Christianity in 30 Seconds

[Knicks4lyfe]

Not even going to dignify this stupid ass comment from a religious fool with a response.

Good , cuz Im responding to the fool who thinks as lo ng as condoms are used, sex is ok. At any age.

 

[LJ4ptplay]

First, if my dad woulda let me drip down his leg, I would not likely be here lol. That was an intended ha, ha moment, designed to loosen up the tension in the thread. Everyone mad for no reason. Including me at times.

Not condoning parents abandoning their kids, but I do condone forgiveness and understanding. My mom fell to crack in the 80's. That forced my sister and I to have to live with granny. Because of my mom, I was reading out of time magazine at 4, and her premium on education has helped me throughout my life. Should I forget the things she did before she fell to drugs and not forgive and understand that she is only human just like me? We all do messed up things in this skin we're in. Does not excuse it, but forgiveness puts a bandaid over it and the wound will eventually heal.

On the flipside, God has abandoned no one. When Adam and Eve sinned, they were perfect. That means they could always practice perfect judgment. That also means by sinning they chose to deliberately disobey God, and deserved the punishment of death being they wanted to become like God, in the sense they wanted to live apart from the one who provided their life. So he allowed them too.

But God knew that their children would unfairly be caught in the curse of sin and death, so like any loving parent, instead of abandoning us, he provided the way out of sin and death for us through his son. That means all of us have an open invitation to recieve that blessing, but we must take him up on the offer, not scoff at it. You are choosing to scoff at the way out for whatever reasons personal to you. But that just means you have rejected God's offer of redemption, not that he abandoned you.

Well I just think that forgiveness is better than staying angry at things we can't control. I will be worse off having pinned up frustration at why my mom chose drugs over taking care of her kids, then to realize sometimes bad things happen to good people, or that bad things just happen due to imperfection in a messed up world. This way, I move forward and can be less stressed andbetter off for having an optimistic viewpoint than a negative.

Besides, I think I read somewhere that people live longer who have an optimistic view of things than not. All I know is it works for me. And I can't see how it can be a bad thing.






Not existed, but EXISTS. He is the son of God, and God protected him by raising him to immortality after his wrongful death. The ressurection is the best protection one can have. And Jehovah protects his people today in various ways besides that hope. Protects them with the truth of his word, so they would not have to revel in the lies of false relisgion. Protects them from the world by them staying out of it, whether politically or in wars and such. Protects them from contracting disease from blood transfusions and such when people were once scoffing at the notion at a time, until they started to figure out diseases were being passed along because of them. Now non blood transfusions are becoming more and more common.

Just a few points in how God protects his people.

So essentially, God is selectively protective. Countless Jehovah's Witnesses have died because of their religious beliefs. Some he protects, some he doesn't. Just like the other religious people and non-religious people. In fact, when you look at it, it really seems like there is no protection at all.

I am optimistic too. But I'm also a realist. You can't explain why bad things happen to good people and why good things happen to bad people. You just chalk it up to "imperfection in a messed up world". Imperfection created by a perfect being. Now that just isn't logical.

Oh wait...it's Adam and Eve's fault.

Adam and Eve sinned, they were perfect. That means they could always practice perfect judgment

That's a contradictory statement. They had perfect judgement before they sinned but made the wrong judgement to sin? That's illogical too. But I've already shown how the Adam and Eve story and the Noah's Arc story are impossible, so I'm not shocked to see you continuing to use unrealistic and illogical claims to support your beliefs.

 

[Knicks4lyfe]

So essentially, God is selectively protective. Countless Jehovah's Witnesses have died because of their religious beliefs. Some he protects, some he doesn't. Just like the other religious people and non-religious people. In fact, when you look at it, it really seems like there is no protection at all.

Well in essence Abraham, Isaac, Noah, Job, King David, Jesus, Paul and down to our very day, are all Jehovah's witnesses. And as Jehovah's witness, you have faith that if you endure to your end, (which is death) Jehovah will ressurect you for dedicating your life to serve him. Jesus was already ressurected to show this can happen. So therefore my friend, even in death a Jehovah's witness is protected because we know Jehovah will surely ressurect those who serve him.

But one who does not believe in God would not view such a thing possible.

I am optimistic too. But I'm also a realist. You can't explain why bad things happen to good people and why good things happen to bad people. You just chalk it up to "imperfection in a messed up world". Imperfection created by a perfect being. Now that just isn't logical.

I have explained many times why bad things happen to people. And it is more than imperfection.

as far as a perfect being creating imperfection, it is very logical, and I'm surprised you even stated such a weak argument. If Adam was perfect and then sinned, well logic has it he is not perfect anymore. That's exactly how sin came into the world through one man.

Oh wait...it's Adam and Eve's fault. That's a contradictory statement. They had perfect judgement before they sinned but made the wrong judgement to sin? That's illogical too. But I've already shown how the Adam and Eve story and the Noah's Arc story are impossible, so I'm not shocked to see you continuing to use unrealistic and illogical claims to support your beliefs.

Well It is really not illogical at all. People knowingly do wrong everyday. It only makes it worse for Adam since unlike us, he was not under the pretense of sin and death. But when you have free will you can choose to do what you wish. He chose to fore go righteousness to sin. People do this now, so not illogical.

I also believe it is not possible for man to relay the biblical prophecies an d they come true unless a God is behind them. And since they have all come true, I have no choice but to believe a God exists, beyond just looking around and seeing his creations.

I believe God made all men through two people, you believe we evolved from monkey ancestors. You claim to have proof based on bones of a monkey, and I say the bones of those monkeys say what God originally stated in the Garden of Eden. Each kind producing according to their kinds. This is why monkey bones are monkey bones, and why man's bones are man's and there is no inbetween monkey/man bones around. Because there is a God, and he created man, and there is no evolution, because monkeys are monkeys and men are men. No matter how much wishful thinking an evolutionist can dream up.

