Some quick points for you atheists / satanists.

[Hepheastus420]

- Life is a test, poverty and pain exists for subjecting to God

poverty and pain exist because of fuck tards who want to rule the earth. why are you trying to conveert you a jahova witness? fag.

Who's converting who?

 

[Heisenberg]

The idea of seeking a prostitute is sensible, of course. But it introduces an element that the priest in question might consider a worse offense than unnatural sex ... premeditation. When a priest has the youngins around as an unconventional but fairly handy sexual resource, he can still convince himself that any malfeasance was unplanned, an accident of sorts. This element of semivoluntary self-seduction (with the distasteful consequence of statutory rape) is thrown out when a sex worker is added to the mix. cn

I see the distinction. It's harder to resist something in the moment when opportunity arises than it is to resist making plans for it, and afterwards it's easier to reconcile as an accident. However, I don't think a clergyman who is resisting making plans to visit a call girl would see a young boy as opportunity. If the attraction is not there, why would it even occur to someone that young boys are a handy resource? If the only criteria is convenience there are lots of other opportunities available, such as the dog. That may sound silly, when is the dog ever an opportunity? The answer is, when you are attracted to it. You don't get with a dog, or anything you are not attracted to, simply for the lack of options. It would seem even gay priests would have the oportunity to be with adult men without premeditation and blame it on a moment of weakness. Convenience probably does play a role, but only for those who have the attraction to begin with. I think the church attracts those with this desire, and fosters it to some degree, but does not create it.

 

[eye exaggerate]

I think the idea may be that anyone who isn't centered could potentially constellate something of a botched attempt at something positive. Priests, in general, are not pedophiles. I wonder what the ratio is from them to the gp - I mean, how many non-clergy have done that?. I realize that it's a matter of trust, which does make it different. But, I wouldn't want to do that to my child and I wouldn't want to break the trust we have (priest or not). There are plenty of secular teachers who did / do those things and they hang around kids all day long. In fact, one of them could hand a parent a report card with a smile on their face and most would just say 'thanks!' (pending good grades, of course )

Heisenberg said that maybe the church attracts these types. The church, or any group of that nature, is made up of people with some good libidos, lets say. This is why 'holy' people are 'holy' - they control the 'seed'. It is obvious that many have failed at that. Actually, I'd say that it is very unfortunate...for everyone.

 

[robert 14617]

... the same one 99.99+% of priests would make as well. Imo.
I am not blaming religion! I'm answering, or contributing to, Heis' scenario. cn

unfortunately for the children the number who choose not to harm the children is less then that more like 94%

 

[olylifter420]

your a silly man i gasp that your still posting here ,

are you trying to say, "you are a silly man, i gasp you are still posting here."?

every point you have ever made in this sub forum has been raped and slaughted

[video=youtube;f68VXKMZT1Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f68VXKMZT1Q&feature=related[/video]

higher inteligence than your own,

what are you talking about? your a silly man man your!!

but your still here

yes, i like discussing with MP and seeing what Hep posts and laughing at your stupid attempts at i really don't know what your point is.

i guess religious indoctrination was pretty tuff on you

to be honest, i was never "indoctrinated" by anyone. NOw, after seeing your repeated "indoctrination" bullshit, it is safe to say that you, yourself were a victim of something so stark so grim that, a great seed of hate and disgust was planted and grew into the piece of shit you are today.

 

[MidWestAlki]

Meh I am a scientist... All natural selection here... I don't believe in magic... More a better understanding in the math that is universal law than anything...

 

[robert 14617]

i respect that christians believe, as soon as i say i have questions all of a sudden im put into a category of atheist, its not that simple

 

[eye exaggerate]

Meh I am a scientist... All natural selection here... I don't believe in magic... More a better understanding in the math that is universal law than anything...

This isn't a stab at your post, it's an actual question. What is the general atheistic consensus on where math came from? - That you know of, at least, I'm not asking you to be the spokesperson.

 

[eye exaggerate]

i respect that christians believe, as soon as i say i have questions all of a sudden im put into a category of atheist, its not that simple

It's too bad that some do that. It's happened to me quite a few times. I've concluded that they can't explain what they want to say... or are just really fckn ignorant. Man, the chasm between me and say a baptist 'feels' huge sometimes because I am not a 'real' christian to them. It's fckd.

You guys aren't the only ones. It's just people, not the banner they carry. (imho)

 

[cannabineer]

I see the distinction. It's harder to resist something in the moment when opportunity arises than it is to resist making plans for it, and afterwards it's easier to reconcile as an accident. However, I don't think a clergyman who is resisting making plans to visit a call girl would see a young boy as opportunity. If the attraction is not there, why would it even occur to someone that young boys are a handy resource? If the only criteria is convenience there are lots of other opportunities available, such as the dog. That may sound silly, when is the dog ever an opportunity? The answer is, when you are attracted to it. You don't get with a dog, or anything you are not attracted to, simply for the lack of options. It would seem even gay priests would have the oportunity to be with adult men without premeditation and blame it on a moment of weakness. Convenience probably does play a role, but only for those who have the attraction to begin with. I think the church attracts those with this desire, and fosters it to some degree, but does not create it.

