BF2S Forums for you catholics,jews w/e if u believe in god read this

kkolodsick wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

kkolodsick wrote:

And their tax status has what to do with it?  Lower income people pay no taxes either should they be allowed to vote?  Blue Cross is a healt care insurance company that pays not taxes and they lobby, is that ok?

People with low incomes still pay taxes, even if they get most or all of it back.  Also, they must still pay taxes on purchases.  Any for profit organization must pay income taxes and taxes on purchases, unless the item is for resale, at which point taxes are collected.  As a not for profit organization a church doesn't have to pay taxes on gifts, donations, or any income they receive.  They also have tax exempt status on all purchases.  As such, they are not allowed to be directly involved in politics.  They can make their stance known on issues, and then their members can vote for candidates that have the same beliefs, but the church may not be directly involved in a candidate's campaign, fund raising, or anything of that nature.

Well then moron, they don't pay taxes do they?  Just because it is taken from your check doesn't mean you are paying it.  I agree a church proper shouldn't lobby but do you know about the Christian groups lobbying?  Are they tax exempt?  If so I agree with you but I don't know the answer to that one.

Yes, they do pay taxes.  The government doesn't just put that money in a coffee can.  They earn interest on it while they have it.  You also have to realize that anyone that gets most or all of it back are usually under the poverty level, but isn't always the case.  A case in point is my co-worker.  He has a traditional family that religious organizations like to espouse.  His wages aren't poverty level by any means, but his wife stays home with their four kids.  Because of their single income and deductions on dependents, they basically get every penny back at the end of the year.  Under your statement, they shouldn't be allowed to vote.  But as I said, even if some one gets their income taxes back, they still pay taxes on everything they purchase.

And yes church organizations can lobby.  However, they may not use church property, income, or tax exempt status as part of their lobbying.  In other words, you as a religious person may donate money to a politcal campaign, but your church may not take money given to it by its members and donate it directly to a political candidate or campaign.  See, what you have to realize is that as tax paying citizens you may gather together under whatever cause you like, because what you do is not directly a function of the church, and any monies you may give are not tax deductible.  A church as a recognized religion, not for profit, tax excempt organization cannot do so.

If there is a god, then I'm safe because I believed (yeah sure thats not enough... For example: I hold Pessach JUST AT THIS MOMENT!) in him. If not then I'm dead. So why not have security ^^

JaMDuDe wrote:

I still dont think ive heard a scientific anwser for how they knew Jesus was coming hundreds of years before He came.

How do you know they knew He was coming?  Because you read it in a book?  That was most likely written after the fact?  You choose to believe what you read out of a book written in two parts: the old testament, which was an attempt by civilizations of old to explain the origin of life mixed with cultural parables; and the new testament, written by a number of people (a lot of them Jesus' followers) after Jesus lived.  So if anything, they are trumpeting their own cause after the fact, by saying Jesus came, and they predicted it hundreds of years ago.  Yes JaMDuDe, we all know you are a devout believer in God.  However, you lose credibility as a rational human being when you quote bible verses and ChristianAnswers.com overzealously and repeat what they say as fact.  You were not alive 2000 years ago.  You choose to trust a book and a ridiculous website for your information.  I have a feeling you are young, probably around 12-15, and have not experienced the world.  Open your mind, and experience life, instead of sitting back and quoting bible verses as truth.  Everything you read in the bible is not 100% correct, I'm sorry to tell you.  Do you want to argue about what is written in the bible?  My mother has a PHD in theology and teaches religion at a catholic school.  She is a devout Catholic.  I am an atheist.  I can have very intelligent conversations with her, one reason being she realizes that no one can take the bible as a non-fiction piece of work.  She is also open minded enough to realize that as long as you live your life in a moral, ethical way, it doesn't matter what you believe.  Please, please, please, stop quoting the bible and saying, "Oh, well the bible says this, what does science have to say."

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2006-04-20 09:26:45)

Its fact that pigs fly.  Its fact that birds are evolved from humans.  Its fact that the world is 6000 years old.  Why?  Because thats what I believe, and anyone saying any different will go to hell.

Jamdude you still havent given that complex example of the bible

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

JaMDuDe wrote:

I still dont think ive heard a scientific anwser for how they knew Jesus was coming hundreds of years before He came.

