Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Chicago, IL 11/17

Regularly scheduled events

Out of the Blue

View
57 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 ] Older >

57. Re: Out of the Blue Apr 26, 2017, 18:55 Orogogus
 
Beamer wrote on Apr 26, 2017, 18:22:
I'm genuinely interested in knowing why someone here for 14 years has spent the past 2 nonstop talking about Jesus despite never mentioning it prior. How he went from criticizing a "Bible-thumping zealot" to being the biggest this board has ever seen.

Must go back to that whole proselytism.

That would be the way it works, wouldn't it? If it relied on followers who were in from birth, it wouldn't be a proselytizing religion. And it's a cliche that the recently born again are the ones who talk about it the most.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
56. Re: Out of the Blue Apr 26, 2017, 18:22 Beamer
 
Quboid wrote on Apr 26, 2017, 17:11:
No Man's Sky too, and I think he said afterwards that nobody could have seen that coming. He seems patient and well-meaning but much too trusting. Maybe too patient as well, given that "the Bible says the Bible's true" posts aren't going to convert anyone here.

What's fascinating is that all this Bible stuff is fairly recent. Granted, proselytism is a huge component of Jehovah's Witness, so it's not a huge surprise he keeps attempting it, but he's been here forever, and it's new.

I mean, look in his history:
Kxmode wrote on Apr 18, 2008, 14:29:
Hope to God one of the classes is a Priest, just so that I can go medieval on their ass; no offense to our visiting Bible-thumping zealot.


Then, around the time of Star Citizen (no lie, his first real Bible mention is in an SC thread), he mentions his Bible study, and suddenly it's 90% of his posts. I know some may see this as stalking or whathaveyou, even though the ability to search a profile for "Bible" is a core component here, but I'm genuinely interested in knowing why someone here for 14 years has spent the past 2 nonstop talking about Jesus despite never mentioning it prior. How he went from criticizing a "Bible-thumping zealot" to being the biggest this board has ever seen.

Must go back to that whole proselytism.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
55. Re: Out of the Blue Apr 26, 2017, 17:11 Quboid
 
No Man's Sky too, and I think he said afterwards that nobody could have seen that coming. He seems patient and well-meaning but much too trusting. Maybe too patient as well, given that "the Bible says the Bible's true" posts aren't going to convert anyone here.  
Avatar 10439
 
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
54. Re: Out of the Blue Apr 26, 2017, 11:45 RedEye9
 
You know ya'll are having a discussion w/someone who gave a grand to star citizen. That should pretty much tell you all that you need to know. drops mic

Kxmode wrote on Mar 6, 2017, 18:49:
spoiler I'm sure many of you are familiar with the expression "pearls before swine." Jesus uses this expression as counsel in his Sermon on the Mount. Notably, he states, "Do not give what is holy to dogs, neither throw your pearls before swine, that they may never trample them under their feet and turn around and rip you open." (Matthew 7:6) In the Bible pearls illustratively were associated with wisdom. Evidently, Jesus meant that, if a person shows that they have no appreciation for spiritual things one should not further endeavor to share religious thoughts and teachings with the person.

Very much duly noted! You guys can thank Jesus for his wise words and indirect principle to stop posting such things here. In other words, I am personally banning myself of such posts.
I miss the days when personal bans meant something, the loss of integrity is not shocking.
 
Avatar 58135
 
https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/andy-borowitz
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
53. Re: Re: Out of the Blue Apr 25, 2017, 09:45 Beamer
 
Kxmode wrote on Apr 24, 2017, 23:21:

I will say this when you see the world's governments start attacking religion en masse (and it will happen); then you'll know God is real because he is the one that will "put it into their hearts to carry out his thought" of destroying false religion. (Revelation 17:17) In other words, if you hate false religion, consider God hates it 50x more and is counting down the days to its annihilation. He knows the day and hour.

It's funny - I've always said that when some random guy on BluesNews.com demands that we all read the Bible to be aware that the Bible is true, then we'll know God isn't real.

