Ok we're going to switch things up a little. My administrators and I had a meeting on monday and decided on the following...
1)The administrators will no longer be called that. as of now I will refer to them as members of the team.
2) The members will also each get their own account on wich to comment from. So that I will be the only one who comments under Timothy. They will still have the same authority and are aloud to tell you when you are getting out of hand. They also have my permission to get back on to Timothy and post up new blogs and topics as they feel needs to be discussed.
3)some of the members on the team have ben unable to get on to the site, i will be looking for possable replacements. If and When we do find good replacements I will post the list of the official members so you know.
NOW... this week were going to slow things down. I dont have a topic planned for this week. concidering Everyone is starting to get a bit overheated. So lets just take it slow until friday when i post somthing new. Tell me how your weeks been guys, lets try to talk like humans for once rather then christians and athiests...we can all agree im sure that we all follow under the catigory of human right? Tell me whats been up Lately?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I start band camp tomorrow. I'm kind of nervous because I've never been in band before, but I know I will have fun.
ReplyDeleteOoo I managed to use an account I already had that had nothing to do with this without knowing how I used it! Gah! It spelled Charlee with an "ie" and I don't know how to fix it! I managed to use an "!" after every sentence! Yay!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAre you guys nerds ?
ReplyDeleteIs everything stereotypes with you?
ReplyDeleteLet's see, I get straight A's, so, if that's your definition of a nerd, yes I am. However, I play three different sports (soccer, volleyball, and basketball) and spend a great deal of my time with practices, games, and playing and conditioning off season, so you could stereotype me as a jock. I am also a Christian, as you know, so you could stereotype me as the religous type. I also am in chorus, and was involved with the school musical so you could stereotype me as the musical/theatrical type. So, ultimately I don't know what stereotype I would fall under according to society, and I really don't care.
How bout you? What stereotypes would society try cramming you into?
Straight A's don't mean that you're smart, and I find it shocking that you could have aced any science class, since you seem to reject even the most basic science. This is only further proof that straight A's don't equal intelligence.
ReplyDeleteVolleyball is for girls. Soccer and basketball are okay.
I don't fit into any stereotype, it's impossible to pigeon hole me. Perhaps it's the same with you. It shows your insecurity when you go on and on about stereotypes when I asked if you were nerds.
Christian... hmmm, i'd categorize that as afraid, delusional and gullible. Definitely.
So you are a delusional, scared, gullible, student athlete thespian.
As always, you spent one tiny sentence on yourself, and the rest attacking me. Why is that always the case with you?
ReplyDeleteCry me a fucking river.
ReplyDeleteIt was only a question, calm down. I'm never trying offend you, I'm only iterested in real discussion.
ReplyDeleteOh stop with this condescending, "calm down" nonsense. No one is screaming and yelling or has lost their cool... when you get berated or strongly or forcefully talked to you assume that the other person is out of control. So please, stop trying to appease your God with your self-righteousness, because that's who you're trying to impress here and if you think this has been lost on me, you are sorely mistaken.
ReplyDeleteWhat shall we talk about next.
ReplyDeleteIt's your language, swearing and vulgar language gives the appearance of anger and crassness. Please refrain from swearing any more on this website, this will help clarify that you're not just ranting and actually want to discuss.
ReplyDeleteWell, I was trying to start a discussion on stereotypes and pre-judging people but you didn't catch on with it, so I don't know whatever you want to talk about.
Oh,and yeah I try to make all of my life glorify God, but I don't do a very good job because of my sinful nature, and I certaintly know that that's not what saves me! Christ died for my sins by God's grace, not for anything I've done or will do.
ReplyDeleteFine, the big bad atheist wont use anymore "no no" words if it makes the little Christians more comfortable.
ReplyDeleteAnyways,
I have a question for you...
To what extent do you think religion should be involved in politics and government... and how much, to your knowledge is our constitution based on Christian dogma?
Ok, thank you.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that the government should be able to tell people what to believe or force anyone to believe anything. I don't want the state to force you to be part of their religion or not part of any religion. I don't want a Soviet Union or an Official Church of England that everbody has to be part of (the case in the past). I believe that when it comes to running each other, the state and government should not have control over each other. However, I do believe that the religion should influence the government and their decisions (morals, values, etc.).
The constitution? I'm not familiar enough with it to give a satisfactory answer so I'll leave that for someone else, or you could tell me what you think.
Whoops! I meant, "I believe that when it comes to running each other, the state and *religion* should not have control of each other."
