• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Toronto

Alfrescian
Loyal
Deuteronomy 21:11-13
If you find an attractive prisoner of war, bring her home, shave her head, trim her nails and give her new clothes. Then she’s yours.

vs

Luke 16:18
Jesus said: Whoever put away his wife and marries another commits adultery. Whoever marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

A good question for the reader who is a believer:
Who do you obey? God in Deuteronomy 21:11-13 or Jesus in Luke 16:18?
 

Conqueror

Alfrescian
Loyal
Deuteronomy 21:11-13
If you find an attractive prisoner of war, bring her home, shave her head, trim her nails and give her new clothes. Then she’s yours.

vs

Luke 16:18
Jesus said: Whoever put away his wife and marries another commits adultery. Whoever marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

A good question for the reader who is a believer:
Who do you obey? God in Deuteronomy 21:11-13 or Jesus in Luke 16:18?


There is no contradiction. The woman must be a virgin or so-called "untouched" by any man.

Divorced woman should not marry again when their ex-husbands are still alive. If he's dead, then she's free to marry anyone.

Marriage is NO good for atheists because it is not freedom. It's a bondage. So, I don't understand why atheists want to marry.

Han men took the Yue women in Fujian when most of the Yue men were killed in the battle during the Han Dynasty. This might be a good thing for the women who mourned for their widowhood.

For a believer like me, this is even MORE complex than you think. :*: You have to ask God for a 'sister' not anyone else. Believers should not join with unbelievers.
 

Toronto

Alfrescian
Loyal
Life is full of contradictions and ironies.

Are you surprised? :biggrin:

Yes, there are surprises in life. The abundant bibilical contradictions and errors that going to be slowly revealed in this thread, you will turn from surprise to disgust.

The chance of an attractive prisoner of war being a virgin is rather slim. Unless you are referring to virgin mary.
You should also find out what your paganic parents or forefathers think of marriage. Without them, you won't be here.
 

Toronto

Alfrescian
Loyal
Matthew 11:12-14 Jesus said: John the Baptist is Elijah

vs

John 1:21 John the Baptist said he was not Elijah

Who to believe? Matthew 11:12-14 or John 1:21?

For a religion book which such a highly acclaimation by their reward-thirsty believers, what is the level of tolerance for error?
 

Conqueror

Alfrescian
Loyal
God Is Everywhere

god only exists between your ears. period.


The world is a Theistic nature, NOT an atheistic one. God and all kinds of spirits can be found almost everywhere. The entire universe has His presence. Why ?

Let me tell you why. If scientists can say that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, then what is the problem with God being the living energy.

I had felt God's presence in a form of energy. I could feel Him (heat like the Sun or spotlight plus shivering mechanically), hear Him (continuous noise), see Him (bright light like the Sun). God has no form. He exists without a beginning and an end. That's INFINITY on both ends. :cool:



The law of conservation of energy, first formulated in the nineteenth century, is a law of physics. It states that the total amount of energy in an isolated system remains constant over time. The total energy is said to be conserved over time. For an isolated system, this law means that energy can change its location within the system, and that it can change form within the system, for instance chemical energy can become kinetic energy, but that energy can be neither created nor destroyed.


If scientists can believe in energy being eternal, then what is the problem with believing that God is ETERNAL too. Don't be hypocritical. :rolleyes:
 

fishbuff

Alfrescian
Loyal
Re: God Is Everywhere

The world is a Theistic nature, NOT an atheistic one. God and all kinds of spirits can be found almost everywhere. The entire universe has His presence. Why ?

Let me tell you why. If scientists can say that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, then what is the problem with God being the living energy.

I had felt God's presence in a form of energy. I could feel Him (heat like the Sun or spotlight plus shivering mechanically), hear Him (continuous noise), see Him (bright light like the Sun). God has no form. He exists without a beginning and an end. That's INFINITY on both ends. :cool:



The law of conservation of energy, first formulated in the nineteenth century, is a law of physics. It states that the total amount of energy in an isolated system remains constant over time. The total energy is said to be conserved over time. For an isolated system, this law means that energy can change its location within the system, and that it can change form within the system, for instance chemical energy can become kinetic energy, but that energy can be neither created nor destroyed.


If scientists can believe in energy being eternal, then what is the problem with believing that God is ETERNAL too. Don't be hypocritical. :rolleyes:

i also felt god in my balls too..

you need to justisfy the existence of god first. dont shift the burden of proof onto us. it is you that claim that stupid god of yours exist.
 