How do you know they knew He was coming?  Because you read it in a book?  That was most likely written after the fact?  You choose to believe what you read out of a book written in two parts: the old testament, which was an attempt by civilizations of old to explain the origin of life mixed with cultural parables; and the new testament, written by a number of people (a lot of them Jesus' followers) after Jesus lived.  So if anything, they are trumpeting their own cause after the fact, by saying Jesus came, and they predicted it hundreds of years ago.  Yes JaMDuDe, we all know you are a devout believer in God.  However, you lose credibility as a rational human being when you quote bible verses and ChristianAnswers.com overzealously and repeat what they say as fact.  You were not alive 2000 years ago.  You choose to trust a book and a ridiculous website for your information.  I have a feeling you are young, probably around 12-15, and have not experienced the world.  Open your mind, and experience life, instead of sitting back and quoting bible verses as truth.  Everything you read in the bible is not 100% correct, I'm sorry to tell you.  Do you want to argue about what is written in the bible?  My mother has a PHD in theology and teaches religion at a catholic school.  She is a devout Catholic.  I am an atheist.  I can have very intelligent conversations with her, one reason being she realizes that no one can take the bible as a non-fiction piece of work.  She is also open minded enough to realize that as long as you live your life in a moral, ethical way, it doesn't matter what you believe.  Please, please, please, stop quoting the bible and saying, "Oh, well the bible says this, what does science have to say."

I agree that it doesn't make sense to quote the bible to people who don't believe as well they don't believe. 
I couldn't disagree more about the bible not being 100% true, if your mother is a devout Catholic as you state, by her faith she HAS to believe the same thing.  The Bible was written by men inspired by God and is not wrong (of course if you're a Christian, everyone else can believe/not as they choose). 

Everyone keeps talking about science and that proves that we evolved from...etc but over history there have been multiple instances where science has been proven wrong, i.e. the world is flat.

XstrangerdangerX wrote:

Oh, and thanks for the -3 karma, so glad to see we're open to other viewpoints.

Not me pardner......I'm not that petty.

the world is flat

This was not science it was observation. Actually if you really want to do into it the world was flat b/c the church said it was flat. (This is where the church is yet again wrong)

Catholics or the catholic church has actually set science back by about 400 years, look at the muslim religion. The muslium should be way way way ahead of us scientifically but their religion holds them back as does christianity, by the will of Allah. (Err, that's because you didn't understand or won't accept a scientific observation)

Fact, Leonardo Da vinchi was put in jail, a devote catholic, b/c his scientific observations. His actual purpose was to show the pope of the time that the church was wrong. The church being a very old organization which is reluctant to change, they don't want to admit fault or incorrect conclusions. So they won't accept scientific fact.

Why has christianity set us back 400 years? Well in the begining God created earth and said it was good. Then god created the (Sun, stars, sky) said it was good.

Later science proved that the earth revolved around the sun. This was contractory to religion at the time, how could the earth revolve around the sun when the earth was created first???

BURN HIM BURN THE WITCH

Well science didn't prove god wrong, not in the slightest, what it proved was man was wrong about the interpretation. They assumed since god said he created the earth first that later it couldn't rotate around the sun.

This one point stop science for 400 years, it wasn't until kepler that the church allowed science to let earth revolve around the sun. Shortly after that a numerous number of physical properties and scientific laws came about. Why b/c publishing this scientific commandments were previously held back by the church.

How can we man... expect to ever understand god. We should be smart enough to know that we can't interpret the word of god and must change our interpretation based upon observation.

The soul... yes it exists it's actually somewhat scientifically proven. The body once it dies takes some time before tit starts loosing heat. Well what is keeping the body warm? Also where does all the entropy go?

Is the ordering of energy in the universe simply the will of god/probablility chance? Absolutely...

If your scientific you are certainly religous, you take specific commandments and apply them to your observations. You also assume things that you can't explain and take them as the truth.

A good analogy is the agruement of good and evil vs darkness and light.

Perhaps does dark exist? no it's simply the absence of light.
Does evil exist? I say no it's simply the absence of good.

Major problem is it's difficult to keep light around it requires energy which wants to be distributed. Same goes for evil if things are left alone unfortunately they tend towards the absence of good.

