 |
|
|
|
 The Air Force Academy has made a big change to its honor code to reflect religious diversity.
October 25th, 2013
05:11 PM ET
Air Force makes 'God' optional in honor codeBy Emily Smith, CNN (CNN) - The U.S. Air Force Academy has decided to make phrase "so help me God" optional in its honor code after an activist group protested that requiring all cadets to recite it violates their rights. The complete oath reads: "We will not lie, steal, or cheat, nor tolerate among us anyone who does, so help me God." Cadets are required to recite the oath when they complete basic training. It is also taken by the entire cadet wing each year as re-affirmation of their commitment to the honor code, said AFA spokesman Major Brus Vidal. The Military for Religious Freedom Foundation, a watchdog group that has waged repeated battle with the armed services, took issue with the last clause of the sentence, saying that no cadets should be forced to make a promise to God. After the complaint was filed by MRFF, the Air Force Academy Honor Review Committee met for an in-depth discussion regarding the oath. On Friday, the AFA released a statement saying they had decided to make the final clause of the honor oath optional. The AFA statement read, in part, “Here at the Academy, we world to build a culture of dignity and respect, and that respect includes the ability of our cadets, Airmen and civilian Airmen to freely practice and exercise their religious preference –- or not.” "The fact that the oath is optional will be communicated in honor lessons, leadership lessons, and religious respect lessons during the summer (cadet basic military training) so all trainees will understand prior to taking the Cadet Honor Oath that the final clause will be completely optional," said Vidal. "The person administering the oath, who is the cadet wing honor chair has the option to say or not say 'so help me god," so this might vary from year to year," Vidal continued. MORE ON CNN: Air Force: Bible and nukes don't mix Mikey Weinstein, MRFF's founder and president, said he would sue the academy on behalf of his clients if the words were still left at the end of the oath, even if repeating them was optional. “If the words are still there and you don’t say [them] you turn yourself into a tarantula on a wedding cake,” he said. MRFF has taken issue with the Air Force before. In 2011, the group complained about an Air Force training presentation that used religion to teach the ethics and morality of using nuclear weapons. That same year, CNN learned that the Air Force was using religious tenets such as the Ten Commandments to teach core values to ROTC cadets. MORE ON CNN: Air Force's use of Christian messages extends to ROTC
« Previous entryVatican suspends German bishop amid spending investigation
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
I find it very reassuring that Santa is out there and brings me presents every year. The way he says "ho, ho, ho" is timeless and fills me with joy. The way he gave Rudolph a chance to shine fills me with hope. It is a message to all people, and I don't think we would have morals without that message. I have read many books that talk about Santa being a happy, jolly fellow and it all has to be true because it's in a book.
Why can't you say something original?
If I was the devil I would write the bible.
No other book has held humanity back so much. He is an evil genius.
Too funny. You can look back to the dark ages caused by scientific repression and embracing blind faith as unquestionable truth, trumping all reason and critical thinking while people are tortured and executed simply for questioning it. Christianity has definitely held us back. The inquisition, the crusades, the dark ages. That's thousands of years worth of more science and technology we could have instead of Christians holding us back by fighting against beneficial stem cell research that could benefit millions and save many lives.
God was used by earthly rulers as a way to make their soldiers fight harder. In any war, both sides were told that god was on their side and hated their enemies. Promise your cannon fodder that god will give them victory and that if they die they will live in an everlasting wonderland up in the sky. What infantile foolishness the human race has been prey to for millennia. Based on greed by the ruling classes and the clergy.
taking god off this pledge is a step away from primitive voodoo and toward knowledge and truth. It is not before time!
Or even better promise them a bunch of virgins. (why anyone would want a bunch of virgins rather than experienced women is beyond me though).
Why do you keep rehashing the same old atheist propaganda?
Why do you keep rehashing the same old religious propaganda?
Why do you ask?
Why do you ask?
Why are you asking me that?
Why are you asking anyone anything?
Why are you asking about me asking about that?
fake Observer/etc. is back, but at least they are just making themself look like a fool.
why do you label historical facts as atheist propaganda and yet label unverifiable lines from a bronze age story book as truth. it would be laughable if you weren't causing so much damage to mankind. As it is, it's tragic.
Why do you say that?
poor sad Rebecca
@bostontola : There is a lot science can't explain yet, your specific question about soft tissue I am unaware of.
Yes, but what happens when the evidence is contrary to the current views (i.e. history or earth)? Should the dino soft tissue falsify the 65 million years ago viewpoint?
BTW – If you google 'dino soft tissue', you'll find the articles I'm referencing. They have been in every major news source over the last 10 years.
L4H,
These findings will be studied and tested, I don't know what they will conclude. I do know that there is no law of physics that will be violated if the fossil is soft tissue. Laws of physics would have to be violated for dinosaurs to be less than 65M years old.
So 1 bit of soft tissue counters millions of other finds?
