanswered. The world is looking for answers and proof for the String theory and parallel universes existing in the same location as ours at a different time with so many dimensions that it confuses most people to try and comprehend how any one thing can exists in more than one location at different times or at the same time. So those that believe and have faith in God should answer those that ask for proof of God by telling then to give the scientist a chance the truth will eventually be known but for now we only live with faith in God. And for those that don't believe they can call me crazy but I have talked and prayed to God for most of my 70 years and as I sit here tonight I know that the Universe is not some accident that started with a big bang billions of years ago .. This is not to say that there was not a big bang but that there is some planning behind all the theories that the scientists are trying to put together and that force and planning was of God's doing.

    Reply
  • 1

    From what I could understand....

    "This discussion was supposed to be about the Bible, but you guys talked about God. I believe in God, science doesn't have all of the answers, and we have freedom of religion."

    Alright, valid. However, the discussion includes the veracity of the text, which is ultimately based upon the foundational question: "Is there a God?" Thus our discussion is easily under the correct categorical umbrella.

    Now, where is the design you see? Can we have a specific example?

    Reply
  • 1

    Hahaha

    Reply
  • 1

    As I said before in another discussion, I have a hard time believing in the bible...or more specifically the King James Bible. As I can't read Hebrew or Greek this is the only bible I know. It was translated from its original language and, if you have done any study in any language, you will see there sometime there is no direct translation of a word or phrase into English (or vice-versa). There were gospels that were left out.

    I believe in a higher power and that we reincarnate. I've experienced far too many things in my life not to believe. Beyond those two beliefs, I know nothing of god or purpose. I grew up in a southern baptist church that left something in me wanting. I live by the rule to do unto others, love and cherish every soul because we are all connect...and I believe that deep down we all feel it (the connection). And not just humans, but we are connected to every fiber of this earth...this universe. I think religion is a kind of social posturing and that all paths lead to god, in that religion at one level teaches us to behave in an unnatural way but the fundamentals are speaking of one god.

    Reply
  • 1

    I see your belief system and like it much more than many others I see. However, my beliefs are based on empiricism in this genre. Do you have anything by way of observation to support it?

    Reply
  • 1

    Are you talking about my observations that led me to believe in reincarnation and that we are all connected?

    Reply
  • 1

    Sure, if that's the belief you would like to focus on : ).

    Reply
  • 1

    Or we can figure it out now! Through the input of empirical evidence into the scientific method of course.

    The output?

    None! Because there is no evidence to input in favor of divine existence. Woooo!

    Reply
  • 1

    The Idea of a holy book itself is flawed.

    • DocSir
    • January 22, 2010, 8:40 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Science makes no comment on the supernatural. Can't prove it's not real, can't prove it is real.

    Reply
  • 1

    Exactly. It also makes no comment on the Invisible Pink Unicorn. Or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Or Russell's Teapot. To say that because it is not proven either way, God exists, is preposterous. See below, a quote from Bertrand Russell.

    "If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time."

    That being established, science cannot make comments on the supernatural itself, but can make comments on specific supernatural claims by testing their effect on the natural world.

    Ex.
    Supernatural claim: YWHW is a God who caused a worldwide flood 4,000 years ago, and created the world around 6,000 years ago.
    Scientific test: Since there was not a worldwide flood, and the Earth is MUCH older than that, this specific claim about YWHW must be incorrect. Thus, a God defined is this way does not exist.

    Reply
  • 1

    YES! A Pastafarian! : ). +1.

    Reply
  • 1

    With all my beliefs, it is a mixture of the things I have been taught or learned about that fit with my own observations and experiences. There is also some psychological theories that kind of twist in too. Carl Jung and his theories in synchronicity. What I'm saying is my belief system may fit what I want it to fit and maybe that is all religion is. These experiences that I've had, some of them have been too much to even believe that they are real and where Carl Jung's theory fits in is in my ever present struggle between what I feel and what I know...am I just manifesting the reality that I want that helps me get through every day, or is it something far beyond me.

    The one specific experience that changed the very foundation of my belief system is far too personal and I'm sorry but I can not share it. It led to the upheaval of my entire life.

    Reply
  • 1

    I really have no idea what a Pastafarian is, but whatever, sounds good!

    • Kojira
    • January 25, 2010, 5:59 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Spaghetti, Pasta, Rastafarian, Pastafarian.

    • Dannyl
    • January 25, 2010, 11:10 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    God is the one and tru none shoud question this but we do.
    i like look at science as way for people to try and understand gods working and making.

    • gw2250
    • January 26, 2010, 5:54 am
    Reply
  • 1

    Ahh, I never knew what that was called. I just knew the Flying Spaghetti Monster, haha.

    • Kojira
    • January 26, 2010, 3:30 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    haha, woot.

    Reply
  • 1

    I agree but your comment is an oxymoron. Sorry if I spelled it wrong and sorry if that's the wrong word.

    Reply
  • 1

    Perhaps it is a pink unicorn with the ability to turn invisible?

    • Dannyl
    • January 28, 2010, 1:46 am
    Reply
  • 1

    Wow, going off topic

    • Dannyl
    • January 28, 2010, 1:46 am
    Reply
  • 1

    Christianity is the only religion that has a God that actually states "I am the one true God." If you can find something else to disprove my statement, please show me.

    This idea is present in pretty much all monotheistic religions I believe? Essentially the Abrahamic religions. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Aside from that, I believe you are correct. Except for some (very interesting) strands of Hinduism, stating that all of the different figures are just representations of a single God, the Creator. But even then it gets dicy.