ReplyDeletewasnt the constitution founded on somewhat unitarian beliefs?
ReplyDeletei feel like i was taught this in school, but its been a while, so im not really sure.
i also dont really know much about the unitarians.
arent they the ones that believe something like God is like a watch maker - He just wound it up and is sitting back watching it until...i dont really know, the world ends?
any help on this would be enlightening and appreciated.
Deism is the "God as a watchmaker view", and at least Thomas Jefferson was a deist. Unitarianism may fall under a category of deism though. The quick bit of research I did said that unitarians don't believe in the trinity; they believe Jesus was not God, which would fit with deism since Jesus as God would be God being involved with His universe after He formed it, and according to deists God doesn't get involved with the world's doings.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, welcome to the website amishpk!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNo, unitarianism connotes a personal God, so you were right in your correction. Religion should absolutely not influence government decisions whatsoever. The religious have no morals or values, to say that Christian morals have influenced anything positive in our government is completely false. Our founding fathers were not Christians, some were deists, as Jefferson was... and Benjamin Franklin was most certainly an atheist. Christians cannot claim any part in our morals or values or our constitution... this is because among christianity from church to church even within the same denominations, people differ on what morals in the bible to follow. You personally pick the "morals" from the bible that fit into your lifestyle, or the ones that are convenient to you... every Christian does this, this means that since the so called values of christianity are completely subjective, that they have no say. I can pick out that most of God's "rules" or "commandments" or "laws" that none of you follow, and if we did, or if they had any legitimate weight in our government or laws we would be a barbaric society indeed. Our founders went to great lengths to make sure that religion played no role in how our government is run, religious "morality", especially Christian morality should not influence government policy or decisions. Bigotry or the denial of rights to others based on religion is unconstitutional... such as the anti-gay rights position of predominantly the right but in some cases on the left, and the anti-choice position of the religious right, which of course the religious have lost on (thank god).
ReplyDelete"Under God" in the pledge of allegiance should be taken out, and "In God we trust" should be taken off of the money. It has no place in a country where diversity of culture, race, sexuality and beliefs is celebrated.
to CR: are you just against Christians morals, or the morals of all religions? because i know this is a Christian debate sight, so it sort of makes sense for you let loose on the Christian beliefs, but if this were say, a Buddhist sight, would you be bashing their morals in the same way? you just seem a little closed minded, and i feel that it might be difficult to debate with you if youre just going to smash everything Christian without at least hearing it out.
ReplyDeleteto Charlie: thank you.
No problem. Oh and be warned, CR is probably gonna write a very... "aggressive" reply to you.
ReplyDeleteUmm, CR, if Christianity had no influence on our founding fathers, then why is the "under God" in our pledge or "In God We Trust" on our money in the first place?
As for religion should not have any influence on the government, well obviously you'd believe that, you believe all religion is bunk; it would be completely foolish for you to say religion should influence government. However, someone who does believe there beliefs have value would obviously agree that they should influence government values and morals. I'm afraid that we'll just have to agree to disagree here. The issue behind it, the validity of a religion, is the real issue.
CR: to say that religion has no morals is false. according to dictionary.com, the definition of moral is, "of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical." part of a religion is to provide some sense of right and wrong. for example: The Ten Commandments in Christianity, Attainment of Enlightenment in Buddhism, and the Wiccan Rede. all religions set some sort of "rules" as to what they believe that should or should not be done (morally and ethically).
ReplyDeleteand let's get something straight here: what you're saying about Christians picking and choosing from the Bible to believe -- get that out of your head. all we're doing is quoting Bible verses that pertain. and maybe we are picking and choosing, but we believe all of it. not all of it pertains to every single discussion.
your last statement was quite controversial. you said that none of our founding fathers were Christians or believed that there is a God. but yet you recognize that "under God" and "in God we trust" exist on influential documents of our country. you said "Our founding fathers were not Christians, some were deists, as Jefferson was... and Benjamin Franklin was most certainly an atheist," but if they weren't Christians or if they didn't believe that God existed, then why do you even recognize that "under God" is written in the Pledge of Allegiance? it seems that if you don't believe that God exists, why should you believe that His name is written on these documents. you said yourself that His name is indeed included in these documents, but yet you say that our founding fathers didn't believe in Him. that doesn't make sense to me.
Charlie: Under God was added in the 50's as well as "in God we trust"... these were never in the original versions of either in this country. So thats why.