Live4Him,
You Google the scientist who made this discovery (Mary Schweitzer, a Christian, btw) and see what she has to say:
"Creation magazine claimed that Schweitzer’s research was “powerful testimony against the whole idea of dinosaurs living millions of years ago. It speaks volumes for the Bible’s account of a recent creation.”
This drives Schweitzer crazy. Geologists have established that the Hell Creek Formation, where B. rex was found, is 68 million years old, and so are the bones buried in it. She’s horrified that some Christians accuse her of hiding the true meaning of her data. “They treat you really bad,” she says. “They twist your words and they manipulate your data.”
Schweitzer’s research has been hijacked by “young earth” creationists, who insist that dinosaur soft tissue couldn’t possibly survive millions of years. They claim her discoveries support their belief, based on their interpretation of Genesis, that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Of course, it’s not unusual for a paleontologist to differ with creationists. But when creationists misrepresent Schweitzer’s data, she takes it personally: she describes herself as “a complete and total Christian.”
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur.html?c=y&page=1
L4H
Schweitzer's research has been hijacked by "young earth" creationists....that claim the earth is only thousands of years old....but when the creationists misinterpret Schweitzer's data she takes it personally....she describes herself as "a complete and total Christian".
Lying to make your point L4H just proves what a mockery you make of the young earth believers.
Why am I here? Nurse! Nurse!
@Live4Him,
"Yes, but what happens when the evidence is contrary to the current views (i.e. history or earth)?"
Science adjusts to new data. The question is whether or not the evidence is accurate and says what you claim it says.
"Should the dino soft tissue falsify the 65 million years ago viewpoint?"
I don't think so, no.
As you've been told before soft tissue does not equate to DNA, which is what your usual "contradiction" entails. If the "soft" tissue is T-rex tissue, then the question becomes how did the tissue survive so long in such a state.
You see there is a huge amount of evidence for the age in which T-rexes lived, i.e. ~65 mya. Supposedly, although I'm not aware of the detials, there is evidence that soft tissue (not DNA) deteriorates in shorter time than 65 million years. So if both measurements, are correct, i.e. it is t-rex "soft" tissue, then two possibilities remain: 1) T-rexes existed at some time more recent or 2) "soft" tissue can last longer than previously thought.
Given the weight of evidence on the side of the age of T-rex fossils, I would suspect the latter is the case, but I would want more data before making any definitive statements.
Atheists are being deceived by an evil demon.
Read all about it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil_demon
But atheist don't believe in this evil demon(god).
Well garsh...since wikipedia said it , it must be true.
Pure rubbish. I am not being deceived by some demon.
Why do you know you are not?
Rebecca. Why do you know that you're not?
Why couldn't a demon make you think that you're not under it's control?
because the tooth fairy and santa would protect me!
Because I would have to believe in some greater being. Since I don't I am not controlled. You however do believe in a greater being. Are you sure you right? Because I believe that if your god exist he is a demon.
Why are you so sure that your thoughts are your own?
Why can't a demon be making you think that your thoughts are your own?
Why can't a demon make you see what it wants you to see, as if you are in a grand, cosmic "Truman Show".
your neighbors are definitely watching you too Rebecca. Close the shades and lock the front door!
Ok. How do you know that a demon isn't making you believe in him as god?
Why so many questions to an obvious troll?
Why would a demon do that?
god uses the Bible to pick out dumb people. Anybody who thinks it is the literal word of god is considered dumb and goes to hell.
In case you skipped over what Jesus actually said, He made it clear he speaks in parables so that those who actually what to know the truth will find it. The rest come up with nonsense like you do when they read it.
In your haste to seem so far above a Christian you also skipped over the part why you cannot hear, see or read about the truth.
fred, enjoy hell.
Yep. Jesus spoke in parables. He wanted to make it as confusing as possible for the mostly ignorant people he was supposedly trying to help. Makes sense to SOME.
Observer
Not confusing at all. Those who truly wish to become children of God are given the gift of the Holy Spirit who guides the believer to the way.
No doubt you are being deceived. The good news is that you are only held accountable for that which you were given. Some people are actually blessed by God because he blinds them from seeing through the deception. There are consequences for rejecting God but they are severe for those who have seen God and then reject the truth. The worst consequence falls upon Satan and his demons as the Bible makes it clear they will spend eternity in a place where the worm never dies. Children who do not have capacity suffer not and those with limited capacity are further given grace and mercy.
The blessing you have is you cannot see the truth. That could be a demon, a defect in awareness capacity, pride, and a host of other possibilities including God blessing you with blindness. I could not possibly know which it is and can only offer the truth as I see it.
You claim you reject God because somehow he never answered your prayer. Well that is BS but, his answer may have been to bind you. I recall you once posted you reject God because the church or God refused to answer you as to the why of certain observed events. God certainly does not need to respond to every demand of a spoiled child and the church does not have all the answers. My guess is that you reject God because God fails to match your man made image or vision. That is a problem most likely related to lack of a sixth sense and poor imagery presented of God in your lifetime.
Rebecca<
"Atheists are being deceived by an evil demon."
