Are you barbaric? That's naive...very primitive.
I don't need a god to be civilized, I know what is right and wrong since I was a kid, And I know it is what we call TOILET training... Now let me ask you ARE YOU CIVILIZED?? Because if you do, you can never imagined these barbaric things you have in your mind. Eww.

The audience never play the act. That's the reason why they pay for the play. I am not into fight or something Sir.An actor and an actress are the ones who acts in a play, they memorize lines, emote and re enacts the play.I am not the actor, I am just observing the matter upon my perception.Okay, I am one of those audience. Now, the audience never ever parts in plays except if it a carnival show or a magic show, We are just here to observe and watch.
Sometimes, stupid questions beggets stupid answers.
But let me tell you this sir, upright and frankly, SIR, I AM NOT FIGHTING FOR ANYTHING, I AM GIVING A COMMENT. I am just exercising my rights as an audience. An audience which 2 religions of SCHISM created and plays. We all know everything must end right? But I am just wonderin when all of your stories end. It's dragging me completely already. Pls give conclusions my dear believers.

I hope somebody do comment likewise upon what I have stated on my previous page.

I hope I did answer your question correctly. If not, pls read this again:
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
Just a reminder to all Christians and Evangelists:
Who are you all to wave your fingers? People are not stupid for this kinds of matters. Every

discussions held in between internet sites and forums are all lame. Neither do I provoke the

existence of it. But let me say, it is like hidding behind your Mother's pants. It is sad to

know how CHURCH became to be a negative acknowledgement of business politics.
I am very ashamed about how Iglesia ni Cristo by Felix Manalo and Iglesia ng Dios by Eli

Soriano has been going on right now.It irritates me.I guess I am not the only one. Let me

say to both members, DO A GOOD THING ABOUT HISTORY!! go on and pick up your phones. Stop

quarreling and parrying about a piece of small gem. Because for us, we think both of you

held to a conspiracy of war. Who do you think suffers more? Believers or Non-believers? Who

takes advantage? Who does not? Who benefits?
Therefore in Conclusion: STOP RUNNING AROUND THE BUSHES and finish the war you all created.
This a instinctively a WAR indeed. A war of religion, "HOLY WAR" let me say.
We have Studied the past and the history. We don't wan't it to happen again. NO more

bloodshed because of this stupid schism.
Why won't you both have a decent debate, in front of a crowd and even in TV or whatever just

as long you both talk at the same moment in history, now with a phone in all your mouth so

every people can hear.
Remember this, People are seekers of truth. And so we are waiting for Iglesia ni Cristo by

Manalo and Iglesia ng Dios by Eli Soriano for whoever there representatives would be to do

an OPEN DEBATE regarding their beliefs in the bible for us to know who we should really

believe. FORUMS, WEBSITES and BLOGS is not enough for this kind of war.
Go ahead and have a debate LIVE VIA SATELLITE around the globe. And after that we'll publish

that in magazines and media. If you think you are both good, let us come on and JOIN this

mass debate.
SO AGAIN, INC and ADD pls face each other and have a one on one or even a panel or whatever

to have an open DEBATE weekly to stop this war. YOu know why we should do this? because both

of you is already creating business out of it. Business is good but your kind of business is

mixed with bad politics.And if this war never ends, Non-believers will still be

non-believers. So in other words, THIS IS ALL USELESS if INC is non responsive between ADD's

call for a duel, a DEBATE once and for all.
If it really won't happen, I think ADD did not made their best, and INC remains LIMP. In

filipino dialect, MGA INUTIL all of you.
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________



SO WHO SHOULD WIN? IGLESIA NI CRISTO by Manalo or IGLESIA NG DIYOS by Eliseo Soriano?

We know we always have one HERO at the end of the play,right? Who wins? Who lose? Or is there another religion coming out explaining how the 3 dumplings fit in one rice box just like the Catholics believed,right?

dude ganto yan eh..

pwde nman ntin gawin tlga gusto nting lahat, pero meron tayong BATAS na tinatawag. meaning pag nang-rape k makukulong k, and so on.. so on..

spiritually speaking, nde nman tlga ntin alam mangyayari sa atin pag namatay tayo. kaya nga may faith db. faith in your religion. ngayon, it depends on you if you're going to believe that there's a God or there's none. Kung naging masama ka, malas mo kng may God, swerte mo kung wala..

hindi ko alam kng paano mo mapprove n may Diyos jan s post mo.

Kira pasensya n kung sumasabat ako s debate nio ni Sheriff pero a thread is a thread, im entitled to my opinion nman cguro.

syempre pg gumawa k ng mgnda. magnda ang relasyon mo s mga tao. wala kang kaaway. nakakatulong k ng mga tao. hindi ka nakakasakit etc etc.. so in short, mgnda ang takbo ng buhay. I can list more benefits of living a good life but i think you already get my point. spiritually speaking nman, kung naniniwala k s diyos at gumawa k ng mabuti, e d s langit k pupunta. at kng masama s impyerno db. Now it falls again kung naniniwala k s Diyos o hinde. gets?

I dont know if Sheriff is afraid to do bad things, but if you we're to ask me i'd say yes. because i dnt want to build bad relationships with people. i want reap the benefits of living a good life just like i stated above. And i don't think your question has any relevance on the thread topic(may diyos b o wala). I dont know where we're getting at this.

Psa 14:1 (A psalm by David for the music leader.) Only a fool would say, "There is no God!" People like that are worthless; they are heartless and cruel and never do right.

Job 22:15 Iyo bang pagpapatuluyan ang dating daan, na nilakaran ng mga masamang tao?

ok so ur saying that atheists are worthless, heartless and cruel? that they NEVER do any good? i can easily dispprove that. i have done a lot of good in my life. i do it everyday.

you can never judge people easily. so you're saying that atheists are worthless and evil people just because they don't believe in what you believe? it's so easy to judge my friend.. and like the topic implies "may diyos b o wala" we are here to discuss God's existence. Not to accuse people of that their evil.

To superpwet,

Sorry but we're not the ones who said that. It's actually what the Bible says.

so then follow what the bible says..that's the correct thing to do right???

so in short, lahat ng makita niong atheist ay masama at walang puso, at walang nagagawang mgnda, khit hindi niyo pa sila kilala?correct?? dahil pra sa inyo, hindi niyo na sila dapat pang kilalanin dahil lahat sila ay msasama dahil hindi sila naniniwala sa pinaniniwalaan niyo..

yeah i understand ur point. but the thing is, not all people believe in what you believe in. some people dont believe in God. and like it shows there in the quote, all people with no God are EVIL, CRUEL, HEARTLESS and NEVER do any good. and i just countered by saying that quote is wrong because i know a lot of people who are atheists and are good people. that's why i said i'd dispprove the quote. im just saying that the quote is stereo-typing people. it's saying that ALL atheists do no good. get it?im not asking what i need to get to heaven. and like i said we're all straying away from the thread topic.

asan n nga pla si kira.sya ung thread starter ah.

Sorry but we can't avoid talking about salavtion, because this is the ultimate goal of most (if not all) people belonging to different religions nowadays. And pretty sure the same thing can be said for most neutral readers in this forum, particularly the self-professing Christians.