 

[LJ4ptplay]

Well in essence Abraham, Isaac, Noah, Job, King David, Jesus, Paul and down to our very day, are all Jehovah's witnesses. And as Jehovah's witness, you have faith that if you endure to your end, (which is death) Jehovah will ressurect you for dedicating your life to serve him. Jesus was already ressurected to show this can happen. So therefore my friend, even in death a Jehovah's witness is protected because we know Jehovah will surely ressurect those who serve him.

But one who does not believe in God would not view such a thing possible.

I have explained many times why bad things happen to people. And it is more than imperfection.

as far as a perfect being creating imperfection, it is very logical, and I'm surprised you even stated such a weak argument. If Adam was perfect and then sinned, well logic has it he is not perfect anymore. That's exactly how sin came into the world through one man.




Well It is really not illogical at all. People knowingly do wrong everyday. It only makes it worse for Adam since unlike us, he was not under the pretense of sin and death. But when you have free will you can choose to do what you wish. He chose to fore go righteousness to sin. People do this now, so not illogical.

I also believe it is not possible for man to relay the biblical prophecies an d they come true unless a God is behind them. And since they have all come true, I have no choice but to believe a God exists, beyond just looking around and seeing his creations.

I believe God made all men through two people, you believe we evolved from monkey ancestors. You claim to have proof based on bones of a monkey, and I say the bones of those monkeys say what God originally stated in the Garden of Eden. Each kind producing according to their kinds. This is why monkey bones are monkey bones, and why man's bones are man's and there is no inbetween monkey/man bones around. Because there is a God, and he created man, and there is no evolution, because monkeys are monkeys and men are men. No matter how much wishful thinking an evolutionist can dream up.

But Adam had perfect judgement. You said so. How can he have perfect judgement and make such an imperfect judgement that cursed us all? If he had perfect judgement, he wouldn't have made the wrong choice in the first place. Like I said. Completely illogical.

The fact remains that Adam and Eve and Noah's Arc are completely impossible. The theory of evolution and the Big Bang theory are completely within the laws of physics, genetics, biology and astronomy. And both theories are supported by countless documented facts that can be tested and analysed. You believe in the impossible and invisible beings, I believe in the possible and real things. That's the difference between you and me. I'm not able to believe in impossible stories.

 

[Knicks4lyfe]

But Adam had perfect judgement. You said so. How can he have perfect judgement and make such an imperfect judgement that cursed us all? If he had perfect judgement, he wouldn't have made the wrong choice in the first place. Like I said. Completely illogical.

No. Adam had the ability to practice perfect Judgement, within his ability to use his free will. The bible says the woman was decieved, but Adam was deliberate. Therefore Adam knew what the snake had told Eve was bs, and instead of wisely waiting for Jehovah to make a ruling, he deliberately chose to sin against Jehovah. So even though Adam's perfect sense of Judgement was red flagging him before he ate, he chose to ignore this and sin deliberately. If he could not do this, he would essentially be programmed much like a robot is. This is why God stopped protecting him and he died.

On the flip side, Jesus too was perfect, and he managed to not ignore the red flags when he was tempted,and he maintained perfect integrity to Jehovah. Which is why when he was Killed, God ressurected him. Protection.

The fact remains that Adam and Eve and Noah's Arc are completely impossible. The theory of evolution and the Big Bang theory are completely within the laws of physics, genetics, biology and astronomy. And both theories are supported by countless documented facts that can be tested and analysed. You believe in the impossible and invisible beings, I believe in the possible and real things. That's the difference between you and me. I'm not able to believe in impossible stories.

This is impossible to you cuz you want it to be. Not everyone agrees

"Science now corroborates what most great religions have long been preaching: Human beings of all races are . . . descended from the same first man."?Heredity in Humans Amram Scheinfeld, p. 238.


"The Bible story of Adam and Eve, father and mother of the whole human race, told centuries ago the same truth that science has shown today: that all the peoples of the earth are a single family and have a common origin."?The Races of Mankind ,Ruth Benedict and Gene Weltfish, p. 3.​

And you can theorize me to death, the bottom line is, monkey bones belong to monkeys and man bones belong to man. There has been found no inbetween monkey men. It is either or. The ones you claim are, I have shown you where scientists have disagreed. What you do is say they are not credible. Great.

And what I also know is, you still.. have not proven one prophecy wrong yet! I have shown you where the fault with monkey bones vs man's lies, and I'm not even a scientist, or even remotely that interested. All you have shown from your bible knowledge is that you lack understanding.

 

[KnicksFan4Realz]

Good , cuz Im responding to the fool who thinks as lo ng as condoms are used, sex is ok. At any age.

Think Im'a put in a call for you..because clearly there is a village out there missing it's idiot. I've already been as concise as I can possibly explain this to you. The bible has truly ruined you as a human being. The world will be better off when we are finally rid of folks like you. All kids should have proper sexual education courses. Condoms should be made available to all, because no one can watch their kids 24/7. Period.

You dumbasses still believe handing out contraception is a license to tell a kid to have sex...even though states that don't hand them out ahve only abstinence programs, have the highest rate of teen pregnancy and STD's as I have already demonstrated.

Even when the facts are against you folks...you still wanna make these religious appeals to the masses.

If JW are supposed to remove themselves from the dealings of the world..

Then why are you even here??

 

[LJ4ptplay]

No. Adam had the ability to practice perfect Judgement, within his ability to use his free will. The bible says the woman was decieved, but Adam was deliberate. Therefore Adam knew what the snake had told Eve was bs, and instead of wisely waiting for Jehovah to make a ruling, he deliberately chose to sin against Jehovah. So even though Adam's perfect sense of Judgement was red flagging him before he ate, he chose to ignore this and sin deliberately. If he could not do this, he would essentially be programmed much like a robot is. This is why God stopped protecting him and he died.