It's probably the same one that turns believers into hypocrites who trash others for not believing all of a Bible that they don't believe all of themselves.
Why are they hypocrites?
Why does this word get used very frequently?
Rebecca,
NO one believes every word of the Bible. They just pick and choose what they like and ignore the rest. That's why so many Christian HYPOCRITES use it to pick on gays while IGNORING the MUCH MUCH GREATER number of Christian ADULTERERS who got that way through divorce and remarriage. Same way for PRETENDING the Bible ever mentions abortion.
Why do you think they are hypocrites?
Rebecca
"Why do you think they are hypocrites?"
Do you have a reading comprehension disability?
Why do you ask?
fake Observer,
That's much better. Just make one person, yourself, look stupid.
Observer
"NO one believes every word of the Bible."
I do.
Yeah totally. Of course men can walk on water, and live inside a whale for several days. Collecting 2 of every species on earth is very likely and logical. If you believe every word of it, I feel sorry for you. Some of the stories are obviously not based on reality and are strictly to teach a lesson.
No need to feel sorry for me. My sins have been washed away. And you can reject those things if you want to. But you better be SURE you're right.
i am not sure i am right, but i am enough of a man to take punishment if i deserve it. i do not hide behind others sacrifice. that is cowardice
And maybe you're being deceived by the impish Mr. Myxlplyx, who can say really?
Why would the impish Mr. Myxlplyx want to deceive me?
because that is his job.
Why would he have such a job?
Rebecca,
An "evil demon", a Master Deceiver, eh? Deceptive enough to have written (or inspired) the Bible, yes? Dazzle 'em with stories of supernatural fantasies, throw in a bit of mushy "god of love" stuff, and promises of eternal bliss - bingo, they're hooked - and the "evil one" sits back and cackles and enjoys watching them all fight about it for century after century!
How do you know the devil isn't the "good one"?
Lucifer is the Light bringer, is he not?
sweet smelling flowers roam the sidewalks
while big bellied dandelions platoon;
the spring rains are falling a funny tune at the expense
of a funny man;
stepping on and off the curb, looking a bit bored;
eyes up and shoes flexed for the sprint
suddenly bright sun elbows its way between two clouds;
a funny man flaps his ready feat into a small puddle and smiles
the sun was sweet;
it tasted warm on his tongue and eye lids
If someone is taking a code of honor in the form of an oath, is it not assumed that person is proclaiming that oath to a person or power who is more holy than they are in order that they might be held accountable?
If that person then is not proclaiming their oath before God, then, pray tell, WHO are they wishing to be accountable to?
The government? Because we all know how immoral our government is... To our fellow man? Maybe, but if we really knew what our peers thought, felt, said, and have done in their life, we would see that none are moral enough to be accountable to.
Is it an oath then for oath's sake? If so, then it is meaningless, for an oath is incapable of making a man holier than he is.
In this country, they have a right to take any oath they choose, but without God, any vow to righteousness, which is what their oath was, is meaningless.
What is the point of swearing an oath to the bogie man?
That doesn't make any sense either.
Who knows what goes on in the unseen hyperspace around us. We are being scrutinized, studied, and judged.
infantile slave mentality
Why do you keep saying the same thing?
" Yet across the gulf of space, minds that are to our minds as ours are to those of the beasts that perish, intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic, regarded this earth with envious eyes, and slowly and surely drew their plans against us."
– War Of The Worlds by H.G. Wells
So you are saying we are being watched by Martians?
Who knows? Apparently you think you do. Why ask that question and then give a ridiculous answer?
Why do you think the answer is ridiculous?
What if I wanted to swear to allah (another fairy tale).
What if I wanted to swear to zeus.
Its all the same silliness.
There was a time when a man's word was his most prized possession, some are still that way. Not all though so your question is valid, do oaths have meaning if people don't value them?
If I was a betting man. I would put money on the fact that I am a better and fairer man than you.
I consider swearing an oath on god to be meaningless because god doesn't exist.
Joey:
It is impossible for you to posit a negative absolute. In fact, if there is anything that science cannot fully explain, and there are many, then until science can fully explain everything there is to know about anything, then you can never discount the possibility of the existence of miracles and the supernatural. And if you are willing to concede that, then you admit at least the possibility that God exists. Since you do not know everything, you cannot say with authority that God does not exist.
and you can't discount the possibility of a fluffy pink flying unicorn flying joyous loop-de-loops around the moon ...
but neither the aforementioned creature or your god actually exist.
Dislexic Dog:
One of the most common objections to the existence of God involves arguments about the existence of Santa Claus, invisible pink unicorns, and the flying spaghetti monster. Although it is not possible to prove absolutely the non-existence of Santa Claus, (because you cannot prove a negative absolute) most people cease to believe in his existence by age 10. Although the existence of Santa Claus has not been disproved, the weight of evidence suggests that he does not exist. Likewise, although we cannot prove invisible pink unicorns or flying spaghetti monsters do not exist, we tend to reject their existence, since none have ever been detected. Shouldn't the same logic apply to the existence of God? Using evidence, God's existence CAN be proven, but whether or not individuals are willing to listen is another story…
Some of us stopped believing in santa and god at the same time. It just makes sense.
