|
07-02-2008, 12:57 PM | #1 |
Elf Lady
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In the lands where mountains are but a fairytale
Posts: 8,588
|
Theology IV
Fourth thread, and the debate can continue.
The topic, as before, is religion. Original thread starter was Ruinel. The previous threads were Real debate thread for religion, Theological opinions, part II and Theology III. Let us enjoy some more polite exchanging of thoughts on religion here
__________________
Love always, deeply and true ★ Friends are those rare people who ask how we are and then wait to hear the answer. ★ Friendship is sharing openly, laughing often, trusting always, caring deeply.
...The Earth laughs in flowers ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson, "Hamatreya"... |
07-02-2008, 04:09 PM | #2 | ||
Co-President of Entmoot
Super Moderator Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 8,397
|
Don't forget Rian's "Why you believe what you believe" thread, which does not appear to exist anymore.
I've closed the old thread. Let me know if you want any posts from that thread moved over here.
__________________
"I can add some more, if you'd like it. Calling your Chief Names, Wishing to Punch his Pimply Face, and Thinking you Shirriffs look a lot of Tom-fools." - Sam Gamgee, p. 340, Return of the King Quote:
Quote:
|
||
07-02-2008, 04:20 PM | #3 |
Elven Warrior
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: in the one town with that weird name that i can;t seem to think of...*luaghes* but its a funny name!
Posts: 238
|
so Chap you wanted a few verse here yeah go....theres a verity.
mat. 12:46-50 and if i knew where to look I'd give you more but i usually just stuble on things. The reason Jesus is not stated in the "for all have sinned..." is because it says over and over in the bible that He has not sinned so why would they need to say it again. You keep on coming back to Adam and eve but they were not born they were created from the dirt and breath of life they were the first to sin so of course they did not have original sin as you call it for they were where it started. Mary I really don't know how to explain this anymore I've been clear with this and you must open your eyes Bro she was great yes, Mother of Jesus yes mother of the God head itself no because the God head was allready made and if Jesus did not have to be born to be human then she wouldn't have been in the picture...maybe not sure...but He was told to be born to a virgin of the david blood line so Mary fit both and found favor in the eyes of God and was chosen to have our savior. She was not sinless bro she was human and I don't mean both human and God like Jesus and she had a birth unlike Adam and eve that had sin in the birth....theres no more I can say bro you ether believe it or not thus not making it any less true..... as for prying to Mary why? the only way to God is through Jesus not Mary and that is said many times in the bible over and over.The ghosts (can't spell the other word) you are showing us, how do you know its real? Did you see close up how do you know it was not a illusion made by human or Satan for that matter.....sorry Bro I see no reason in Mary to come and walk around and float....do you honestly see a reason for God to have that happen? God does not do things to show off and thats what I think that was so I do not think that is the work of God.
__________________
One Love, One God, One Way! -Me- Do you trust me? I can show you the world -Aladdin- If home is where the heart is, then my home is where you are! -Relient K, I'm taking you with me- |
07-02-2008, 06:47 PM | #4 | ||||||||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
Quote:
The idea that He isn't mentioned only because his sinlessness is referred to in other parts of the Bible is one possibility, but there could be plenty of other reasons. For instance, it could be (similarly) that His perfection was broadly accepted by the early Christians, so they didn't bother mentioning it. And it's possible Mary's perfection was likewise broadly accepted and so not mentioned for the same reason. Or maybe they just purposely were making a generally true statement and weren't bothering with exceptions to the rule. For instance, Jesus said sometimes, "whoever believes and is baptized will be saved." Does that mean that no one who isn't baptized will be saved? No . . . there are exceptions. There are many other passages where it makes broad statements, but there are exceptions it doesn't mention, because it's just talking about the general truth, not every single detail. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The entire Protestant belief system on Mary being sinful is one interpretation of the Bible, but interpretations coming to the opposite conclusion make just as much sense in view of what the Bible says on the matter. The Protestant perspective here is really personal opinion and tradition dating back five hundred years or so. Since the Bible doesn't have much to say on the matter, and we are in the realm of human traditions, why go with the tradition dating back only 500 or so years rather than the one dating 2,000 years back, to the very dawn of Christianity? If the early Christians, those who knew the apostles and were their friends and companions, and their successors, all the original teachers of Christianity, if they believed that Mary was sinless, doesn't it make sense to pay more attention to their view than to views invented over a thousand years later? Because they were closer to the events that had happened. They knew more about Mary, because she had passed away more recently. Quote:
Quote:
Unlikely. The apparition resulted in vast numbers of people converting to Christianity. That doesn't seem like something the Devil would find useful. Quote:
The Copts have given an explanation too- I don't know exactly what it is, as I haven't researched that point. And if it doesn't seem like God because it's too big a display of power, I can mention all kinds of incidents in the Bible where God unleashed power in a public display. This falls right in line with those. I think I'll add at this point that the Early Church really did see Mary as sinless. Their writings call her the "second Eve," repeatedly, and in the 4th century there are writings calling her completely pure and "spotless," "immaculate." That dates from very, very early in Church history. Not to mention that the glorious image of Mary in Revelation 12 comes straight from the Bible. As Gwaimir pointed out, if the child who was snatched up to be with God and who would rule the nations with an iron scepter was Jesus (and virtually all Protestants agree that that's true), then the one who gave birth to the Christ-child in the vision would logically be his mother. The Messianic community or the Church are alternate explanations that also work, but interpreted literally, it would refer to his physical mother, Mary.