OK. You're changing words again to make your beliefs seem logical. Again. You seem to do that often. So, instead of Adam having perfect judgement...he now "had the ability to practice perfect judgement". Whatever. He either had perfect judgement, or he didn't.

This is impossible to you cuz you want it to be. Not everyone agrees

"Science now corroborates what most great religions have long been preaching: Human beings of all races are . . . descended from the same first man."—Heredity in Humans Amram Scheinfeld, p. 238.


"The Bible story of Adam and Eve, father and mother of the whole human race, told centuries ago the same truth that science has shown today: that all the peoples of the earth are a single family and have a common origin."—The Races of Mankind ,Ruth Benedict and Gene Weltfish, p. 3.​

I'm not going to answer any more quotes from religious websites. I've shown you multiple times how they lie, but you continue to quote them. I've asked you numeroues times to provide links to the entire articles or quotes, which you won't do. Which leads me to believe that you are taking quotes out of context again.

Show me evidence that supports the possibility of two species sustaining a viable population through sexual reproduction. You can't. It's genetically impossible. So yes, Adam and Eve and Noah's Arc are still IMPOSSIBLE!!!

And you can theorize me to death, the bottom line is, monkey bones belong to monkeys and man bones belong to man. There has been found no inbetween monkey men. It is either or. The ones you claim are, I have shown you where scientists have disagreed. What you do is say they are not credible. Great.

I have already shown multiple examples of transitional species. The only one that is debatable is Australopithecus africanus. But you weren't able to argue Australopithecus anamensis, Australopithecus afarensis, Kenyanthropus platyops, Homo erectus, Homo habilis, Neanderthal man and Cromagnon man. We've actually done DNA testing on Neanderthal and Cromagnon man fossils. It shows that they were different then man, but had language, art, tools, walked upright, ect. But your claim was that they were races of humans that have different shapes. Which is bullsh*t. They have different DNA then humans..which makes them NOT HUMAN!!

I think your definition of "inbetwen monkey men" is way off. What evidence do you need to see to prove this "inbetwen monkey men" form? Honestly?

And what I also know is, you still.. have not proven one prophecy wrong yet! I have shown you where the fault with monkey bones vs man's lies, and I'm not even a scientist, or even remotely that interested. All you have shown from your bible knowledge is that you lack understanding.

I've already shown multiple prophecies to be false. But you change the definition of words to make the prohecies to be true. Also, I 've given about a dozen false prophecies of Jehovah's Witnesses. But when they were proven to be untrue, you said "God gave us better understanding". Yeah right.

We're going in circles here. I'm not going to get back in this debate with you. I've answered every one of your claims, debated your claims, and you can only come up with quotes taken out of context from religious websites that lie, and change definitions of words to fit your beliefs. It's pointless.

 

[TunerAddict]

LJ 17, Lyfe 0

 

[Knicks4lyfe]

LJ 17, Lyfe 0

Wait a sec... everyone in this thread has taken turns spankin you. You need to calm down.

 

[Knicks4lyfe]

Think Im'a put in a call for you..because clearly there is a village out there missing it's idiot. I've already been as concise as I can possibly explain this to you. The bible has truly ruined you as a human being. The world will be better off when we are finally rid of folks like you. All kids should have proper sexual education courses. Condoms should be made available to all, because no one can watch their kids 24/7. Period.

You dumbasses still believe handing out contraception is a license to tell a kid to have sex...even though states that don't hand them out ahve only abstinence programs, have the highest rate of teen pregnancy and STD's as I have already demonstrated.

Even when the facts are against you folks...you still wanna make these religious appeals to the masses.

If JW are supposed to remove themselves from the dealings of the world..

Then why are you even here??

Yea, you've been as concise as possible. Your view is whenever kids get horny enough to have sex, whether that's 7, 8 , 9, heck maybe even younger, it's ok for them to have sex with condoms. That is the answer for a better human society.

I don't vote on what goes on in the classrooms, schools, country, not my deal. I do however raise my kids to the best of my ability according to God's word, and I also know that if everyone adhered to waiting for sex until marriage, the world would be a lot better off in many areas. Because again, the world as a whole is doing things the way you like it, and the world sucks because of it. Period.

Now why am I here in the world? On the boards? Which one you refering too?

 

[KnicksFan4Realz]

Yea, you've been as concise as possible. Your view is whenever kids get horny enough to have sex, whether that's 7, 8 , 9, heck maybe even younger, it's ok for them to have sex with condoms.

That is the answer for a better human society.

I don't vote on what goes on in the classrooms, schools, country, not my deal. I do however raise my kids to the best of my ability according to God's word, and I also know that if everyone adhered to waiting for sex until marriage, the world would be a lot better off in many areas. Because again, the world as a whole is doing things the way you like it, and the world sucks because of it. Period.

Now why am I here in the world? On the boards? Which one you refering too?

Where did I ever say it was okay? Please show me the quote where I passed a moral judgment on it!!!!

I am not naive, dumb, or blind enough to think that kids don't mess around...I think just about everyone...has played "DOCTOR" with a girl their age around 3-7 by the jungle gym or the monkey bars, and if you didn't you were lame.

So don't sit here and suggest that kids are not curious about SEX, they are deal with the reality and stop trying to act like getting them to believe in the imaginary friends you do is somehow going to shield them from the harsh realties of the real actual physical world.

Kids and I'll say this again need proper sexual education. It's never too early to try and explain sex PROPERLY to your kids. Because before you know it..one's going to get their period...and the other is going to start seeing girls differently. Atleast this way..sure they might not understand what condoms are, and what they are used. You really don't have to be that specific at their young age.

A basic understanding of the anatomy between boys and girls, where babies come from, and how they are made...usually is going to be enough to satisfy their inquisitive nature at those ages. No one is saying whip out a porno and go "this is how it's done" either.

