Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - mark

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: June 03, 2014, 08:09:51 PM »
Atheists consistently attempt to take the higher ground by pointing fingers of accusation at theists and accusing theists of committing all sorts of human rights violations in the name of "cultish religions," as they are fond of putting it. According to atheists, it is the belief in God that has caused people to commit the various atrocities common to mankind. Remove religion, belief in God, and belief in the Bible, etc.--the atheists argue--and the world will be a better place. This latter conclusion is mortally flawed for the following reasons:

1. Atheists have committed human rights violations en masse throughout history. For instance, Joseph Stalin--the atheist--ordered the deaths of between 40 million to 62 million people (20 million of which were everyday Soviet civilians), compared to the 6 million killed by Adolph Hitler the Roman Catholic "Christian."

 In other words, the problem is not the Bible or God. The problem is people, including those in false religions which have failed to teach the masses Biblical truths. An appreciation for Biblical truths and  standards of what's right and what's wrong is the only detriment against people committing human rights violations. Blaming God for the crimes of false Christians is an attempt at passing the buck.

"See! This only I have found, that the true God made mankind upright, but they themselves have sought out many plans." (Ecclesiastes 7:29)

"They have acted ruinously on their own part; they are not his children, the defect is their own. A generation crooked and twisted!" (Deuteronomy 32:5)

2. Atheism is itself a religion aka a cult. While atheist will argue that they don't believe in any god, the issue is not merely non-belief in God or gods but in having ANY sort of belief system. The belief system of atheism is centered around the philosophy of "secular-humanism."

3. Atheism is a religion according to a 2005 Wisconsin federal court ruling as well as the U.S. Supreme Court—the highest court in the land.

I don't understand the problem honestly. We got a soldier back, they got 5 people who had not been charged with a crime back. Where is the problem, Isn't it about time we discussed with the Taliban how to live at peace?
When I saw your name on this thread I was truly hoping you were going to say something intelligent for a change. Didn't happen :(

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: June 03, 2014, 07:37:23 PM »
What piece of crap message board did you get this from? Why do you believe what idiots write about religion and not what smart people write about atheism?
Kinda figured you would blame the source so I added a second source! Look it up for yourself brainless!

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: June 03, 2014, 07:24:46 PM »
Lets look at that, what is a religion.
: the belief in a god or in a group of gods (Nope we have a lack of belief in god or gods. We don't think they exist)

: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods (No ceremonies or worship here.)

: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group (You might be right here, but that would mean that sports is also a religion and politics, card games, tabletop games and money, also the reason it is important is because there are people shoving there faith in our throats.)

So it looks like a fail here. Sorry Mark, maybe if you had only 2 brain cells you would believe it, but I have billions and can critically think about what I do.

Atheism is a religion too! For a theist there’s nothing quite like watching an atheist get an intellectual walloping from a preacher. There’s just something apocalyptic about it, and it most easily occurs when the atheist tries to chop up religion to irrelevancy without realizing that he is himself awfully religious.

It happened again recently at the Cambridge Union debating society when former Anglican Archbishop Rowan Williams took on the best known name in contemporary atheism, Richard Dawkins. They were debating whether religion has a role in the 21st century.

Dawkins said it didn’t.

Williams said it did.

Everyone needs and everyone has a “God.” That’s why we’re so religious.

In the end, Williams was handed a decidedly strong victory with more than two times as many votes from the audience as the infamous atheist, Dawkins. It was a triumphant day for the faithful and a shameful one for the irreligious.

But actually no one really is irreligious.

This world beats to the rhythm of religion in a thousand ways, and absolutely everyone is religious -- including atheists.

Religion certainly includes an idea of a God under whom man is inherently subservient, but religion also governs the belief system undergirding the way people think about, and live, their lives.

It tells them who their authority is and it informs their values and behavior. It gives them their sense of morality and goodwill, and it guides them in the way they treat themselves and others. Religion does nothing less than construct one’s view of the world.

Atheists are, in fact, some of the most religious people.

First, they have a functioning God under whom they are subservient (normally it’s science or rationality, but mainly themselves), and that idea of God informs the way they live and interpret their lives. It informs their biases and determines their values, and governs any sense of morality or ethics they adhere too, or ignore.

Once that’s all settled all that’s left is the preaching.

And they preach all the time.

This new breed of atheists is obsessed with the idea of God. They write books, deliver speeches, comment-bomb the evangelical blogosphere and generally rant on ad nauseam about the ills of believing in God.

Honestly – comically – some atheists must type the word “God” on the Internet five times more often than most Christians I know and they do it with the fury of a fire-and-brimstone zealot!

Maybe no one invokes the name of “God” more than they, and they are doing so in more and more virulent ways such as the shocking moment when Dr. Dawkins recently told Al-Jazeera television that he believed being raised Catholic was in itself even more psychologically damaging than being abused by a priest!

Instead of just ignoring God, or the idea of God, atheist preachers feel somehow compelled to rid the Earth of him; so they argue endlessly that theists can’t prove God exists without confessing that they can’t prove he doesn’t either.

Occasionally, some of them discover that they do indeed worship a God, but it is an insufficient one.

They worship a God that loses his car keys when they are in his hand, or that misplaces the glasses on his face – a God filled with flaws and inadequacies, and a God (themselves) whose probability of helping them supernaturally is absolutely zero.

Everyone needs and everyone has a “God.” That’s why we’re so religious.

It’s a matter of which religion is yours.

One of the nice things about the Christian God is that he seems to be as concerned about those that do not believe as those who do.

Or as one skeptic-turned-believer has said of the Him, “a young man who wishes to remain a sound Atheist cannot be too careful of his reading. There are traps everywhere – God is, if I may say it, very unscrupulous.”

He knew it well.

For C.S. Lewis, the iconic British scholar, was himself a convert from the religion of the atheism to the religion of Christianity because, as he later said: “atheism turns out to be too simple.”

