PDA

View Full Version : Bananas indicate intelligent design


PunkinDrublic
04-23-2006, 01:14 AM
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/04/22.html#a8004

Watch the clip from about the 3:30- 4:36 mark. Where do these dingbats come up with this shit?

Pitt Gorilla
04-23-2006, 01:31 AM
The watermellon: Intelligent design's worst enemy.

Ugly Duck
04-23-2006, 07:38 AM
"Behold the Atheist Nightmare - the banana! The Almighty has made it with a non-slip surface!"

Well, if logic like that doesn't convince people that we should teach religion instead of science in public schools, I dunno what will.

jAZ
04-23-2006, 08:47 AM
Stupid hollywood elitist liberals! They should just shut up, we don't care about their liberal agenda!

Sully
04-23-2006, 08:54 AM
On my way to church. Gotta leave early to pick up some bananas.

Chiefs Express
04-23-2006, 09:03 AM
:rolleyes:

patteeu
04-23-2006, 09:08 AM
Stupid hollywood elitist liberals! They should just shut up, we don't care about their liberal agenda!

Do you still claim to be a moderate, jAZ?

jAZ
04-23-2006, 09:23 AM
Do you still claim to be a moderate, jAZ?
On the issues, yes. On the Bush presidency, no.

jAZ
04-23-2006, 09:25 AM
Do you still claim to be a moderate, jAZ?
Thankfully, a video like this points out what radical views really look like.

Adept Havelock
04-23-2006, 09:41 AM
On my way to church. Gotta leave early to pick up some bananas.


ROFL ROFL

"And now, a reading from the book of Chiquita..."

Frankie
04-23-2006, 10:00 AM
Did anybody else find the Banana description pretty pornographic? I think even Kirk Cameron was thinking that as the guy was going at it. Look at his expression there.

stevieray
04-23-2006, 10:03 AM
I for one hope the liberals keep on with their Christian bashing, it''ll be especially funny when the very spiritual African American race realizes that the Democratic party has been using them for forty years, and pushes them to the Conservative side of the table.

Adept Havelock
04-23-2006, 10:31 AM
I for one hope the liberals keep on with their Christian bashing, it''ll be especially funny when the very spiritual African American race realizes that the Democratic party has been using them for forty years, and pushes them to the Conservative side of the table.


Stevieray, I can't and won't speak for the others, but I'm not "Christian" bashing. I'm "nutjob" bashing. When It comes to "nutjobs", I think I've shown I'm an equal opportunity basher, be they white, black, brown, or yellow, purportedly Christian, Jew, Muslim, Wiccan, Hellenic Revivialist, or Athiestic.

BTW- Perhaps it's splitting hairs, and I obviously can't speak from the standpoint of a believer, but philosophically (and in most theology) it's my understanding that "Spiritual" does not necessarily equal "Religious". In my understanding of it, "Spiritual" refers to ones connection/understanding of/relation to/ the divine. "Religion" is the socio-political-economic structure which man created around the concept of spirituality.

With a few exceptions, I don't see most here (or in politics for that matter) bashing spirituality. Some "liberals", certainly. In my experience, so do some "conservatives" who work in the hard sciences. Do most "bash" what many would consider "extremist" religions or religious viewpoints? Yes. Religion and spirituality in general, no. For every militant athiest who wants society to codify his lack of faith, one can find an equal and opposite religious extremist who claims they are being persecuted just because their viewpoint isn't codified into law, with everyone made to follow it. Both views are equally absurd, IMO.

Then again, "Liberals hate people of faith" is a pretty good GOTV tool, which is why the Right embraces it. Kind of like how some on the Left embrace "Conservatives hate people of color and their cultures". Both are ridiculous, but somewhat effective. ;)

Have a good one.

BTW- IMO, after seeing that video, Kirk Cameron is heading down the road of becoming to Christianity what Tom Cruise is to Scientology. Just another bad actor who has become a (likely sincere) spokesnut.

Sully
04-23-2006, 11:09 AM
I for one hope the liberals keep on with their Christian bashing, it''ll be especially funny when the very spiritual African American race realizes that the Democratic party has been using them for forty years, and pushes them to the Conservative side of the table.


Wait...
I was under the impression that Intelligent Design had nothing to do with a Christian God, and was in no way a vessel to bring the teaching of Christianity to schools.

Was I wrong?


By the way, just because I bash your particular brand of Christianity, doesn't mean I bash Christianity...

Frankie
04-23-2006, 11:19 AM
I for one hope the liberals keep on with their Christian bashing, it''ll be especially funny when the very spiritual African American race realizes that the Democratic party has been using them for forty years, and pushes them to the Conservative side of the table.
I'm sure this is not how you meant it, but the wording in your post seems to indicate that you don't consider that particular demographic capable of thinking and analyzing things by themselves. Especially if they've had as much as "forty years" to think about it. I believe that African Americans, just like any other group, have their share of nuts. But also their share of intellectuals and open minded folks. With that in mind, I'm sure they know what they are doing and the factors that generally gravitates them toward the Dems will still keep them on that side. Those factors transcend hollow screams of "Lord" and "Jesus."

BTW the history of African Americans and their preference of the Dems go way more than 40 years.

stevieray
04-23-2006, 11:39 AM
I'm sure this is not how you meant it, but the wording in your post seems to indicate that you don't consider that particular demographic capable of thinking and analyzing things by themselves. Especially if they've had as much as "forty years" to think about it. I believe that African Americans, just like any other group, have their share of nuts. But also their share of intellectuals and open minded folks. With that in mind, I'm sure they know what they are doing and the factors that generally gravitates them toward the Dems will still keep them on that side. Those factors transcend hollow screams of "Lord" and "Jesus."

BTW the history of African Americans and their preference of the Dems go way more than 40 years.



I think they are totally capable, that's why AA conservatives are on the rise.