You sound like the tons of parents I see day in day out that have come into my office, or down the hall..that are far too embarrassed and ashamed to talk about SEX with their children. And then wonder why little Allison experimented too freely, or Johnny might have caught something.

If your GOD was so ****ing perfect why'd he give humans hormones in the first place? Why lust? If GOD knew all this was far too dangerous for us to handle..why give the ability?

Another example of your galactic ****up once again...assuming he's perfect.

Now, when the children get older..hopefully they'll have a good sex education teacher that's not going to judge them...and disown them should they do something that don't please you. The conversation explaining sexual desire...can be more descriptive.

Of course if one of your daugthers were to tell you she was having feelings for another girl...I wonder what your homophobic reaction would be then!

 

[Knicks4lyfe]

OK. You're changing words again to make your beliefs seem logical. Again. You seem to do that often. So, instead of Adam having perfect judgement...he now "had the ability to practice perfect judgement". Whatever. He either had perfect judgement, or he didn't.

It's not hard. Just because someone is perfect does not mean they cannot choose to sin from God. In essence that is what a perfect being is. One who walks in God's statutes perfectly. Adam, Eve, Satan and HIS angels did that for awhile. When they decided to no longer do God's will they then lost their perfect ability and judgement and deliberately erred to do their own selfish will.

Flip side, Jesus was born from a virgin for the sake of being born perfect in flesh. He, unlike the previously mentioned, maintained perfect integrity to God in his laws. He broke no laws of God his entire life, even under temptation just like Adam and Eve and the rest of us. This is why Adam, Eve, Satan and his angels lost Jehovah's protection, while Jesus was protected by the ressurection. Adam could have done the same thing Jesus did, he just chose not too.

Call it a change, call it whatever you like, I'll call it you wanting to remain ignorant. Cuz you want to. Which is your right.

I'm not going to answer any more quotes from religious websites. I've shown you multiple times how they lie, but you continue to quote them. I've asked you numeroues times to provide links to the entire articles or quotes, which you won't do. Which leads me to believe that you are taking quotes out of context again.

Show me evidence that supports the possibility of two species sustaining a viable population through sexual reproduction. You can't. It's genetically impossible. So yes, Adam and Eve and Noah's Arc are still IMPOSSIBLE!!!

Clearly these people that I have quoted used Science to support their argument. I even bolded where they said science had proven it. You choosing not to read it does not mean it went away. You just choose to be ignorant to it. Which again, is your choice. These are books by the way, not articles where this stuff is written.

I have already shown multiple examples of transitional species. The only one that is debatable is Australopithecus africanus. But you weren't able to argue Australopithecus anamensis, Australopithecus afarensis, Kenyanthropus platyops, Homo erectus, Homo habilis, Neanderthal man and Cromagnon man. We've actually done DNA testing on Neanderthal and Cromagnon man fossils. It shows that they were different then man, but had language, art, tools, walked upright, ect. But your claim was that they were races of humans that have different shapes. Which is bullsh*t. They have different DNA then humans..which makes them NOT HUMAN!!

I think your definition of "inbetwen monkey men" is way off. What evidence do you need to see to prove this "inbetwen monkey men" form? Honestly?

I don't know. I'd like maybe a human skull and brain but ape hands and feet and such. A combo. Something that says ape-man. From what I have been reading it has been one or the other. Look again.

30 But when the evidence for anything actually is flimsy or nonexistent, or based on outright deception, sooner or later the claim comes to nothing. This has proved to be the case with many past examples of presumed "ape-men."
31 So, too, with Australopithecus. More research has disclosed that its skull "differed from that of humans in more ways than its smaller brain capacity."43 Anatomist Zuckerman wrote: "When compared with human and simian [ape] skulls, the Australopithecine skull is in appearance overwhelmingly simian?not human. The contrary proposition could be equated to an assertion that black is white."44 He also said: "Our findings leave little doubt that . . . Australopithecus resembles not Homo sapiens but the living monkeys and apes."45 Donald Johanson also said: "Australopithecines . . . were not men."46 Similarly Richard Leakey called it "unlikely that our direct ancestors are evolutionary descendants of the australopithecines."47

Australoptithecines would mean each species, correct? Donald Johanson says they were not men. They were apes. And others agreed with him. Why should I think these people don't know what they are talking about? Cuz that is basically what I would have to do to side with you. Say these people are wrong. WHY?

And about the human family.

The Human Family

34 Neanderthal man (named after the Neander district in Germany where the first fossil was found) was undoubtedly human. At first he was pictured as bent over, stupid looking, hairy and apelike. Now it is known that this mistaken reconstruction was based on a fossil skeleton badly deformed by disease. Since then, many Neanderthal fossils have been found, confirming that he was not much different from modern humans. In his book Ice, Fred Hoyle stated: "There is no evidence that Neanderthal man was in any way inferior to ourselves."51 As a result, recent drawings of Neanderthals have taken on a more modern look.

35 Another fossil type frequently encountered in scientific literature is Cro-Magnon man. It was named for the locality in southern France where his bones were first unearthed. These specimens "were so virtually indistinguishable from those of today that even the most skeptical had to concede that they were humans," said the book Lucy.52​

Again, Fred Hoyle was considered one the the brightest in the scientific community. WHY SHOULD I BELIEVE HE IS WRONG????????? Lucy, the book on apemen. Says Cro-magnon man is human, nothing about ape-human.

So here I am, a stupid homeschooled guy in your almighty opinion, reading that it's either human or ape in the fossil record, which would then agree with the bibles view of creation each according to it's kind, but I'm somehow lost as an individual because I believe the bible, when the evidence scientists themselves dig up support biblical view? I'M THE STUPID ONE?