Oddly enough, atheists often accuse theists of being the simple ones. We are “anti-intellectual,” they say, and in so doing they become exactly what they accuse us of being.

It must be an unfortunate plight to be both anti-intellectual and religious!

God help them.

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: June 03, 2014, 07:17:07 PM »
The supreme court has ruled it a religion, LOL.. Let's hear this one dummy? LOL. Stop believing what idiots write on message boards or fake news sites.

Atheism is a Religion Says US Supreme Court
December 01, 2009 10:07 AM EST (Updated: December 01, 2009 10:44 AM EST)
views: 4115 | 1 person recommends this | comments: 176
Up until yesterday, I had been totally unaware that there was a case adjudicated in 2005 in Wisconsin, Kaufman v. McCaughtry. This case involved an Atheist inmate who filed a grievance as a result of being denied to form a study group for Atheists in his prison on the grounds that his First Amendment rights were thwarted by denial to form the group by the prison authorities. In order to understand how this was adjudicated, we need to know exactly what  the First Amendment regarding religion says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

 This amendment has two clauses. The first clause is referred to as the establishment clause, as you see the word establishment used in the first clause of the sentence that creates the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the US. The second clause is referred to as the free exercise clause, as you see the phrase free exercise noted in the second clause. This is the law that judges use to determine cases where freedom of religion is an issue. They interpret the law according to the evidence of the case that is under consideration. Whatever they decide sets precedence, a rule of thumb, so to speak, or a preceding condition of judgment that determines the way subsequent or following cases will be interpreted.

When this atheist plaintiff’s case was presented to the lower court, it was thrown out of court because the prisoner was asking to form a group that was not based on religious beliefs, but was considered by prison officials to be a request to form a non-religious group that was considered to be an activity group. At the time of his request, the prison authorities, defendants in the case, said that no other activity groups were permitted to be formed at that time, so the denial of his request by the prison officials was considered legitimate. The plaintiff himself did not see his atheism as any more than really just an opposition to religion so there had been no violation of either his right to establish the group or to exercise any religious belief.

The atheist was still not satisfied, so he appealed the case. When the case was brought before the higher court, it was further considered, that although the prison officials did not deem atheism a religion, perhaps it should have been considered a religion because it was a group that was "religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being." The case, therefore, was finally judged by the State Supreme Court as not being in violation of free exercise because the atheist would still be able to practice his atheism whether or not he was allowed to form the group, however, his right to establishment of that group that was religious in nature was denied, and thus a violation of his First Amendment rights. This case sets precedence that atheism is considered a religion by the United States Supreme Court.

 This ruling raises a lot of issues and some questions. One of the questions that immediately comes to mind is that if the Supreme Court has declared Atheism to be a religion, then why are atheistic philosophies like Darwinism, whether taught in science class or not, still an atheist philosophy, allowed to be propagated in schools without also the creationist aspect of religion also allowed in the curriculum? It seems to me that atheists are being allowed to establish and practice their religion in their secularist and humanist curriculum in our public schools without allowing either the establishment or free exercise of any other religion but their own. They seem to be able to do this because they claim theirs isn’t a religion, but the Supreme Court has declared that it is.
Another article!


Court rules atheism a religion

Decides 1st Amendment protects prison inmate's right to start study group

Published: 08/20/2005 at 1:00 AM

Printer Friendly

Text smaller

Text bigger


A federal court of appeals ruled yesterday Wisconsin prison officials violated an inmate’s rights because they did not treat atheism as a religion.

“Atheism is [the inmate's] religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being,” the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals said.

The court decided the inmate’s First Amendment rights were violated because the prison refused to allow him to create a study group for atheists.

Brian Fahling, senior trial attorney for the American Family Association Center for Law & Policy, called the court’s ruling “a sort of Alice in Wonderland jurisprudence.”

“Up is down, and atheism, the antithesis of religion, is religion,” said Fahling.

The Supreme Court has said a religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being. In the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins, the court described “secular humanism” as a religion.

Fahling said today’s ruling was “further evidence of the incoherence of Establishment Clause jurisprudence.”

“It is difficult not to be somewhat jaundiced about our courts when they take clauses especially designed to protect religion from the state and turn them on their head by giving protective cover to a belief system, that, by every known definition other than the courts’ is not a religion, while simultaneously declaring public expressions of true religious faith to be prohibited,” Fahling said.


Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: June 03, 2014, 11:59:29 AM »
 Atheism is a Religion! Anyone with two brain cells can figure this out! The Supreme court has ruled it a religion! If your an are simply following the wrong religion!

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: May 29, 2014, 11:33:47 AM »



Everything has a cause...

It is illogical to suggest that something had no cause. This is where the theory of evolution becomes inadequate. It can not explain how anything began, let alone life. When we consider the evidence (that there are things which exist) it logically demands that either something or someone caused it. We can then rule out "something" as the solution since we would be returning to the original problem (what made the something?). This demands that there must be someone who has always existed (eternal) and is in themselves therefore uncreated. We don't have to understand this in order for it to be so.

At this point some say we should not even try to understand these things because our minds just get in the way. But I suspect the opposite is the case. That is, it is perfectly legitimate to ponder these things and rather than our minds being too bigger an obstacle, our minds are actually too inadequate to comprehend them. Therefore, faith and thinking are not incompatible, its just that we have realise that they both require discipline and exercise.


 There is evidence for design...
The unraveling of the Human Genome Code was announced to the world as the discovery of the language of the Creator by then President, Bill Clinton. What scientists discovered was an extremely sophisticated genetic language necessary for even the simplest life forms to exist. To believe that this level of apparent design happened either randomly or by chance is a mathematical equation of probability with more zeros than I care to type (plus I don't know what the word is for numbers which are thousands of trillions!).