Last edited:

Conqueror

Alfrescian
Loyal
Energy Is Eternal And So Is God

you need to justisfy the existence of god first. dont shift the burden of proof onto us. it is you that claim that stupid god of yours exist.


That's what many atheists will say on the other side of the globe. That's not going to give you any credibility as a defense. Proofs have always been surfacing since the last few decades. But, these atheists have always been selective with proofs to pander to the bloated ego of the community.

And this ego for atheism is also dying out quickly. Those that are bored with the constant unchanging rhetoric without the support of real scientific evidence from the atheist community are also finding themselves with more questions about the correctness of the atheists' stance. This is not a good news for the atheists. :wink:

When ID was being printed out on the famous science journals, there's no question that the believers have become much stronger in their faith than before. :cool:
 

HappyCAMPER

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Matthew 11:12-14 Jesus said: John the Baptist is Elijah

vs

John 1:21 John the Baptist said he was not Elijah

Who to believe? Matthew 11:12-14 or John 1:21?

For a religion book which such a highly acclaimation by their reward-thirsty believers, what is the level of tolerance for error?

Don't believe in both. It's not a situation you need to believe in any of the choices.
 

Toronto

Alfrescian
Loyal
Re: Energy Is Eternal And So Is God

Matthew 27:5 Judas went off and hanged himself.

vs

Acts 1:18 Judas, falling headlong, burst open and his guts gushed out.

The third biblical conflict or contradiction!
 

Conqueror

Alfrescian
Loyal
Why Is That Important ?

Matthew 27:5 Judas went off and hanged himself.

vs

Acts 1:18 Judas, falling headlong, burst open and his guts gushed out.

The third biblical conflict or contradiction!


To me, as a bible user, this is not so important at all. Well, it will be nice if it is in order. Even if it isn't in order, that will not make the bible less effective as my smartphone to communicate with God. Even if you find your smartphone's is loaded with an outdated version app, you can always update it later with the latest one.

Remember the time I told you about the Noah's Ark ? I was surprise that it has nothing to do with the "end" of the world. At first sight, you probably will come to a conclusion that God will be destroying men with this flood as the finale. God said that He would 'not' flood and kill men again in this fashion as recorded in bible. Right ? :cool:

Many do not understand this line. The Flood was a prominent event for men to see and witness it. Men would write it down as a historical record. You must remember that God wanted the design of the bible as an aid like a comm box for his anointed ones, NOT as a literature or history book. What is the purpose of reading a history book for believers ? It must NOT be DISCONNECTED with us, believers.

Why worry about the two accounts that don't really seems to tally ? What is that to ME as a believer and as a true bible user ?



17The third time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?”

Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.”

Jesus said, “Feed my sheep.

18I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.”

19Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, “Follow me!”

20Peter turned and saw that the disciple whom Jesus loved was following them. (This was the one who had leaned back against Jesus at the supper and had said, “Lord, who is going to betray you?”)

21When Peter saw him, he asked, “Lord, what about him?”

22Jesus answered, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me.”

23Because of this, the rumor spread among the brothers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?”

24This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true.

25Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.



Jesus wanted his beloved disciple to follow him and to feed his sheep. This is important because Jesus reminded him many times. So, that must be really important. Whether the betrayer will be punished in the near future is NOT important at all.

Jesus mission would be over soon ? It was only the beginning of more things to come. :wink:
 

fishbuff

Alfrescian
Loyal
Re: Why Is That Important ?

To me, as a bible user, this is not so important at all. Well, it will be nice if it is in order. Even if it isn't in order, that will not make the bible less effective as my smartphone to communicate with God. Even if you find your smartphone's is loaded with an outdated version app, you can always update it later with the latest one.

Remember the time I told you about the Noah's Ark ? I was surprise that it has nothing to do with the "end" of the world. At first sight, you probably will come to a conclusion that God will be destroying men with this flood as the finale. God said that He would 'not' flood and kill men again in this fashion as recorded in bible. Right ? :cool:

Many do not understand this line. The Flood was a prominent event for men to see and witness it. Men would write it down as a historical record. You must remember that God wanted the design of the bible as an aid like a comm box for his anointed ones, NOT as a literature or history book. What is the purpose of reading a history book for believers ? It must NOT be DISCONNECTED with us, believers.