Couple this in with the fact that the bible chronology indicates that a period of about 6000 years have passed since the creations of humans, and guess what? In all the billions of years australiphithecines and such and cro-magnon man been and blah , blah been around... only the last 5000 or so years has man left written records!!!!!! This harmonizes more with the bible than anything!

And on top of this, you have said this. " We've actually done DNA testing on Neanderthal and Cromagnon man fossils. It shows that they were different then man, but had language, art, tools, walked upright, ect."

Now if these people were walking, talking, writing, and had tools, all these millions of years ago... WHY NO WRITTEN RECORDS BEYOND 5000 YEARS? WHY NO CRO-MAGNON MEMOIRS? WHERE ARE THEY? WHY NO NEANDERTHAL HISTORICAL VIEWPOINTS? GIVE ME THIS STUFF!! THEY DON'T HAVE IT, NOR WILL THEY EVER HAVE IT, CUZ IT DID NOT HAPPEN.

Keep, dreamin.

I've already shown multiple prophecies to be false. But you change the definition of words to make the prohecies to be true. Also, I 've given about a dozen false prophecies of Jehovah's Witnesses. But when they were proven to be untrue, you said "God gave us better understanding". Yeah right.

We're going in circles here. I'm not going to get back in this debate with you. I've answered every one of your claims, debated your claims, and you can only come up with quotes taken out of context from religious websites that lie, and change definitions of words to fit your beliefs. It's pointless.

Again, even Disciples in Jesus day thought wrong and had to be corrected, but the bible did not refer to them as fasle prophets as it did those who went after lying dreams and visions and such. So Jehovah's witnesses having wrong thoughts on prophecy being fulfilled is not in itself a crime biblically. If Jehovah and Jesus did not forsake those in Jesus day who had similar issues, he surely would not do so in ours.

And about prophetic word. You don't want to entertain that because you have no leg to stand on, and that smart. Just because you refuse to take into account what words mean, does not mean everyone does. For instance. The prophecy here concerin g the return to jerusalem from Babylonish exile
And keep in mind, Jehovah stated in jeremiah 25:11, 12 that he would make babylon a desolate waste which it has also become. Damn, for Jehovah to be some non existant invisible sky daddy, he sure can predict outcomes of world events.

Jeremiah 30:
18 This is what Jehovah has said: "Here I am gathering the captive ones of the tents of Jacob, and for his tabernacles I shall have pity. And the city will actually be rebuilt upon her mound; and upon its rightful site the dwelling tower itself will sit. 19

Was Jersualem rebuilt and restored exactly to what it was as a city, and it's people? Yes.

Now was Tyre ever rebuilt and restored exactly to what it was as a city and it's people? NO!

There are no Tyrians in the world right now, but there are Jews. And I'm actually again, surprised you have chosen to take such a weak stance to defend your view on this "you're changing words" LOL. Not really, one word can have more than a strict meaning. But I guess you only learn that when you have been homeschooled.

Again, I need reasons why I should believe you, rather than these scientists when it comes to this evolution stuff. And also, if you could just disprove one prophecy, it would help greatly.

 

[KnicksFan4Realz]

LJ 17, Lyfe 0

I wonder what I've scored against him?

 

[Knicks4lyfe]

Where did I ever say it was okay? Please show me the quote where I passed a moral judgment on it!!!!

I am not naive, dumb, or blind enough to think that kids don't mess around...I think just about everyone...has played "DOCTOR" with a girl their age around 3-7 by the jungle gym or the monkey bars, and if you didn't you were lame.

So don't sit here and suggest that kids are not curious about SEX, they are deal with the reality and stop trying to act like getting them to believe in the imaginary friends you do is somehow going to shield them from the harsh realties of the real actual physical world.

Kids and I'll say this again need proper sexual education. It's never too early to try and explain sex PROPERLY to your kids. Because before you know it..one's going to get their period...and the other is going to start seeing girls differently. Atleast this way..sure they might not understand what condoms are, and what they are used. You really don't have to be that specific at their young age.

A basic understanding of the anatomy between boys and girls, where babies come from, and how they are made...usually is going to be enough to satisfy their inquisitive nature at those ages. No one is saying whip out a porno and go "this is how it's done" either.

You sound like the tons of parents I see day in day out that have come into my office, or down the hall..that are far too embarrassed and ashamed to talk about SEX with their children. And then wonder why little Allison experimented too freely, or Johnny might have caught something.

If your GOD was so ****ing perfect why'd he give humans hormones in the first place? Why lust? If GOD knew all this was far too dangerous for us to handle..why give the ability?

Another example of your galactic ****up once again...assuming he's perfect.

Now, when the children get older..hopefully they'll have a good sex education teacher that's not going to judge them...and disown them should they do something that don't please you. The conversation explaining sexual desire...can be more descriptive.

Of course if one of your daugthers were to tell you she was having feelings for another girl...I wonder what your homophobic reaction would be then!

This is a joke. You really think I don't talk to my kids about what they may start to feel at certain ages? My oldest daughter is 10 in october. You think I don't know that she likes boys and that boys like her? My second oldest girl is 8, 9 in nov. My son, just turned 7 this past may. He thinks he's popular. You must think just because I'm religious that I don't know people have feelings and are imperfect and sometimes, even at young ages, act on what they feel.

That being said, I'm teaching all of my kids to respect God, their parents and themselves. And part of respecting yourself is knowing your worth, and everyone is worth more than a test drive to see if they can be compatible with a potential marriage mate. This is where you disagree.

Bottom line is though, if everyone did wait to have sex after marriage, they would put alot more thought into who, how when. When they don't respect that arrangements, they tend to drift along and you see the moral aspects of the world today.

We should all have this thought in common. THE WORLD IS MESSED UP!

And a lot of that has to do with the free moral outlook the world takes on sex. It is in opposition to what God says benefits us, and maybe people should just start to ask, what if we all did it God's way?