The universe displays an amazingly complex level of interdependency which logically leads to the conclusion that it was designed that way. There are just too many coincidences of such "just rightness" for it too be a random haphazard coincidence. The earth is "just the right" distance from the Sun; it contains "just the right" mixture of chemicals and gases to sustain life; humans have "just the right" ability to breath these gases; the human body has "just the right" synergy of internal organs in order to function, and so on.

Its important to note that the Bible does not give a date for the commencement of creation of the universe, or the date for the creation of mankind. The universe may well be 10,000,000,000 years old, and mankind's origins may well be as recent as 50,000 - 30,000 years ago. These numbers are in no way counter to the Biblical record, and extremely compatible with the evidence.


There is intrinsic morality which needs a point of reference...

How do we know what "evil" is? How do we know what "good" is? These concepts demand either the existence of a standard to make such evaluations, or an understanding what these concepts mean. Each of us are born with an innate sense of morality. We each fundamentally know what is right and wrong. It is incredible to consider that no matter time, culture, geographic location, or people, the Moral Law has been universally acknowledged.

This tends to confirm that all of creation bears the finger-prints of a Creator who is fundamentally good and right. That is, we each share a knowledge of what is right and wrong not just because we are taught or conditioned to accept these values, but because we are born with them.


The Resurrection of Jesus Christ...

Skeptics may dispute this historical claim that Jesus Christ rose again from the dead but they do so perilously. This is because there is enough evidence to validate it and it is the point at which all of the history of Christ and Christianity rests. This means that if anything of Christ and Christianity is true then the Physical Resurrection of Christ is also true. The opposite is also true. If Christ did not literally rise from the dead then none of his history or teachings have any credence.

But if the resurrection of Christ can be seen as a reasonable historic fact (based on over 500 eye-witnesses, the preparedness of all of those witnesses to defend their testimonies even at the point of losing their lives, the resultant baptism in the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues- still available today) then this is perhaps the most overwhelming piece of proof for the existence of God.

The claims of Christ can be experienced...

Jesus Christ made some seemingly outrageous claims about the benefits of following Him. He offered "rest" for the weary, "nourishment" for the hungry, "water" for the thirsty, "resurrection" for the dead, "direction" for aimless, "liberty" for the oppressed, "protection" for the vulnerable, "healing" for the hurting, and "salvation" for the lost.

I was 15 years of age when I accepted Christ. Never have I ever regretted it. It has been a journey for me that has seen me grow and change. I have felt the Lord guiding me. I can honestly say that I have heard Him speak to me (even though it hasn't been audibly). He has answered my prayers so often that I now almost take it for granted that my prayers will be answered. He has given my life direction and purpose that I otherwise would never have had.

Today He extends to you the invitation to experience for yourself the claims which He has made.

The evidence for the existence of God is available. For honest enquirers there are honest answers. For those who acknowledge that there is at least reasonable evidence (even if not all 5 points of evidence are accepted) then they can no longer claim to be "atheist". Like Professor Flew they can bravely embrace the title "theist" (God believer) without adopting any particular religious framework. Once this position can be reached then the next phase of the journey is to answer the question, "Is religion necessary or even helpful in discovering God?"



The scientific method has become synonymous with methodological naturalism. This is the idea that the only way knowledge can be apprehended is if it can be observed. But this is a fairly recent hijacking of what the scientific method means. If we could allow the scientific method to lead to certain to certain deductions, whether they be physical or metaphysical, we may be removing the restrictions which might hold us back from the truth - especially if we employ the scientific method in examining any theories involving metaphysical claims.

Since there is sufficient evidence to show that the universe began and therefore must have had a beginning, we must also include the dimensions of time and space as part of that beginning. Therefore the "Beginning Cause" must have been outside of time and space. This is one of the central claims of the Bible about God:  He is eternal and dwells 'above the heavens' (Heb. 7:26) - that is, God is outside of time and space. At this point, we could apply these deductions using the scientific method to dismiss the claims of certain religions which present their "God" as being a part of time and space (pantheism). This includes Buddhism and Hinduism.

Within time and space there is moral-evil, corruption, and decay. Since the Creator is outside of this He must be holy, immutable, and impeccable. This then excludes the concepts of "God" put forward by Islam and Mormonism. But it fits perfectly with the concept of God as portrayed in the Christian Bible.

Perhaps the simplest test for discovering the identity of the Creator-God is to employ the scientific method to Psalm 34:8 and Matthew 7:7.


Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: May 28, 2014, 08:46:12 PM »
Flunked another test. What are you doing in school again?

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: May 28, 2014, 12:22:25 PM »
1.How would you define atheism?
2.Do you act according to what you believe (there is no God) in or what you don't believe in (lack belief in God)?
3.Do you think it is inconsistent for someone who "lacks belief" in God to work against God's existence by attempting to show that God doesn't exist?
4.How sure are you that your atheism properly represents reality?
5.How sure are you that your atheism is correct?
6.How would you define what truth is?
7.Why do you believe your atheism is a justifiable position to hold?
8.Are you a materialist or a physicalist or what?
9.Do you affirm or deny that atheism is a worldview?  Why or why not?
10.Not all atheists are antagonistic to Christianity but for those of you who are, why the antagonism?
11.If you were at one time a believer in the Christian God, what caused you to deny his existence?
12.Do you believe the world would be better off without religion?
13.Do you believe the world would be better off without Christianity?
14.Do you believe that faith in a God or gods is a mental disorder?
15.Must God be known through the scientific method?
16.If you answered yes to the previous question, then how do you avoid a category mistake by requiring material evidence for an immaterial God?
17.Do we have any purpose as human beings?
18.If we do have purpose, can you as an atheist please explain how that purpose is determined?
19.Where does morality come from?
20.Are there moral absolutes?
21.If there are moral absolutes, could you list a few of them?
22.Do you believe there is such a thing as evil?  If so, what is it?
23.If you believe that the God of the Old Testament is morally bad, by what standard do you judge that he is bad?
24.What would it take for you to believe in God?
25.What would constitute sufficient evidence for God’s existence?
26.Must this evidence be rationally based, archaeological, testable in a lab, etc., or what?
27.Do you think that a society that is run by Christians or atheists would be safer?  Why?
28.Do you believe in free will?  (free will being the ability to make choices without coersion). 
29.If you believe in free will, do you see any problem with defending the idea that the physical brain, which is limited and subject to the neuro-chemical laws of the brain, can still produce free will choices?
30.If you affirm evolution and that the universe will continue to expand forever, then do you think it is probable that given enough time, brains would evolve to the point of exceeding mere physical limitations and become free of the physical and temporal and thereby become "deity" and not be restricted by space and time?  If not, why not? 
31.If you answered the previous question in the affirmative, then aren't you saying that it is probable that some sort of God exists?