Why worry about the two accounts that don't really seems to tally ? What is that to ME as a believer and as a true bible user ?



17The third time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?”

Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.”

Jesus said, “Feed my sheep.

18I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.”

19Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, “Follow me!”

20Peter turned and saw that the disciple whom Jesus loved was following them. (This was the one who had leaned back against Jesus at the supper and had said, “Lord, who is going to betray you?”)

21When Peter saw him, he asked, “Lord, what about him?”

22Jesus answered, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me.”

23Because of this, the rumor spread among the brothers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?”

24This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true.

25Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.



Jesus wanted his beloved disciple to follow him and to feed his sheep. This is important because Jesus reminded him many times. So, that must be really important. Whether the betrayer will be punished in the near future is NOT important at all.

Jesus mission would be over soon ? It was only the beginning of more things to come. :wink:

noah's ark?

god did a genocide on the whole world. but that is a story.

and there is no explanation about dinosaur fossils, kangaroos in australia, kiwi bird in nz, lamas in north america, etc..

and when you pump in petrol, that came from the fossil fuel from hundred of millions years ago.
my CISRO friends who work in mining exploration confirmed the radiometric dating on the coals.

silly christians, always distort whatever facts to suit their delusion.
 

Conqueror

Alfrescian
Loyal
Don't Be Fooled

noah's ark?

god did a genocide on the whole world. but that is a story.

and there is no explanation about dinosaur fossils, kangaroos in australia, kiwi bird in nz, lamas in north america, etc..

and when you pump in petrol, that came from the fossil fuel from hundred of millions years ago.
my CISRO friends who work in mining exploration confirmed the radiometric dating on the coals.

silly christians, always distort whatever facts to suit their delusion.


It is NOT the whole world. OMG ! The word world is often used as a certain area or place of influence. Even the ancient Chinese used the word "tian xia" (under the heaven) as referring only to the China Proper and not as "the whole world" viewpoint. Therefore, the flood did not kill everyone on the Earth.

Atheists are often silly enough to believe what they want to believe and to be totally blind to the fact that atheism has even lesser logical explanation to offer. That's the most probable reason why many atheists preferred to be called agnostics rather than being labelled as strong atheists. One of them is Dawkin. :biggrin:

I wonder what had happened to his fervor for writing "The God's Delusion" which he so strongly believed. And now, he has ended him up being JUST an agnostic and too shameful to admit he was actually the champion for the strong atheists community ? This is surprising. :eek:

Maybe, he should do us a favour by writing another book on why he believes that ID is right and atheism is probably wrong in his new book and calling it "The Atheists' Delusion" instead. :biggrin:



Wilder-Smith authored many books on biogenesis, his particular field of expertise. (A list of his books can be seen at www.wildersmith.org). In The Natural Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution he exposed the idea that life arose spontaneously from the ocean:

" ... if excess water is present in the reacting mixture, peptide synthesis does not take place, equilibrium remains on the side of the initial reagents, the amino acids, which are the building blocks of life. This phenomenon is covered by the law of mass action: it is valid for all reversible reactions. Briefly said: in reactions of this type, synthesis of polypeptides from amino acids does not take place in the presence of excess water. The consequence of this well-known fact of organic chemistry is important: concentrations of amino acids will combine only in minute amounts, if they combine at all in a primeval ocean providing excess water, to form polypeptides. Any amounts of polypeptide which might be formed will be broken down into their initial components (amino acids) by the excess of water. The ocean is thus practically the last place on this or any other planet where the proteins of life could be formed spontaneously from amino acids. Yet nearly all text-books of biology teach this nonsense to support evolutionary theory and spontaneous biogenesis ... Has materialistic Neo-Darwinian philosophy overwhelmed us to such an extent that we forget or overlook the well-known facts of science and of chemistry in order to support this philosophy?

"Approximately twenty amino acids comprise the basic building blocks of life from a material point of view. Without these, life as we know it today could neither originate nor exist. Some of these amino acids can, under certain circumstances, be formed in the primeval atmosphere through chance lightning, as we have already discovered. But to state, as many experts do, that these amino acids which are formed by chance can be used to build living protoplasm is certainly grossly erroneous in principle, for they are for such purposes, in fact, entirely useless. Without exception all Miller's amino acids are completely unsuitable for any type of spontaneous biogenesis. And the same applies to all and any randomly formed substances and amino acids which form racemates. This statement is categorical and absolute and cannot be affected by special conditions."