So yeah, you just proved that my viewpoint is correct by going against it. Wonderful!

Also, yeah, when you're making something up, it's easy to predict there will be a time when it is no longer popular. Saying that's proof of anything is kind of asinine, no? Demanding we all read the Bible to prove the Bible right is equally asinine, no? Thinking you're the only one to be familiar with it is kind of asinine.

I mean, how long after the events was The Bible written? Do you really think those stories held 100% consistent over centuries? And then through translations to new languages further centuries later?

And how in the world can you say the existence of a book is proof the book is accurate? I've read a lot of historical fiction, does the fact that some of the events occurred in some form mean that what's on the pages is 100% true?

 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
52. Re: Re: Out of the Blue Apr 25, 2017, 05:02 jdreyer
 
Kxmode wrote on Apr 24, 2017, 23:21:
BobBob wrote on Apr 24, 2017, 14:52:
The main difference is that you believe that your faith defines reality, whereas the atheists/agnostics believe that whatever you think won't change reality.

That's a good point, although I will say that agnostics can believe in some form of powerful being and that in turn can shape their reality. They simply haven't crossed over into believing God exists (as atheism dictates), or being skeptical of God's existence. Anyhow, I've gone through the both schools of Agnosticism and Atheism and learned that God exists.
Actually agnostics don't really think about God one way or the other. They just don't care. If he exists, fine. If not, fine. Whatevs.

That I can't see him is faith. The same principle could apply to those who vehemently believe there is no God, and are quick to snuff out dissenting viewpoints. In either case, time will tell.
The same could be said about the Klingons. Or The Force.

I will say this when you see the world's governments start attacking religion en masse (and it will happen); then you'll know God is real because he is the one that will "put it into their hearts to carry out his thought" of destroying false religion. (Revelation 17:17) In other words, if you hate false religion, consider God hates it 50x more and is counting down the days to its annihilation. He knows the day and hour.
Why would governments attack religion? They've been using it for centuries to control the masses.
 
Avatar 22024
 
Stay a while, and listen.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
51. Re: Out of the Blue Apr 25, 2017, 04:38 jdreyer
 
Kxmode wrote on Apr 24, 2017, 11:35:

Your viewpoint and my viewpoint are both based on faith. Humanity will wait and see which comes true.

Actually, my viewpoint is based on science and the extrapolation of empirically proven trends in the climate science. Humans have come a long way since 100 A.D.

Also, Bill Watterson was an atheist. And any time Calvin (named after John Calvin, of course) espouses fatalism (such as riding the sled down the mountain) it always ends badly for him. This is his rebuke against fatalism. Yet you embrace it, while using Watterson's anti-fatalism character as your mascot. Is your subconscious manifesting your true feelings?
 
Avatar 22024
 
Stay a while, and listen.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
50. Re: Quake Champions Trailer and Interview Apr 25, 2017, 04:24 descender
 
What a typical "I know better so fuck you" response. You can't get into a point by point analytical argument with me over religion KXMode, because you can't. I have actually studied religion and not just your favorite book. Study of religion has nothing to do with your Bible. You claim to have "studied it all", which is a complete and utter lie, because you apparently learned nothing in the process. You studied thousands of religions and decided the one you already believed in was right? HOW CONVENIENT!

In other words, come back and say the same things after you have studied the Bible at considerable length.
How about no? How about you go learn rudimentary science that is taught to 10-year-olds and stop making up controversy where there is none? Stop looking for answers in a stone age pagan worship of hypocrisy and ignorance and positing the existence of the book as evidence that the book is right? Maybe you need to study something other than the Bible and learn how to stop projecting your belief in a single book on other people and other topics to which it is completely irrelevant.

This comment was edited on Apr 25, 2017, 05:24.
 
Avatar 56185
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
49. Re: Quake Champions Trailer and Interview Apr 25, 2017, 04:05 descender
 
No. You need to study things other than the Bible and learn how to stop projecting your false beliefs on others.  
Avatar 56185
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
48. Re: Quake Champions Trailer and Interview Apr 24, 2017, 23:37 Kxmode
 
descender wrote on Apr 24, 2017, 16:24:
You don't have to have faith or belief in science, science is merely a process that produces evidence. Science doesn't require belief because you can be shown how and why it works or else it isn't science.