"Using evidence, God's existence CAN be proven" ... ???
oh your poor deluded mind. There is no more proof for your god than for Santa, the tooth fairy, unicorns, zeus, ra, ganesa, Dracula, zombies, ghosts, ... or any other imaginary creature.
God may exist in your infantile slave mind but he does not exist out of it.
I guess you could say it was the best gift Santa Claus ever gave me.
Dislexic Dog:
Sir, I have treated you with the utmost respect, and to try to make your point, you turn to attacks on me? I don't understand that.
It is a mistake to limit reality only to the realm of what can be objectivity proven. The definition of reality includes everything that is and has been whether or not it is observable or comprehensible. Love is real, but it is not objectively proven. Scientists may be able to point to certain chemicals in our brain that are involved in the process of us feeling the emotion of love, but if we were to take all of those chemicals and dump them into a bowl, can I now say that the bowl loves me? Are we not more than just the sum of our physical parts?
Likewise, just because a scientific test cannot be devised to test for and prove the existence of God, evidences abound that God is nonetheless real. (See Romans 1:18-32)
• Something exists.
• You do not get something from nothing.
• Therefore a necessary and eternal “something” exists.
• The only two options are an eternal universe or an eternal Creator.
• Science and philosophy have disproven the concept of an eternal universe.
• Therefore, an eternal Creator exists.
Dislexic Dog:
Sir, I have treated you with the utmost respect, and to try to make your point, you turn to attacks on me? I don't understand that.
It is a mistake to limit reality only to the realm of what can be objectively proven. The definition of reality includes everything that is and has been whether or not it is observable or comprehensible. Love is real, but it is not objectively proven. Scientists may be able to point to certain chemicals in our brain that are involved in the process of us feeling the emotion of love, but if we were to take all of those chemicals and dump them into a bowl, can I now say that the bowl loves me? Are we not more than just the sum of our physical parts?
Likewise, just because a scientific test cannot be devised to test for and prove the existence of God, evidences abound that God is nonetheless real. (See Romans 1:18-32)
• Something exists.
• You do not get something from nothing.
• Therefore a necessary and eternal “something” exists.
• The only two options are an eternal universe or an eternal Creator.
• Science and philosophy have disproven the concept of an eternal universe.
• Therefore, an eternal Creator exists.
Sorry for double post... Computer glitch...
how can you use a quote from your book to justify god's existence?
Using the words of someone in the same cult as you, who is just as deluded as you, to prove your point is hilarious!
It is a mistake to limit reality only to the realm of what can be objectivity proven.
Translation: Reality can be whatever you want it to be.
By your own logic, you now have to prove that I don't know everything. Good luck.
Lamb,
No, reality is defined by what is objective and subjective.
Joey,
Prove you don't know everything? Sure. What color is my hair?
Lawrence of Arabia,
"• The only two options are an eternal universe or an eternal Creator."
Nope. We don't know what we don't know yet.
Feel free to keep your hypothesis in the hopper, though, but do not claim that it's fact. Someday maybe we'll know what's really up.
I'm not going to make it easy for you Lawrence, much like your god I will now go silent. So, can you prove that I don't know what color your hair is?
Joey,
No one on this planet claims to know everything, and if they did, they would be placed into a padded room so that they would not hurt themselves.
If you knew everything, you would have all of the intimate details of the love lives of the fleas on the back of Napolean's great grandmother's black cat. (if she had one) For a human to claim to know everything is insanity. But, that is what you would have to have in order to make an authoritative statement such as "there is no God."
On the other hand, if I make the claim that there IS a God, then all I am required to know is that bit of knowledge that pertains to the existence of God, nothing more.
Which is more likely true then? After all, I may have come upon a bit of understanding that you have not yet come across.
I find the chance that there is no god to be much higher than the chance that the Christian god exists.
Having spent my entire life surrounded by Christians and attending Christian schools I highly doubt you have any arguments for the existence of god that I haven't already found to be lacking.
Joey,
Then that is your choice, and you have that right. But you do not have the authority, nor the knowledge to say that God does not exist.
Your right there could be a god, but anyone who has read the bible, and has half a brain can tell you that the god it describes is in fact impossible.
Joey,
"anyone who has read the bible, and has half a brain can tell you that the god it describes is in fact impossible"
For the moment, I will ignore your attack... Are you saying then that Jonathan Edwards was stupid? He was one of the greatest minds that America ever produced, and probably the greatest theologian. What about John Owen? John Flavel? Thomas Manton?
Jonathan Edwards? His he the guy that claims he can talk to dead people? The rest of those people I have never heard of.
"Science and philosophy have disproven the concept of an eternal universe."
No they have not.