 

[Knicks4lyfe]

I wonder what I've scored against him?

In your mind you're batting 1.000

But I'm thinking you're a legend in your own mind.

 

[Knicks4lyfe]

Where did I ever say it was okay? Please show me the quote where I passed a moral judgment on it!!!!!

Anyone engaging in safe sex at any age is responsible. Period. Doesn't matter whether she is 13, 15, 17, 23...30..etc. Clearly you do not know if she is controlling her hormones or not..such is an assumption. There is no difference in the hormonal needs of a 13 year old..or 23 year old. You know if you feel the desire to get laid or not. The only question is are you going to act on them responsibly!!!!!

http://www.knicksonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5184&page=8
This is the page you said this on.

This basically implies that so long as one is being responsible using condoms, sex is then ok. So me saying that an 8 year old seeing a girl he likes that like him back, and they can't control their hormones, so long as they use condoms it's ok. That is basically what you said above. Is it not? When someone is responsible, they are being prudent. So I'm guessing 8 year olds having sex with condoms is then responsible and ok by this statement of yours.

Waiting for the spin job in 3... 2...

 

[TunerAddict]

In your mind you're batting 1.000

But I'm thinking you're a legend in your own mind.

No! Spelling errors have lowered his average to .945!!!

 

[Knicks4lyfe]

:teeth:

No! Spelling errors have lowered his average to .945!!!

:agreed: he is the best.

 

[LJ4ptplay]

It's not hard. Just because someone is perfect does not mean they cannot choose to sin from God. In essence that is what a perfect being is. One who walks in God's statutes perfectly. Adam, Eve, Satan and HIS angels did that for awhile. When they decided to no longer do God's will they then lost their perfect ability and judgement and deliberately erred to do their own selfish will.

I think our definition of words differs again. I define "perfect judgement" as making judgement without errors. Hence the word "perfect". If someone had perfect judgement, they wouldn't choose the wrong path. He wouldn't have chosen to sin, because that would have been the wrong choice and erroneous judement.

[
Clearly these people that I have quoted used Science to support their argument. I even bolded where they said science had proven it. You choosing not to read it does not mean it went away. You just choose to be ignorant to it. Which again, is your choice. These are books by the way, not articles where this stuff is written.

It's genetically impossible, so no, they didn't use science, it's their opinion. Saying it's science, and actually using science to support a claim are two different things.

Give me an example where two individuals of a species can sustain a viable population with sexual reproduction. You can't. Because it's genetically impossible. It comes down to the lack of available genetic (chromosome) combinations.

[
I don't know. I'd like maybe a human skull and brain but ape hands and feet and such. A combo. Something that says ape-man. From what I have been reading it has been one or the other. Look again.

The evolution of our hands and our brains are directly linked as well as the rest of our body. As our hands became more developed for using tools, the smarter we became...and the smarter we became the more advanced our tools, use of tools and our tool making abilities became. It's a gradual change, so you won't find a human head with ape hands.

But how about ape-like head with human-like body? Will that convince you?

Introducing...Homo ergaster...

From wikipedia
A notable characteristic of H. ergaster is that it was the first hominid to have the same body proportions as modern H. sapiens. It is estimated that H. ergaster stood at 1.9 m (6ft3) tall. The species name originates from the Greek ergaster meaning "Workman". This name was chosen due to the discovery of various tools such as hand-axes and cleavers. Its use of advanced (rather than simple) tools was unique to this species; H. ergaster tool use belongs to the Acheulean industry. H. ergaster first began using these tools 1.6 million years ago. Charred animal bones in fossil deposits and traces of camps suggest that the species made creative use of fire.

Hmmm...ape-like skull, but walked upright, had tools and used fire. As did Homo erectus. You are running out of excuses to ignore these facts.

What about Homo habilis?

Again, walked upright and used tools.

30 But when the evidence for anything actually is flimsy or nonexistent, or based on outright deception, sooner or later the claim comes to nothing. This has proved to be the case with many past examples of presumed "ape-men."
31 So, too, with Australopithecus. More research has disclosed that its skull "differed from that of humans in more ways than its smaller brain capacity."43 Anatomist Zuckerman wrote: "When compared with human and simian [ape] skulls, the Australopithecine skull is in appearance overwhelmingly simian—not human. The contrary proposition could be equated to an assertion that black is white."44 He also said: "Our findings leave little doubt that . . . Australopithecus resembles not Homo sapiens but the living monkeys and apes."45 Donald Johanson also said: "Australopithecines . . . were not men."46 Similarly Richard Leakey called it "unlikely that our direct ancestors are evolutionary descendants of the australopithecines."47

Australoptithecines would mean each species, correct? Donald Johanson says they were not men. They were apes. And others agreed with him. Why should I think these people don't know what they are talking about? Cuz that is basically what I would have to do to side with you. Say these people are wrong. WHY?

More quotes from creationist's websites. You keep giving these same quotes, when none of them disprove evolution, in fact many of them support it. I've never argued that Australopithecus was human, nor does anybody else, hence the genus Australopithecus, not Homo. It was very ape-like, except for the fact that it walked upright. This is proven by the structure of the hips, legs and spine. Apes and monkeys do not walk upright. They have the ability to do it temporarily, but not regularly like Australopithecus and humans. By the way Donald Johanson wrote "Lucy: The Beginnings of Humankind" and "Lucy's Child: The Discovery of a Human Ancestor", where he states Australopithecus is part of the human evolutionary chain.

Again, Fred Hoyle was considered one the the brightest in the scientific community. WHY SHOULD I BELIEVE HE IS WRONG????????? Lucy, the book on apemen. Says Cro-magnon man is human, nothing about ape-human.

Fred Hoyle died before we had the capability to analyse the mitochondrial DNA of both Neanderthal man and Cro-magnon man. The DNA evidence proves they were not human.