National Political Opinion / Re: happy memorial day!
« on: May 27, 2014, 10:24:00 PM »

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: May 27, 2014, 12:05:18 PM »
No one can prove he does or does not exist, you won't ever get it because you are obviously slow.
some more video's of your God Rick!

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: May 27, 2014, 11:54:54 AM »
"I also sucked out the air in a glass jar. As the PSI went down, so did the temp. This you can try for yourself." LOL Sorry ebilly no one sucks as good as you!

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: May 26, 2014, 11:17:08 AM »
No water in space? I figured a seasoned scientist would know this?

Jupiter’s icy moon Europa squirts water like a squishy bath toy when it’s squeezed by the gas giant’s gravity, scientists say. Using NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope, they caught two 124-mile-tall geysers of water vapor spewing out over seven hours from near its south pole.

The discovery, described in the journal Science and at the American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco, shows that Europa is still geophysically active – and that this world in our own solar system could hold an environment friendly to life.

"It’s exciting," said Lorenz Roth, a planetary scientist at the Southwest Research Institute in San Antonio and one of the study’s lead authors. "The results are actually more convincing than I would have thought before."

Europa isn’t the only squirty moon in our planetary system: Saturn’s moon Enceladus has also been caught shooting water out of its south pole in so-called tiger stripes. These pretty plumes are caused by tidal forces. Just as our moon’s gravity squeezes and stretches the Earth a bit, causing the oceans to rise and fall, Saturn’s massive gravitational pull squeezes and stretches its tiny moon, causing cracks on its icy surface to open and allowing water to shoot out.

Scientists have long wondered whether something similar was happening on Jupiter’s moon Europa. After all, its surface is about 65 million years old, which is extremely young by our solar system’s standards, little more than 1.5% of the solar system’s age. This should mean that some geophysical processes must be constantly renewing the surface.

But over several decades, researchers repeatedly failed to catch the moon in action, said Robert Pappalardo, a Jet Propulsion Laboratory planetary scientist who was not involved in the study.

When the Voyager spacecraft, launched in 1977, flew by Europa, it caught a tiny blip on the moon's edge that people thought might be a plume, but it could not be confirmed. Then the 1989 Galileo spacecraft saw a potential plume of its own. But this turned out to be digital residue, traces of a previous image, Pappalardo said.

Even Hubble probably wasn’t able to properly see such plumes until space shuttle astronauts on the very last servicing mission for the iconic space telescope in 2009 fixed one of its cameras. Even now, looking for water vapor in the ultraviolet wavelengths of light tests the limits of Hubble’s abilities, scientists said.

To catch Europa in the act, the researchers also knew they had to time their observations right. Saturn's icy moon, Enceladus, shoots water near the farthest point in its orbit from Saturn, when the tidal forces cause cracks at the moon’s south pole to open. Around Jupiter, Europa was probably doing the same thing.

Sure enough, when the scientists looked at Europa when it was close to Jupiter in its orbit, they saw nothing. But in December 2012, when the ice moon was at its farthest point from the gas giant, they caught a pair of plumes bearing clear signs of oxygen and hydrogen – the components of water vapor – shooting from near the southern pole.

Scientists can’t say exactly where the plumes are coming from. It could be that they’re going directly from solid ice to gas, as Europa’s ice sheets rub against each other. But it could also be that the these plumes of vapor may be coming from the ocean of liquid water thought to lie under the moon’s frozen surface.

If the moon is still geophysically active, that could make it a prime environment for life.

Another study out of this week’s American Geophysical Union meeting found signs of clays on Europa’s surface. Clays are often associated with organic matter, which is why NASA’s Mars rover Curiosity is headed to Mt. Sharp, whose clay-rich layers could hold signs of life-friendly environments.

Those clays were probably brought to Europa by comets or asteroids, and if such material was able to make it into Europa’s subsurface ocean, it could provide the nutrient-rich soup that could allow life to emerge.

"We’re trying to understand, could this be a habitable environment today? Could there be life there today?" Pappalardo said. "At Europa, it seems the processes that could permit habitability may be going on now."

Perhaps future studies can analyze all the contents of that watery plume and see if there are any signs of organic matter, Pappalardo said. Perhaps a future mission to Europa could fly through the plume and directly sample its contents.

For now, it’s important to replicate the results, he added.

"I will sleep better knowing that there are follow-up observations that confirm it," Pappalardo said.

[For the Record, 3:53 p.m. PST Dec. 13: An earlier version of this post in one instance referred to Europa as a planet. It is a moon.]