For now I just wanna share with this to you:

==========================================================

http://www.network54.com/Forum/261121/thread/1144514212/last-1150491637/

Pagbabalik...
April 9 2006 at 1:36 AM
No score for this post Bro. Vic (Lumayas na sa ADD) (Login bro.vic.101)

Pagbati sa mga kapatid sa Iglesia ni Cristo, sa mga miembro at/o tagasunod ni eli soriano. Matagal-tagal din akong nawala, salamat sa Dios at nananatili pa rin ang forum na ito.

Humihingi ako ng paumanhin sa lahat, sa aking biglang pagkawala sa forum. Ako'y nasadlak sa napakaraming personal na suliranin sa mga nagdaang panahon. Inaamin ko, na ang mga problemang aking naranasan ay directang maiuugnay sa salot at sumpa na dulot sa akin ng ADD. Ako'y nakatapos sa Pagsubok sa INC, nakatanggap ako ng txt message bilang compirmasyon para sa schedule ng bautismo. Hindi ako tumuloy. Naisip ko, kailangan ko pa ng panahon para magsuri. Naisip ko, baka tulad din lang ang Iglesia ni Cristo sa ADD na nagandahan ako, wala akong makitang pwedeng ipangtapat, kaya naisip ko tama na.

Hindi ako nagpatuloy. Pati pagdalo ko sa mga pagsamba ay itinigil ko. Back to zero ako sa pagsusuri. Judaismo, Islam, pati Agnosticism at Atheism ay pinag-ukulan ko ng panahon. Baka naman talaga'ng walang Dios, tulad ng tunay na paniniwala ni soriano. Nagdaan ang mga buwan at taon, buhat nang ako ay tumigil sa pag-po-post sa forum na ito, ni pagbabasa ng forum ay itinigil ko...subalit patuloy akong nakikinig sa mga programa ng Iglesia ni Cristo, at nagsuri. Iisa lang ang aking naging pangunahing pamantayan- Logic. Totoong may Dios at imposibleng lumitaw lang ang sansinukob sa pamamagitan ng tsamba o aksidente. Lahat ng bagay ay may dahilan, may katuturan, directang may kaugnayan sa pagkakaron ng Dios. Maski daanin sa Physics at mathematics, iisa ang magiging conclusyon...may Dios, hindi lumitaw ang sansinukob dahil lang sa tinatawag na "element of chance". Pinili kong ako'y manahimik, sarilinin ang ginagawang pagsusuri, sapagkat ayaw kong maging sanhi ako ng kawalan ng pananampalataya o pagkatisod.

Habang lumalayo ako sa Iglesia ni Cristo, ay lalo akong napapalapit. Ilan sa mga dating nakasama kong personal at nakaugnayan ko sa ADD ay naglitawan na sa ATD para magpatotoo. Daniel Veridiano, Mr.& Mrs. Pernito, etc.. Hindi ko na babanggitin ang iba, dahil hanggang ngayon ay di pa din alam nila eli soriano kung sino ba talaga si "Bro. Vic (Lumayas na sa ADD)". Maski si Daniel Veridiano, di nya alam kung sino ba talaga ako. Tumador, kung buhay ka pa... pangalanan mo na ako. Marami na kayong mas malaking problema kaysa akin ngayon mga alaga ni bakla! Ewan ko lang kung hanggang ngayon ay mapapasweldo pa kayo ni soriano, kasi si razon na ang nasa puder; mas malupit mangbalasubas yan kaysa tiyo nya.

Buhat sa araw na ito, sa tulong at awa ng Dios...ako ay magpapatuloy, ipagpapatuloy ko ang mga nasimulan ko. Nauunawaan ko na isa ito sa dahilan ng aking pag-iral sa mundong ito. Kung may nais kumontexto, magsiyasat sa aking ginawang mga pagsusuri, nakahanda akong ilahad kahit saan.

Balita ko may, nagkakalat ng maling inpormasyon, na ako daw ay bumalik sa ADD. Yan ay hindi totoo, kung ayaw nyong maniwala, itanong nyo mismo kay Ka. Michael Sandoval. Walang may matino ang pag-iisip na nanggaling sa ADD, nagpadoctrina sa Iglesia ni Cristo, nanampalataya na totoong sa Dios ang INC, pagdaka ay bumalik sa ADD para maging actibong miembro uli. Nagkaproblema man akong personal subalit hindi ang pagiging sira-ulo para bumalik uli ako sa relihiyon ni soriano.

Yun dating email ko na gamit ko para dito, nakalimutan ko na. Kung may nais makipag-ugnayan sa akin, pwede nyo akong e-email sa bro.vic@i12.com. Ang login name/username ko dito ay: bro.vic.101, yung dati wala na. Hindi ako gagamit ng email tulad ng yahoo, gmail, hotmail sapagkat ang mga yan ay madaling ma-hack. Yung mga dating nakaugnayan ko na, alam nyo na kung paano. Ka. Webspy, nagbago na yung celphone number ko. Yung nakausap ko dati na pinagbibintangan ng mga ADD na nilusob daw sila na may dalang mga baril, paki-email mo na lang ako; Kinasal na yong kaibigan/kakilala nating abogado.

Yung mga nag-email sa akin dati, karamihan ay di ko na nasagot, mag-email lang kayo uli. Muli, humihingi ako ng paumanhin, nagkaproblema lang ako nang personal at ngayon muling narito para ipagpatuloy ang laban.

Ito lang ang masasabi ko sa mga naniniwala na "walang dios"-- Walang agham na makakapagpatunay na "walang dios". Hindi lahat ng bagay na hindi nakikita ay hindi nag-e-exist.

Maraming salamat sa isang dati kong classmate na ginawang halimbawa sa akin ang hangin, hindi nakikita subalit umiiral. Codename-- Opcode', a/k/a Bro. Mike.

Hello, I am sori just got my PC from repair.. okay, just a correction every one... ABOUT BEING AN ATHESIT... To anyone : " NOT ALL ATHESIT BELIEVES THAT THERE IS NO GOD...okay... for me as an audience, I BELIVE THAT WE ALL HAVE A CREATOR< BUT DON'T CONSIDER HIM A GOD... and you put me in a box and labeled me an Atheist.. what else can I say...

Atheism is the disbelief[1] in the existence of any deities.[2] It is commonly defined as the denial of theism, amounting to the positive assertion that deities do not exist, or as the deliberate rejection of theism.


Pejorative definition: atheism as immorality
Further information: Discrimination against atheists

Opponents of atheism have frequently associated atheism with immorality and evil, often characterizing it as a willful and malicious repudiation of God or gods. This, in fact, is the original definition and sense of the word, but changing sensibilities and the normalization of non-religious viewpoints have caused the term to lose most of its pejorative connotations in general parlance.

-- by Wikipedia.org

Let me just clear these out... I AM NOT ENCOURAGING ANYONE TO UNDERSTAND MY BELIEF OF BEING AN ATHEIST..
I POSTED A FORUM TO DO A COMMENT AND SPEAK OUT.
A forum entitled INUTIL to awaken filipino believers and finish the long since birth fight with these 2 opposite religion whom they have engaged to exchange battles with.