Now if these people were walking, talking, writing, and had tools, all these millions of years ago... WHY NO WRITTEN RECORDS BEYOND 5000 YEARS? WHY NO CRO-MAGNON MEMOIRS? WHERE ARE THEY? WHY NO NEANDERTHAL HISTORICAL VIEWPOINTS? GIVE ME THIS STUFF!! THEY DON'T HAVE IT, NOR WILL THEY EVER HAVE IT, CUZ IT DID NOT HAPPEN.

Keep, dreamin.

Cave drawing of Neanderthal man

Why would the Neanderthal man make memoirs? They lived in small hunter/gatherer groups. The human hunter/gatherer groups that exist today (Amazon, Africa tribes) don't record their memoirs either. There is no need to. That's a silly request. It's like asking why didn't the ancient humans use computers? Plus, I don't think paper remains would last 150,000 years.

Again, even Disciples in Jesus day thought wrong and had to be corrected, but the bible did not refer to them as fasle prophets as it did those who went after lying dreams and visions and such. So Jehovah's witnesses having wrong thoughts on prophecy being fulfilled is not in itself a crime biblically. If Jehovah and Jesus did not forsake those in Jesus day who had similar issues, he surely would not do so in ours.

And about prophetic word. You don't want to entertain that because you have no leg to stand on, and that smart. Just because you refuse to take into account what words mean, does not mean everyone does. For instance. The prophecy here concerin g the return to jerusalem from Babylonish exile
And keep in mind, Jehovah stated in jeremiah 25:11, 12 that he would make babylon a desolate waste which it has also become. Damn, for Jehovah to be some non existant invisible sky daddy, he sure can predict outcomes of world events.

Jeremiah 30:
18 This is what Jehovah has said: "Here I am gathering the captive ones of the tents of Jacob, and for his tabernacles I shall have pity. And the city will actually be rebuilt upon her mound; and upon its rightful site the dwelling tower itself will sit. 19

Was Jersualem rebuilt and restored exactly to what it was as a city, and it's people? Yes.

Now was Tyre ever rebuilt and restored exactly to what it was as a city and it's people? NO!

There are no Tyrians in the world right now, but there are Jews. And I'm actually again, surprised you have chosen to take such a weak stance to defend your view on this "you're changing words" LOL. Not really, one word can have more than a strict meaning. But I guess you only learn that when you have been homeschooled.

Again, I need reasons why I should believe you, rather than these scientists when it comes to this evolution stuff. And also, if you could just disprove one prophecy, it would help greatly.

Tyre is the fourth largest city in Lebanon and one of the largest ports. It is a city, if that's what you require. If you require it to be identical to the previous city then your definition of rebuilt is wrong and the Jersualem example is wrong too. Jersualem is not completely identical to the previous city. Regardless, Tyre is rebuilt. It stands as a city today = prophecy disproved.

Plus, how am I to believe any of the prophecies when they are consistently misinterpreted by Jehovah's Witnesses? You guys have a track record of this.

 

[Knicks4lyfe]

I think our definition of words differs again. I define "perfect judgement" as making judgement without errors. Hence the word "perfect". If someone had perfect judgement, they wouldn't choose the wrong path. He wouldn't have chosen to sin, because that would have been the wrong choice and erroneous judement.

If a person has free will, even if they could use perfect judgement, they may choose not too. People see stop signs when they drive. Some choose to not stop at times. They know it's the law to stop, it's in their best judgement to stop, but for whatever reason, they choose not too. It's not because they could not have, it was choice.

That is why there are some angels who remained in heaven, and some who chose to follow satan. Because some chose to use their perfect judgement in accord with God's will, and others chose to ignore that ability for their selfish will. And the minute they broke God's law, they were no longer perfect, and niether was Adam and Eve, which in turn why we're all imperfect.

It's genetically impossible, so no, they didn't use science, it's their opinion. Saying it's science, and actually using science to support a claim are two different things.

Give me an example where two individuals of a species can sustain a viable population with sexual reproduction. You can't. Because it's genetically impossible. It comes down to the lack of available genetic (chromosome) combinations.

But they said science proved their theory. I'd at least take a look see.

The evolution of our hands and our brains are directly linked as well as the rest of our body. As our hands became more developed for using tools, the smarter we became...and the smarter we became the more advanced our tools, use of tools and our tool making abilities became. It's a gradual change, so you won't find a human head with ape hands.

But how about ape-like head with human-like body? Will that convince you?

Introducing...Homo ergaster...

From wikipedia
A notable characteristic of H. ergaster is that it was the first hominid to have the same body proportions as modern H. sapiens. It is estimated that H. ergaster stood at 1.9 m (6ft3) tall. The species name originates from the Greek ergaster meaning "Workman". This name was chosen due to the discovery of various tools such as hand-axes and cleavers. Its use of advanced (rather than simple) tools was unique to this species; H. ergaster tool use belongs to the Acheulean industry. H. ergaster first began using these tools 1.6 million years ago. Charred animal bones in fossil deposits and traces of camps suggest that the species made creative use of fire.

Hmmm...ape-like skull, but walked upright, had tools and used fire. As did Homo erectus. You are running out of excuses to ignore these facts.

What about Homo habilis?

Again, walked upright and used tools.



More quotes from creationist's websites. You keep giving these same quotes, when none of them disprove evolution, in fact many of them support it. I've never argued that Australopithecus was human, nor does anybody else, hence the genus Australopithecus, not Homo. It was very ape-like, except for the fact that it walked upright. This is proven by the structure of the hips, legs and spine. Apes and monkeys do not walk upright. They have the ability to do it temporarily, but not regularly like Australopithecus and humans. By the way Donald Johanson wrote "Lucy: The Beginnings of Humankind", where he states Australopithecus is part of the human evolutionary chain.

