Child's request to make Wooly Mammoth state fossil of SC blocked by two Creationists-R

Ketchupbot will not respond to you. He only grunts out streams of inanity and the putters about the D&D, looking for other threads to squeeze his ramblings into.

Imagine this every time he posts and it makes much more sense:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/GpVgEmMmFVY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

There's a omnipotent, omniscient - yet also incredibly jealous, insecure, petty and vindictive - magic man in the sky who's going to unleash a can of whoopass on you.

Why? Because he can. No further questions, this interview is over.

 

Those two politicians' actions reak of ignorance and stupidity. And so do a lot of posts in this thread.

 

Fundamentalists.......

"ERRRR WE WILL SUCK THE FUN OUT OF EVERYTHING AND DESTROY FREE THOUGHT AND DESTROY COMMON SENSE."

Seriously..... you are going to object to a state fossil? WTF...

These asshats are the exact same as the fundies in the middle east.....

 

I knew there was a state large and small mamal. Longhorn and armadillo. I guess there's a medium too?

 

I'll fix it:

 

Exactly. If you created this universe or multiverse and everything in it, would you really care how humans on earth think about you? I mean do you care about the fishes in your fish tank think about you(we are not even as significant as a pet fish to GOD).

If you are the only GOD out there, what does it matter if people believe in you or not?

 

Close, but shouldn't their be a few blacks and homosexuals being crushed by the mammoth?

 

Flying mammal: the "Mexican free-tailed bat"

 

I blame teh aggies.

 

If you honestly want a Biblical answer to your question, check THIS out.

Not looking for an argument, just wanted to share in case you were interested.

 

That doesn't really answer his question though.

All that says is that God loves you - great, good to know, but why does he care what you think?

And stuff like this is just truly offensive:

So god inflicting torture, pain, suffering and tragedy on human beings is evidence of love.

I don't even know where to start with that it's such an awful, awful, awful statement on so many levels.

 

You're an idiot. A big one. HUUUUUUUUUGE.

 

I believe that he cares what we think because he loves us. That seems kind of self explanatory to me. However, I do see the dilemma that creates for someone who doesn't believe in God and his love.

I don't believe that your interpretation of that quote is the spirit that it was written in. I see it more as a "no pain, no gain" type of thing. Just like getting in shape requires the hard work and pain associated with diet and exercise. And obtaining a degree requires sacrifice, studying, etc... I see it as we are given test and trials to make us stronger and better people, while never being faced with a test that is too much for us to handle. Because he has our back, and what doesn't kill us makes us stronger.

 

There is only one GOD right? old testament GOD is the same one in the new testament correct?

 

FIXED !!

 

I can see the setup coming from a mile away... But, yes. One God.

 

But then we're just back to the original question. An omniscient being/force/entity/whatever, who loves lesser beings he/she/it created, loves you when you believe in him/her/it etc, but obviously loves you less when you don't - (potentially, a whole lot less, enough even to be mean about it, thus making him in our terms to be somewhat vindictive) - it just begs the question as to his motives and "it's a mystery!" is distinctly unsatisfactory to me, as it would be to you in the context of most other problems

But think about that statement, God has your back, but he killed your offspring with ebola to make you stronger? If he really had your back, he wouldn't have made your offspring suffer a horrible death - that statement just seems self-executing to me.

Honestly maybe the idea of God is easier to rationalize if he's not as omnipotent/all powerful as we are traditionally taught - like "he's got a ton of stuff to worry about, and he's very busy, so sometimes things just fall through the cracks like awful suffering and stuff that he generally hates." rather than the "he's just helping you by being outrageously mean and causing you untold misery!"

The setup yeah - the Old Testament God is a real embarrassment, a petty, vindictive sociopath who just does horrible things for the hell of them (or to trump his rival Baal). The New Testament one isn't really that great either but he's light years ahead of his beta build. I'm not going to force you into the position of justifying the silliest of the silliness that we see in the OT, I don't think most Christians will even bother with that anymore. I do think though that if we're just picking and choosing which parts we like and we don't, it tends to undescore that morals, ethics and other useful thngs we derive from religion actually come from somewhere else.

 

I don't believe that God loves you less if you choose not to believe in him. Rather, I believe that to feel the full extent and benefit of his love it must be reciprocated. Ie: If my wife had never loved me back then we wouldn't have a family together. All off our great memories and times spent together and to come wouldn't exist.

I also don't believe that God's love exempts us from ever having to experiencing bad things. Why would anyone expect that? But I do believe that it gives us the strength and desire to persevere.

 

I hate the thought of whole cities, countries, and families being destroyed. And no, for the life of me, I don't fully understand why. But for everytime I see in the OT where God brought judgement, I also see him offering his grace, mercy, and redemption. I believe that Jesus' birth and death on the cross was a game changer. And, IMO, the greatest semblance of his mercy and love. And in that, lies the difference betwwen the OT and NT.