SATAN WANTS YOUR CHILDREN

Author Topic: SATAN WANTS YOUR CHILDREN  (Read 29383 times)

I'll incite the point that I have made many times before. We have shown how almost impossibly improbable complexity can be arrived at through gradual stages of selection and random mutation.

Alright. I can agree with this.

God, being the creator of all that exists, is undoubtedly more complex than all that exists. This complexity is so improbable that the only rational way that he could exist was if he was the end result of random change influenced by a form of selection and therefore was not in existence since the beginning of everything. This is why I bring up the notion that God is insanely improbable.

It is said God just does exist, he really wasn't ever made. He always will and always has. (At least this is my take on God.)

A counterpoint to this argument that I just thought of invokes the anthropic principle. We may be here pondering God's existence only because this insanely improbable occurrence happened. This is a weak argument, though, because the same can be said about why we exist.

You could also take the fact that science exists as a counterpoint to that argument. We are naturally curious, which led to religion. Since we are naturally curious, however, once we found a better way to satisfy our curiosity (science) that way was chosen to be the norm. This would mean that religion is no more than an outdated way to explain the previously unexplainable.



Yeah I can't argue with all that. After all you didn't even skim through my post from the looks of it, let alone attempt to understand any of it. But this really REALLY did get to me:

Quote
Yes, you made a pretty decent argument in the case, but with what I know about sciences, I have also come up with counter arguments that can make sense if people cared to take the time to theorize, philosophize, and keep an open mind about the possibilities instead of immediately dismissing them because it's religious. It's almost like it's a thing people fear.

You know nothing about sciences, you can't even grasp what Open Mindedness is let alone what goes into scientific theories. It isn't the voluntary relinquishing of your mind to ANY idea floating out there, that's not open mindedness that's just being someone's bitch. Saying we fear religion or god is excruciatingly ironic, seeing as we first considered him and then dismissed him as highly improbable, not even considering religious implications. If we feared religion, feared Hell, feared godly omnipotence, we would have no choice but to conform to religion as it would be an active threat to our lives. We would be controlled by fear of the thing we would worship like so many others.

Scientists do not fear Science, if they do they are in the wrong loving career path. Scientists embrace discovery and novel ideas with a critical open mind. You fear science, and you are not fit to think critically about the sciences. You fali to dismiss god being an improbability even when rebuked with the very characteristics he is appraised of having, all being shown as irrationalities, therefore you are the one who is close minded.

Scientists WILL pour sweat and blood into their search for answers, they can back up their claims with more evidence then you can even fathom ("HUH??!?!?"), the forget do you even do? You can't even be bothered reading a few paragraphs. I'm done, have fun being confused forever, forget if I care anymore.

The main problem I have with the way believers approach science is that they make an assumption and then seek evidence for it. This breaks the scientific method, and is yet another way religion has taken a toll on society.


The main problem I have with the way believers approach science is that they make an assumption and then seek evidence for it. This breaks the scientific method, and is yet another way religion has taken a toll on society.

No that's the first steps in a correct approach to solving any problem. The issue arises in that religion assumptions are eternal, while scientific assumptions are subject to change upon the status of the evidence. You could say Religious groups make assumptions and refute evidence.

This thread has gone from laughing at a dumb website to a firefight.

Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots (Komani, PS3)
6.12.2008: (Note: I have not played this game since it is rated "M" and isn't allowed on the Fellowship U campus, so I am basing this mini-review on Secular media reports.) In Metal Gear Solid 4, you play the role of Snake, a soldier who uses stealth to sneak around a battlefield on a mission to steal guns from the Patriots (and to choke people from behind). As his name implies, Snake is actually a symbolic agent of Satan, sent into the world to finish what he started in the Garden. Evidence of this symbolism can be seen by Snake's use of an Apple iPod throughout the game (Apple is a notorious promoter of Darwinism and counter-culture). Also, Meryl, who guides Snake via a disembodied voice, uses an Apple Macintosh computer (I think Meryl is supposed to represent Satan himself, but all the symbolism is very confusing since it was written by a Japanese guy). This game promotes drug use (Snake is addicted to cigarettes and the HDD installation process features an 8-minute video of Snake teaching players how to smoke), eugenics through human cloning (Snake was the product of a project to clone "super soldiers"), disrespect of Authority (Snake's main enemy in the game are the Patriots, who represent the Christian founders of our nation), and Materialistic Determinacy with an absence of Free Will (every game in the MGS series is a remake of the first, only with a different Snake clone, the theory being that by putting the clones through the same missions, they will develop into the same person). MGS4 was designed to train those who will be left behind after the Rapture to serve in the Antichrist's military forces. As such, it has no value for the Christian gamer, who is among the Elect and won't have to deal with that, but it may help the unsaved to know the tactics they will be up against in a post-Rapture world should they choose to join the fight against the Antichrist and secure themselves a place among the Sheep when Christ returns. Therefore, I am giving it ONE CROSS for this slight benefit. †

No that's the first steps in a correct approach to solving any problem. The issue arises in that religion assumptions are eternal, while scientific assumptions are subject to change upon the status of the evidence. You could say Religious groups make assumptions and refute evidence.

No, you make a hypothesis, test it, and draw a conclusion. You then create a theory based on the evidence, which is a type of assumption. The main point I am making is that they go about the scientific method in reverse. You do not make a theory and then find the evidence for it.

Satan fuels your rock

Satan fuels your rock

I read that last word wrong.

For future reference, r =/= c.



I love this website, it is now my homepage since JESUS IS L33T3R THAN NEO :O!!!

Looks like even Jesus is a 'Tough guy'.

http://objectiveministries.org/

/headdesk

I think that they're being too damn paranoid.
I could really care less what the Church thinks.

Church =/= State

And about the bible thing?
I've got real problems to worry about, same with the paranormal. If it's true, fine. Until proof, I've got my future to worry about, not "If" type questions or things beyond our understanding.