Do not ask me about any opinions about your religion and their religion. I AM JUST AN AUDIENCE WAITING FOR THE CONCLUSION OF THE TRUE STORY these 2 church has been over the years. Wake up, it is 2007 already..stop arguing and engaged into sports. Single arena battle, same time same moment, different viewers. Sooner or later we need to find the truth.Audience don't participate, what they do is watch and in the end seek in their heart who's the real HERO to put it in their history books and tell it to their friends,families, love ones.
CHEERS!!

Sheriff_Atheist
(Login Sheriff_Atheist)wrote

"... and you put me in a box and labeled me an Atheist.. what else can I say..."
____________________________________________________________________________
tayo raw ang naglabel sa kanya na isa syang atheist... tsk! tsk! e kung hindi sya atheist at itoy label lang namin sau e ano tong sinabi mo sa next post mo???





Sheriff_Atheist
(Login Sheriff_Atheist)
No score for this post January 20 2007, 10:45 AM
wrote:


"... I AM NOT ENCOURAGING ANYONE TO UNDERSTAND MY BELIEF OF BEING AN ATHEIST.."
____________________________________________________________________________

ikaw naman pala ang umaamin na isa kang atheist e di ba??? walang naglelabel sayo dito kaibigan. aminado ka naman talaga na atheist ka di ba???

ngayon maaaring puntuhan mo ko na hindi lahat ng atheist ay di naniniwalang walang Dios katulad ng sabi mo...
_____________________________________________________________________________

"ABOUT BEING AN ATHESIT... To anyone : " NOT ALL ATHESIT BELIEVES THAT THERE IS NO GOD...okay... for me as an audience, I BELIVE THAT WE ALL HAVE A CREATOR..."
_____________________________________________________________________________


pero yung creator ba na kinikilala mo ay Dios??? sabi mo...

____________________________________________________________________________


"I BELIVE THAT WE ALL HAVE A CREATOR< BUT DON'T CONSIDER HIM A GOD..."
_____________________________________________________________________________

malinaw naman di ba??? naniniwala kang may creator pero hindi yun Dios para sayo. kaya tama pa rin na tawagin kang isang atheist o isang tao na di naniniwala sa Dios sapagkat iyon ang tunay nyan kahulugan. may mali ba sa analysis ko? o isa ka rin sa mga inutil na sinasabi ng isip mo?





Ito ay sapagkat sa aking kalooban, ako ay lubos na nalulugod sa kautusan ng Diyos.(roma 7:22)

Mr. Sheriff Atheist,

Pakibasa lang po ang repost ni Bro. texhnolyze sa naunang pahayag ni Bro. Vic.

Salamat po.

Ang Dating Daan Forum Eli Soriano at Ang Dating Daan - Members of the Church of God International Forum Members of the Church of God International Forum Sir Boying's Ang Dating Daan Forum Ang Dating Daan News Center Ang Dating Daan Audio/Video Clips

Bro Vic, ang hangin hindi nga nakikita, pero napapatunayan ng science.

I posted while ago and it's gone???? Even some post above mine also got deleted????

so dhil lng s complex ang isang bagay at hindi maipaliwanag eh un n ang dahilan pra maniwala k n me isang unknown entity n lumikha ng bagay n un? prang ambabaw nmn n dahilan nun.. pretty easy to accept yet it has a very flimsy structure of thought..

Eagle's Eye
(Login 4u2c) Re: Kira Vs. Sheriff_Atheist: May Diyos O Wala?
No score for this post January 22 2007, 11:06 PM

I posted while ago and it's gone???? Even some post above mine also got deleted????

Bro, I advise Mr. bitchslayer to change his login name and refrain from using foul words such as "fuck".

His posts must be deleted because they contain such words, and any other posts below it ay madadamay din po.

We apologize for the inconvenience.

to Athrun Zala

so dahil complex ang pag gawa ng hangin, sinabi mo na "then someone else must have created" those complex stuff right?

how come you sound so unsure? so u mean to say that all you and kira's proof that God exists is the idea that everything is so complex that someone must have created everything and that's why u follow the bible? and I didnt mention anything about the world being created by chance..^_^ im just not sticking to what is in the bible, because i also rely on scientific facts, like dinosaurs roaming the earth before, etc etc..

so in short, you dont know where we really came from, then you read a book that everyone is reading and believing, then follow it as well. and then you go on talking to people so CONFIDENTLY that there's a God that loves us and cares for us etc etc, amidst of all the babies dying of hunger, war, death, sadness, suicide, and other negative things around us. If you really know God, and have found him, how come you sound so unsure yourself??

Correct si superpwet! hahaha.... Both sides are making they're own efforts to fight back! Come on man!!! Where's the love on that? You guys preach what's written on the bibble right...? Why not set an example? When is it gonna end?

I'm not quoting each and every member but both sides despise each other. Which shouldn'y be the case. I just don't get it!!! Like what he said: PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH...!

SuperPwet (Login SuperPwet) Re: Kira Vs. Sheriff_Atheist: May Diyos O Wala? No score for this post January 23 2007, 5:43 PM to Athrun Zala so dahil complex ang pag gawa ng hangin, sinabi mo na "then someone else must have created" those complex stuff right? how come you sound so unsure? so u mean to say that all you and kira's proof that God exists is the idea that everything is so complex that someone must have created everything and that's why u follow the bible? and I didnt mention anything about the world being created by chance..^_^ im just not sticking to what is in the bible, because i also rely on scientific facts, like dinosaurs roaming the earth before, etc etc.. so in short, you dont know where we really came from, then you read a book that everyone is reading and believing, then follow it as well. and then you go on talking to people so CONFIDENTLY that there's a God that loves us and cares for us etc etc, amidst of all the babies dying of hunger, war, death, sadness, suicide, and other negative things around us. If you really know God, and have found him, how come you sound so unsure yourself?? WELL, THE BIBLE ALSO TELLS US THAT IN THESE LAST DAYS MAGIGING LAGANAP ANG KAHIRAPAN SA MUNDONG ITO. AND SUCH CAME TRUE. SORRY I FORGOT KUNG ANONG TALATA SA BIBLIA NAKASULAT 'YUN. IT IS TRUE NA LAHAT NG TAO AY NILALANG NG DIYOS, PERO HINDI LAHAT NG TAO AY CONSIDERED NA ANAK NG DIYOS. KAYA LUMAGANAP ANG KAHIRAPAN SA MUNDO IS BECAUSE OF MAN'S SIN. SO IT IS MAN WHO SHOULD BE BLAMED AND NOT GOD. EVEN WORSE, MAY ITINAKDA ANG DIYOS NA ETERNAL PUNISHMENT SA TAO. PARA MALIGTAS ANG TAO SA PARUSANG ITO, I'M AFRAID KULANG ANG ORAS KO SA NGAYON PARA TALAKAYIN ITO. BAHALA NA LANG PO ANG IBA PANG MGA KAPATID NAMIN UKOL SA BAGAY NA 'YAN. HANGGANG SA MULI. --DEARKA ELSMAN, BUSTER GUNDAM PILOT

wait.. i athrun hasn't answered my question yet.

"someone else must have created"

is this all the proof? how come you sound unsure my friend??

Hello kira,

It's been a long time right? I am really sorry KIRA i have just read your question ( nirereview ko kasi this KIRA VS ATHEIST SHERIFF Forum)and I almost forgot to answer you small question, Sorry.