ReplyDeleteAmishpk: I know the "Christian morals" all too well. To convey an opinion and show that I know what I'm talking about is closed minded? It seems you had made up your mind about that before I had said anything. Avoid it next time. Christian "morals" are derived from us, not the other way around. I can cite a hundred verses that no moral person, or any person at all would dare follow. The rules and "laws" of God are ignored even by the most fundamental so called believer. You cherry pick what fits into your life, and ignore the rest, this is undeniable, and if you want to say otherwise than give me the names of the homosexuals you have put to death, all of the re-married women or adulterers that you have stoned and lets not get started on Jesus's teachings, you don't follow those either, only certain ones. Our government was is and cannot be from the bible and if these so-called "morals" influenced them this would be a hell-world indeed. Equal rights under the law in this country is what is celebrated, in the bible not all men are equal, some go to hell and some go to heaven. This is not American, Christianity is very Un-American in fact and it is for that reason that if you read the memoirs of our founders, you will see that almost all of them despised religion, and saw it as dangerous, hence why this country is SECULAR. I am against the morals of Christianity... my opposition isn't limited to Christianity, but this site is about Christianity so i'll stick with this for now. I will say that on the evidence, buddhism is a peaceful religion... no killing the gays or the nonbelievers, no hell or commandments or other nonsense, buddhism isn't really a religion at all more of a school of thought, and it isn't mutually exclusive like Islam and Christianity.
Laura: You have delivered yet another fresh batch of nonsense. If the ten commandments were taken seriously, we'd have a LOT less cheating going on between spouses, because they would be put to death. Even Christians don't pay attention to this nonsense. Senator Mark Ensign, Governor Mark Sanford, Bill Clinton, TED HAGGARD... all men except one are on the right, all parade Christian "morals", and these are members of our government that it seems haven't let their christian "morals" affect their decisions, and if we put them to death like the bible said it would be illegal. Only TWO of the ten commandments are laws and they're the obvious ones, don't steal and don't kill. We don't need any sickly advice from Nazareth to know those two, and we certainly didn't get it from some silly old flat earth book. The ten commandments and "God's laws" are a joke, and it's quite clear. TWO OUT OF TEN. No one takes this crap seriously, the only people that do are the ones who don't know anything about how religion has affected government, because we are secular and don't follow almost ALL of your precious "bible laws". The next point you made was even worse... I will not "get it out of my head" you witch, and don't try to command me, I'm not a slave to anyone, or any God, thats something you can't say. So if you believe that it all is true and good and moral, then you believe in IMMORAL things that are illegal, and immoral by the standards of today. This is what you seem to be too foolish to understand. You parade jesus and your little bible as if it's so great and moral, it has so much murder and hate and misery in it, and you want to say it's so great, ignoring those verses and quoting the ones that sound good. You quote the good ones out of context and then accuse me of quoting out of context... hypocrisy is at every turn in the bible. Your God not only does not exist, but CANNOT exist. More on that later. Once again you display that you don't know history just like Charlie. Under God and In God we trust were added later on in the 50's, it wasn't in the original pledge of allegiance, and in God we trust was added in much later as well... we had money called "green backs" during the founding days, and there were NO mentions of God on any of it, so your argument fails again because of your ignorance of history, try researching these things a bit before bringing them forth as your main point of rebuttal.
ReplyDeleteThe words "under God" weren't added til the 1950's, but even if that wasn't true that wouldn't matter as the pledge wasn't written until 1892 as a little research discovered, so that means the pledge wasn't even around during our country's early days to begin with. However, what about the mentioning of God in the Declaration of Independance?
ReplyDeleteAbout cherry picking morals out of the Bible, you don't seem to understand the transition from the Old to New Testament, which has been explained alreay but you ignored that explanation. Christ fulfilled the Old Testament Law and the sacrificial system, they were no longer necessary to set Israel apart from the other nations or show us how badly we need a saviour since no one can follow the law perfectly (or symbolize Christ in the case of the sacrificial system). The Bible isn't even a book of morals anyway, that's not it's main purpose. The main purpose is Jesus Christ, the only way to be saved. The Bible isn't just a rulebook for your life, though it does contain laws, rules and guidelines, again that's not it's main purpose, the good news about Christ is. Here's another bit of information for you, there are parts of the Bible that were written only for the culture it was in, that don't apply today. The tricky part is knowing what is only cultural, it's only ever cultural issues, like washing feet as a sign of servitude, never universal rules or creation ordances (like marriage). Sometimes the rule still applies but the method of carrying it out changes from cultural to culture. It is necessary to find out which parts of the Bible are just culture (and there isn't much), but it's not just picking and choosing at random, theologians and scholars look and have looked and continue to look into the matters deeply.