Adept Havelock
04-23-2006, 11:46 AM
I think they are totally capable, that's why AA conservatives are on the rise.

That must be why the Bush administration is polling around 5% favoribility with African Americans (according to the last polls I saw I on the subject).


The Republican Party in each election cycle has claimed that they are making such efforts, but it's very difficult to see them. African Americans will say, for example, that they have changed their party identification. Right now, however, the growth in party identification is for neither major party, but with Independents. Yet, when you look at how people actually vote, African Americans voted 90 percent Democrat in the last election in each age group. So, although some of the past Joint Center studies show that younger blacks below the age of 35 were more conservative on some issues, still, when it came to political behavior, they voted pretty much like their elders.

http://usinfo.state.gov/dhr/Archive/2004/Mar/03-484995.html

The Repubs claim that African American voting went from 8% for Bush in 2000 to 11% in 2004, and I'll accept those numbers. I'm willing to bet most of it was driven by those parts of the African-American fundamentalist community that bought into the hype about how Gay Marriage was going to destroy America. JMO, but I Don't think that tactic is going to work too well on a regular basis.

stevieray
04-23-2006, 11:49 AM
That must be why the Bush administration is polling around 5% favoribility with African Americans (according to the last polls I saw I on the subject).


The Republican Party in each election cycle has claimed that they are making such efforts, but it's very difficult to see them. African Americans will say, for example, that they have changed their party identification. Right now, however, the growth in party identification is for neither major party, but with Independents. Yet, when you look at how people actually vote, African Americans voted 90 percent Democrat in the last election in each age group. So, although some of the past Joint Center studies show that younger blacks below the age of 35 were more conservative on some issues, still, when it came to political behavior, they voted pretty much like their elders.

http://usinfo.state.gov/dhr/Archive/2004/Mar/03-484995.html

I think we'll see those numbers change.

Adept Havelock
04-23-2006, 11:55 AM
I think we'll see those numbers change.


Your party better hope so. If they can't improve those percentages given future demographic trends, they are in trouble. It doesn't help that some in the party have done a lovely job recently of alienating a large chunk of the Hispanic community which Rove was counting on for his so called "permanent majority". "Permanent majority"? ROFL The fastest growing political affiliation in this nation is "Independent".

The pendulum swings back and forth in this country, and has for most of it's existence. After the excesses of this "Conservative Revolution", it appears to me the pendulum has reached it's far point on the right, and is beginning to swing back to the middle. Unless something truly dramatic occurs to change things, demographic shifts will also likely continue to favor that trend. Again, JMO.

stevieray
04-23-2006, 12:07 PM
Your party better hope so. If they can't improve those percentages given future demographic trends, they are in trouble. It doesn't help that some in the party have done a lovely job recently of alienating a large chunk of the Hispanic community which Rove was counting on for his so called "permanent majority". "Permanent majority"? ROFL The fastest growing political affiliation in this nation is "Independent".

The pendulum swings back and forth in this country, and has for most of it's existence. After the excesses of this "Conservative Revolution", it appears to me the pendulum has reached it's far point on the right, and is beginning to swing back to the middle. Unless something truly dramatic occurs to change things, demographic shifts will also likely continue to favor that trend. Again, JMO.

I don't have a party..I think the political pressure of removing the culture this country was founded upon will create the shift. As times goes on, it's going to be harder to convince young AA that they don't live in color blind world, and that only a certain "party" cares about their needs. When in reality , it's all of our needs. I think that spiritual lines between the races is more powerful than those of party affiliation.

JMO.

Dave Lane
04-23-2006, 12:09 PM
I agree with Adept the pendulum swings right and left right now the religious and conservatives are at a historical peak at least in recent times. Things are good for them. Churches are adding on and expanding like weeds. 20 Years ago they were lamenting lack of attendace and many churches either folded or were in dire straits. Now the edge appears to be reached and will begin heading back to 20 years ago.

Then after another 10 or 20 years it will head back to the right once again. Its the way it will be and one reason why it didn't bother me too badly when Bush got in. I knew given enough rope he'd hang himself and there wouldn't be a viable gop for many years.

Dave

Dave Lane
04-23-2006, 12:09 PM
the culture this country was founded upon


What is this?

Dave

stevieray
04-23-2006, 12:11 PM
What is this?

Dave

Dave needs more faith to believe there is no God.

Dave Lane
04-23-2006, 12:13 PM
Yes but explain this part to me:

the culture this country was founded upon

Dave

stevieray
04-23-2006, 12:17 PM
Yes but explain this part to me:

the culture this country was founded upon

Dave

Removing In God We Trust from legal tender.

Lake
04-23-2006, 12:20 PM
Removing Under God from the Pledge.

Adept Havelock
04-23-2006, 12:21 PM
Removing In God We Trust from legal tender.

Considering it wasn't added until the Civil War (4 generations after the founding of the US), what's that have to do with "the culture this country was founded upon"? Are you speaking of the original culture the colonies that became this nation was founded upon? I.E. A people so tight-assed that the English kicked them out? Or the colonies formed by corporations for the relenteless pursuit of profit? ;)


Removing Under God from the Pledge.

Heck, we got along fine without it for 70+ years before it was added in the 1950's. ;)

Dave Lane
04-23-2006, 12:23 PM
The motto IN GOD WE TRUST was placed on United States coins largely because of the increased religious sentiment existing during the Civil War. Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase received many appeals from devout persons throughout the country, urging that the United States recognize the Deity on United States coins. From Treasury Department records, it appears that the first such appeal came in a letter dated November 13, 1861. It was written to Secretary Chase by Rev. M. R. Watkinson, Minister of the Gospel from Ridleyville, Pennsylvania, and read:

Dear Sir: You are about to submit your annual report to the Congress respecting the affairs of the national finances.

One fact touching our currency has hitherto been seriously overlooked. I mean the recognition of the Almighty God in some form on our coins.