FROM KIRA:
AYON SA INYO, WALANG DIYOS. THEREFORE, IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL AT ALL KUNG GUMAWA MAN TAYO NG MABUTI O MASAMA. SO WHAT KUNG HULIHIN TAYO NG PULIS, LITISIN SA CORTE AT HATULAN NG CAPITAL PUNISHMENT? BOTH GOOD AND EVIL PEOPLE WILL DIE ANYWAY. THAT IS IF WE ARE GOING TO FOLLOW YOUR ARGUMENTS.
TANONG, TAKOT (OR AT LEAST RELUCTANT) BA KAYONG GUMAWA NG MASAMA O HINDI?

MY ANSWER:
1.AYON SA INYO, WALANG DIYOS. THEREFORE, IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL AT ALL KUNG GUMAWA MAN TAYO NG MABUTI O MASAMA.
Answer:First of all I would like to Clear my name about "WALANG DIYOS" statement ( i think i already answered this somehow )My personal opinion is that we do have a creator but i don't consider him god. So for m, i treat Everybody as gods (PANTAY PANTAY) for equality purposes. About those people na "WALANG DIYOS" it is really impossible to say that in tagalog if you are a filipino because you have mentioned "DIYOS" already if there is none, gets? I am not those people who says "WALANG DIYOS",

I am an Atheist Implicit to "ANTITHEISM" gets?


SO WHAT KUNG HULIHIN TAYO NG PULIS, LITISIN SA CORTE AT HATULAN NG CAPITAL PUNISHMENT? BOTH GOOD AND EVIL PEOPLE WILL DIE ANYWAY. THAT IS IF WE ARE GOING TO FOLLOW YOUR ARGUMENTS.
Answer: So what? But sure do, I KNOW THEY WON'T BE ASKED IF THEY BELIEVED IN GOD OR NOT by the police, by the court or by the council..IT IS IRELEVANT to the court to ask the accused if they believe in God or not.. So what if they are good or evil?Who cares...just as long as they prove that they are not guilty to the front of the Government then a right judgement is necessary.But I think KIRA you should learn not only from the bible but to history books as well and observe. You will know the importance of your name...yes you may do evil, or you may do good, (I AM NOT TELLING THIS OUT FROM THE BIBLE, this is my original teachings..ORIGINALITY IS THE BEST!! WOW!!) but by doing so you must accept the consequences of your action. Doing evil will put you name to shame. REMEMBER YOUR NAME IS VERY IMPORTANT,it is your only posession in the world that is more that GOLD and DIAMONDS... yes you can take my house, you can take my money, you can take my care, but you cannot take my name... it is the last thing I will ever have before I die. I WANT RESPECT IN THAT NAME.....Respect is not something you ask for, It is something that you have to earn. Yes, we will die too both evil and good, but do you have something good aside from your ATD program to let your children and grand children know ?


3.TAKOT (OR AT LEAST RELUCTANT) BA KAYONG GUMAWA NG MASAMA O HINDI?
Yes. I am afraid to do something that would put my name in shame. As I have mentioned. Name is the last thing I will ever had.

I notice your challenge po sa forum na ito. I would like to accept your challenge. Oh by the way, I also post the same challege sa mga believers like you.

If you really like to challenge us atheists for a fight, I may suggest that you come out of your foxhole and face us in the battleground.

The site is on http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atheistangpinoy/ and most of your responce sa mga atheist members nyo will be posted on that group as well as in my blog @ http://atheistangpinoy.blogspot.com/

So I came out to face you, the question is will you face me?

Have a nice day.
Pinoy Atheist

If I will follow your logic @ Kira na hindi lalabas ang isang bagay kung walang gagawa, then what created "god"?

If you say na walang gumawa dyan, diba pwede din nating sabihin na walang gumawa sa ibang mga bagay-bagay?

If you said that God is a necessary being kaya walang gumawa sa god, then what make God a necessary being? Diba kailangan i -explain mo na bakit sa dinami daming existing entity why God shoud be the necessary being?

Nagtatanong lang po,

Pinoy Atheist

Truth is not intimidated by "scare tactics."

have a nice day

Pinoy Atheist

The fools said in his heart "there is no god", the wise said it to the world.

Have a nice day,
Pinoy Atheist

Mr. pinoy atheist,

May I ask you if you believe, a least some of what the Bible teaches? Tnx.

Mr. pinoy atheist,

May I ask you if you believe, at least some of what the Bible teaches? Tnx.

Bible? Sorry bud, I prefer the Dharma.

The fool said in his heart, "There is no God", the wise say it to the world.

Pinoy Atheist
(Login pinoyatheist) Re: Correction
No score for this post January 27 2007, 10:13 AM

Bible? Sorry bud, I prefer the Dharma.

The fool said in his heart, "There is no God", the wise say it to the world.

---

Then it's ok for a person to disrespect ("lapastanganin" in Tagalog) his or her parents if that's the case, 'coz one of the teachings of the Bible is to respect our parents.

Perhaps you don't show any respect to your parents, do you?

Ep!Ep!Ep not so fast. According to the Decalogue. You must honor your parents BECAUSE IF YOU DO SO, YOUR LIFE WILL BE LONGER!( Exodus 20:11 Honour thy father and thy mother, that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee).

Sa madaling salita you have to honor your parents kasi may gantimpala kang matatangap. But I honor my parents without any strings attached, which is unfortunately not what the one the 10 commandments stated. So I never use the Ten Commandments as my standard. Sabi ko nga, The Dharma is better

"The kind of seed sown
will produce that kind of fruit.
Those who do good will reap good results.
Those who do evil will reap evil results.
If you carefully plant a good seed,
You will joyfully gather good fruit."
Dhammapada

ciao!
Pinoy Atheist

The fool said in his heart, "There is no God", the wise say it to the world.

So inevitably you believe in at least one of the teachings of the Bible.

But the so-called Dharma doesn't seem to teach such.

It seems you didn't read my post. Oh well...Tought Luck. BTW are you wearing your glasses?

ciao!
Pinoy Atheist

The fool said in his heart, "There is no God", the wise say it to the world.

Pinoy Atheist
(Login pinoyatheist) Re: Kira Vs. Sheriff_Atheist: May Diyos O Wala?
No score for this post January 27 2007, 11:13 AM

It seems you didn't read my post. Oh well...Tought Luck. BTW are you wearing your glasses?

ciao!
Pinoy Atheist

The fool said in his heart, "There is no God", the wise say it to the world.

What do you mean by that?

Pinoy Atheist wrote:

"Sa madaling salita you have to honor your parents kasi may gantimpala kang matatangap. But I honor my parents without any strings attached..."
_____________________________________________________________________________
may paggalang naman pala sya sa magulang kaya lang without string attach di katulad daw ng nasa bible na you have to honor your parents kasi may gantimpala kang matatanggap.
kaya sabi nya pa...

"So I never use the Ten Commandments as my standard. Sabi ko nga, The Dharma is better"
_____________________________________________________________________________
ang dharma daw ay much better than what is written in the bible. wait ano ba ang sabi ng dharma ayon sa pagkakalagay ni pinoy atheist??? wala nga bang gantimpala kung gawin mo ang paggalang sa magulang???? eto ang nilagay nya na...