    : D
    - Logos385 January 27, 2011, 1:28 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    many call themselvs christians but their actions prove that they are not so i do not call myself a christian but a follower of Jesus Christ

    • Kodi93
    • January 27, 2011, 4:52 am
    Interesting, I've heard this distinction only a few times. I'm curious, if you wouldn't mind answering a query or two?

    Being a Follower of Christ, how do you feel about the Old Testament, in light of verses like Luke 16:17-18?

    If you'd rather not discuss, I more than understand. Thanks.
    - Logos385 January 27, 2011, 1:29 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    I believe the bible should only be used as a minor stand point. There is many things in the bible that are misleading and humans try to look their best in front of someone of higher power. Some Christians I know love the person hate the sin. They do this because god says "Love another how I have loved you". Sadly many Christians don't understand that it means, and believe that god only loved Christians when he actually loved everyone. No matter what the believe in. This causes a lot of Christians to think that god hates some humans for who they are, or that they're demons on earth. There's logic flaws that I believe are attacked way to often and Christians no longer decide to listen to them. in my mind if you're going to go with a single point in religion you need to be a saint and fallow them all the best you can; if you're not a saint you can just fuck yourself really cause who are you to tell someones going to hell when you're too. Then not to mention Christians sometimes believe that they can clam something has hell deserving or not (such has metal and rock I honestly have never seen anything about loud music in the bible). Also my aunt and her dauther are catholic(I'm atheist of coarse) and my cousin is barely 14 and has a sex addiction and has had fuck buddies. her mom buys her birth control so she doesn't get pregnant. This breaks three laws in the bible, so by logic they should go to hell. This also points out another fact. Sometimes God isn't a good thing, cause they'll just repent and then do everything over again. Which shows that the bible leads an inability to be responsible for what you've done. This can cause the bible to actually be a bad influence. I don't have a god but I have heard that I am better then most Christians. Clearly I have broken less sins then my very own catholic cousin.
    Another thing is that most Christians believe that there is minor sins and major sins. (I was told this by a christian them self) sin is sin no difference in the punishment, so saying a lie is just has bad has killing someone. Most Christians decide (yet again) to make some sins minor because they're ether so easy to commit or that everyone does them. Which is yet again not being responsible. All i have to say now is come at me

    Reply
  • 0

    The Bible is the Holy Word of the omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent creator of all that was, is, and ever will be. It is absolute truth. It is God-breathed. It is God-inspired. And it shows the true story of the sacrifice of God to save mankind. There is no way to Heaven outside of Christ. The God of the Bible is the only God, and he is a jealous God. He is an angry God, a wrathful God, whose divine glory demands justice. But He is also a forgiving God, a friend to His creation, and loves all of mankind. So he chose justice through His Son's death, so that we might be forgiven. Amen.

    • Ertrov
    • November 26, 2009, 8:46 pm
    i love people that make religion and the bible look stupid... XD
    - TryThat January 28, 2011, 2:19 pm
    Reply
  • 0

    Care to elaborate why you hold this opinion?

    • Ertrov
    • November 26, 2009, 8:47 pm
    Reply
  • 0

    Interesting concept

    • Ertrov
    • November 27, 2009, 6:44 pm
    Reply
  • 0

    Seriously? Who keeps taking points off my posts? This is a debate, in which all views are welcome. It's not like I said something mean....

    • Ertrov
    • November 27, 2009, 6:48 pm
    Reply
  • 0

    Just becuase the bible is imperfect maybe those mistakes were made by humans. After all humans are imperfect and we were only the vessels to proclaim gods word. I'm sure that there are many mistakes in the bible. But they are not gods mistakes, they are human errors. But I beleive that the basics of of are accurate.

    Reply
  • 0

    the bible makes good TP

    Lulz.
    - Logos385 October 30, 2010, 10:00 pm
    Reply
  • 0

    There is one flaw in religion: GOD

    • TryThat
    • January 27, 2011, 7:10 am
    DOG
    - Logos385 January 27, 2011, 1:30 pm
    Reply
  • -1

    First of all, everything you read on the internet isn't always true. Secondly, evolution makes no sense, and is discredited by a large number of scientists. Explain the human eye? Or the giraffe's blood system. There are countless things that defy evolution. If you really study it past the propaganda taught in high school textbooks, you'll discover it is a theory full of holes. Even the odds of the big bang are unimaginably small. To the point of bordering on impossibility. And if you add in the question, "Where did the gasses that caused the big bang come from?" You get no answer whatsoever from the "scientific" community. Whether you believe in God's Word or not, intelligent design is far more scientifically feasible than evolution. Also, I challenge you to come up with a contradiction in the Bible I can't disprove. If it weren't God-inspired, how did a book written over thousands of years never contradict itself? And it has never been proven to be false in any way, either.

    • Ertrov
    • November 26, 2009, 9:10 pm
    Reply
  • -1

    Evolution is no different. There is actually more archeological evidence for the Bible's accuracy than for evolution.

    • Ertrov
    • November 27, 2009, 6:43 pm
    Reply
  • -1

    Cant prove Evolution Either. Both are Faith Based beliefs. Its up to you to logically decide for yourself which one you think the evidence best points towards.

    Oh and by the way, making fun of something by making Comments like "He is an imaginary Friend for adults" Does not prove your case.

    So.... Lets just stick with the evidence, your opinion doesnt matter.

    Reply
  • -1

    Still working, for the record.

    • Ertrov
    • January 17, 2010, 7:32 pm
    Reply
  • -1

    The Bible is a door stop

    Reply
Related Posts