Joey,
What claim of Jonathan Edwards' are you referring to? The other men were puritans, part of the Westminster Divines who would pen the Westminster Confession of Faith in the 1600's.
"But you do not have the authority, nor the knowledge to say that God does not exist."
How about the lack of evidence? There is no objective evidence for a creator, so yeah he has every right to say god doesn't exist. It's illogical to assume he does without evidence. That's like me saying that you do not have the authority or knowledge to say that invisible gnomes that run your digestive system do not exist. You don't have to prove non existence, but evidence IS required to prove existence. Something doesn't just exist by default because you can't prove it doesn't.
Barcs,
No model of an eternal universe works. Furthermore, if any math or model of an eternal universe DID work, it is merely theory that can never align with observable reality. And any mathematics that cannot align with observable reality is fiction.
Robert J. Smith, a mathematics professor at the University of Ottawa, in publishing a book ent.itled “Mathematical Modeling of Zombies” (University of Ottawa Press, 2014) developed mathematical formulae to describe the rate of zombie transmission within a population… OK, so he’s got a math formula, does that automatically make it correct, or even real? Obviously, no.
The math must stack up to reality, otherwise you are using a calculator with the same skill as a writer who uses a pen to draft a work of fiction. It is wrong to calculate something, get a result and say, "This is how the world works." because you are ignoring the fact that everything is made up of real matter. You can't separate that fact or you will end up in trouble. The calculations must stack up to observable reality.
To Larry of her labia: "No model of an eternal universe works. Furthermore, if any math or model of an eternal universe DID work, it is merely theory that can never align with observable reality. And any mathematics that cannot align with observable reality is fiction."
====
That is essentially admitting that an eternal god is fiction, Larry, not being able to align with observable reality and all....
Why can't a person merely be held accountable to the word he has sworn?
Do you need some higher power to make you behave?
The point is, if you are not appealing to a higher power to keep you accountable, then what reason do you have for holy living? Are you appealing to a moral code? Where did the moral code come from? Did it come from wicked men, or a holy God? Oaths are nothing without accountability, and if we wish to be holy, then we cannot expect wicked men to keep us accountable.
Why would I need to be accountable to some higher power, when I am already accountable to my fellow man, and to my own conscience?
If the ability to live good and moral does not come from within me, no external threat or promise can make it so.
"If the ability to live good and moral does not come from within me, no external threat or promise can make it so."
I would agree that our consciences certainly play a part in keeping us moral, but the problem with that is that our conscience is not always the best determiner of right and wrong... For instance, the conscience of the po.rno.gra.pher will not be the same as that of the pastor. Also, we cannot determine for ourselves what is right and wrong. If I walk into a store and I only want to pay 5 dollars for a 10 dollar item, what I "feel" is right, isn't actually right.
Morality can only come from without a man, not from within. His conscience is educated by the highest standard of morality that he perceives, so for any man making an oath to moral standards, it is imperative to find out what the highest standards are... What are they? Where did they come from? How does one keep them? etc...
Straw man... "wicked men" and "holy god" are not the only choices.
Morality HAD to exist before religions, since religions adopted morality into their set of club rules.
holy living? pompous dweeb.
If you need supernatural threats and promises in order to be a good and honorable person then you are not a good or honorable person.
Lawrence, I think the facts themselves are evidence you are wrong. Many of the most peaceful, low crime countries in the world are run by secular law. We agree to a standard to promote health and happiness and knowledge (wellness) among our citizens and then we make laws to promote it. Like it or not, it works.
NEWS FLASH!
God exists proof in soft dinosaur tissue.
The earth is only 6000 years old.
Read all about it.
The earth is 6,000 years old.
The earth is 13,500,000,000 years old.
Guess which one is likely to be closer to true.
Based upon the dino soft tissue, I'd say the former.
mind numbing foolishness!
6000 for sure.
Liar. Deceiver.
Speaking of her garbage:
Karie called Bible Clown a “disgusting, deviant perverted virus,” and a “Bozo,” before ending with this prediction:
“Hell is coming for you love. Special dungeon just for u and u won’t be able to die. LOL.LOL.”
Her various troll names:
Lamb of Dog (stolen)
Apple Bush (stolen)
Cpt. Obvious (stolen)
Richard Cranium (stolen)
Akira (stolen)
AvdBerg (stolen)
Maddy (stolen)
laststonecarver (stolen)
doc zzzz
Doc Vegetable Lasagna
Observer (obviously hijacked)
bananas
bo
ploj
pas
dodo murdock
lulu
bootyfunk (stolen)
slappy
love
tt
point being
louie
cherrie
prophet
Dr E
kati
sam tone
blessed
Meredith S. (Stolen from a 9/11 widow!!
doodoo
bingo
wary
alaqeada
sam stone (stolen)
al
observer
sammy
karie
bethany
barry
blake
faith
hharri
charlie
terry
mary
yudhisthira mahabharata jr
eddie
tex
dewie
Pharisee DM
DODO
perdy
greg
Atheism is... (stolen)
Such a profoundly ill person. So very, very sick.