Saturn's icy moon Enceladus squirts water from 'tiger stripes'

Harrowing: Italian astronaut describes nearly drowning in space

Mars and your sweaty armpits may have something in common

Eureka! NASA's Curiosity rover finds ancient, life-friendly lake on Mars

Scary smart! Alligators and crocodiles use sticks to lure birds








Death of Scott Sterling, son of Clippers owner, ruled accidental

Bree Walker talks about her sobriety, her arrest, and that mug shot

How not to say the wrong thing


Mayor feels a `sense of failure' in marital split

Seizure Led to FloJo's Death

His 104 scores make his case

Brutal Murder by Teen-Age Girls Adds to Britons' Shock

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: May 25, 2014, 01:01:37 PM »
 Stay down ebilly....Fish is kicking your butt. Cover up and stay down!

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: May 24, 2014, 01:18:36 PM »
Is there any scientific proof of God? Before we can discuss the existence of scientific proof of God, we need to identify what we mean by proof. Also, to know what type of evidence supporting the existence of God would be considered by science, we also need to know which definition of science applies. The definition of science has changed within the last century from an overall search for truth to a more limited scope of natural explanations of natural processes. Using the current narrow scope definition, there is not any scientific proof of God. The truth or untruth of this statement is not based upon evidence or lack of evidence, but by definition alone. Even though there is extensive, solid evidence for God’ s existence, none of that evidence would be admissible in the science court of law using the current definition. Consequently, to know what evidence really supports the existence of God, we need to base our statements on the old classic definition of science to eliminate the disqualification of the evidence. The kind of evidence we need to consider is the same type that would be admissible in a court of law. The level of proof is different in a criminal court than a civil court. In a civil court the prosecution only needs to prove that the preponderance of evidence tips the scales in their direction. Alternatively, in a criminal court a higher level of proof is required. The prosecutor needs to provide evidence that proves the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. What types of evidence are admissible in courtrooms? These include direct evidence such as fingerprints, DNA, or eyewitness accounts. Also, circumstantial evidence is normally admissible unless it is abnormally weak. Although circumstantial evidence is indirect, it can be powerful evidence to prove guilt or innocence. Scientific Proof of God – The Evidence What evidence exists that could prove the existence or non-existence of God? Does God exist? First, the non-existence of God cannot be proven. One cannot prove a universal negative. Alternatively, the existence of God is provable. The concept, design, and intricate details of our world necessitate an intelligent designer. Both direct and indirect evidence for God’s existence are well known and well documented. Nothing in history is better known or better documented than the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. We even use the year of His birth as the basis for our calendar. He perfectly matched the over 100 unique Messianic prophecies in the Old Testament regarding His birth, life, death, and resurrection. The laws of probability cannot give us a reasonable explanation for either the Messianic predictions or the resurrection, let alone both by the same person. Jesus’ miracles were witnessed by many and were documented redundantly for additional corroboration. He was seen by at least 500 people after His resurrection. He was seen ascending into heaven. His transfiguration was seen by Peter, James, and John. His wisdom in dealing with many circumstances was astounding. He never promoted Himself or His miracles. C. S. Lewis stated that He couldn’t have just been a good teacher. He was either a liar, lunatic, or Lord. He didn’t even come close to meeting the profile of a liar or lunatic, so He had to be God. Jesus Christ also supported the truth of the Old Testament and quoted it many times. Consequently, with Jesus Christ, we have an eyewitness to the truth of the Old Testament. This gives credibility to the creation account and God’s interaction with man. The entire Old Testament account is about how God is trying to have a relationship with man while man is separating himself from God by sin. It tells how God is long-suffering and merciful and ultimately how God sent His Son to die for our sins so God could ultimately have a relationship with us. God’s interaction with man in the Old Testament was often and powerful. Some of the main interactions included Adam, Cain, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Joshua, the Israelites, the prophets, and the kings. In addition to Jesus’ testimony to the truth of the Old Testament, ancient manuscripts, archaeology, and internal consistency also testify to its truth. Consequently, much direct evidence including eyewitness accounts and indirect evidence corroborate the existence of God and the truth of the Bible. - See more at:

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: May 22, 2014, 01:46:55 PM »
If having religion in control is such a good idea.
Were are the good examples?
"Religion" can be really bad! The all time worst religion is the religion of atheism! A good example would be "Christianity"! The Resurrection alone proves this one to be correct!

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: May 21, 2014, 12:18:41 PM »

Unique among all books ever written, the Bible accurately foretells specific events-in detail-many years, sometimes centuries, before they occur. Approximately 2500 prophecies appear in the pages of the Bible, about 2000 of which already have been fulfilled to the letter—no errors.

(The remaining 500 or so reach into the future and may be seen unfolding as days go by.) Since the probability for any one of these prophecies having been fulfilled by chance averages less than one in ten (figured very conservatively) and since the prophecies are for the most part independent of one another, the odds for all these prophecies having been fulfilled by chance without error is less than one in 102000 (that is 1 with 2000 zeros written after it)!

God is not the only one, however, who uses forecasts of future events to get people's attention. Satan does, too. Through clairvoyants (such as Jeanne Dixon and Edgar Cayce), mediums, spiritists, and others, come remarkable predictions, though rarely with more than about 60 percent accuracy, never with total accuracy. Messages from Satan, furthermore, fail to match the detail of Bible prophecies, nor do they include a call to repentance.

The acid test for identifying a prophet of God is recorded by Moses in Deuteronomy 18:21-22. According to this Bible passage (and others), God's prophets, as distinct from Satan's spokesmen, are 100 percent accurate in their predictions. There is no room for error.

As economy does not permit an explanation of all the Biblical prophecies that have been fulfilled, what follows in a discussion of a few that exemplify the high degree of specificity, the range of projection, and/or the "supernature" of the predicted events. Readers are encouraged to select others, as well, and to carefully examine their historicity.