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." Last edited by Lief Erikson : 07-02-2008 at 06:54 PM. |
||||||||||
07-02-2008, 07:06 PM | #5 |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
What's more, who are those who are his mother and brothers? Those who hear the Word of God and obey it. Sounds like, "Behold the handmaiden of the Lord; be it done unto me according to thy word." By that definition, sure SOUNDS like she's his mother....
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
07-02-2008, 07:35 PM | #6 | |||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
Guys, you might like this article about the Early Church's claims about Mary. You'd like it anyway, Gwaimir . And you might at least find it interesting, Azrael! It has several interesting sections of available information from the beliefs of the first two centuries of Christians about the Virgin Mary. Here's how it begins (I didn't know this part, so I found it particularly interesting: Quote:
Quote:
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." Last edited by Lief Erikson : 07-02-2008 at 07:36 PM. |
|||
07-02-2008, 08:14 PM | #7 |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
Indeed. The very earliest Fathers, really, who made any attempt at a whole account of Christianity, proclaim the glorious mystery of the Virgin. I think perhaps an even better argument for Marian devotion is the effects it has on a civilization, as mentioned in your article.
Also, there is this: We have a Father in God, but without the Virgin, where is a mother? What family is complete lacking that?
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
07-02-2008, 04:30 PM | #8 | ||||
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
Quote:
And it came about that Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. And she cried out with a loud voice, and said, "Blessed among women are you, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And how has it happened to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" [Luke 1:41-43; NASB] I am assuming that "my Lord" in this context refers to Christ; if it does, then the Holy Spirit has spoken, the case is closed. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
||||
07-23-2008, 04:48 PM | #9 |
The Black Númenórean
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 6,773
|
All this fuss ... because he kept a cookie?
Okay, this is just plain stupid. I get the whole symbolism thing to some degree (Without it religion is pointless)... But it's a cookie he stuffed in his mouth. WTF does it matter what he does with it? He wanted to show it to his friend. Who are all these grabby people who kept waylaying him? And what's more, I don't care what religion you are, but if yer getting publicly funded, you sure as hell shouldnt be so fussy on the public dime. Fund your own self thank you very much. It's a cookie. It's kinda sad, but I laughed so hard at the end with the whole 'God will punish us if we don't return the cookie! Quick! We must pray!' Hehehe he is hold a cookie "Hostage" Oh this is great.
__________________
Your children are not your children. They are the sons and daughters of Life's longing for itself. They come through you but not from you, And though they are with you yet they belong not to you. You may give them your love but not your thoughts, For they have their own thoughts. You may house their bodies but not their souls, For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow, which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams. |
07-23-2008, 06:00 PM | #10 | |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
Actually, it was because of Bill Donohue's response to it. That arrogant, self-righteous, belligerent twat is always just looking to pick a fight, and now he got one with consequences he would never have expected. I know that I'm going to write to Bill Donohue and make it very clear that it's because of his puffed-up and aggressive attitudes that this whole thing happened. If he's a decent Catholic, instead of just a complacent conservative who uses Catholicism as a background for his own self-assurance (like so many frickin' people are), he'll care about that.