If you still think Christianity and the Bible are all about following rules to get into heaven, then you don't understand Christianity yet. Christ died for sinners, including homosexuals, adulterors, and everyone else, so that He could take the punishments for our sins for us.
They don't reference the God that you are talking about. They think that the deity that DOES NOT INTERVENE, a DIFFERENT God than yours, they DISBELIEVED in your god. The only time they mentioned "the deity" was when they said endowed with inalienable rights from our creator. This does not connote anything to do with Christianity.
ReplyDeleteYou have yet again unleashed more foolish nonsense with your next point... you claim that we get away with not following rules because Jesus died for our "sins"... yet you STILL follow some while ignoring others and condemn those that don't follow the ones that you do. This is hypocrisy in it's purest form. You cannot condemn ANYONE FOR ANYTHING if jesus died for all of them and paid our debts off. Your "acceptance" of christ doesn't exempt you from this. It seems you are the one who doesn't understand the bible. Jesus's teachings are ones that you don't follow either, only the ones you like, so what new excuses do you have for not following those? They are in the NEW testament.
Where in the bible does it say "this section of the bible is for the time today, not culture in the future, in fact, IGNORE most of these in the future because they would land you in jail if you followed them". This is nowhere in the bible, nowhere does it say that you get to modernize it and take out what you don't think is relevant anymore. This is only a way for you to try to talk your way out of having to follow everything, you simply made it up. You call washing feet cultural, but you say marriage is a "creation ordinance"... YOU are making the difference not God, YOU are trying to decide for yourself what to follow and what not to, this is just the cowards way of trying to hold onto beliefs that make no sense. This God didn't assign value to each of these, he simply says "this is what you do" and YOU are the one who has tried to assign value based on HOW YOU WANT TO LIVE YOUR LIFE. You are no more of a Christian than I am. The difference is you make what you like in the bible to fit your life and ignore the rest, that is indisputable. Theologans are guilty of the same botched pseudo-reasoning as you, both cherry pick and call the bible a "good" book when it's got so much wickedness and immorality in it. God sent jesus to die for our sins so all of them are absolved, so that means that NONE of us to hell then. If he died for sins, then why create hell? This is just another way that you seem to not be able to see as a contradiction.
I want to point out that I have beaten every one of your arguments to death, every person that has been on here. There have been several, and there is only one me, one atheist and one person against all of you religious ideologues. This should be pointed out. Sammy Jayne, TRY TO FIND SOME MORE FUCKING ATHEISTS. Por favor.
ReplyDeleteFind some more so we can really have some fun. It's already an unfair fight, but I'm hoping to make some Christians cry.
ReplyDeleteBelieve me we are trying to find more, but for various reasons none have worked out, if you know anyone who would be willing to come to the site, feel free to invite them.
ReplyDeleteAgain, please don't swear.
Oh and if you think beating every argument means ingoring or twisting most of what we say and then automatically saying what you believe is absolutely right without question, then sure, you've beaten every argument we've throw at you. You can't be both the lawyer and the judge in a case. We come from two totally different worldviews, and so we disagree on very fundamental issues. You can't just judge an argument on worldviews from one worldview perspective; I imagine from your worldview you certaintly seem to have no competion in these discussions, but that's because you're taking for it granted that we share your worldview, when we don't.
You can have the last word, then it's break time again! Any light issue you wanna talk about or some hobby you have or whatever you wanna talk about that isn't related to religion will do. If you don't have anything then I'll kick things off with something.
ReplyDeleteIgnoring and twisting? You quote the bible's positive aspects out of context and claim they are moral. I quote the bible and you claim that it's immoral and you claim that i'm "taking it out of context" Oh you hypocritical little Christians. Your worldview is based on NO evidence, so yes I can be a judge. You can't say that I "disagree" with your evidence... evidence is evidence... and you haven't presented any, science, the big bang and evolution are all based on sound evidence, you can't say that. You have just one silly little book that you think tells you everything that's true, based on NO evidence. You are the definition of fools.
ReplyDeleteYou are wrong. Deal with it.
YOU are wrong. Now you deal with it.
ReplyDeleteNow now, we don't want this to turn into a shouting match. This thread is closed, too much of a threat of it turning into a petty verbal fight at the moment. Move on to another discussion please.
ReplyDeleteLaura, you're a clown.
ReplyDelete