"The kind of seed sown
will produce that kind of fruit.
Those who do good will reap good results.
Those who do evil will reap evil results.
If you carefully plant a good seed,
You will joyfully gather good fruit."
Dhammapada
____________________________________________________________________________
wala bang gantimpala??? basahin man natin ng paulit ulit ang mga salitang inilagay nya maliwanag parin... may ganti ang paggawa ng mabuti... kaya may gantimpala pa rin di ba???

"Those who do good will reap good results."

masama bang igalang ang magulang??? hindi. kasi si pinoy atheist man ay iginagalang nya ang kanyang magulang. may ganti ba o gantimpala kung gagawain mo ang mabuti??? meron din.

"If you carefully plant a good seed,
You will joyfully gather good fruit."




kaya mali na sabihin mong iginagalang mo ang magulang mo without string attached... kasi ang paggalang sa magulang ay mabuting gawain... at ang mabuting gawain ayon sa biblia at ayon sa sinasabi mong dharma ay may gantimpala.











Ito ay sapagkat sa aking kalooban, ako ay lubos na nalulugod sa kautusan ng Diyos.(roma 7:22)

To Mr. Santo Tomas,

Let me again re-state my quote (napakasimple naman di pa natarok Hay my papaya!)

Sabi ko sa ka brad mo and pag-galang ko po sa magulang ko eh hindi po batay sa Decalogue (10 Commandments) kasi po ayon sa Exodus 20:11 Honour thy father and thy mother, that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee - kung babasahin mo po ang talata may gantimpala ang pagrespeto sa pag-galang ng magulang, at yan po yung "that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee"

Now sabi ko since ang pag-galang ko sa magulang ko ay walang kaugnayan sa kahit anong gantimpala whatsoever, hindi po ang Decalogue and sandard ng ethics ko. Naintindihan mo na po?

Now sabi ko mas gusto ko ang Buddhist Dharma kaysa sa Bible as a literature. kasi po and Dharma is not about rewards and punishment pag dating sa morality. It's about cause and effect po.

What you sow is what you reap ika nga sabi ni Jesus. yet unfortunately, Christian ethics is very different from Eastern philosophy.

Now ang statement po na "If you carefully plant a good seed,
You will joyfully gather good fruit." this is not a sample of a reward and punishment po. Basahim mo pong mabuti, diba it's a logical consequence po na pag nagtanim ka ng magandang butil, magandang bunga po ang aanihin mo? Now tell me po Mr. Santo Tomas, does "that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee" sound as a logical consequence po or a reward? Kasi marami po akong kilalang mga anak na mabait sa magulang nila pero nauna pong namatay.

ciao!
Pinoy Atheist



The fool said in his heart, "There is no God", the wise say it to the world.

Pinoy Atheist wrote:

"Now sabi ko mas gusto ko ang Buddhist Dharma kaysa sa Bible as a literature. kasi po and Dharma is not about rewards and punishment pag dating sa morality. It's about cause and effect po."
___________________________________________________________________________
its about cause and effect daw sabi ni pinoy atheist... kaya ang patuloy nya pa...

"hat you sow is what you reap ika nga sabi ni Jesus. yet unfortunately, Christian ethics is very different from Eastern philosophy."
___________________________________________________________________________________oooopsss... why use the dialogue of my Lord Jesus Christ if you dont believe in him??? just stick with your eastern philopsophy...



"ow ang statement po na "If you carefully plant a good seed,
You will joyfully gather good fruit." this is not a sample of a reward and punishment po. Basahim mo pong mabuti, diba it's a logical consequence po na pag nagtanim ka ng magandang butil, magandang bunga po ang aanihin mo? Now tell me po Mr. Santo Tomas, does "that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee" sound as a logical consequence po or a reward?"
____________________________________________________________________________
hindi nga ba ito reward??? natural na pag nagtanim ka ng magandang butil ay aani ka ng magandang bunga ayon sa inaasahan ng tao.. tama po yon. mali ba ngayon na sabihin na kung maganda ang ang gawa mo na iyon nga ay ang paggalang sa magulang ay maganda rin ang iyong inaasahan???

pumunta tayo sa pagtatanim...

meron akong magandang butil...

itinanim ko sa magandang lupa...

inalagaan ko...

ang pag-asa mo ba ay tutubo na lang ito ng maganda???

kung ito ang inaasahan mo...

sana'y wala ng nasisirang mga pananim o mga halaman...

yun lang ang alam mong rule di ba??? ang cause and effect...

na kapag mabuti ang butil ay maganda ang bunga???

sabi mo pa....



" Kasi marami po akong kilalang mga anak na mabait sa magulang nila pero nauna pong namatay."
_____________________________________________________________________________
sino ka para malaman kung sino ang mabait at kung sino ang hindi??? kaya mo bang bashain ang utak ng tao??? ang kanyang nararamdaman??? ang kanyang mga ninanais???



ako marami rin akong kilalang nagtatanim na gumagamit ng mabuting butil...

at marami sa kanila ang dumanas ng pag-ani ng di magandang bunga...



nais mo bang tanungin kung bakit may ganoong pangyayari??? sana alam mo na...

























Ito ay sapagkat sa aking kalooban, ako ay lubos na nalulugod sa kautusan ng Diyos.(roma 7:22)

Hello JOman,

I think my friend Pnoy Atheist is trying to compare Bible and Dharma teachings...I think it is just okay to use some context in the bible and compare it to Dharma so to see which is more better...i hope you could understand that no porque él está utilizando la biblia cotiza medios que él cree en ella.....//oops sorry (can't help it)// not just because he used some of the bible teachings means that he believes in it, right? He's just trying to explain to ya that the qoutes in the bible is no match to dharma teachings....he is also not trying to imply that he follows the dharma teachings....

Thank you...
Keep it up!! This is all good for the brain...let's exercise our brain and be healthy!!

Belated Happy new year to all....

Oh sya nga pala, here's my comments regarding sa mga post na ginawa ng mga INC in relation sa kanilang conversation sa dalawang magigiting na mga atheista sa forum na ito.

Read and weep guys!

According to a certain KIRA YAMATO, FREEDOM GUNDAM PILOT
KUNG WALANG DIYOS, EH DI OK LANG KAHIT GUMAWA TAYO NG MASAMA. HALIMBAWA, PWEDE NA TAYONG PUMATAY, MAGNAKAW, MANG-RAPE, GUMAMIT NG IPINAGBABAWAL NG GAMOT, ETC. TUTAL WALA NAMAN PALANG DIYOS NA PUPUNA AT MAGPAPARUSA SA ATIN DAHIL SA ATING MASAMANG GAWAIN.

I really don’t know why most Christian says that if there is no God we can do all the evil things we want to do. Well, base on the Bible, evil came from God isn’t it (Isa. 45:7)? So without God then evil doesn’t even exist.

But seriously folks. What does belief in a God has to do with good deeds? The Golden Rule is sufficient to establish a good rapport with society even if a certain god doesn’t exist. Now this is simple…Don’t do unto others what you don’t want to be done unto you. Do you want to be rape or do you want to be a victim of a crime? Then if not, do you think others want that to happen to them? Then don’t do it. PERIOD! You don’t need a god-belief to figure it out.