I'm not refuting your claim that some attraction has to be there in the first place. However, when I consider the lot of a man in or near his sexual prime, faced with restrictions, frustrations and marginal opportunity, "attracted" can easily morph into "not completely repelled". In the final analysis it's all jesuitry, which is rather appropriate to the situation imo. cn

 

[robert 14617]

This isn't a stab at your post, it's an actual question. What is the general atheistic consensus on where math came from? - That you know of, at least, I'm not asking you to be the spokesperson.

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]circa 30,000 B.C.: Paleolithic peoples in Europe etch markings on bones to represent numbers.

circa 5,000 B.C.: The Egyptians use a decimal number system, a precursor to modern number systems which are also based on the number 10. The Ancient Egyptians also made use of a multiplication system that relied on successive doublings and additions in order to find the products of relatively large numbers. For example, 176 x 313 might be calculated by first finding the double of 313 (313 x 2 = 626), then finding the double of that number (313 x 4 = 1252), the double of that number (313 x 8 = 2,504) and so on (313 x 16 = 5,008; 313 x 32 = 10,016; 313 x 64 = 20,032; 313 x 128 = 40,064....). Thus, using these known products produced by doublings, and knowing that 128 + 32 + 16 = 176, then you add the known products of 40,064 + 10,016 + 5,008, to acheive the final answer of 176 x 313 = 55,088.
where were you going with this question

[/FONT]

 

[eye exaggerate]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]circa 30,000 B.C.: Paleolithic peoples in Europe etch markings on bones to represent numbers.

circa 5,000 B.C.: The Egyptians use a decimal number system, a precursor to modern number systems which are also based on the number 10. The Ancient Egyptians also made use of a multiplication system that relied on successive doublings and additions in order to find the products of relatively large numbers. For example, 176 x 313 might be calculated by first finding the double of 313 (313 x 2 = 626), then finding the double of that number (313 x 4 = 1252), the double of that number (313 x 8 = 2,504) and so on (313 x 16 = 5,008; 313 x 32 = 10,016; 313 x 64 = 20,032; 313 x 128 = 40,064....). Thus, using these known products produced by doublings, and knowing that 128 + 32 + 16 = 176, then you add the known products of 40,064 + 10,016 + 5,008, to acheive the final answer of 176 x 313 = 55,088.
where were you going with this question

[/FONT]

...to play drums. I rarely have the house to myself on a Friday night.

And to answer with all truthfulness, nowhere. I wanted to know exactly what the question asked, and that's it. I really didn't know for myself, this seems like a good place to ask.

 

[MidWestAlki]

Math is a conception with set limits(whether we know them or not) which speak for all logic. As to where it came from, I know just as much about natural selection as you know about your beliefs... What I have learned through stories of ancient and current times... The simple explanation that faith is the one all answer to all of the universe's questions should not limit my conceptions or discoveries of truth's. Whether or not they have been proven yet is again a conception, just as all sermons invite themselves. Any religious leader i.e. a pastor, uses their conception to project spiritual guidance over a number of people who in turn have their own conceptions. I feel elated in questioning answers unknown, but would never tell someone there is a definite answer. If there was, and you knew it for sure, there would be an end to all questioning and thus religious choice would expire. If and when that may occur, threads like this will be obsolete, and no one would have the aspiration for all this rhetoric...

 

[Prefontaine]

- Their is a God, explain the universe
- Life is a test, poverty and pain exists for subjecting to God
- Satan is an arch-angel
- Atheism should not exist, why would you choose to believe in NOTHING
- Leave out the religious jokes, will not be funny when your burning in hell..
- I hope you guys find a God
- I am not a certain ' religion ' I believe their is a God, be a good human being and you will go heaven
- Blasphemy is a sin, don't take the piss..

- Before i get some satanists or atheists here makes religious remarks and stupid pictures, i'll like to tell you that i've done my bit by telling you guys, i hope you guys find a God and only one..

1st why do you need some kind of meaning for your life, in order to be happy?
2nd Satan doesnt exist to people who dont believe in god in the first place
3rd Atheism is not the belief in nothing simply the belief that there is no god, which is logical when you base your ideas on what is observable or repeatable for verification.
4th telling people not to make jokes because they will burn in hell, makes a great intro for a joke
5th any true believer in god will accept an atheists lack of faith understanding that god comes to all people in his own good time, not yours, hence the rule about not judging others
6th if your not a certain religion than according to many religions you are going to burn in hell for not accepting jesus christ as your savior, which would make you a christian
7th if jesus christ died for the sins of man, then he died for all the sins of man including denial of thy father, aka blasphemy.
8th good for you making yourself feel big by judging the lives of others, unfortunately by doing so you are acting in a prideful manner, which is one of the biggest sins of all.

in other words let god spread his own word, you dont get points in the afterlife for getting converts, and even if you did, im pretty sure the churches are stealing all your commissions.

