Paul W

Everyone has heard, Im sure, about the republicans thinking about putting the Lousiana governor on the next pres ticket, who is Asian Indian. Do you think Obama's win means that from now on only people of color will appear on presidential tickets, at least for the next few elections?

I came up with this quote in a story I am writing. What do you think of it? Are there any others like it? If so, provide them. I'd hate to be committing plagorism. Thanks :)

Without faith we trust no one, and without reason we doubt nothing.

Genesis Ch 1

V 1. In the Beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

6. And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so

8. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

Then the Bible goes on to describe the Earth's creation in day 3. So day 1, God moved upon the face of the "waters" and created light; Day and Night. Day 2 the firmament which he named Heaven. Day 3, the Earth.

Also, in light of that, wouldn't it seem that Lucifer's attempt to overthrow God's rule in Heaven would have taken place after the Earth was created? Perhaps Satan wasn't responsible for the serpent in the Garden? Unless, of course, he rebeled on day 2, the first day of Heaven.

Thanks :)

Is there any amount of time stipulated in the Bible as to how long Adam and Eve stayed in the Garden of Eden before eating the forbidden fruit? 5 years? 50? 5,000? 5 million? Any?

Even from a scientific perspective, isn't life after death plausible? It is a law of the universe that energy can neither be created or destroyed, but merely changes form. Even your body itself is energy compactified into cells and atoms. And, the mind is the result of the functions of the brain, created by electro-chemical reactions. If energy exists forever, then perhaps our minds never truly die: They merely change form.

What do you guys think. And pelase be nice. This is an honest, intellectual question. Thanks :)

I used to be unsure as to whether or not God really was all out against Homosexuality, as thoguh it were a terribly great sin. However, I've asked myself this:

If Mary Magdaline had been a homosexual rather than an adulteress, would have Jesus still cast himself in front of her and said, "Those of you who are without sin, cast the first stone."

I believe he would have. While it may be a sin (Biblically speaking), perhaps most of us, as Christians, are too judgemental of homosexuals. Perhaps it is just one of those sins between that person and God, unlike murder, rape, theft, etc.

Is my thinking wrong on this? Am I perhaps reading into the story of Mary being nearly stoned too deeply?

Thanks :)

My thinking is that ther eis God, the creator and conductor of the universe, the Holy Ghost, which is the purity that exists in the Human spirit, and and the son Jesus Christ, who allowed God to experience Humanity and allowed Humanity to see that God could maintain his perfection even as a Human. God the father, the Holy Ghost the blessed Human spirit, and Jesus Christ, the bridge between Humanity (the Holy Ghost) and God.

Is my thinking unfounded? If so, then who is the Holy Ghost, and why is he part of the Trinity? And this isn't just to Catholics. Most Christians believe in the three as the One God.

So, who is he?

Thanks :)

I came up with this paradox and was wondering if I followed the proper process of logic. Here it is:

1. Human beings can be both logical and illogical.

2. Something cannot exist if it has two contradictory characteristics. Ex: A cubic sphere cannot exist because a cube has four corners and a sphere has none. Ex: A frictionless, friction surface cannot exist because it either has friction or none.

3. Therefore, Humans don't exist.

Of course, Humans do exist. But, counter-intuitive paradoxes exist such as Zeno's paradoox which states motion isn't possible because space and time can be divided into infinite fractions.

Anyways, is this paradox I came up with a good one? Did I follow logic properly? Thanks guys :)

Spiritual people tend to believe all exists for an unknown purpose to serve the creator. Some spiritual people believe we were put here to discover our own purpose. Many Atheists believe there is no purpose, but to simply carry on genes. In a broader sense, some even believe that this universe is part of an even larger universe, where universes are constantly created in sort of a cosmological natural selection, so that eventually one is created to support life (where the argument that life exists merely to carry on genes kind of falls apart). One Atheist I know even suggested that the universe began with no purpose and perhaps life was created so that we could give the universe purpose. Also, Carl Sagan stated, we are the universe trying to understand itself.

So, what do you guys think? Are we here simply to carry on genes? To simply serve a creator? To simply serve the universe in understanding itself? To give purpose for purpose's sake? What do you guys think?

Take care :)

Sure, we're smart enough to split atoms, save species from extinction (which is against nature if that is the way of that species: to die), we can destroy worlds with 1,000 A-bombs (which count for only a fraction of the nukes which exist), we can imagine and figure out there is a fabric of space-time, we understand gravity is the same force which acts upon us as the moon, and so on. But, what evolutionary purpose do we serve? If we disappeared tomorrow, as wonderous and terrible as the HUman imagination and mind may be, the Earth would still rotate, the animals would live on, and another intelligent species may come about. What evolutionary purpose do we serve? Or any intelligent being?