You are probably a Christian. What if our Republic were not shattered beyond reconstruction? Would not the antiquaries of succeeding centuries rightly reason from our past that we were a heathen nation? What I propose is that instead of the goddess of liberty we shall have next inside the 13 stars a ring inscribed with the words PERPETUAL UNION; within the ring the allseeing eye, crowned with a halo; beneath this eye the American flag, bearing in its field stars equal to the number of the States united; in the folds of the bars the words GOD, LIBERTY, LAW.

This would make a beautiful coin, to which no possible citizen could object. This would relieve us from the ignominy of heathenism. This would place us openly under the Divine protection we have personally claimed. From my hearth I have felt our national shame in disowning God as not the least of our present national disasters.

To you first I address a subject that must be agitated.


The use of IN GOD WE TRUST has not been uninterrupted. The motto disappeared from the five-cent coin in 1883, and did not reappear until production of the Jefferson nickel began in 1938. Since 1938, all United States coins bear the inscription. Later, the motto was found missing from the new design of the double-eagle gold coin and the eagle gold coin shortly after they appeared in 1907.


No mention of In God We Trust till 1864. The nation was founded when? First coinage began when?

Pop quiz and double donuts for the first right answer.

Dave

Dave Lane
04-23-2006, 12:25 PM
I.E. A people so tight-assed that the English kicked them out?


ROFL ROFL

Boy when the English kick you out for being an uptight a-hole man you really do have something to worry about

ROFL

Dave

Lake
04-23-2006, 12:29 PM
I do not care when it was or was not I was just trying to back up stevieray that by his beliefs being battled by the unseen that they are after him too.

Dave Lane
04-23-2006, 12:31 PM
What did the Nazis have on their uniforms and money as a religious saying?

The pop quiz continues...

Dave

Adept Havelock
04-23-2006, 12:35 PM
I do not care when it was or was not I was just trying to back up stevieray that by his beliefs being battled by the unseen that they are after him too.

I recognize those words, but the meaning utterly eludes me. Especially:

"by his beliefs being battled by the unseen that they are after him too"

Unseen forces are battling Stevieray's beliefs, and are personally after him as well?


Diagnostic criteria for 301.0 Paranoid Personality Disorder
(cautionary statement)
A. A pervasive distrust and suspiciousness of others such that their motives are interpreted as malevolent, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by four (or more) of the following:

(1) suspects, without sufficient basis, that others are exploiting, harming, or deceiving him or her
(2) is preoccupied with unjustified doubts about the loyalty or trustworthiness of friends or associates (3) is reluctant to confide in others because of unwarranted fear that the information will be used maliciously against him or her
(4) reads hidden demeaning or threatening meanings into benign remarks or events
(5) persistently bears grudges, i.e., is unforgiving of insults, injuries, or slights
(6) perceives attacks on his or her character or reputation that are not apparent to others and is quick to react angrily or to counterattack
(7) has recurrent suspicions, without justification, regarding fidelity of spouse or sexual partner

B. Does not occur exclusively during the course of Schizophrenia, a Mood Disorder With Psychotic Features, or another Psychotic Disorder and is not due to the direct physiological effects of a general medical condition.
Note: If criteria are met prior to the onset of Schizophrenia, add "Premorbid," e.g., "Paranoid Personality Disorder (Premorbid)."

******************************************************
Diagnostic criteria for 295.30 (Schizophrenia) Paranoid Type
(cautionary statement)
A type of Schizophrenia in which the following criteria are met:

A. Preoccupation with one or more delusions or frequent auditory hallucinations.

B. None of the following is prominent: disorganized speech, disorganized or catatonic behavior, or flat or inappropriate affect.

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth Edition. Copyright 1994 American Psychiatric Association


Treatment of Paranoia
Treatment of paranoia is usually via behavior therapy which is aimed at reducing sensitivity to criticism and improving social skills. It can be difficult to treat a person with paranoia as they may be irritable, emotionally guarded, hostile, and unwilling; therefore, progress is slow. Therapy attempts to break the cycle of suspicion and isolation by using relaxation and anxiety management and by aiding the person to change certain behaviors.
http://www.nmha.org/infoctr/factsheets/paranoia.cfm

Lake, if you don't get help at Charter, please get help somewhere. ;)

Adept Havelock
04-23-2006, 12:39 PM
What did the Nazis have on their uniforms and money as a religious saying?

The pop quiz continues...

Dave


Honestly, I don't know. I always thought it was "Blood and Honor". Or was that the SS motto? :hmmm:

Either way, I really regret to inform you that per Godwin's law, you have just lost this argument.

Have a good one all. It's too nice an afternoon to spend debating on the internet. Especially as it's the first day I've felt back to normal after a really nasty case of Acute Tonsilitis. Should have had the damn things taken out years ago. More trouble than they are worth.

Cheers, everybody. :toast:

Dave Lane
04-23-2006, 12:43 PM
I'm headed out shortly as well.

But the answer is Soldiers in the German Nazi Wehrmacht (army) wore belt buckles inscribed with:

Gott Mit Uns (God is with us).

Dave

stevieray
04-23-2006, 12:50 PM
The motto IN GOD WE TRUST was placed on United States coins largely because of the increased religious sentiment existing during the Civil War. Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase received many appeals from devout persons throughout the country, urging that the United States recognize the Deity on United States coins. From Treasury Department records, it appears that the first such appeal came in a letter dated November 13, 1861. It was written to Secretary Chase by Rev. M. R. Watkinson, Minister of the Gospel from Ridleyville, Pennsylvania, and read:

Dear Sir: You are about to submit your annual report to the Congress respecting the affairs of the national finances.

One fact touching our currency has hitherto been seriously overlooked. I mean the recognition of the Almighty God in some form on our coins.