If you want to get even more deep into this scientifically, what is containted in a bottle of nothing/vaccum/space etc.  People say nothing... well this is and isn't true.

Between the earth and the sun, people think it's an vaccum with the odd atom running around. If this were true how does light propagate from the sun to the earth... there is no medium.

O.K. Light duality... non-sence... light waves are particles with wave a nature. What are they propigating through??? Dead non energetic light... Like religion science has yet to accept this, but we will and once we do we will understand alot more.

Religion should do the same, God is not against science, the church is against science. The church is people not god, science has never been against god only the churches interpretation of god. If religions can change rewrite the bible science should be able to continue without interference from the church.

How can we as people be so self centered as to actually believe that we can understand the will of the creator. I personally think this is blastfamy.

Sorry for all the spelling errors I'm a little pissed that the church can make it's way into a BF2 forum.

Screw the anti-darwin, screw darwinists, they are both wrong. It's puncated equilbrium!!! Call it spikes of creation followed by evolution of the creation. This goes with gods teaching, something is created then it evolves. Does man not do this himself, if you disagree don't bother typing simply throw your computer out the window and turn out the lights.  Get a oil lamp and sit in your goat skin, since science must be a sin.

vjs wrote:

the world is flat

Why has christianity set us back 400 years? Well in the begining God created earth and said it was good. Then god created the (Sun, stars, sky) said it was good.

Later science proved that the earth revolved around the sun. This was contractory to religion at the time, how could the earth revolve around the sun when the earth was created first?

No the sun was created first in "let there be light", but if you read through genisis quickly it looks like the sun was made later. Day 4 was when the atmosphere cleared so that the sun could be seen, not when it was made.

JaMDuDe wrote:

vjs wrote:

the world is flat

Why has christianity set us back 400 years? Well in the begining God created earth and said it was good. Then god created the (Sun, stars, sky) said it was good.

Later science proved that the earth revolved around the sun. This was contractory to religion at the time, how could the earth revolve around the sun when the earth was created first?

No the sun was created first in "let there be light", but if you read through genisis quickly it looks like the sun was made later. Day 4 was when the atmosphere cleared so that the sun could be seen, not when it was made.

Your own religious website says otherwise.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2006/0404order.asp

I meant that figuratively. It is anyway a minor point, but this is taken directly from the bible (via bible.com that is).

And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars.

Seems pretty unambiguous to me. As answersingenesis.com says, that does not happen on the first day.

vjs wrote:

the world is flat

This was not science it was observation. Actually if you really want to do into it the world was flat b/c the church said it was flat. (This is where the church is yet again wrong)

The "church" corrected their stance long ago......please read from Wikipedia....Flat Earth.

Catholics or the catholic church has actually set science back by about 400 years, look at the muslim religion. The muslium should be way way way ahead of us scientifically but their religion holds them back as does christianity, by the will of Allah. (Err, that's because you didn't understand or won't accept a scientific observation)

And what 400 year period are you talking about?  The Dark Ages?  Any setback that you're clammoring about has been wiped out within the last century.

Fact, Leonardo Da vinchi was put in jail, a devote catholic, b/c his scientific observations. His actual purpose was to show the pope of the time that the church was wrong. The church being a very old organization which is reluctant to change, they don't want to admit fault or incorrect conclusions. So they won't accept scientific fact.

Totally FALSE.....he was jailed for sodomy for two months.  Again, Wikipedia is your helpful friend.

Maybe you were talking about Galileo Galilei?  He was sentenced to jail, but the sentence was reduced to house arrest, so your claim that he was jailed is false.  The Church (slowly, of course) accepted Galileo's works and trashed the Geocentric model in 1758 in favor of the Heliocentric model that Galileo proposed.  Your still pissed that the Church did this almost 250 years ago?  Are you really that bitter?

Why has christianity set us back 400 years? Well in the begining God created earth and said it was good. Then god created the (Sun, stars, sky) said it was good.

Later science proved that the earth revolved around the sun. This was contractory to religion at the time, how could the earth revolve around the sun when the earth was created first???

If you are a Bible "literalist", (which I am not and probably a majority are not), the first statement might be true.  Amongst the Catholic population (the "chrurch" that you are referring to), we are not that close minded although at times the church is slow to react to change.  But change it did.