Hmmm. Maybe crazy. Maybe sick. Maybe just a jerk throwing a giant temper tantrum. Maybe, like B'rer Rabbit and the tar-baby, he's flailing around and making himself more frustrated. The more junk he posts, the more he gets deleted, so he posts more junk to get deleted, ad infinitum. We should try not to get any of that sticky stuff on us.
if i had to guess, i would guess it is a jerk throwing a temper tantrum
now, if it would just take some sound advice, and suck on the business end of a 12 gauge, i would have no real objection
Ok crazy.
The joyful myth and eager messenger;
Stained glass soars to the rafters;
Surely God is here, and yet this house is empty;
No salesman can close;
Lovely building full of lies, heard less prayers than cries;
Sacred this and sacred that;
Babies raped and priests zipping up their pants;
No leads to follow;
This is what Jesus witnesses from His lofty perch in that glass;
Abuse the sheep and pay the tithe;
Fill the tray and please don’t stay;
Such a lovely cathedral, such a vile torture chamber.
Charm, you forgot to include my rap in the new new testament!
Religion is a crime
I preach that mess all the time
The churches just keep on prayin’ and sayin’
I ain’t hatin’
Just demonstratin’
Atheists stand up fool and show your face
Ain’t no disgrace
Gotta be that way player
Do us all that favor
Psalms, unfortunately were stuck in the OT, you do have poetic licence to include them wherever you like. Of course you could always include it as an epistle the devotees believe almost anything in the book.
Uptempo/Swing
I remember there was a time when I could troll to my heart’s content.
But now it seems I can’t get the blog’s consent.
Every time I try to troll
It’s just another nasty “No!”
Someone says the same thing every time…
They say, trolling is bad, it makes me feel sad.
I wish that you wouldn’t troll you see?
We all need a break, from your crummy mistake!
So please stop your trolling today!
I really mean it…..
Please stop the trolling, Christ quit the trolling, cease with the trolling today!
Tips is the case please.
Quit following me I got no more to give you people I got no more to give so no coffee... I'm done. Done.
But I wasn’t done. I was only pouring foundation. That is when it happened. Yeah I guess it is like a cell. It has dark spots, corners. There is a lighted area but the bulb flickers on and off more than it used too. Strange to be a rabid animal in a cage you built yourself and when they try to save you….bite them…then ask them to come back.
to eat a steak, politely rest your butter knife through a perfectly cooked filet that melts in your mouth like warm, fresh spoiled tuna.
Is science and belief in god compatible?
Unknown.
Is science and some religion compatible?
Unknown.
Is science and the biggest religion, Christianity, compatible?
There may be small pockets of Christians that interpret scripture to enable compatibility. By and large the answer seems to be no.
Even though many Christians claim that science and Christianity are complementary, when you dig deeper, conflicts appear. Religion and science could search for answers to different classes of questions keeping them complimentary. The problem is, Abrahamic religions were created before people understood that there were different classes of questions regarding the nature of the universe and the nature of man/societies. They combined moral, and practical civil law with a theory of the universe and it's hard to take it back now.
If religion stuck to laws for human and societal interaction, science and Christianity may be able to be complementary. Sticking with the theory of the universe creates conflict of fact, and conflict of method.
Factual conflicts have sprouted up since the scientific method took root, we all know how Galileo was arrested for supporting a helio-centric system rather than a geo-centric system. These factual conflicts raise doubt in the source god for Christianity. Why did their god allow such errors to be instilled in foundational scripture? Why would their god let its flock defend such errors to the continual embarrassment of the religion?
Conflict in methodology might be irrelevant if science and Christianity were pursuing a different class of questions, but the overlap puts the faith based methodology and the test based methodology on a collision course for issues in the intersection. Founding dogma and doctrine on issues that are, or eventually will be decided factually, like free will, evolution, etc., further erode the foundation of Christianity. Catholic doctrine does "evolve", but only slowly. The rate of scientific knowledge acceleration will soon outpace their ability to adapt.
I wonder if a broader reset will happen where a sect of Christianity will form that separates the moral part from the natural universe part.
@bostontola : Is science and belief in god compatible? Unknown
Why wouldn't they be compatible? Science is nothing more than a methodology – its not the answer to the question.
L4H,
Maybe in your view thats true, that would be another incompatibility. Science is a methodology and the body of knowledge gained by that methodology.
@bostontola : Science is a methodology and the body of knowledge gained by that methodology.
So, how does "science" explain the incompatibility between dinos living 65 million years ago and dino soft tissue being found (when soft tissue decays in less than 10,000 years)?
I knew dinosaurs weren't that old.
L4H,
There is a lot science can't explain yet, your specific question about soft tissue I am unaware of. I know that soft tissue has been fossilized, but of course that is different.