In his book God: To Be or Not to Be? he wrote about DNA:

"Once we have reached the arrangements of matter of complexity such as DNA molecules the sailing is fairly plain. But we have no known way of accounting for the original order of life residing on DNA or the enzyme systems producing it, which must have come from some source apparently outside matter and able to convert energy into codes and sequences ... Why should it be anathema to Monod and the materialistic scientists to deny a priori any source of information/energy conversion outside matter?

"May not thought itself be the source of material order, sequences and codes with which life is inextricably interwoven? Jeans thought so. For thought consists of concepts embedded in sequences and codes which are, in our experience, imposable on to matter in the form of voice, printed text, poems, song or even memory macromolecules. The matter the poems ride on (paper) is not part of the poem or even the thought behind it. It is merely the medium on which the poem code is simulated and nothing else. We come then to the suggestion that thought, which is in itself not material, but which can ride on matter (paper, grey matter, magnetic tapes, etc.) imposed itself onto amino acid units and their sequences as a 'written code' which bears life and its meaning ... Why should it be unscientific, then, to suggest that something similar to human thought, which is a converter of energy into sequences and codes, produced primeval life? Since life's order is not, as far as we can see, present on matter endogenously today, it certainly could not have been resident in or on matter at the beginning (for in the beginning matter was by definition identical with present-day matter.) Thus the primeval orderer must have resided outside matter. Which is merely a polite way of saying that we are forced to conclude that the primeval source of order must have been metaphysical and have resided extra-materially."


In 1985 Professor Wilder-Smith was invited to present the scientific case for creation at England's foremost debating society, the Oxford Union, under the auspices of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. The debate took place on 14th February 1986, as a kind of re-run of the 1860 Wilberforce-Huxley debate. Professor Wilder-Smith and Professor Andrews (University of London) were selected to debate the evolutionary professors Richard Dawkins and John Maynard-Smith. In his part in the debate Professor Wilder-Smith deliberately gave only scientific evidence as to why Darwinism cannot answer the origin of life puzzle, and why the evidence points firmly in the direction of an outside designer using information to order matter. In a direct reply to Wilder-Smith's speech, Professor Maynard-Smith acknowledged that while Darwin had not answered the problem of the origin of life, any creationist pinning their hopes on the riddle of the origin of life as proof that there must be a God would be 'crazy' because, "Before you're very much older it's going to be solved. I mean, really, you'd be mad to say 'I believe' because scientists can't explain the origin of life. Things are moving very fast in that field."

As of this present time, well over 20 years since the debate, evolutionary scientists are further away than ever from answering not only the question of the origin of life, but also the origin of consciousness and indeed, the origin of the universe itself. Wilder-Smith's arguments have stood the test of time and the case for an intelligent designer is stronger than ever. :cool:



Well, I rest my case. And I'm not even surprised that Atheism is waning.

Delusional people with delusional 'facts' often ended up losing EVERY arguments. This is nothing new. :rolleyes:
 

Toronto

Alfrescian
Loyal
Re: Don't Be Fooled

God needs to rest on 7th day.
Yet God is ETERNAL?

The bible parallels the prejudices and preferences of the human maker.
 

Toronto

Alfrescian
Loyal
Re: Don't Be Fooled

Accordingly to a cultist, Adam and his wife were not the first man and woman. They are the 7th day people. The account was twisted to fix some archaelogical artifacts older than biblical period.

Because there is no record in the history of all human civilisations of such a global flood like Noah Ark water, which surely contradicts the bible's account.
So this part of the fable is now being twisted to be a regional flood.

I believe that the pair of panda from sichuan and the pair of orang utan thousand of miles away were able to board the ship on time. Because they took SQ747 flight to the middle eat. I can believe it, in the context of a legend.
 

Toronto

Alfrescian
Loyal
Re: Don't Be Fooled

The Bible is supposed to be the inerrant and inspired Word of the Living God.
So even the slightest mistake in the representation of meaning has to be taken seriously. Some typos errors are reasonably ignorable.

There is a big different between "Conqueror raped his own daughter" and "Conqueror raped other daughter".

The first case, I might close an eye but not for the 2nd case. Because believers are known to treat others less humanely.
 

Toronto

Alfrescian
Loyal
Re: Don't Be Fooled

28738_494270087261841_203976801_n.jpg
 
Top