 

[eye exaggerate]

Math is a conception with set limits(whether we know them or not) which speak for all logic. As to where it came from, I know just as much about natural selection as you know about your beliefs... What I have learned through stories of ancient and current times... The simple explanation that faith is the one all answer to all of the universe's questions should not limit my conceptions or discoveries of truth's. Whether or not they have been proven yet is again a conception, just as all sermons invite themselves. Any religious leader i.e. a pastor, uses their conception to project spiritual guidance over a number of people who in turn have their own conceptions. I feel elated in questioning answers unknown, but would never tell someone there is a definite answer. If there was, and you knew it for sure, there would be an end to all questioning and thus religious choice would expire. If and when that may occur, threads like this will be obsolete, and no one would have the aspiration for all this rhetoric...

Nicely done.

I'd say faith is needed until action should take place at the end of a 'sentence' of questions. Which looks like a 'scientific faith' of sorts. When an atheist goes to buy a book on purely calculable things, he cannot calculate all events ahead of him as to ensure safe passage. He takes it on faith that he will get back and further his thoughts or theories until they fail or pass and he moves again to the next question. But I guess that is fairly obvious in a way.

Oh yeah, I wanted to say that I've never been held back on anything in a religious sense. No one suffocated me with a book or anything like that.

 

[Prefontaine]

This isn't a stab at your post, it's an actual question. What is the general atheistic consensus on where math came from? - That you know of, at least, I'm not asking you to be the spokesperson.

shortly after some monkey learned to associate the number of bananas on the tree with the number of fingers on his hand to the number of monkeys in his family, this can also be called learning to count,

if your idea of creation was accurate, wouldnt babies come out with full knowledge of how to use their bodies and do math and science?

 

[eye exaggerate]

shortly after some monkey learned to associate the number of bananas on the tree with the number of fingers on his hand to the number of monkeys in his family, this can also be called learning to count,

if your idea of creation was accurate, wouldnt babies come out with full knowledge of how to use their bodies and do math and science?

...suppose my idea of creation claims that they do but must wake to it first. No one on this side of the screen denies evolution. Christ is a consciousness. Jesus was the walker. Creator / Created - it's a sine wave of sorts. Sun / Moon and the 'us' in between.

Babies actually teach us that intuition is modus operandi for humans, followed by the use of the intellect, then eventually back to intuition. Look at a senior, someone who's made it to 90. Not many can take care of themselves better than babies.

 

[Prefontaine]

Nicely done.

I'd say faith is needed until action should take place at the end of a 'sentence' of questions. Which looks like a 'scientific faith' of sorts. When an atheist goes to buy a book on purely calculable things, he cannot calculate all events ahead of him as to ensure safe passage. He takes it on faith that he will get back and further his thoughts or theories until they fail or pass and he moves again to the next question. But I guess that is fairly obvious in a way.

Oh yeah, I wanted to say that I've never been held back on anything in a religious sense. No one suffocated me with a book or anything like that.

accept that the scientific mind accepts that all thoughts and movements ideas and plans are mathematical calculations based in a computer of biological processors, so yeah the subconcious is continually doing calculations to figure out how much pressure to apply to type, or do a pushup, all these things take precise calculations by your brain, and guess what, math is nothing more than that same processor cognitively using logic to understand the surrounding world,

 

[MidWestAlki]

Absolutely not. With the right algorithm and all variables accounted for, one could plan for exactly what is to happen(in theory). To really dissect your post though, you are MAJORLY confusing chance and chaos theory with faith. Who says one has intentions on being safe or not? Now that is where you "faith" comes in to play. You sir, obviously have faith in everyone wanting to secure safe passage to bookstores worldwide...

Nicely done.

I'd say faith is needed until action should take place at the end of a 'sentence' of questions. Which looks like a 'scientific faith' of sorts. When an atheist goes to buy a book on purely calculable things, he cannot calculate all events ahead of him as to ensure safe passage. He takes it on faith that he will get back and further his thoughts or theories until they fail or pass and he moves again to the next question. But I guess that is fairly obvious in a way.

Oh yeah, I wanted to say that I've never been held back on anything in a religious sense. No one suffocated me with a book or anything like that.

 

[eye exaggerate]

Absolutely not. With the right algorithm and all variables accounted for, one could plan for exactly what is to happen(in theory). To really dissect your post though, you are MAJORLY confusing chance and chaos theory with faith. Who says one has intentions on being safe or not? Now that is where you "faith" comes in to play. You sir, obviously have faith in everyone wanting to secure safe passage to bookstores worldwide...

..ok - I do, ya got me.