Quote:
Try to keep in mind, Catholics don't believe in symbolism. We believe that the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ. To a Catholic, he didn't take a symbol with him, he took our God. It's not some dull Protestant memorialist concept. Catholics believe in the Eucharist as a mystic sacrifice, a consecration, God becoming bread and offering himself under that aspect to us for our salvation. And the boy just had a temper tantrum and walked out with him. That is just wrong. Now, that said, I think a lot of people did over-react. People threw words like desecration a lot, which as far as I can tell doesn't bear on this situation. What the college student did was wrong, but people got too hysterical about it. But since you don't object at all to the University of Minnesota professors seething hatred of Catholicism, and out and out statements that he will publically "with much pomp and circumstance" desecrate the single most sacred object in the Catholic religion, I take it you think there is nothing objectionable to him wilfully, maliciously, and intentionally performing the action which is the single most offensive and blasphemous , for NO REASON other than to wilfully, maliciously, and intentionally perform the single , you find no problem with that. Nope; desecration, absolute mean-spirited spite, and incredible insult all for no reason other than their own sake is all perfectly okay. It's just getting offended at some undergrad brat's pouting theft of your God that's problematic. I'm surprised at you, though, Nurv. Being a Christian, I would think this would mean more to you than a mild and empty "I don't think people should purposefully disrespect each others' religions". I would think it would matter to you the absolute disrespect for the Christian faith exhibited here. I would think you would object more to this man's absolute hatred, contempt, and intentional baiting of Christians than to people getting mad about it. I seem to recall you being a good deal more upset about the Danish cartoons than a lip service "I don't think people should purposely disrespect each others' religions". If anyone's interested, here's the guy's blog. There should be juicy pictures of Eucharistic desecration tomorrow.
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle Last edited by Gwaimir Windgem : 07-23-2008 at 06:47 PM. |
|
07-23-2008, 07:42 PM | #11 | |
The Black Númenórean
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 6,773
|
Quote:
When did I say that? I only read about the cookie abduction; I didn't go to the other link. Personally, I'm not really one for the catholic religion, but I'll tolerate it like I do every other religion. I'm not one for spouting seething hate though. So, what did this other fellow do?
__________________
Your children are not your children. They are the sons and daughters of Life's longing for itself. They come through you but not from you, And though they are with you yet they belong not to you. You may give them your love but not your thoughts, For they have their own thoughts. You may house their bodies but not their souls, For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow, which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams. |
|
07-23-2008, 07:55 PM | #12 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,535
|
But is the Eucharist sacred to everyone because it's sacred to some?
I know people who worship trees...is it a matter of religious tolerance so now no one makes a pencil out of one? It looks like a tempest in a teapot to me, but we're low church from waaaaaay back.
__________________
That would be the swirling vortex to another world. Cool. I want one. TMNT No, I'm not emo. I just have a really poor sense of direction. (Thanks to katya for this quote) This is the best news story EVER! http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26087293/ “Often my haste is a mistake, but I live with the consequences without complaint.”...John McCain "I shall go back. And I shall find that therapist. And I shall whack her upside her head with my blanket full of rocks." ...Louisa May |
07-23-2008, 08:04 PM | #13 |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
He posted an advertisement on his blog, asking for people to send or bring consecrated hosts to him, in order that he might "treat it with profound disrespect and heinous cracker abuse, all photographed and presented here on the web". Someone sent him the hosts, and apparently a Koran, as well, and today he wrote, "Yes, the sad little cracker has met its undignified end, so stop pestering me. The cracker, the koran, and another surprise entry have been violated and are gone."
So, he deliberately desecrated a consecrated Host (to Catholics, Orthodox, Lutherans, and most Anglicans the Body of Christ), and a Koran (the Word of God to Muslims), along with a third unidentified object, presumably of religious significance.
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
07-23-2008, 08:08 PM | #14 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,535
|
Quote:
__________________
That would be the swirling vortex to another world. Cool. I want one. TMNT No, I'm not emo. I just have a really poor sense of direction. (Thanks to katya for this quote) This is the best news story EVER! http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26087293/ “Often my haste is a mistake, but I live with the consequences without complaint.”...John McCain "I shall go back. And I shall find that therapist. And I shall whack her upside her head with my blanket full of rocks." ...Louisa May |
|
09-08-2008, 04:49 PM | #15 |
The Ñoldóran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Mishawaka, IN
Posts: 2,050
|
If you believe in God (or whatever particular diety you like) and the principles of the Bible (or whatever particular holy book you like), then I see very little 'illogical' about theism. It fits nicely into its little world, once that faith exists. Unless I'm misunderstanding totally (which is completely possible), I think Gwaimir is referring to this faith, to the acceptance of the core principles of the religion.