Of which, mine is based on historical evidence

No, it isn't.

There is absolutely zero evidence that any of the mystical things mentioned in your religious text of choice actually happened. There are a few references to actual historical events and civilizations that existed at the time but zero evidence to support any of the mystical claims made by the writings.

Actual historical evidence only shows that humans have been reinventing and stealing similar religious stories for millenia across thousands of different religions. There is zero evidence to show that any of them are actually accurate or true or possess any verifiable knowledge of a living deity. That you would or could be so naive to believe any one religious text in the face of insurmountable evidence that your book is neither original nor special... that's faith. Having "faith" in any particular religion is essentially being willfully ignorant to historical evidence.

I'm not going to get into the analytical point-by-point minutiae with you because to do so would be a waste of time for us both. Your respond is typical of someone with surface knowledge of the Bible, at best. In other words, come back and say the same things after you have studied the Bible at considerable length.
 
Avatar 18786
 
William Shakespeare's "Star Wars" Act I, Scene 4: CHORUS: And now, dear viewers, shall our play go to \ A Planet stark and drear for our next scene. \ Imagine sand and rocks within thy view. \ Prepare thy souls - we fly to Tatooine!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
47. Re: Out of the Blue Apr 24, 2017, 23:21 Kxmode
 
BobBob wrote on Apr 24, 2017, 14:52:
The main difference is that you believe that your faith defines reality, whereas the atheists/agnostics believe that whatever you think won't change reality.

That's a good point, although I will say that agnostics can believe in some form of powerful being and that in turn can shape their reality. They simply haven't crossed over into believing God exists (as atheism dictates), or being skeptical of God's existence. Anyhow, I've gone through the both schools of Agnosticism and Atheism and learned that God exists. That I can't see him is faith. The same principle could apply to those who vehemently believe there is no God, and are quick to snuff out dissenting viewpoints. In either case, time will tell.

I will say this when you see the world's governments start attacking religion en masse (and it will happen); then you'll know God is real because he is the one that will "put it into their hearts to carry out his thought" of destroying false religion. (Revelation 17:17) In other words, if you hate false religion, consider God hates it 50x more and is counting down the days to its annihilation. He knows the day and hour.
 
Avatar 18786
 
William Shakespeare's "Star Wars" Act I, Scene 4: CHORUS: And now, dear viewers, shall our play go to \ A Planet stark and drear for our next scene. \ Imagine sand and rocks within thy view. \ Prepare thy souls - we fly to Tatooine!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
46. Re: Out of the Blue Apr 24, 2017, 16:29 Beamer
 
Kxmode wrote on Apr 24, 2017, 14:48:
Beamer wrote on Apr 24, 2017, 11:51:
There's evidence-based faith, and there's utterly blind faith.

Of which, mine is based on historical evidence. The same could be said of jdryer's third point. Faith fills in the rest for both. I see one outcome, and other's see another. In either case, time ultimately determines which is correct.

We have more evidence that OJ Simpson is innocent than we do Jesus the son of some God. I mean, there are books that say it, and people believe it, so, yeah, must be true. OJ is innocent.

Also, there's a school for magic in England.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
45. Re: Quake Champions Trailer and Interview Apr 24, 2017, 16:24 descender
 
You don't have to have faith or belief in science, science is merely a process that produces evidence. Science doesn't require belief because you can be shown how and why it works or else it isn't science.

Of which, mine is based on historical evidence

No, it isn't.

There is absolutely zero evidence that any of the mystical things mentioned in your religious text of choice actually happened. There are a few references to actual historical events and civilizations that existed at the time but zero evidence to support any of the mystical claims made by the writings.