@HIM: there are quite a few methods of "fossilzation" everything from the know bone fossils of prehistoric animals, to freeze dried mamoth carcasses.
dinosaur fossils are strictly "bone fossils" by the manner of how they are preserved requires the calcium in the bones to be replaced by rock minerals. that would be the reason you can not find "bone fossils" in a forested/ damp enviroment because the moisture decays the bones before the minerals in the soil can replace the calcium in the bones.
that manner of "fossilization" doesn't preserve soft tissues, only bones. now you can have things like "outlines" of leaves and skin markings preserved merely as a picture, but not the true material itself.
so please stop reading mormon properganda, it rots your brain studies have shone. XD
The "soft tissue" he is referring to is not of dinosaur origin...it was contamination from microbes/bacteria.
He has tried this in the past, it does not fly.
Sired Boston...
How many 'celestial universes' will need to be formed in order for a being made celestial can thusly be shaped..?
Are atomically formulated celestially terrestrial beings the end-all around living systemic entropies..?
Where at or where does one's conscience end from its beginning momentum..?
Lionly,
I wish I could answer your questions but they are beyond me.
Is Science and belief in God compatible? = YES (Science will eventually confirm all that the Bible says. Remember, the Bible remains the same... however, scientific theories change from time to time as more evidence are discovered).
Will science eventually show that we live in a geo-centric universe?
Ask the dinosaurs.
JB,
Your assumption is the bible is right and science is wrong. I know that science will change over time, but not in the way you are thinking. Science improves over time, extending the range of its theories. Newton's laws could be viewed as wrong or as limited to range of velocities and mass densities. Einstein's theory extended the range of validity. The technological world we live in couldn't function with major flaws in science. The principles have been validated uncounted times by different people, our technology works. That's a lot of evidence for science. The bible on the other hand has little objective evidence to support it, and much to refute it.
I'm not assuming Science is wrong at all. What I'm saying is, the Bible is a finished Book. Nothing in it will ever change or can be changed. Science will eventually confirm what has been written in the Bible.
Example: The 7 dimensions of the unseen (spirit) world. Science has acknowledge electromagnetism, the other 6 curled up dimensions they do not yet know much about. (All these are mentioned in the Bible).
"Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things WHICH ARE SEEN WERE NOT MADE OF THINGS WHICH DO APPEAR.
JB,
The bible says the earth was created before the stars, do you think science will eventually show that? If so, science is wrong today.
Science suggests the earth is ~4.5 Billion years old, and the universe ~ 13.7 Billion years old.
The Bible says: Gen 2:7 "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the dust of the ground, and breathe into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Where did the dust come from?
Proverbs 8:1-31 The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, FROM THE BEGINNING, OR EVER THE EARTH WAS.....
Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: WHILE AS YET HE HAD NOT MADE THE EARTH nor the fields, nor THE HIGHEST PART OF THE DUST OF THE WORLD. (Cosmos).
So the creation process began with the dust of the world (cosmos).
How old then are the elements of the earth? The Bible doesn't say. It could be 4.5 Billion years, 4.5 Trillion years – or even everlasting (i.e. it's completely outside of time and space).
Therefore the process of creating the elements that were used to create the heaven and earth in its configuration would seem to be independent of the age of the elements used to assemble it. (Fr: The Articles of Configuration)
And there you have it...the Bible NEVER said the earth was 6000 yrs old.
JB,
I didn't mention the age of the earth or the cosmos. The bible is pretty clear that the earth was created before the stars though.
"The bible says the earth was created before the stars....?"
(Answer taken from The Articles of Configuration)
The scripture clearly says in verse 1 God CREATED and created is from the Hebrew word "bara". However in verse 16, it says God MADE and this is the Hebrew word "asah"
In verse 16, did God make the sun, moon, and stars – OR did HE MAKE THEM TO DO SOMETHING.
What was the something that he MADE them to do?
God MADE the sun TO RULE the day. He MADE the moon TO RULE the night.
How did he bring about this rule -by fine tuning cloud dispersion, rotation of the earth, and orbital tilt of the earth for signs and for seasons, and for days, and years?
Ex. we can say "my boss made me work overtime." does it mean that he created me? Or, does it mean my boss MADE me do something? The distinction is very clear! And so it is with the sun and the moon.
For the VISIBLE things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made...
These are great and thought provoking questions that you have asked.
Please note that I am answering with the aid of my resources.. (I grow in wisdom and knowledge daily... so I don't have all the answers... so I answer what I know, and use the resources that I read daily to answer your question).
The book I mentioned (or used to answer your question) is written by a scientist who is a believer in Christ Jesus. Some of his writings can be found here: dayspringfromonhigh.com
Do not be put off by the simplicity of the page. Some recommendations if you choose to read any of the writings:
The Ancients 1 & 2. The Alabaster Box. Transforming the Mind.
Good afternoon, everyone!
What's up T. You have been a topic this morning lol
Why is that?
Since you are pregnant, we all feel like aunties and uncles!
Congratulations, Topher, on the upcoming blessed event. Take no offence but I have been having a little fun at your expense.
Thanks!
Haha. Do you want to know where we're registered, Uncle Apple?