You are probably a Christian. What if our Republic were not shattered beyond reconstruction? Would not the antiquaries of succeeding centuries rightly reason from our past that we were a heathen nation? What I propose is that instead of the goddess of liberty we shall have next inside the 13 stars a ring inscribed with the words PERPETUAL UNION; within the ring the allseeing eye, crowned with a halo; beneath this eye the American flag, bearing in its field stars equal to the number of the States united; in the folds of the bars the words GOD, LIBERTY, LAW.

This would make a beautiful coin, to which no possible citizen could object. This would relieve us from the ignominy of heathenism. This would place us openly under the Divine protection we have personally claimed. From my hearth I have felt our national shame in disowning God as not the least of our present national disasters.

To you first I address a subject that must be agitated.


The use of IN GOD WE TRUST has not been uninterrupted. The motto disappeared from the five-cent coin in 1883, and did not reappear until production of the Jefferson nickel began in 1938. Since 1938, all United States coins bear the inscription. Later, the motto was found missing from the new design of the double-eagle gold coin and the eagle gold coin shortly after they appeared in 1907.


No mention of In God We Trust till 1864. The nation was founded when? First coinage began when?

Pop quiz and double donuts for the first right answer.

Dave


you can play semantics all you what, but if the country wasn't founded upon a culture of spirituality, you would'nt be spending almost everday trying disprove it.

First textbook published by the Library of Congress.

First Universitites in this country.

Pitt Gorilla
04-23-2006, 12:59 PM
I for one hope the liberals keep on with their Christian bashing, it''ll be especially funny when the very spiritual African American race realizes that the Democratic party has been using them for forty years, and pushes them to the Conservative side of the table.You agree with this nut vis-a-vis the banana? I honestly don't believe you're that stupid.

Dave Lane
04-23-2006, 01:20 PM
you can play semantics all you what, but if the country wasn't founded upon a culture of spirituality, you would'nt be spending almost everday trying disprove it.

First textbook published by the Library of Congress.

First Universitites in this country.


Here I'll play semantics with you...

If the country was founded upon a culture of spirituality, you would'nt be spending almost everday trying prove it.

This country was not founded on religion. I'm sorry if that distorts your world view but get over it. It was founded on Liberty and the right to choose of not choose to believe in anything.

Dave

Lake
04-23-2006, 01:21 PM
What are the Christians going to do when they realize that the Republican Party has been using them longer than the Democrats have used Black People?

stevieray
04-23-2006, 01:25 PM
Here I'll play semantics with you...

If the country was founded upon a culture of spirituality, you would'nt be spending almost everday trying prove it.

This country was not founded on religion. I'm sorry if that distorts your world view but get over it. It was founded on Liberty and the right to choose of not choose to believe in anything.

Dave

I'll bet money you spend more time talking about it than I do. There aren't any threads here this forum trying to convert anyone. I don't have to prove anything, history does that for me.

The right to choose? Thanks for proving my point.

Dave Lane
04-23-2006, 01:25 PM
What are the Christians going to do when they realize that the Republican Party has been using them longer than the Democrats have used Black People?


ROFL ROFL ROFL

Nice!

Dave

Ugly Duck
04-23-2006, 01:26 PM
That must be why the Bush administration is polling around 5% favoribility with African Americans (according to the last polls I saw I on the subject).Last poll was 2%. Thats 2 out of every 100 blacks that give these neocons a favorable rating. Not too shabby considering the galactic failure of the neocon experiment - the RNC is probably pretty happy with 2%.

Dave Lane
04-23-2006, 01:27 PM
I'll bet money you spend more time talking about it than I do. There aren't any threads here this forum trying to convert anyone. I don't have to prove anything, history does that for me.

The right to choose? Thanks for proving my point.


I spend almost 0 time talking about it with strangers. Some friends and I talk about it on occasion. Probably like you do in the real world.

Dave

Dave Lane
04-23-2006, 01:28 PM
Last poll was 2%. Thats 2 out of every 100 blacks that give these neocons a favorable rating. Not too shabby considering the galactic failure of the neocon experiment - the RNC is probably pretty happy with 2%.


If I was them I'd be ecstatic.

Dave

stevieray
04-23-2006, 01:35 PM
Last poll was 2%. Thats 2 out of every 100 blacks that give these neocons a favorable rating. Not too shabby considering the galactic failure of the neocon experiment - the RNC is probably pretty happy with 2%.


Interesting , considering there are more minorities in this cabinet than ever before.

Again, I think these numbers will shift in the future.

stevieray
04-23-2006, 01:37 PM
I spend almost 0 time talking about it with strangers. Some friends and I talk about it on occasion. Probably like you do in the real world.

Dave

Nope.

banyon
04-23-2006, 02:00 PM
I'll bet money you spend more time talking about it than I do. There aren't any threads here this forum trying to convert anyone. I don't have to prove anything, history does that for me.

The right to choose? Thanks for proving my point.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=138720&highlight=religious+thread

I tried. :(

Lake
04-23-2006, 02:16 PM
The only AAs that I can see voting for Republicans are the ones with money. I am sure that the Repubs do well in the middle and upper classes of the Black Community. I hear that they do well with most that have money.

stevieray
04-23-2006, 02:25 PM
The only AAs that I can see voting for Republicans are the ones with money. I am sure that the Repubs do well in the middle and upper classes of the Black Community. I hear that they do well with most that have money.

IMO, that trend will continue to grow. While the big wealth has always been held by few, most who are successful have worked very hard to get there.

IIRC, Vincente Fox said was the reason so many of his countrymen leave Mexico for the U.S. is due to the fact that they aren't a welfare state.

Lake
04-23-2006, 03:48 PM
Vincente Fox says many things. Maybe if he would do more instead of say more people might be more inclined to stay. How many people actualy come here from other countries for the welfare?

Ultra Peanut
04-23-2006, 06:29 PM
What is this?