Beside rape, murder, plunder, stealing, illegal drug uses are all offenses listed in our Penal Code of the Philippines and the Criminal Code of the Philippines. So who said that no one will punish us if we get caught?

Kung tutuusin Kira’s claim is a logical fallacy knows as a “Generic Fallacy”. All that is happening here is that Kira is making claim about why a person is an atheist and then attacking that motivation. It really doesn’t say anything about atheism itself. Kira is not giving any reason why atheism is not a good position. Pareho po yan ng mga taong mahilig mag quote ng Psalms 14:1.

Speaking of Psalms 14:1 let us now look at taganood’s post.
Psa 14:1 (A psalm by David for the music leader.) Only a fool would say, "There is no God!" People like that are worthless; they are heartless and cruel and never do right.

Hmmm…it seems taganood re-wrote the whole passages. According to the King James version,
To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.
The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Wala po doon yung salitang worthless, heartless and cruel (hindi kaya sa Lamsa translation ito? But Lamsa’s translation is just the Peshsita translation ng NT according to George Lamsa? Hmmmmm…Isep-Isep!). To Mr. taganood, di mo ba nakikita ang pagiging illogical mo? If a fool is heartless, then how can he tell to his heart there is no God, since he doesn’t have a heart in the first place? Beside the passage is very clear in this, “The Fool said in his heart there is no God”. So where the “fool” did said it? Well, according to the scripture is in his heart. But does an atheist say it in heart there is no god? Nope. The atheist says it to the world.

Now let’s go back to this Bible passage. This is an example of an ad hominem response. Kung titignan mong mabuti, ang verse na ito ay umaatake sa pag-katao ng nagsasalitang “There is no God” yet hindi ito gumagawa ng kahit anong hakbang para pasinungalingan ang bintang na ito. Hindi kaya medyo kulang pa sa wisdom si haring David at ang Psalmter?

Anyway, let see if tama ang bintang ni Haring David, ng Psalmster at ni Mr. Taganood.
Is a non-believer heartless or is God himself is the heartless one? According to the dictionary, heartless means lacking in feeling or pity or warmth. Kung babasahin mo ang Bible, maraming inutos na pag-patay ang diyos ng mga Judeo-Christian kung ikukumpara sa mga ibang diyos ng ibang kultura. Aba! Kahit bata at mga alagang hayop ay pinapapatay nya. Cruel? According to the dictionary cruel menas, “able or disposed to inflict pain or suffering”. So let see how cruel is the God of the Bible.
• "there came out a fire from the Lord, and consumed the 250 men that offered incense" (Num. 16:35). "the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died" (Num. 21:6). "See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound and I heal...." (Deut. 32:39). "The Lord smote the men of Beth-shemesh, because they had looked into the ark of the Lord, even he smote of the people 50,070 men: and the people lamented, because the Lord had smitten many of the people with a great slaughter" (1 Sam. 6:19). "The Lord kills, and makes alive: he brings down to the grave, and brings up" (1 Sam. 2:6). "the hand of the Lord was heavy upon them of Ashdod, and he destroyed them, and smote them...." (1 Sam. 5:6). "it came to pass about 10 days after, that the Lord smote Nabal, that he died" (1 Sam. 25:38). "Who smote great nations and slew mighty kings...." (Psalms 135:10). "For by fire and by his sword will the Lord plead with all flesh: and the slain of the Lord shall be many" (Isaiah 66:16). "I will dash them one against another, even the father and the sons together, saith the Lord: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them" (Jer. 13:14). "I have sent among you the pestilence after the manner of Egypt: your young men have I slain with the sword...." (Amos 4:10). "For our God is a consuming fire" (Heb. 12:29), "Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys" (1 Sam. 15:3), "A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to the 10th generation shall he not enter...." (Deut. 23:2). , "The Lord said to Joshua,...You are to hamstring their horses and burn their chariots." (Joshua 11:6), Ezek. 9:6 says, "Slay utterly old and young, both maids and little children, and women...." and 1 Sam. 15:3 says, "...slay both man and woman, infant and suckling...."
So, again sino ang cruel?

Now again the accusation is that an atheist will never do right.
So if you never did something right, you feel sorry to what you have done diba, kasi nga mali…not right diba. So when you did something wrong which is not right, you repent diba? Then why did God repent?
• "...that I the Lord God may repent of the evil, which I purpose to do unto them and "...for I repent of the evil that I have done to you" (Jer. 42:10).
• It repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart" (Gen. 6:6).
• "...the Lord repented of the evil which he though to do unto his people" (Ex. 32:14).
Beside, just think about this for a while. Here God wanted to get rid of evil in the world. So he devised a plan that well…according to him, is sufficient to get rid of evil in this world. So he flooded the Earth to kill all living flesh that live in or on the land and spared a perfectly righteous man named Noah and his family. After a few thousand years evil again returned so it is necessary to sacrifices his only begotten son as payment to all sins. And yet after his son’s second (?) coming he will now end the evil of this world. What? So what happened on the first attempt? Nagkamali ba sya?
Worthless? If I worship an malevolent fiend, sino kaya sa aming dalawa ang worthless? Beside if god is suppose to be perfect, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, benevolent being then evil doesn’t exist, yet evil still exist! So anong worth ng pagiging god nya in the first place?
Sabi nga ni Michael Donald Goulder in a public dialogue with the English theologian John Hick, “The God of the past no longer had any real work to do. The tasks assigned to this God by traditional wisdom have been slowly but surely stripped from the divine side. This God no longer fights wars and defeats enemies. This God no longer chooses a special people and works through them. This God no longer sends the storms, heals the sick, spares the dying, or even judge the sinners. This God no longer rewards goodness and punish evil. Yet this virtually unemployed deity is still the primary object and substance of the Christian Church’s faith.”
Hmmmm…so again who is worthless? The only worth I see here is that a lot of con-artist earns millions of pesos, thanks for the tax free ride and the gullible Filipinos.
Robert Ingersoll is right when he summarized what this God you want me to believe is really all about…"A false friend, an unjust judge, a braggart, a hypocrite, a tyrant, sincere in hatred, jealous, vain and revengeful, false in promise, honest in curse, suspicious, ignorant, infamous and hideous--such is the God of the Pentateuch."

Now here’s something from --ATHRUN ZALA, JUSTICE GUNDAM PILOT
TOTOO PO YUN, AND FOR US HINDI PO NALIKHA ANG HANGIN SA PAMAMAGITAN NG TSAMBA LAMANG. SOMEONE ELSE MUST HAVE CREATED IT, GIVEN ITS COMPLEXITIES WITH REGARDS TO ITS OVERALL COMPOSITION - MAY OXYGEN, CARBON DIOXIDE, NITROGEN, ETC.

KUNG BAGA SA ISANG SASAKYAN, COMPUTER, CELLPHONES ATBP., IMPOSIBLE RIN PO NA ANG MGA ITO'Y NALIKHA SA PAMAMAGITAN NG TSAMBA LANG.

If we look closely on this argument, it seems he’s saying that all complex objects has a “creator” – Hmmmm now he gives us some example of elements and compounds that compose air.
Maybe he have forgotten or haven’t encountered the scientific law that says “energy and matter was not created nor cannot be destroyed” huh?