(1) Some time before 500 B.C. the prophet Daniel proclaimed that Israel's long-awaited Messiah would begin his public ministry 483 years after the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem (Daniel 9:25-26). He further predicted that the Messiah would be "cut off," killed, and that this event would take place prior to a second destruction of Jerusalem. Abundant documentation shows that these prophecies were perfectly fulfilled in the life (and crucifixion) of Jesus Christ. The decree regarding the restoration of Jerusalem was issued by Persia's King Artaxerxes to the Hebrew priest Ezra in 458 B.C., 483 years later the ministry of Jesus Christ began in Galilee. (Remember that due to calendar changes, the date for the start of Christ's ministry is set by most historians at about 26 A.D. Also note that from 1 B.C. to 1 A.D. is just one year.) Jesus' crucifixion occurred only a few years later, and about four decades later, in 70 A.D. came the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus.

(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 105.)*

(2) In approximately 700 B.C. the prophet Micah named the tiny village of Bethlehem as the birthplace of Israel's Messiah (Micah 5:2). The fulfillment of this prophecy in the birth of Christ is one of the most widely known and widely celebrated facts in history.

(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 105.)

(3) In the fifth century B.C. a prophet named Zechariah declared that the Messiah would be betrayed for the price of a slave—thirty pieces of silver, according to Jewish law-and also that this money would be used to buy a burial ground for Jerusalem's poor foreigners (Zechariah 11:12-13). Bible writers and secular historians both record thirty pieces of silver as the sum paid to Judas Iscariot for betraying Jesus, and they indicate that the money went to purchase a "potter's field," used—just as predicted—for the burial of poor aliens (Matthew 27:3-10).

(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 1011.)

(4) Some 400 years before crucifixion was invented, both Israel's King David and the prophet Zechariah described the Messiah's death in words that perfectly depict that mode of execution. Further, they said that the body would be pierced and that none of the bones would be broken, contrary to customary procedure in cases of crucifixion (Psalm 22 and 34:20; Zechariah 12:10). Again, historians and New Testament writers confirm the fulfillment: Jesus of Nazareth died on a Roman cross, and his extraordinarily quick death eliminated the need for the usual breaking of bones. A spear was thrust into his side to verify that he was, indeed, dead.

(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 1013.)

(5) The prophet Isaiah foretold that a conqueror named Cyrus would destroy seemingly impregnable Babylon and subdue Egypt along with most of the rest of the known world. This same man, said Isaiah, would decide to let the Jewish exiles in his territory go free without any payment of ransom (Isaiah 44:28; 45:1; and 45:13). Isaiah made this prophecy 150 years before Cyrus was born, 180 years before Cyrus performed any of these feats (and he did, eventually, perform them all), and 80 years before the Jews were taken into exile.

(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 1015.)

(6) Mighty Babylon, 196 miles square, was enclosed not only by a moat, but also by a double wall 330 feet high, each part 90 feet thick. It was said by unanimous popular opinion to be indestructible, yet two Bible prophets declared its doom. These prophets further claimed that the ruins would be avoided by travelers, that the city would never again be inhabited, and that its stones would not even be moved for use as building material (Isaiah 13:17-22 and Jeremiah 51:26, 43). Their description is, in fact, the well-documented history of the famous citadel.

(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 109.)

(7) The exact location and construction sequence of Jerusalem's nine suburbs was predicted by Jeremiah about 2600 years ago. He referred to the time of this building project as "the last days," that is, the time period of Israel's second rebirth as a nation in the land of Palestine (Jeremiah 31:38-40). This rebirth became history in 1948, and the construction of the nine suburbs has gone forward precisely in the locations and in the sequence predicted.

(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 1018.)

(8) The prophet Moses foretold (with some additions by Jeremiah and Jesus) that the ancient Jewish nation would be conquered twice and that the people would be carried off as slaves each time, first by the Babylonians (for a period of 70 years), and then by a fourth world kingdom (which we know as Rome). The second conqueror, Moses said, would take the Jews captive to Egypt in ships, selling them or giving them away as slaves to all parts of the world. Both of these predictions were fulfilled to the letter, the first in 607 B.C. and the second in 70 A.D. God's spokesmen said, further, that the Jews would remain scattered throughout the entire world for many generations, but without becoming assimilated by the peoples or of other nations, and that the Jews would one day return to the land of Palestine to re-establish for a second time their nation (Deuteronomy 29; Isaiah 11:11-13; Jeremiah 25:11; Hosea 3:4-5 and Luke 21:23-24).

This prophetic statement sweeps across 3500 years of history to its complete fulfillment—in our lifetime.

(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 120.)

(9) Jeremiah predicted that despite its fertility and despite the accessibility of its water supply, the land of Edom (today a part of Jordan) would become a barren, uninhabited wasteland (Jeremiah 49:15-20; Ezekiel 25:12-14). His description accurately tells the history of that now bleak region.

(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 105.)

(10) Joshua prophesied that Jericho would be rebuilt by one man. He also said that the man's eldest son would die when the reconstruction began and that his youngest son would die when the work reached completion (Joshua 6:26). About five centuries later this prophecy found its fulfillment in the life and family of a man named Hiel (1 Kings 16:33-34).

(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 107).

(11) The day of Elijah's supernatural departure from Earth was predicted unanimously—and accurately, according to the eye-witness account—by a group of fifty prophets (2 Kings 2:3-11).

(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 109).

(12) Jahaziel prophesied that King Jehoshaphat and a tiny band of men would defeat an enormous, well-equipped, well-trained army without even having to fight. Just as predicted, the King and his troops stood looking on as their foes were supernaturally destroyed to the last man (2 Chronicles 20).

(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 108).

(13) One prophet of God (unnamed, but probably Shemiah) said that a future king of Judah, named Josiah, would take the bones of all the occultic priests (priests of the "high places") of Israel's King Jeroboam and burn them on Jeroboam's altar (1 Kings 13:2 and 2 Kings 23:15-18). This event occurred approximately 300 years after it was foretold.

(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 1013).