Here is the problem with these so called pictures of these species. They are all imagination. All of them. There is no way they can accurately render this stuff. Imagination. The scientists says.. I think this is what this looked like.

Not buyin it.

And secondly, why is it that these species of apes could not have walked upright, just because the ones we see now don't? Who decided that all apes that ever lived were to walk as the modern ones of our time? Do they have to be our acestor because it walked upright? Or could it just be a plane ape that walks upright? Is that possible?

And also, how come there is only accurate written human history 5000 years and change back, and not millions? Man has made many advancements the last 5k years, why did it take that long for them to come? We have groups with tools who write on walls supposedly, yet the only accurate written human history starts 5000 years ago, conveniently around the time the bible chronology dates the begining of mankind.

Nice. How come you don't address this?

Fred Hoyle died before we had the capability to analyse the mitochondrial DNA of both Neanderthal man and Cro-magnon man. The DNA evidence proves they were not human.

Fair point. I would need to do some added research on this myself.

You say though, that the DNA evidence proves they were not human, even though they are in fact called man, and the article I posted, the views in it stated they were so closely linked to us, they had to resign to calling them human. Now you're telling me the DNA has proven they are not human. Are they apes? If not, what are they?

Cave drawing of Neanderthal man

Why would the Neanderthal man make memoirs? They lived in small hunter/gatherer groups. The human hunter/gatherer groups that exist today (Amazon, Africa tribes) don't record their memoirs either. There is no need to. That's a silly request. It's like asking why didn't the ancient humans use computers? Plus, I don't think paper remains would last 150,000 years.

Actually, I do not think it's a silly request at all. Especially since Jehovah has managed to keep his word around in many different forms for thousands of years, and there appears to be no slow up. There should be a distinct sign that says Cro-magnon, or neanderthal. You give me this art, which could really attribute to any sort of modern species of man within the last 5000 years as well. How Am I to look at that and say yea, that was those Cro-magnon dudes? Or Neanderthals? Seriously?

Jehovah keeps his word alive through all trials and tribulations to remove it from the earth. Yet we can't have a distinct record of life beyond 5000 years? Conveniently around the time the bible says man was created? All of Jehovah's word has occured when mankind can actually prove it was around, and all of what you believe occurs before that, when mankind can't accurately prove it was around, but somehow these imaginary pictures of species, and art drawings tell you all you need to know?

Tyre is the fourth largest city in Lebanon and one of the largest ports. It is a city, if that's what you require. If you require it to be identical to the previous city then your definition of rebuilt is wrong and the Jersualem example is wrong too. Jersualem is not completely identical to the previous city. Regardless, Tyre is rebuilt. It stands as a major city today = prophecy disproved.

Plus, how am I to believe any of the prophecies when they are consistently misinterpreted by Jehova's Witnesses? You guys have a track record of this.

Favor, stop calling it Tyre. It's Sur, or Sour as you once put it. And again, the usage of rebuilt is what we're arguing, but the basis of the prophecy depended on Tyre being rebuilt actually.

The prophetic word of Jehovah was that he would have many nations Pummel Tyre, and it would eventually become a drying yard for dragnets, or a sea port. And she will never be rebuilt could not then be in the strict sense you use it, or else it could then never become a drying yard for dragnets which it is right now. All of this happened.

I have already shown you multiple times the meanings of rebuild. One of them was concering society, rebuilding a society to what it once was. I gave you an example of another prophecy where Jehovah says Jerusalem would be rebuilt. The same word, and meaning of the word he applied to Tyre. Jerusalem was rebuilt the same exact way it once was. Temple, worship and society.

Tyre, while it was rebuilt in a sense it was populated, was never in the same state it was in before the prophecy. In fact, it is no longer even called Tyre anymore, and no one there calls themselves Tyrians, and oh, by the way, it ended up becoming just a sea port, or drying yard for nets, like the prophecy said it would. No Tyrian Society, No longer a world reknown sea power, Not even called Tyre anymore. I'd say it's safe to say that Jehovah once again told the truth.

Plus, how am I to believe any of the prophecies when they are consistently misinterpreted by Jehova's Witnesses? You guys have a track record of this.

Another fair point.

The ones that I have mentioned here are not the ones you, and most people have had issue with against us. Usually, it pertains to 1914 and the end of the world and the generation of 1914 being alive to witness the great tribulation and armeggedon. They all died in the late 80's I believe. There are some others that we have misunderstood, and now have a better understanding of things now. It's kinda the same way with your beliefs. As time goes on, science claims to have added understanding to previous beliefs. Even if they in the past have made mistakes, due to their research in particular fields, they kept going to try and unlock better understanding.

That is in essence what JW's have been through. We have had expectations based on early understanding of prophecy, that have had to be more keenly studied. But instead of acting as if we know it all, we humbly admit we have made mistakes in our understanding of the word at times in the past. But Christians in Jesus' very day had done the same, yet the bible did not call them false prophets. They simply had to have their understanding adjusted.

All witnesses believe what we believe because it makes logical sense more so than any other form of faith or belief. For instance, it does not make sense to us that most Christian faiths believe Jesus is God when nowhere in the bible does he in fact say this. In fact he actually says his God is the same God we pray to. So to believe he is God would go against just logical sense to us.


As a whole, we do just what the bible says a follower of God should do, and not what we think is ok. If one looked at who God favored in the bible, and the individual writers in the bible, it would be easy to see that those that do his will, he speaks through, even if they are like Daniel, and did not even understand what they were speaking of. This is why we say we have the truth of the bible because we live to do God's will and he always at some point makes his servants understand his word to serve him, and help others too.

Because Science has made a mistake or two never stopped them from trying to find the answers. Them making mistakes has not stopped you from putting faith in it. Why should we be penalized for making mistakes in understanding at one time? Is that penalty forever for us?