And I think, in that case, that he's right. He's also right that everyone, religious or not, makes presuppositions. Nobody bases everything on empirical knowledge and experience. Just isn't possible. And I also think that writing off all of 'theism' as social control is a bit of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There are some religions I like more than others (and I'm not going to give details on which ones), but there are certainly some that are very individualistic and have nothing to do with social control at all. I consider myself to be very spiritual, but I haven't been to 'church' or practiced my religion with others in nearly ten years. How exactly is that 'social control'? My religion is a very personal thing between myself and my dieties, and what I get out of it is a very personal thing as well. Nobody's controlling me except myself.
__________________
Then Celegorm no more would stay, And Curufin smiled and turned away... ~The Lay of Leithian |
09-08-2008, 05:49 PM | #16 | |
Entmoot Minister of Foreign Affairs
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 2,145
|
Quote:
Core principles, or should we say, the moral principles, that are supposed to lay a foundation for the Christian faith, contradict one another. They have shown themselves to not be absolute, but subject to wide variations in understanding and priority. And if moral principles are contradictory they are of little use. Likewise, they provide little truth. If you base your moral principles on your faith, and that your moral principles require that you do have that particular faith, then moral principles will be defined, viewed and practiced differently according to different faiths. What you get is a myriad of moral principles, often in variation with one another; the New Testament Ten Commandments versus Sharia Law. And then we have the principles defined under the United Nations' Human Rights Charter. They require no faith. They only require that you exist.
__________________
"Well, thief! I smell you and I feel your air. I hear your breath. Come along! Help yourself again, there is plenty and to spare." |
|
09-09-2008, 01:33 AM | #17 | |||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
Do you believe you exist? You can't know you even exist. You can't know that you have hands and eyes and a brain- you might live in the Matrix . You live in faith that you aren't in the Matrix, but you don't know you don't. You don't know you aren't insane or wandering in a hallucinatory dream. You don't think you are and the evidence around you may strongly suggest you're not insane. How do you know you're sitting in front of a computer right now? Your eyes might be playing tricks on you. You have faith in your eyes. You have faith in your eyes, in the functionality of your brain, in your hands and arms, in your legs. You don't have faith that they'll always work the way they do now, but you trust that they work pretty well at the moment, that you aren't completely deluded as to their capacity. You don't believe you're in a bank handing out thousand dollar check notes right now, and your mind is playing tricks on you. Why don't you think that? Faith, based on evidence, probably. Everything is faith, when it comes down to it. The world is built on faith. Your 21st century Western civilization ethical opinions of the Human Rights Charter are opinions, faith. They're beliefs about justice and right or wrong, beliefs other people in the world disagree with. It's impossible to avoid living without faith. Everything is faith outside of mathematics. Not BLIND faith, hopefully. Seeing faith. Faith that is an opinion based upon available evidence. Come to think of it, even math can be based upon "postulates," and those are all about faith. Don't delude yourself into thinking you've escaped faith. Everyone lives in a world consumed by faith. Everyone, including you, is engulfed in it. Religion is one facet of the faith that fills the world, a belief system that in the case of several major religions is supported by evidence. Atheism is one of the most notable belief systems for the fact that it has zero evidence supporting it. It is the blindest blind faith outlook I've ever seen, because all its adherents have only their own opinions that there is no God, and not the tiniest shred of evidence that there is no God. They never can have any evidence at all that there is no God, because it is impossible to prove a negative. You were saying earlier, Coffeehouse, that we assume something is not true unless it's proven to be true. And thus, since God is not proven to be real (in your opinion), we can validly assume He's not real. That isn't how science functions. It does not declare something to exist without evidence, but neither does it declare something to not exist without evidence. If a hypothesis extends beyond the realm of available evidence, scientists don't reject it automatically. They accept it as a possibility until it's shown by evidence to be an impossibility. Otherwise they would in a small minded fashion reject out of hand all new hypotheses that came up, rather than seeking more evidence to test them and find out if they are in fact real. The scientists try not to assume either a negative or a positive. They collect data and find out what the data show. Does it indicate that something exists? Then they'll say it looks like it exists. Does it indicate that that thing does not exist? Then