Thanks :)

Quantum Mechanics helps us understand the behavior of theoretical atoms, and the actions of thier constituents. Quantum Mechanics, through mathematics, suggests that there are other dimensions of space (other directions to travel as well as other planes of existance or universes), and that there is a small yet finite probability that people can walk through walls (Dr. Brian Green, Elegant Universe). If quantum mechanics works so well in predicting the behavior of atoms and their constituents, then we must believe its other assertions, no matter how unreal they may sound. But, since quantum mechanics suggests things which cannot ever be proven, should we discard and dismiss it? Should we also dismiss String Theory? Should we look for another way to understand our universe? A new theory? What does this say about our necessity to have imagination and faith in our abilities to predict things we cannot see in science?

I just wanted some opinions and feelings on this. Thanks :)

I've wondered this myself. I know he said to render unto Caesar what is Ceasar's. But, that was specifically dealing with tax. If Jesus were drafted, would he fight? I know that wasn't his purpose (to fight), but for the sake of argument and curiousity, what do you think he would do?

I actually have no opinion on what Jesus would have done in such case. I don't know what to think honestly. So, what would he do, in your opinion? Thanks guys, and God bless.

:)

Is forgetting a past transgression needed to truly forgive someone? Or, is it wiser to forgive, but not to forget (just to protect yourself from, say, a "friend" who steals). Use Biblical quotes if you want. Thanks. :)

John 13: 47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.

48: He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

Now, the way I interpret these verses, to me it seems Jesus is saying that if you listen (read) to what he has to say, and don't believe, then he judges you not. But, if you don't listen to Jesus, and turn him away outright in judgement, you will be judged as you judged his word.

It also seems to me he is saying that if it truly isn't in your heart to follow him, then he won't judge you based solely on that. You will be judged according to how you lived, but not because you followed "your own soul's salvation".

How do you guys interpret this verse? Just curious as to what other people's opinions are.

:)

Personally, I don't. I disbelieve such a notion with every fiber of my being. What do you guys think, though? Support with scriptures, if possible. I just don't know where this idea comes from.

To believe the Big Bang to be true, we must believe two things: 1) All matter in the universe is evenly distributed and 2) The universe was created ex nihlo, from nothing. Stephen Hawking said that asking what happened before the Big Bang is like asking what is north of the North Pole.

However, the empirical problem is that for everything there is a cause and effect. Something does not come from nothing, and nothing cannot make something. So, really, what is the difference between believing the universe came from an all powerful being, and believing it came ex nihlo? No evidence exists to support either, empirically speaking of course. So, why is it more rediculous to believe the universe came from God than ex nihlo? Where's the 100%, irrevocable proof? Why have faith in such a thing as creatio ex nihlo, when it is just as illogical to the human senses as some claim God to be?

Debate away :) Just please keep it civil and peaceful. No disrespect intended to anyone.

Some people see nature and see beauty and order. Some see chaos and disorder. Some see beauty in chaos.

Everyone sees nature differently and have different feelings evoked. Some feel there is a God with complete certainty, some feel it is a big, yet beautiful accident. Opinions vary, but doesn't it seem like people scrutinize nature like art? How do you see nature and the universe? How does it make you feel? Or do you feel we should not look at nature like art?

:)

I think we all change history in some way, however small it may be. Say somebody is killed. Then, we missout on their progeny until the end of the universe. Perhaps millions of people, in the grand scheme of things.

What do you think? Agree?

:)

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm glad the man is recovering. But, the news brags about him being just fine. Of course he's fine! He has the best medical care in the world. Yet, many Americans die because they can't afford the best care, even hard working Americans who are responsible with thier funds. Should we be bragging about how well our politicians are cared for when the average American struggles daily, and cannot afford even decent care?

And keep it peaceful and civilized. I want debate, not war.

:)

First, my fellow Christians, let me say I have no doubt there is a God, and that Jesus is our messiah. Through life experiences and education, and I cannot help but to feel and conclude there is a God beyond any shadow of a doubt. However, I have doubts about the validity of the Bible. We have read and thought deeply about many of the contradictions that occur throughout the Bible. Plus, the Bible has been re-written, reinterpreted so many ways, and has had texts added and taken away. Finally, I don't feel the Bible describes a perfect God. In essence, I believe God to be far more merciful and perfect than the Bible describes him to be. However, I do not discount the Bible completely for its "flaws".I do believe there are truths there.

So, fellow Christians, how do you deal with the inconsistencies of the Bible? Do you believe it to be completely true? Or, am I merely being inconsistant with how I interpret the Bible? Please, keep it peaceful and civilized. I want debate, not war.