Actual historical evidence only shows that humans have been reinventing and stealing similar religious stories for millenia across thousands of different religions. There is zero evidence to show that any of them are actually accurate or true or possess any verifiable knowledge of a living deity. That you would or could be so naive to believe any one religious text in the face of insurmountable evidence that your book is neither original nor special... that's faith. Having "faith" in any particular religion is essentially being willfully ignorant to historical evidence.
 
Avatar 56185
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
44. Re: Out of the Blue Apr 24, 2017, 14:52 BobBob
 
Kxmode wrote on Apr 24, 2017, 14:48:
Beamer wrote on Apr 24, 2017, 11:51:
There's evidence-based faith, and there's utterly blind faith.

Of which, mine is based on historical evidence. The same could be said of jdryer's third point. Faith fills in the rest for both. I see one outcome, and other's see another. In either case, time ultimately determines which is correct.

The main difference is that you believe that your faith defines reality, whereas the atheists / agnostics believe that whatever you think won't change reality.
 
Don't like my post? Submit a complaint
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
43. Re: Out of the Blue Apr 24, 2017, 14:48 Kxmode
 
Beamer wrote on Apr 24, 2017, 11:51:
There's evidence-based faith, and there's utterly blind faith.

Of which, mine is based on historical evidence. The same could be said of jdryer's third point. Faith fills in the rest for both. I see one outcome, and other's see another. In either case, time ultimately determines which is correct.
 
Avatar 18786
 
William Shakespeare's "Star Wars" Act I, Scene 4: CHORUS: And now, dear viewers, shall our play go to \ A Planet stark and drear for our next scene. \ Imagine sand and rocks within thy view. \ Prepare thy souls - we fly to Tatooine!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
42. Re: Out of the Blue Apr 24, 2017, 11:51 Beamer
 
Kxmode wrote on Apr 24, 2017, 11:35:
jdreyer wrote on Apr 22, 2017, 15:49:
1) A fatalistic attitude is extremely dangerous thinking. Humans are absolutely capable of poisoning the planet down to the point where only bacteria and tardigrades can exist. India has about the same number of vehicles as Great Britian. However, death from accidents is six times higher. Fatalism plays a huge part in this, as people don't drive safely, wear seatbelts, etc. "My time is my time" is a prevailing sentiment, so most people don't take care.

2) Let's not forget Aesop. When the cart gets stuck in the mud, the farmer implores Hercules to come and push it out for him. Hercules appears, and says "Don't just stand there man, put your shoulder to the wheel!" The Gods help those that help themselves.

3) Doom and gloom is absolutely the correct response. Global warming has in the past caused mass extinctions, and will do so again in the next 100 years, except this time it will be the first anthropogenic climate change extinction.

Your viewpoint and my viewpoint are both based on faith. Humanity will wait and see which comes true.

There's evidence-based faith, and there's utterly blind faith.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
41. Re: Out of the Blue Apr 24, 2017, 11:35 Kxmode
 
jdreyer wrote on Apr 22, 2017, 15:49:
1) A fatalistic attitude is extremely dangerous thinking. Humans are absolutely capable of poisoning the planet down to the point where only bacteria and tardigrades can exist. India has about the same number of vehicles as Great Britian. However, death from accidents is six times higher. Fatalism plays a huge part in this, as people don't drive safely, wear seatbelts, etc. "My time is my time" is a prevailing sentiment, so most people don't take care.

2) Let's not forget Aesop. When the cart gets stuck in the mud, the farmer implores Hercules to come and push it out for him. Hercules appears, and says "Don't just stand there man, put your shoulder to the wheel!" The Gods help those that help themselves.

3) Doom and gloom is absolutely the correct response. Global warming has in the past caused mass extinctions, and will do so again in the next 100 years, except this time it will be the first anthropogenic climate change extinction.

Your viewpoint and my viewpoint are both based on faith. Humanity will wait and see which comes true.
 