Since these thirteen prophecies cover mostly separate and independent events, the probability of chance occurrence for all thirteen is about 1 in 10138 (138 equals the sum of all the exponents of 10 in the probability estimates above). For the sake of putting the figure into perspective, this probability can be compared to the statistical chance that the second law of thermodynamics will be reversed in a given situation (for example, that a gasoline engine will refrigerate itself during its combustion cycle or that heat will flow from a cold body to a hot body)—that chance = 1 in 1080. Stating it simply, based on these thirteen prophecies alone, the Bible record may be said to be vastly more reliable than the second law of thermodynamics. Each reader should feel free to make his own reasonable estimates of probability for the chance fulfillment of the prophecies cited here. In any case, the probabilities deduced still will be absurdly remote.

Given that the Bible proves so reliable a document, there is every reason to expect that the remaining 500 prophecies, those slated for the "time of the end," also will be fulfilled to the last letter. Who can afford to ignore these coming events, much less miss out on the immeasurable blessings offered to anyone and everyone who submits to the control of the Bible's author, Jesus Christ? Would a reasonable person take lightly God's warning of judgment for those who reject what they know to be true about Jesus Christ and the Bible, or who reject Jesus' claim on their lives?

*The estimates of probability included herein come from a group of secular research scientists. As an example of their method of estimation, consider their calculations for this first prophecy cited:
•Since the Messiah's ministry could conceivably begin in any one of about 5000 years, there is, then, one chance in about 5000 that his ministry could begin in 26 A.D.
•Since the Messiah is God in human form, the possibility of his being killed  is considerably low, say less than one chance in 10.
•Relative to the second destruction of Jerusalem, this execution has roughly an even chance of occurring before or after that event, that is, one chance in 2.

Hence, the probability of chance fulfillment for this prophecy is 1 in 5000 x 10 x 2, which is 1 in 100,000, or 1 in 105.

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: May 20, 2014, 07:38:20 PM »
Again, you have failed each question! Miracles are done every need only to open your eyes. There were countless eyewitnesses who saw Jesus before and after the resurrection! Hundreds of Bible prophecies have come to fruition. "Animals have personality" Where did it come from?

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: May 20, 2014, 01:56:21 PM »
How do you explain the high degree of design and order in the universe if there is no God?

How do you account for the vast archaeological documentation of Biblical stories, places, and people?

Since absolutely no Bible prophecy has ever failed (and there are hundreds), how can one realistically remain unconvinced that the Bible is of divine origin?

How do you explain David's graphic portrayal of Jesus' death by crucifixion (Psalm 22) 1000 years before Christ lived?

How do you explain that the prophet Daniel prophesied the exact YEAR when the Christ would be presented as Messiah and also prophesied that the temple would be destroyed afterwards over 500 years in advance (Daniel 9:24-27)?

How could any mere human pinpoint the birth town of the Messiah seven full centuries before the fact, as did the prophet Micah?

How do you account for the odds (1 in 10 to the 157th power) that even just 48 (of 300) Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled in Jesus Christ?

How was it possible for the Old Testament prophet Isaiah to have predicted the virgin birth of Jesus (Isaiah 7:14) 700 years before it occurred?

How can anyone doubt the reliability of Scripture considering the number and the proximity to the originals of its many copied manuscripts?

In what sense was Jesus a "good man" if He was lying in His claim to be God?

If the Bible is not true, why is it so universally regarded as "the Good Book"?

Did you know that the Bible has been the number one bestseller almost every single year since the 1436 invention of the Gutenberg printing press?

If God does not exist, then from where comes humanity's universal moral sense?

If man is nothing but the random arrangement of molecules, what motivates you to care and to live honorably in the world?

Can you explain how personality could have ever evolved from the impersonal, or how order could have ever resulted from chaos?

If Jesus' resurrection was faked, why would twelve intelligent men (Jesus' disciples) have died for what they knew to be a lie?

How do you explain the fact that a single, relatively uneducated and virtually untraveled man, dead at age 33, radically changed lives and society to this day?

Why have so many of history's greatest thinkers been believers?

Have you ever wondered why thousands of intelligent scientists, living and dead, have been men and women of great faith?

If time never had a beginning, but rather goes backwards infinitely or has gone through an infinite number of cycles, then how is it possible that we are here today?

How can something as small as a brain understand extremely complicated aspects of the universe, even though it is (supposedly) just a bunch of chemical reactions and electrical signals? But at the same time, this brain can’t create another brain like itself, so how can nature, that has no brain, create a brain?

Everyone knows Mount Rushmore was the result of intelligent design. Do you think the human body is the result of intelligent design?

When you look at a lot of creatures such as zebras, turtles, butterflies, bees, lady bugs, leopards, etc., you will notice amazing color patterns designed into them. Who came up with those? Does nature have a “taste” in colors , and does it know which colors go together nicely?

How do you account for the origin of life considering the irreducible complexity of its essential components?

How can the Second Law of Thermodynamics be reconciled with progressive, naturalistic evolutionary theory?

How do you reconcile the existence of human intelligence with naturalism and the Law of Entropy?

How come there are some things on our planet seem that they are especially designed for us? For example, the 2 most comfortable colors are blue and green , which happen to be the color of the sky and most of the nature around us. Who chose those colors to be there , before earth even existed?

Why does the Bible alone, of all of the world's holy books, contain such detailed prophecies of future events?

Is it absolutely true that "truth is not absolute" or only relatively true that "all things are relative?"

Is it possible that your unbelief in God is actually an unwillingness to submit to Him?

Does your present worldview provide you with an adequate sense of meaning and purpose?

How do you explain the radically changed lives of so many Christian believers down through history?

Are you aware that every alleged Bible contradiction has been answered in an intelligible and credible manner?

What do you say about the hundreds of scholarly books that carefully document the veracity and reliability of the Bible?

Why and how has the Bible survived and even flourished in spite of centuries of worldwide attempts to destroy and ban its message?