DavePuritans were so rad.

you can play semantics all you what, but if the country wasn't founded upon a culture of spirituality, you would'nt be spending almost everday trying disprove it.Spirituality... that's a bit of a stretch, but I'll grant you a maybe. Christianity? Not so much.

Deists ahoy.

Dave Lane
04-23-2006, 09:22 PM
Vincente Fox says many things. Maybe if he would do more instead of say more people might be more inclined to stay. How many people actualy come here from other countries for the welfare?


Yes like how about he keep his corruption down to a point where some of the "serfs" that flee northward can make a living there. If you ever wanted to see where true republican ideal world is its Mexico. The haves and the have nots with nothing but lies in the middle.

Dave

tiptap
04-23-2006, 09:32 PM
Just to get back to the video, do you'all think this guy realized that the cavendish dessert banana that he uses was cultivated by man. It is an asexual offshoot that is under very strong selective evolutionary pressure to go extinct.
Plantains and other varieties of similar fruit are usually starch sources and are cooked like potatoes to get nutritional value.
I just think it is peculiar to choose a domesticated variety that wouldn't last a year without intense human effort. So I do see a creator for that specific fruit he was handling. Some farmer from the tropical region.

Dave Lane
04-23-2006, 10:18 PM
Right. Bananas. How to defend yourself against a man armed with a banana. Now you, come at me with this banana. Catch! Now, it's quite simple to defend yourself against a man armed with a banana. First of all you force him to drop the banana; then, second, you eat the banana, thus disarming him. You have now rendered him 'elpless.

Suppose he's got a bunch.

Shut up.

Suppose he's got a pointed stick.

Shut up.

ROFL

Dave

Chiefs Express
04-24-2006, 03:22 AM
I tried.

Not quite right. You tried to insult SR. I dont' think your courtroom tactics will make you a successful trial lawyer.

sd4chiefs
04-24-2006, 09:14 AM
If you believe that bananas indicate intelligent design then...


You may be interested to know that global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking numbers of Pirates since the 1800s.

This from the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster website.

http://www.venganza.org/index.htm

Sully
04-24-2006, 09:33 AM
Right. Bananas. How to defend yourself against a man armed with a banana. Now you, come at me with this banana. Catch! Now, it's quite simple to defend yourself against a man armed with a banana. First of all you force him to drop the banana; then, second, you eat the banana, thus disarming him. You have now rendered him 'elpless.

Suppose he's got a bunch.

Shut up.

Suppose he's got a pointed stick.

Shut up.

ROFL

Dave

I've been racking y brain all morning... what's that from?

Baby Lee
04-24-2006, 09:40 AM
Gott Mit Uns (God is with us).
Actually, the literal translation is "our hands are warm, but our fingers cannot operate independantly."

DanT
04-24-2006, 09:50 AM
Actually, the literal translation is "our hands are warm, but our fingers cannot operate independantly."
ROFL

Dave Lane
04-24-2006, 10:05 AM
I've been racking y brain all morning... what's that from?


Monty Python defending yourself against fresh fruit.

Nice oldie!

Dave

Dave Lane
04-24-2006, 10:08 AM
If you believe that bananas indicate intelligent design then...


You may be interested to know that global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking numbers of Pirates since the 1800s.

This from the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster website.

http://www.venganza.org/index.htm


I put my FSM trunk label on the Lexus this weekend!

Dave

Sully
04-24-2006, 10:56 AM
Monty Python defending yourself against fresh fruit.

Nice oldie!

Dave

I haven't seen a ton of Monte Python, but now that you mention it, I do remember that. I loved it first thing in the morning, starting my day off with a good laugh.

mcan
04-24-2006, 06:47 PM
There are definately holes in the logic in this video, but I wouldn't label these guys as "nutjobs." In fact, I would think that these guys are very well intended and level headed. They just have different beliefs about the workings of the universe. Part of that belief is that being a follower of Christ (or not) is the MOST important decision you can ever make. If they are right... Well... We've all got a lot to worry about.


While their arguments for an intelligent design seem fairly reasonable (not proof by any means but reasonable), what they fail to see is that THEIR explanation for whom actually created us is a leap of faith. Even if you could PROVE to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that evolution does not create species and that someone or something MADE me, there is no way of knowing which (if any) of the Gods that man has worshiped since Mesopotamia is the actual one that made us. Or even if the one that made us is still around. Maybe there are SEVERAL Gods that made us. Or perhaps one God made us and he was deposed by a group of other Gods, one of which wrote the Bible and the rest are too busy playing a million year old game of Parcheezy. Perhaps the Christian God is the "nerdy" God among a group of school children Gods who sits in the corner with his science project (Man) and eventually his teacher will grow tired of God not paying attention and make him throw us all away. Sure, he SAYS he loves us, but God does this every Science Fair... Next Science Fair he will "LOVE" the Gomarianites that he makes, until he spills them all over the street while getting off the school bus.

While these scenerios seems unlikely (proposterous and stupid to some), it really isn't any more or less rediculous than the stories presented in the Bible. The difference is, those stories were written beautifully and inspired people, and my stories are written to seem pedestrian. But fundamentally, they both require the same amount of FAITH to consider as reality... They both require a person of sound judgement to believe in the existance of a SUPERNATURAL element that goes beyond their understanding and experience.

That is precisely the difference between an "atheist" and an "agnostic." The Agnostic believes that there might be supernatural elements in the universe, but doesn't know what they are and often times doesn't care. The Athiest firmly believes that there are NO supernatural elements to the universe and that everything is quantifiable and qualifiable.