they'll say it looks like it does not exist. If they have no evidence for or against the existence of something, they'll say, "we don't have any way of knowing." They won't jump beyond their available evidence to say, "it does not exist." That would be absurdly small minded. For this reason, they won't say God does not exist, if they don't have any evidence for His existence. They'll say that in the absence of affirmative or negative evidence, "We don't have any way of knowing." To jump to a conclusion that He exists or does not exist without evidence would be a blind faith jump, something out of accord with science and based on pure conjecture. That's the absurdity of atheism. Just like the religious convictions of some people, it's 100% blind faith. No evidence whatsoever supports it. Any religion with any evidence at all, no matter how feeble, has more than Atheism has or ever can have. Anything makes more sense, because Atheism is pure irrationality, pure conjecture. Agnosticism, with its statement, "I don't know," makes a great deal more sense than Atheism. The Human Rights Charter is one more faith-based opinion set. It has a lot of evidence and reason to support the legitimacy of each of its precepts. Your belief in its legitimacy is faith with evidence, though. Not evidence alone, for evidence alone contains no opinions. Opinions are faith. They are positions that come from human perceptions of the evidence, faith that a certain answer works well and best explains the data. Everything rests on faith. Quote:
Quote:
You only wind up with your own opinion, which could easily be wrong. It's one opinion in a sea of billions, and there have been billions before you and there will be billions after you, and vast numbers of them will differ from you. So how can you possibly know you're right? You can't- it's just your opinion. It's not an absolute. But that's scary, because it means it hasn't gotten a solid foundation and you might be the good guy or the bad guy. You just don't know. Ignorance about such important matters as evil is terrifying, for it is one of the key causes of evil. To escape evil, its opposite must be revealed to us from a source outside of humanity. Because ideas about good that come from within humanity might well be wrong, and so might themselves be evil or in some way corrupt. This outside source has to control our lives because we cannot save ourselves, as we are locked in our own relativistic ideas (on our own) of what's right and wrong, and thus risk sinking into evil and have no way of knowing if we're doing right or wrong in a real sense. We only have our own beliefs. That's why the outside source, God, has to control our lives to bring us back from the lethal pit of relativism. We can't do it for ourselves. The absolute is the only thing that can really save humans from evil, because they don't know what it is when it's their own brains that rule. This is part of the reason why Jesus said we must completely give up ourselves and all our possessions, everything of meaning to us coming second to Him, so that He is first in our lives. Otherwise, we continue to rule and our relativistic, subjective thinking can lead us into becoming the world's evil rather than its good. Humans desperately need the absolute. And it must be revealed to them and come to control them from outside of themselves.
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." |
|||
09-09-2008, 01:36 AM | #18 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
I don't know that I'll be here long. I'm getting less interested in debating, at least of late. There are happier things to do .
I probably will vanish soon.
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." |
09-09-2008, 01:58 AM | #19 |
Entmoot Minister of Foreign Affairs
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 2,145
|
"Opium for the people". So true.
__________________
"Well, thief! I smell you and I feel your air. I hear your breath. Come along! Help yourself again, there is plenty and to spare." |
09-09-2008, 10:21 AM | #20 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ilha Formosa
Posts: 2,068
|
Quote:
AToothFairyism is one of the most notable belief systems for the fact that it has zero evidence supporting it. It is the blindest faith outlook I've ever seen, because all of its adherents have only their own opinions that there is no Tooth Fairy, and not the the tiniest shred of evidence at all that there is no Tooth Fairy. They never can have any evidence at all that there is no Tooth Fairy, because it's impossible to prove a negative. Hey, this is fun- anyone want to do the Great Pumpkin? the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Zeus, Father of Gods and Men? [/QUOTE]
__________________
Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep. Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man; But will they come when you do call for them? "I like pigs. Dogs look up to us, cats look down on us, but pigs treat us as equals."- Winston Churchill |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Science | ayarella | General Messages | 804 | 04-13-2012 09:05 PM |
muslims PART 2 | Spock | General Messages | 805 | 02-03-2011 03:16 AM |
Theology III | Earniel | General Messages | 1007 | 07-02-2008 02:22 PM |
Theological Opinions | Nurvingiel | General Messages | 992 | 02-10-2006 04:15 PM |
REAL debate thread for RELIGION | Ruinel | General Messages | 1439 | 04-01-2005 02:47 PM |