Given this kind of logic, if a believer say all complex existing objects needs a creator we can formulate the following preposition:

A – All complex existing objects (when we say object we also include all complex being) have a “creator”.
B - God is a complex existing object
Therefore God has a creator.

If you say that God has no creator, they why God? We can also say that energy has no creator, nor matter. We can also say that the Universe has no beginning nor end diba? Sky’s the limit my friends.

If you say that God is a necessary being as proposed by Thomas Aquinas (sorry hindi sya member ng INC) then we just entered a merry-go-round of circular reasoning. Since it already assume the conclusion in one of its premises. Mr. Aquinas never really gave us a good reason why God is supposed to be a “necessary being”? Baka kayo may mas magandang dahilan?

Before you say that God created these entire complex existing beings, you have to produce God first or in layman’s term. Kung may sapatos, may sapatero, pero kung nandito and sansinukod, nasaan ang dyos mo?

Now from Jomar,
malinaw naman di ba??? naniniwala kang may creator pero hindi yun Dios para sayo. kaya tama pa rin na tawagin kang isang atheist o isang tao na di naniniwala sa Dios sapagkat iyon ang tunay nyan kahulugan. may mali ba sa analysis ko? o isa ka rin sa mga inutil na sinasabi ng isip mo?

An atheist is a person that is not a theist. That is the simplest definition of an atheist. Now suppose an atheist believe in a creator, does that mean he believe in a god? Hold your horses there; a god doesn’t necessary mean a creator nor does it mean the source of creation.

Suppose something did create everything, yet this something is not worthy of worship, Does that mean that the creator is a god? Now papaano if the beginning or the cause is really very insignificant compare to the effect (like the snowball effect), will this insignificant cause worthy of my unfettered devotion?

Suppose everything was created by The Invisible Pink Unicorn, The Giant Spaghetti Monster or Russel’s Teapot. Are they gods?

For example, the pantheist thinks that Nature and God is the same. So kung sila ang tatanungin, that makes Nature the Creator. But will you guys accept that a creator is a formless, non-sentient, entity? Does that by definition is a creator-god?

So please before you tread waters with an atheist, be careful on how you will response on his inquiries.

Nagpapaalala lang po.

Ciao!
Pinoy Atheist




The fool said in his heart, "There is no God", the wise say it to the world.

It seems Jomam here can't understand the difference between reward and punishment vs. Cause and Effect. If you can't even understand the difference between the two which is quite very simple, then how can I trust his understanding on Bible Hermeneutics?

Cause and Effect is also known as the The Law of Consequences. When we talk about consequences, wala po yan nakaipin na eternal damnation. Sa madaling salita, it doesn't use any intimidations po.
Rewards and Punishment in the other hand are repeated pleasant consequence and unpleasant consequence that is use to affect someone's behavior po. The difference between the 2 is that C&E doesn't measure up base on someone's standards po. Sa madaling salita, it is independent to any human opinion, ideas or belief while R&P is base on a judgement of a certain standards po.

Example: When we say homosexual is a sin, it is because the Bible (a standard) have stated that homosexual is a sin and deserves to be punish. Now if you don't become a homosexual, you go to heaven (as a reward). Now in C&E, Let say a good person was expose to radiation because of his job in a nuclear power plant. Nagkaroon sya ng cancer. The cancer (effect) doesn't care if the person is morally good or not. He have cancer because of the radiation (cause). Naintindihan mo na ba?

If you will notice in the Bible,it is largely characterized by God warning the Israelites to repent of their sins and idolatries with the threat of punishment as a consequence, and sometimes promises of rewards as an incentive. Even in the New Testament. According to Christian belief when the Second Coming have taken place, it will be about rewards that will be given or lost depending on how one has used his or her life for the Lord.
That is not cause or effect. Remember that cause and effect doesn't care if you are morally good or not. There are no rewards. If an evil man will die in a fire, so does a good man.

Now the difference between a religion that teaches the Law of Consequences vs. those whose into reward and punishments are the following:
1. Those into rewards and punishments believe in a personal god
2. Those into rewards and punishmemts believe in hell and eternal damnation
3. Those into rewards and punishments believe in heraven and eternal life

In Jesus ehhhhh...Paul's teaching pala, what you sow is what you reap (Galatians 6:7 KJV) This is not about cause and effect. Kasi po ang sinasabi ni Pablo po dito eh yung ma-rereap mo is whether reward or punishment po.It's about your action kung magiging pleasant o unpleasant consequences (See: Luke 6:37-38). In an untrained eye para pong cause and effect, but sabi ko nga kanina, in cause and effect, there is no rewards and punishment. Even if a rightheous man did something na nasasaktan sya, eh masasaktan sya.

I hope nagkaintindihan tayo,
Pinoy Atheist



The fool said in his heart, "There is no God", the wise say it to the world.

great points given by Pinoy Atheist.. hope we dont get responses like "God moves in mysterious ways kaya hindi natin naiintindihan kung bakit nia ginagawa ang mga bagay bagay etc etc..".. those responses i get usually from people that are starting to lose a debate. these are solid facts given by Pinoy Atheist. hope we get some cool rebuttals from INC.

eto isa pang cruel Pinoy Atheist! with visuals p hehehe...


http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/191437



(click niyo sa watch this movie)



and to those people saying n im cruel, ssabihin ko sa inyo, hindi ko magagawa ang ginawa ng taong ito. if im cruel, ano p tong nsa movie? demonyo?

Well we are not interested in your movie as well hehehehe

We are not learning from you either. All you are preaching was to use logic and intuition. Might as well watch CSI hehehe fiction and science

"For though although we walk in the flesh we do not war in the flesh for the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly but the power of God to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every proud obstacle to the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ." - The Apostle Paul

well now, mukhang walang gustong sumagot dun sa reply ni pinoy atheist ah!

and i didnt want you guys to be interested anyway. i was asking you guys what do you think about the man in the movie? kung ako cruel eh ano p ung nsa movie? watch it and you'll see in the end that the movie was created based from the bible itself. why not just answer my question Eagle Eye? you guys post videos about eli db? now that i post what came from the bible, you say that you'd rather watch fiction and science. dont be such a spoil sport. pano ka mkakapili ng paniniwalaan mo kng walang logic at intuition?. how the hell are you going to choose without those? sabi nga nila suriin db?

once again i ask, ano ang msasabi niyo tungkol sa taong yan na pumatay ng maraming tao dahil inasar siya? you guys tell me that we're cruel and heartless, but yet, you guys don't seem to think this guy is evil.

Don't be stubborn in pushing your movie LOL!

Bring it to MRTCB maybe they have the time to review and give comments HAHAHAHA

It would be more interesting to watch a funny guy like Eli Soriano talking about his god with butt...PWET like your handle Superpwet. And those mindless members of Eli Soriano are clapping and cheering out of ignorance.

"For though although we walk in the flesh we do not war in the flesh for the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly but the power of God to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every proud obstacle to the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ." - The Apostle Paul

Let’s see if I get this correctly.

Mr. Anonymous asks if atheists (as represented by Pinoy Atheist) believe at least some of what the Bible teaches.