Have you ever considered the fact that Christianity is the only religion whose leader is said to have risen from the dead?

How do you explain the empty tomb of Jesus in light of all the evidence that has now proven essentially irrefutable for twenty centuries?

If Jesus did not actually die and rise from the dead, how could He (in His condition) have circumvented all of the security measures in place at His tomb?

If the authorities stole Jesus' body, why?

Why would they have perpetrated the very scenario that they most wanted to prevent?

If Jesus merely resuscitated in the tomb, how did He deal with the Roman guard posted just outside its entrance?

How can one realistically discount the testimony of over 500 witnesses to a living Jesus following His crucifixion (see 1 Corinthians 15:6)?

If all of Jesus' claims to be God were the result of His own self-delusion, why didn't He show evidence of lunacy in any other areas of His life?

Is your unbelief in a perfect God possibly the result of a bad experience with an imperfect church or a misunderstanding of the facts, and therefore an unfair rejection of God Himself?

How did 35-40 men, spanning 1500 years and living on three separate continents, ever manage to author one unified message, i.e. the Bible?

Because life origins are not observable, verifiable, or falsifiable, how does the theory of "evolution" amount to anything more than just another faith system?

What do you make of all the anthropological studies indicating that even the most remote tribes show some sort of theological awareness?

If every effect has a cause, then what or who caused the universe?

How do you explain the thousands of people who have experienced heaven or hell and have come back to tell us about it?

How do you explain the countless people who have received miracles from God?

Is there any evidence that would satisfy you and persuade you to become a believer, or are you just going to believe what you WANT to believe?

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: May 19, 2014, 10:46:51 AM »
 Got to admit the Troll with "the butt shaped mouse" cracked me up! And its OK to make fun of Fish or me. (We ALL make mistakes) But not God. His name is Holy! He is to be worshiped... for our benefit not His! When you disrespect God.....any thinking person can clearly see that you are demonically possessed! (and you don't even realize it!)  God = Good,  Devil = Bad!

Religion Opinion / Re: Questions for Atheists
« on: May 15, 2014, 02:35:10 PM »
His name is God with a capital G. He will spank your little bottom for being disrespectful!

Sports Opinion / Re: Ewwww, Why my team?
« on: May 15, 2014, 02:32:12 PM »
 The world has gone "nuttier than a squirrel turd"!

I can tell you from here...... He searched it illegally, but will swear up and down that he did everything by the book!

Sports Opinion / Re: Ewwww, Why my team?
« on: May 14, 2014, 11:14:25 AM »
Turns my stomach!

World News / Re: SEAL Team 4 Commanding Officer Commits Suicide
« on: May 14, 2014, 11:11:58 AM »
So you pretending to be someone else when you switch to your other account doesn't fall under lie?
Me? I only have one account!

Sports Opinion / Ewwww, Why my team?
« on: May 13, 2014, 12:13:00 PM »
NFL draft: Reactions heat up after Michael Sam kisses boyfriend on TV

Religion Opinion / Questions for Atheists
« on: May 13, 2014, 11:46:15 AM »
Questions for Atheists

1. Are you absolutely sure there is no God? If not, then is it not possible that there is a God? And if it is possible that God exists, then can you think of any reason that would keep you from wanting to look at the evidence?

2. Would you agree that intelligently designed things call for an intelligent designer of them? If so, then would you agree that evidence for intelligent design in the universe would be evidence for a designer of the universe?

3. Would you agree that nothing cannot produce something? If so, then if the universe did not exist but then came to exist, wouldn’t this be evidence of a cause beyond the universe?

4. Would you agree with me that just because we cannot see something with our eyes—such as our mind, gravity, magnetism, the wind—that does not mean it doesn’t exist?

5. Would you also agree that just because we cannot see God with our eyes does not necessarily mean He doesn’t exist?

6. In the light of the big bang evidence for the origin of the universe, is it more reasonable to believe that no one created something out of nothing or someone created something out of nothing?

7. Would you agree that something presently exists? If something presently exists, and something cannot come from nothing, then would you also agree that something must have always existed?

8. If it takes an intelligent being to produce an encyclopedia, then would it not also take an intelligent being to produce the equivalent of 1000 sets of an encyclopedia full of information in the first one-celled animal? (Even atheists such as Richard Dawkins acknowledges that “amoebas have as much information in their DNA as 1000 Encyclopaedia Britannicas.” Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker (New York: WW. Norton and Co., 1996), 116.)

9. If an effect cannot be greater than its cause (since you can’t give what you do not have to give), then does it not make more sense that mind produced matter than that matter produced mind, as atheists say?

10. Is there anything wrong anywhere? If so, how can we know unless there is a moral law?

11. If every law needs a lawgiver, does it not make sense to say a moral law needs a Moral Lawgiver?

12. Would you agree that if it took intelligence to make a model universe in a science lab, then it took super-intelligence to make the real universe?

13. Would you agree that it takes a cause to make a small glass ball found in the woods? And would you agree that making the ball larger does not eliminate the need for a cause? If so, then doesn’t the biggest ball of all (the whole universe) need a cause?

14. If there is a cause beyond the whole finite (limited) universe, would not this cause have to be beyond the finite, namely, non-finite or infinite?

15. In the light of the anthropic principle (that the universe was fine-tuned for the emergence of life from its very inception), wouldn’t it make sense to say there was an intelligent being who preplanned human life?

World News / Re: SEAL Team 4 Commanding Officer Commits Suicide
« on: May 12, 2014, 01:54:18 PM »
Osama prolly lives in George Bushes guest house!

World News / Re: SEAL Team 4 Commanding Officer Commits Suicide
« on: May 11, 2014, 08:18:06 PM »
Another idiot bites the dust.
That's what I thought.....You can't name a lie that I've told so you resort to name calling. Who's mentally challenged?