So, the logic in this video that proposes all "athiests" are REALLY "agnostics" is FALSE. While it is true that no athiest has the proper knowledge perspective to disprove or say with any reasonalbe authority that there is no God, that knowlegde is not necessary to be an athiest. The burden of proof is on YOU, Mr. Creationist, to give one reasonable SHRED of even possible evidence to the existance of a SUPERNATURAL realm. The athiest isn't looking for God himself to come down and say, "stop being an athiest." All he/she needs is to ONCE, just ONCE, see a ghost... Or have a true medical miracle happen... Or have anything happen in this entire universe that could even remotely resemble the SUPERNATURAL, and BAM... The atheist is off the wagon.

Chiefs Express
04-24-2006, 07:51 PM
There are definately holes in the logic in this video, but I wouldn't label these guys as "nutjobs." In fact, I would think that these guys are very well intended and level headed. They just have different beliefs about the workings of the universe. Part of that belief is that being a follower of Christ (or not) is the MOST important decision you can ever make. If they are right... Well... We've all got a lot to worry about.


While their arguments for an intelligent design seem fairly reasonable (not proof by any means but reasonable), what they fail to see is that THEIR explanation for whom actually created us is a leap of faith. Even if you could PROVE to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that evolution does not create species and that someone or something MADE me, there is no way of knowing which (if any) of the Gods that man has worshiped since Mesopotamia is the actual one that made us. Or even if the one that made us is still around. Maybe there are SEVERAL Gods that made us. Or perhaps one God made us and he was deposed by a group of other Gods, one of which wrote the Bible and the rest are too busy playing a million year old game of Parcheezy. Perhaps the Christian God is the "nerdy" God among a group of school children Gods who sits in the corner with his science project (Man) and eventually his teacher will grow tired of God not paying attention and make him throw us all away. Sure, he SAYS he loves us, but God does this every Science Fair... Next Science Fair he will "LOVE" the Gomarianites that he makes, until he spills them all over the street while getting off the school bus.

While these scenerios seems unlikely (proposterous and stupid to some), it really isn't any more or less rediculous than the stories presented in the Bible. The difference is, those stories were written beautifully and inspired people, and my stories are written to seem pedestrian. But fundamentally, they both require the same amount of FAITH to consider as reality... They both require a person of sound judgement to believe in the existance of a SUPERNATURAL element that goes beyond their understanding and experience.

That is precisely the difference between an "atheist" and an "agnostic." The Agnostic believes that there might be supernatural elements in the universe, but doesn't know what they are and often times doesn't care. The Athiest firmly believes that there are NO supernatural elements to the universe and that everything is quantifiable and qualifiable.

So, the logic in this video that proposes all "athiests" are REALLY "agnostics" is FALSE. While it is true that no athiest has the proper knowledge perspective to disprove or say with any reasonalbe authority that there is no God, that knowlegde is not necessary to be an athiest. The burden of proof is on YOU, Mr. Creationist, to give one reasonable SHRED of even possible evidence to the existance of a SUPERNATURAL realm. The athiest isn't looking for God himself to come down and say, "stop being an athiest." All he/she needs is to ONCE, just ONCE, see a ghost... Or have a true medical miracle happen... Or have anything happen in this entire universe that could even remotely resemble the SUPERNATURAL, and BAM... The atheist is off the wagon.

What you have for proof? You can hear testimonies all the time about the blind healed and the lame walk, cancer healed, the dead brought back to life. The proof is there, but most explain away the miracles due to their non-belief or by trying to use the intellect that we all have.

I think what would be very impressive would be if someone like Vlad was healed by prayer. Vlad professes to be a diest and doesn't buy in to much of standard religious beliefs. Maybe Vlad believes the way he does because he was prayed for and didn't get the healing that he thought he should have.

Many people ask why good people die. It would ge great to be able to answer that particular question, but by the time we find out [if you are a believer] you are already beyond explaining it to the rest of the world.

I heard a minister tell a story about a guy that was sitting next to him on a plane headed for Hawaii[IIRC]. The guy spent the bulk of the trip making fun of the minister and what he did for a living, he was an agnostic or something comparable. At one point during the flight the plane was struck by lightning, the guy next to the minister shouted for God to save him. Was he really an agnostic? Is the old saying true about there being no atheists in foxholes?

Have you ever been healed of a minor malady? Have you ever known anyone that has been? I've known those that have been healed, those that have been healed with a doctors help and those that have not been healed by prayer. The best part of the situation for those that were not healed by prayer was that they never lost their faith. If you are atheist or agnostic, or whatever 'anti-God' type belief you may have, how can you ever have hope?

Adept Havelock
04-24-2006, 08:09 PM
how can you ever have hope?

While I know this wasn't adressed specifically to me, I'll leave for the evening with this bon mot:

Wishing for a favorable outcome of multiple probabilities (the fundamental definition of hope) is not exclusively a religious concept, it's simply an expression of self-interest. IMO, an inevitable byproduct of self-awareness, unless of course, one is a masochist.

Chiefs Express
04-24-2006, 08:29 PM
While I know this wasn't adressed specifically to me, I'll leave for the evening with this bon mot:

Wishing for a favorable outcome of multiple probabilities (the fundamental definition of hope) is not exclusively a religious concept, it's simply an expression of self-interest. IMO, an inevitable byproduct of self-awareness, unless of course, one is a masochist.

I don't think the definition of hope is the same for both of us. My hope is for life everlasting as promised in the Bible. I'm not perfect, but the part of Christianity is that I can be forgiven for my sins ( and I'm sure there are more than what you might consider sins on this board ).

What do you look forward to when you die? Will your soul/spirit die with your body?

Dave Lane
04-24-2006, 08:33 PM
If there are miracles then why do popes die? With 300 million people praying for them they should spring straight up out of bed and go jogging. Why doesn't John Paul rise again? I'd be a believer on this one if that happened big time. Till then I guess I'm out on this belief system.

Dave

Chiefs Express
04-24-2006, 08:40 PM
If there are miracles then why do popes die? With 300 million people praying for them they should spring straight up out of bed and go jogging. Why doesn't John Paul rise again? I'd be a believer on this one if that happened big time. Till then I guess I'm out on this belief system.