Hey, I bet you didn't know that the Vatican has it's own observatory (one of the OLDEST in the world) and added the Mt. Grahmn telescope in Arizona which both have contributed quite a bit to the science of astronomy.  How's that for closed-mindedness and setting everything back for 400 years?  Here, allow me to Google that for you.

Hey, are we learning yet?

BURN HIM BURN THE WITCH

Well science didn't prove god wrong, not in the slightest, what it proved was man was wrong about the interpretation. They assumed since god said he created the earth first that later it couldn't rotate around the sun.

This one point stop science for 400 years, it wasn't until kepler that the church allowed science to let earth revolve around the sun. Shortly after that a numerous number of physical properties and scientific laws came about. Why b/c publishing this scientific commandments were previously held back by the church.

How can we man... expect to ever understand god. We should be smart enough to know that we can't interpret the word of god and must change our interpretation based upon observation.

The soul... yes it exists it's actually somewhat scientifically proven. The body once it dies takes some time before tit starts loosing heat. Well what is keeping the body warm? Also where does all the entropy go?

Is the ordering of energy in the universe simply the will of god/probablility chance? Absolutely...

If your scientific you are certainly religous, you take specific commandments and apply them to your observations. You also assume things that you can't explain and take them as the truth.

A good analogy is the agruement of good and evil vs darkness and light.

Perhaps does dark exist? no it's simply the absence of light.
Does evil exist? I say no it's simply the absence of good.

Major problem is it's difficult to keep light around it requires energy which wants to be distributed. Same goes for evil if things are left alone unfortunately they tend towards the absence of good.

If you want to get even more deep into this scientifically, what is containted in a bottle of nothing/vaccum/space etc.  People say nothing... well this is and isn't true.

Between the earth and the sun, people think it's an vaccum with the odd atom running around. If this were true how does light propagate from the sun to the earth... there is no medium.

O.K. Light duality... non-sence... light waves are particles with wave a nature. What are they propigating through??? Dead non energetic light... Like religion science has yet to accept this, but we will and once we do we will understand alot more.

Religion should do the same, God is not against science, the church is against science. The church is people not god, science has never been against god only the churches interpretation of god. If religions can change rewrite the bible science should be able to continue without interference from the church.

How can we as people be so self centered as to actually believe that we can understand the will of the creator. I personally think this is blastfamy.

Sorry for all the spelling errors I'm a little pissed that the church can make it's way into a BF2 forum.

Screw the anti-darwin, screw darwinists, they are both wrong. It's puncated equilbrium!!! Call it spikes of creation followed by evolution of the creation. This goes with gods teaching, something is created then it evolves. Does man not do this himself, if you disagree don't bother typing simply throw your computer out the window and turn out the lights.  Get a oil lamp and sit in your goat skin, since science must be a sin.

Ok.....now you are just pulling things out of your arse.  The "church" you are currently referring to is clearly not Catholic; you are just railing against Bible literalists.  Who is spoon-feeding you this drivel?  The Bible is there, take what you want from it.  I don't refer to the Bible if I want to learn science, so I don't need to rewrite the Bible to be scientifically correct.  The Bible is a spiritual guide to living a good life.  I'll read an astronomy book if I want to learn astronomy and not expect others to rewrite those books because God is missing in them.  I think many posters here have a hard time separating the two on both sides of the aisle.

Last edited by Yeticus Rex (2006-04-20 13:29:43)

kkolodsick wrote:

I find it funny how evolutionists can stand on science today but call science from "those" days observation.
You can't have it both ways. 

I see a clock and look at the inside and I just know that there is a clock maker.   Why is it so hard to believe, or at least entertain the though that there is a maker of the earth? 

Creation is real my friends sorry to burst your bubble.

And what would you call the people before christ who believed in multiple gods?  Are they wrong?  If so, how do you know and why?  If not, then you are admitting there may be multiple gods.  I believe the concept of God was a result of early civilizations trying to explain why things are the way they are.  Just like science is trying to explain why things are the way they are.  Back then, people thought the sun was a manifestation of a person.  Back then, people thought the planets and sun rotated around the earth.  Obviously as time progresses, we make observational and scientific progress.  In time, we may find that the idea of a God is as outdated as the idea that the earth was flat.