Avatar 18786
 
William Shakespeare's "Star Wars" Act I, Scene 4: CHORUS: And now, dear viewers, shall our play go to \ A Planet stark and drear for our next scene. \ Imagine sand and rocks within thy view. \ Prepare thy souls - we fly to Tatooine!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
40. Re: Out of the Blue Apr 22, 2017, 15:49 jdreyer
 
Kxmode wrote on Apr 21, 2017, 19:23:
It doesn't matter what humans do. They won't ever be allowed to destroy the fundamental things that make the planet "operational." This doomsday scenario is something that environmentalists hinge their beliefs and fears on. I want clean air and water, but in the grand scheme of things, I am not at the level of concern as environmentalists. I put my faith in what the Bible states the Earth will eventually become, which is a paradise.

I'm not sure how you saw my viewpoint as "anti-science." It's not. It's belief in a different and positive outcome for our planet. Thumbsup

1) A fatalistic attitude is extremely dangerous thinking. Humans are absolutely capable of poisoning the planet down to the point where only bacteria and tardigrades can exist. India has about the same number of vehicles as Great Britian. However, death from accidents is six times higher. Fatalism plays a huge part in this, as people don't drive safely, wear seatbelts, etc. "My time is my time" is a prevailing sentiment, so most people don't take care.

2) Let's not forget Aesop. When the cart gets stuck in the mud, the farmer implores Hercules to come and push it out for him. Hercules appears, and says "Don't just stand there man, put your shoulder to the wheel!" The Gods help those that help themselves.

3) Doom and gloom is absolutely the correct response. Global warming has in the past caused mass extinctions, and will do so again in the next 100 years, except this time it will be the first anthropogenic climate change extinction.
 
Avatar 22024
 
Stay a while, and listen.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
39. Re: Out of the Blue Apr 22, 2017, 13:39 BobBob
 
El Pit wrote on Apr 22, 2017, 02:48:
BobBob wrote on Apr 21, 2017, 19:32:
Sure, the planet will survive -- as a barren wasteland, devoid of all life -- but I'm sure it'll still keep orbiting the sun for another billion or so years. As I always like to say, "One man's paradise is another man's dead rock floating in space."

Life is an STD that is hard to get rid off! Evolution is a master at spreading this STD.

We have found life where we expected it to be impossible (e.g. close to black smokers). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IcJlmpen4A0 I am sure that once life exists it is hard to get totally killed. Fungi, moss, lichens, bacteria - very hard to kill them all. But more complex lifeforms (especially those who cannot adapt very well to a changing habitat) will die much easier and earlier than simple lifeforms that adapt to almost every climate.

And yet ... only on Earth.
 
Don't like my post? Submit a complaint
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
38. Re: Out of the Blue Apr 22, 2017, 05:46 Kxmode
 
El Pit wrote on Apr 22, 2017, 02:48:
Life is an STD that is hard to get rid off! Evolution is a master at spreading this STD.

We have found life where we expected it to be impossible (e.g. close to black smokers). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IcJlmpen4A0 I am sure that once life exists it is hard to get totally killed. Fungi, moss, lichens, bacteria - very hard to kill them all. But more complex lifeforms (especially those who cannot adapt very well to a changing habitat) will die much easier and earlier than simple lifeforms that adapt to almost every climate.

There are bacteria in Carlsbad Caverns called Paenibacillus that are "immortal." Its age is 4 million years. Given the location in such harsh conditions, the bacteria built up defenses to fight other bacteria for resources through attrition. Over time the strain became immune to many modern antibiotics. Effectively they cannot die from natural causes. And then, of course, there are Tardigrades. These little tiny water bears looking for picket baskets is all kinds of extremes like lava and pools of acid, and if none are found can shrivel up and hibernate for hundreds of years without dying.

This comment was edited on Apr 22, 2017, 05:58.
 
Avatar 18786
 
William Shakespeare's "Star Wars" Act I, Scene 4: CHORUS: And now, dear viewers, shall our play go to \ A Planet stark and drear for our next scene. \ Imagine sand and rocks within thy view. \ Prepare thy souls - we fly to Tatooine!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
57 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 ] Older >




Blue's News is a participant in Amazon Associates programs
and earns advertising fees by linking to Amazon.



footer

Blue's News logo