Dave Many people ask why good people die. It would ge great to be able to answer that particular question, but by the time we find out [if you are a believer] you are already beyond explaining it to the rest of the world.

I think you'd be better off asking why children and babies die.

I guess you missed this part of the post.

You are trying to place specifics on something that is hard to explain, even by people with a doctorate in theology. I guess you are a Thomas, he didn't believe that Jesus was risen until he thrust his hand into his stomach where the Roman soldier got him with his sword.

Nobody says you have to believe, but I've seen some things that cannot be explained by medicine, nor the doctors that practice medicine.

Dave Lane
04-24-2006, 08:59 PM
Please explain these things you're seen for me I'm interested. I've seen some pretty bizarre things as well that don't have a religious connatation.

Also it was a spear wound so get the dogma right! ROFL

Dave

Dave Lane
04-24-2006, 09:01 PM
And actually the baby thing can be explained better than why with 300 million people praying for him not one single one of them has faith the size of a mustard seed.

Dave

Chiefs Express
04-24-2006, 09:01 PM
Please explain these things you're seen for me I'm interested. I've seen some pretty bizarre things as well that don't have a religious connatation.

Also it was a spear wound so get the dogma right! ROFL

Dave

Don't tell my pastor!!!

Chiefs Express
04-24-2006, 09:03 PM
And actually the baby thing can be explained better than why with 300 million people praying for him not one single one of them has faith the size of a mustard seed.

Dave

There are several ways you could splinter that comment.

1. The Pope didn't have the faith to be healed.
2. The 300 million people didn't have the faith of a mustard seed between them.
3. Their prayers were amiss.

I'm sure there are more things that could be said, but I don't really have an answer and I doubt that anyone on earth has the right answer either.

Dave Lane
04-24-2006, 09:04 PM
You have the power to work miracles.

Matthew 17:19 (New King James Version)

So Jesus said to them, "For assuredly, I say
to you, if you have faith as a mustard seed, you will say to this
mountain, "Move from here to there,' and it will move; and nothing will
be impossible for you."

Kind of a problem unless:

a) no one that prayed had even the tiniest amount of faith

or

b) No one wanted him to do anything other than die.

Dave

Dave Lane
04-24-2006, 09:08 PM
There are several ways you could splinter that comment.

1. The Pope didn't have the faith to be healed.
2. The 300 million people didn't have the faith of a mustard seed between them.
3. Their prayers were amiss.

I'm sure there are more things that could be said, but I don't really have an answer and I doubt that anyone on earth has the right answer either.


This is even more of a problem if you extrapolate it out to all popes that ever lived. Not one person? Not one worthy pope? Even though there would be less people 500 years ago still 100 million praying for someone ought to work once in awhile.

Dave

Chiefs Express
04-24-2006, 09:30 PM
This is even more of a problem if you extrapolate it out to all popes that ever lived. Not one person? Not one worthy pope? Even though there would be less people 500 years ago still 100 million praying for someone ought to work once in awhile.

Dave

Like I said, I can't explain it. Have you heard of any other denominations ministers or leaders that have been prayed away from death?

Our local chiropractor was at home last week, he had a small case of cardiac arrest. The EMT's and Nurse practicioners got there and hooked him up to the 'box'. He was flat lined. They zapped him three times and got some fibrilation but no pulse. The Nurse practioner is a Christian and was praying while they were administering the shock. When they were done she leaned down and told the doc that his time had not come and he had to come back. In a few seconds there was a rythymic heartbeat.

I'm sure you have heard similar stories around the country. Although not pronounced dead the flat line was a pretty good indication that if there were no interaction witht he EMT's and Nurse Practioner there was a good probability that he would have been.

As I said, go figure.

mcan
04-24-2006, 10:09 PM
I'm talking about SUPERNATURAL things.



WHOA, you've missed my point entirely. I'm saying that calling all athiests, AGNOSTICS by this logic:

they don't have the necessary knowlegde to truly KNOW there is no GOD, ---> therefore, they are AGNOSTIC..

That is not a valid argument.


they are changing the definition of athiest to fit their mantra. They have, in essence made it impossible for an athiest to exist unless they were omniscient (all knowing).


Atheism is a BELIEF that there are no supernatural elements in this world. GOD is just one of those SUPERNATURAL elements. Very few people fit this definition, but they do exist. They aren't Agnostics, as this video says.


For my own part. I believe that there is a God. I believe that he cares about us. I believe that Christ was the son of God. I believe that he was crucified. I believe that he rose from the grave. I believe that his followers were sincere when they wrote the Gospels. I do not, however, believe that the BIBLE is the word of GOD. I do not believe that Jesus' death was the important part of salvation. I believe his LIFE, and ressurection was. I believe that the "sacrifice" (lamb) element is the only way that men could understand what was happening. So, they invented all the ritual elements to make themselves feel better.


God is all powerful. He is not bound by rituals or any of that crap. If he wanted to save us from all of our sins, he could do so by just saying, "OK, now you're saved." He would not HAVE to send his son to die. That doesn't make any sense at all. And if you believe that, you're creating a power higher than GOD. A set of rules that GOD has to follow. It's rediculous that he could just say "Let there be light" and there it is. But if he wants to save somebody he has to go through a bunch of hoops.

Chiefs Express
04-24-2006, 10:25 PM
I'm talking about SUPERNATURAL things.



WHOA, you've missed my point entirely. I'm saying that calling all athiests, AGNOSTICS by this logic:

they don't have the necessary knowlegde to truly KNOW there is no GOD, ---> therefore, they are AGNOSTIC..

That is not a valid argument.


they are changing the definition of athiest to fit their mantra. They have, in essence made it impossible for an athiest to exist unless they were omniscient (all knowing).