You know I really am a damn good uncle! lol
Good afternoon, Topher! I understand congratulations are in order for you and your wife? So, congratulations!
Thank you!
Topher, just know that if you have a kid god might send you to hell for participating in the blasphemy that is evolution.
Joey doesn't get it.
To make it funny!
Kind of hard for me to participate in something that doesn't exist.
really? yet you claim to have a personal relationship with god
oh, the irony
congrats on the new little one on the way.
i love children the most, they always bring me hope for a better future because they can avoid the mistakes our generation has made. 🙂
Thanks
Go now and tell the fools the truth of their misplaced worship.
Speak loudly that religion is the true great evil on this Earth.
This Evil affects every plant and animal the Mother gave us.
Tell them and care not if they are vulgar, for you are the light.
Not bad!
Nobody's denying any freedom of speech rights. They used to force them to take an oath that mentions god. This is no longer the case. Previously they were forced to say this oath or they weren't allowed in. This has absolutely nothing to do with taking away freedom of speech, it's separation of church and state, a concept that many religious folks do not understand. Just because you believe something with no evidence behind it whatsoever, doesn't mean that everyone else has to believe it and follow it.
I am now esoteric in my feelings towards believers that are agnostic, however I do believe that they are, each one, atheist. However since I am a solipsist I know they are what I want them to be, and that is comforting.
Not a single word he spoke, of which we have a record, has proven unreliable or inaccurate.
Wrong.
What was the last thing he said?
@Born2BModerated : What was the last thing he said?
Trying to add to the Bible? No passage claims to records what His last words were.
Really? Are you reading the same New Testament that I am?
@EnjaySea : Are you reading the same New Testament that I am?
Where's the passage that states that "These are the last words Jesus ever spoke"?
(Matt. 27:45-46) “From the sixth hour until the ninth hour darkness came over all the land. About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"—which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"
(Luke 23:46) “Jesus called out with a loud voice, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." When he had said this, he breathed his last.”
(John 19:30) “When he had received the drink, Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.”
@Observer
Okay, but where does it say that these were His last words?
Really Live? That is the argument you want to go with. The verses quoted say he said something and then died, and you want to claim that doesn't mean they were his last words?
Alrighty Live4Him, since there is no passage that says "And he sayeth his last frickin words as thus:", I'll rephrase my point. The last words that each gospel recorded for him (before closing their story) were different. I suppose since you're sure that the New Testament is all true, that therefore he said all of these things at one point or another, and it just so happens that each gospel novelist picked and chose his quotes, and all coincidentally ended up choosing different quotes.
Okay, have it your way. But those of us who understand human nature can see as plain as day that these discrepancies highlight the fact that these accounts were invented, shaped, exaggerated, and embelished at each writer's discretion, and I see that as a reason to not trust any of it.
Good point. His last words are different, depending on the personality not of the prophet, but of the novelist whose job it was to fictionalize the story for public consumption.
So why can't this same line of reasoning be applied to the pledge?
It has been. Many times.
The biggest difference is that the pledge was changed to add god.
Because adding the phrase to the PLedge violated the Const!tution, it is inappropriate for it to be there, and it s representative of ALL of "We the people".
Other oaths do not have the backing and are not representative of the entire population.
I am always amused that the Pledge of Allegiance was written by a Baptist Minister, without the "Under God" included.
Yeah, and I am always amazed at the original Bellamy* salute which accompanied it!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellamy_salute
* Francis Bellamy, the Baptist minister who wrote the pledge.
Oh, yes, they changed that quickly once Hitler was elected Chancellor. Gee, wonder why?
Hi Akira!,
Yes I agree, but many religious people do not want religion involved with gov't in any way, and realistically why would they? There is no guarantee that their particular version of religion will be the accepted view, or even if it did, that it would stay that way. It should be the most reasonable position regardless of belief.
I had an interesting discussion with my best friend who is well educated and knowledgable, he said he supports leaving "Under God" in the pledge because of "tradition", I then happily pointed out that if he was arguing for tradition he would have to switch his opinion since "traditionally" it was added later. He had to reluctantly agree.
Hi, Blessed! I agree totally; "traditionally", the words weren't included. As the United States are secular, it seems to be disingenuous that the words would have been included in the first place...but then, the Red Scare frightened many.
One issue with the pledge is "One nation, under God" implies the person saying the pledge is putting "god" above the Nation. One is therefore pledging allegiance first and foremost to God, why should that be necessary and why would that be considered a good thing in a country founded upon freedom of thought?
I agree, and perhaps I was unclear about my meaning.
The article details how the clause was taken out of the oath. I'm wondering how the same reasoning used here DOESN'T lead one to conclude that under god should be taken out of the pledge. Both are swearing an oath invoking god after all, so what's the difference?
The article says that the phrase "so help me god" will be optional, so I took your post to mean that that 'option' should be extended to the Pledge, so that is what I was disagreeing with.
You're correct cheesemaker.
I misread the end of the article, my apologies.
Feel free to try