Atheism is a BELIEF that there are no supernatural elements in this world. GOD is just one of those SUPERNATURAL elements. Very few people fit this definition, but they do exist. They aren't Agnostics, as this video says.


For my own part. I believe that there is a God. I believe that he cares about us. I believe that Christ was the son of God. I believe that he was crucified. I believe that he rose from the grave. I believe that his followers were sincere when they wrote the Gospels. I do not, however, believe that the BIBLE is the word of GOD. I do not believe that Jesus' death was the important part of salvation. I believe his LIFE, and ressurection was. I believe that the "sacrifice" (lamb) element is the only way that men could understand what was happening. So, they invented all the ritual elements to make themselves feel better.


God is all powerful. He is not bound by rituals or any of that crap. If he wanted to save us from all of our sins, he could do so by just saying, "OK, now you're saved." He would not HAVE to send his son to die. That doesn't make any sense at all. And if you believe that, you're creating a power higher than GOD. A set of rules that GOD has to follow. It's rediculous that he could just say "Let there be light" and there it is. But if he wants to save somebody he has to go through a bunch of hoops.

If you believe everything you just said I think you've misunderstood some of the basics.

First he didn't HAVE to send his son to die, that was a choice he made to provide salvation for mankind. If you believe in the Trinity, Jesus was God incarnate when he was on the earth. If you will remember, Adam and Eve made the choice to eat of the tree of knowledge, that act condemned us all to be born into sin. As we are all born into sin we bacame moral free agents, we choose our path. When we do something that we know is wrong it is a sin, but it is also a choice that we made to do the act.

You are right, God is not bound by rituals, but then we are not the ones that make up the daily activity list for God. If God had rules, they would be rules that he made and if he made them I think he would abide by them at all costs.

Your comments about Jesus death and resurection seem to be at tremendous odds. If Jesus had not have been scourged and killed by the Jews/Romans there would have been no resurection. Although I believe that the whole process was so that Jesus blood would pay for our sins I believe that it was also symbolic that he died so that we might live. Notice the word might, it becomes the key word as we still have the option as moral free agents.

As for the Bible, it was not written by God, it was written by man by the inspiration of God. Think about this, if it were just men writing a book, why is it that it has survived for so long? Which ever translation you use it inspires people to be lawful and honest. Granted everyone is not lawful and honest, but for those that try to adhere to it's principles provide a part of society that that is not one the police have to patrol. That isn't said exactly the way I want to say it, but I'm getting tired, long day and short night last night.

tiptap
04-25-2006, 06:50 AM
If you believe everything you just said I think you've misunderstood some of the basics.

First he didn't HAVE to send his son to die, that was a choice he made to provide salvation for mankind. If you believe in the Trinity, Jesus was God incarnate when he was on the earth. If you will remember, Adam and Eve made the choice to eat of the tree of knowledge, that act condemned us all to be born into sin. As we are all born into sin we bacame moral free agents, we choose our path. When we do something that we know is wrong it is a sin, but it is also a choice that we made to do the act.

You are right, God is not bound by rituals, but then we are not the ones that make up the daily activity list for God. If God had rules, they would be rules that he made and if he made them I think he would abide by them at all costs.

Your comments about Jesus death and resurection seem to be at tremendous odds. If Jesus had not have been scourged and killed by the Jews/Romans there would have been no resurection. Although I believe that the whole process was so that Jesus blood would pay for our sins I believe that it was also symbolic that he died so that we might live. Notice the word might, it becomes the key word as we still have the option as moral free agents.

As for the Bible, it was not written by God, it was written by man by the inspiration of God. Think about this, if it were just men writing a book, why is it that it has survived for so long? Which ever translation you use it inspires people to be lawful and honest. Granted everyone is not lawful and honest, but for those that try to adhere to it's principles provide a part of society that that is not one the police have to patrol. That isn't said exactly the way I want to say it, but I'm getting tired, long day and short night last night.


Just a few things, if we admit that Jesus is God, as in doctrine of Trinity, then Jesus cannot die, never could. "I am that I am" Yahwah notion means you can't obliterate a god. Suffering and sacrifice is only possible if you are mortal, if your loss is real and permanent and it helped others to a greater degree than your loss. (That is why I do try to honor the sacrifice of soldiers, police and fireman by living a life that honors them.)

It isn't just christians that have stories of people being pronounced dead and then reviving. Moslems, Buddists, Hindu and even Athiests have stories of beating the odds. There is no particular benefits of being christian. Science, vaccines and medicines, have done more to prolong life than prayer. If you thought prayer was really tTHE answer you'd be a Christian Scientist or something and never seek medical treatment.

However what is true for all of us is that we all do eventually die. Now if, like Jesus, Christians rose from the dead and rocketed off into space 40 days later and no other religion had similar events, then I would call that a miracle. Otherwise I call it word claims. It is only your words, in contrast to the reality, that you will be reanimated. And strangely, you claim to worship a spiritual god, but demand a physical ressurection.

Saulbadguy
04-25-2006, 06:56 AM
PBJ

Dave Lane
04-25-2006, 10:22 PM
Is that a vibrating banana?

Dave

BucEyedPea
04-26-2006, 07:25 AM
... it's my understanding that "Spiritual" does not necessarily equal "Religious".

I would agree.

For every militant athiest who wants society to codify his lack of faith...

I never heard it put this way...but that's exactly the case.
Few of them are even aware that our own Supreme Court has declared
"atheism" a protected "faith"...for legal purposes. As is Secular Humanism and Eastern beliefs that do not support a "god." An absence in the belief in God/god/gods and views on end-of-life issues is a very broad field.

Then again, "Liberals hate people of faith" is a pretty good GOTV tool, which is why the Right embraces it. Kind of like how some on the Left embrace "Conservatives hate people of color and their cultures". Both are ridiculous, but somewhat effective. ;)

I agree.