Pinoy Atheists replies that he prefers the Dharma.

Then Mr. Anonymous said:

“Then it's ok for a person to disrespect ("lapastanganin" in Tagalog) his or her parents if that's the case, 'coz one of the teachings of the Bible is to respect our parents.”

How does preferring the Dharma have anything to do with respect for one’s parents?

It’s like this:

Premise: Person X prefers the Dharma (or let’s even say that person X does not believe the Bible)

Conclusion: Person X does not respect his parents.

The conclusion does not follow from the premise! Mr. Anonymous needs further support to establish that believing in the Bible means respecting one’s parents.

Matthew 10:35-36 “For I have come to turn 'a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law - a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.”

Luke 14:26-27 “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple. And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.”

Here’s a question for believers here: do you believe and live by the words of the Bible?

Now I can almost hear a collective “Yeah!”

That’s fine. Now, if that is the case, then does that mean slavery is okay? I think most of you guys (Christians) would oppose to slavery, and that is fine. So, I submit that even the most hardline Judeo-Christian fundamentalist does not live by the words of the Bible uncritically. The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted by the General Assembly as far back as 1948) has enshrined the freedom of the individual from such form of servitude: "Article 4. No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms." (http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html). If Christians indeed live by the literal words of the Bible, then slavery should not be criminal in nature in Christian cultures: Americans for instance ought to still be allowed to own African-Americans as their slaves, or to own Filipino slaves as well. We should not read mindlessly and apply everything that it asks of the reader, rationalizing it as "but the Bible says so" or even “because God says so”.

Let us look at Lev. 25:44-46:

"As for your male and female slaves who may belong to you—-you may buy male and female slaves from the nations all around you. Also you may buy slaves from the children of the foreigners who reside with you, and from their families that are with you, whom they have fathered in your land, they may become your property. You may give them as inheritance to your children after you to possess as property. You may enslave them perpetually. However, as for your brothers the Israelites, no man may rule over his brother harshly."

Yahweh personally instructed Moses about the ins and outs of slavery. And this supposedly all-loving deity said we can pass them on to our children, treat them as property, and enslave them perpetually. Does this sound like an all-good God to you?

As you can see we have a little bit of a problem here. Slavery does not at all fit in into Christianity, yet the Bible shows that it condones it. There are severals ways to look at this. Here are some that come to mind at the moment:

1. The god who said the above things is not the real god
2. The god above is a very imperfect god, is not omniscient, and/or has an evolving consciousness/morality
3. The law on slavery has an expiration date (but is not stated).
4. The Bible (as a whole or sections thereof) is not the word of God but the word of men.

If we take any of the above as true then there would be no dilemma, although #3 would probably raise further questions.

On the other hand I don't see how we can resolve the slavery injunction problem if our premises include the following:

1. God is all-good and all-knowing
2. Ethics of God does not change or evolve; it is absolute
3. The entire bible is the word of God
4. We must obey God
5. Slavery is wrong

If both the old and new testaments permit slavery, then aren't the 18th/19th century Americans of the south right when they said that slavery is biblical and that they are warranted in owning slaves? If Christians are to obey God, then why has GWBush and all the preceding Christian presidents not reinstated slavery? Why did they outlaw it in the first place? And if on the other hand the United Nations is correct in condemning slavery--because it is an affront to human dignity and freedom--why did Yahweh permit it in the first place? Isn’t He supposed to be transcendent? All-knowing? All-good? Was an African during 1000 BC worth less than an African-American in 1950 AD? If God is omniscient, all-loving, all-good, etc., what is the reason for not condemning slavery from the very start? Is God a temporal being such that in the three millennia between Moses and the 20th century God realized that slavery is morally wrong?

Is every verse in the Bible the word of God? If not then thank goodness! But if it is, as some Christians believe, then does that mean that even the text in Leviticus--had God's blessing or was inspired by God himself or is actually God's word? If so then why did he have this human write this, knowing full well that the books of the Bible would one day be collected and read by billions of Christians? Why complicate ethics by giving slavery a thumbs up both in the old and new testament, a practice which today is condemned even by Christians? Why?

Now perhaps some will say that the Laws in the OT have been trumped by the new Laws in the NT. But neither Jesus nor St. Paul, nor any other Biblical figure is recorded as saying anything in opposition to the institution of slavery. Slavery was very much a part of life in Palestine and in the rest of the Roman Empire during New Testament times. Quoting Rabbi M.J. Raphall, circa 1861, "Receiving slavery as one of the conditions of society, the New Testament nowhere interferes with or contradicts the slave code of Moses; it even preserves a letter [to Philemon] written by one of the most eminent Christian teachers [St. Paul] to a slave owner on sending back to him his runaway slave." 1

People in debt (and their children) were still being sold into slavery in New Testament times:

Matthew 18:25: "But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made."

Priests still owned slaves:

Mark 14:66: "And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest:"

Jesus is recorded as mentioning slaves in one of his parables. It is important to realize that the term "servant" in the King James Version of the Bible refers to slaves, not employees like a butler, cook, or maid. Here, a slave which did not follow his owner's will would be beaten with many lashes of a whip. A slave who was unaware of his owner's will, but who did not behave properly, would also be beaten, but with fewer stripes.

This would have been a marvelous opportunity for Jesus to condemn the institution of slavery and its abuse of slaves. But he is not recorded of having taken it:

Luke 12:45-48: "The lord [owner] of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more."

One of the favorite passages of slave-owning Christians was St. Paul's infamous instruction that slaves to obey their owners in the same way that they obey Christ:

Ephesians 6:5-9: "Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men: Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him."

Other passages instructing slaves and slave owners in proper behavior are:

Colossians 4:1: "Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven."

1 Timothy 6:1-3 "Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honor, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort. If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;"

In his defense, St. Paul incorrectly expected that Jesus would return in the very near future. This might have demotivated him from speaking out against slavery or other social evils in the Roman Empire. Also he regarded slaves as persons of worth whom at least God considers of importance. St. Paul mentioned that both slaves and free persons are sons of God, and thus all part of the body of Christ and spiritually equal.

1 Corinthians 12:13: "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit."

Galatians 3:28: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

Colossians 3:11: "Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all."

St. Paul apparently saw no evil in the concept of one person owning another as a piece of property. In his Letter to Philemon, he had every opportunity to discuss the immorality of slave-owning, but declined to do so.

Deuteronomy 23:15-16, cited above, requires a Jew to protect a runaway slave, and to not return him/her to their owner. However, St. Paul violated the law. While in prison, he met a runaway slave, Onesimus, the slave of a Christian. He was presumably owned by Pheliemon. Rather than give the slave sanctuary, he returned him to his owner. Paul seems to hint that he would like Pheliemon to give Onesimus his freedom, but does not actually request it. See the Letter to Philemon in the Christian Scriptures.

References

1. Rabbi M.J. Raphall, "The Bible View of Slavery," delivered in New York City, 1861. Available at: http://www.access.digex.net/~bdboyle/bible.slavery.txt

( http://www.religioustolerance.org/sla_bibl2.htm )


For an abridged history of how slavery was institutionalized by Christianity and how it was ultimately considered immoral and criminal please read the following pages in succession:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_slav1.htm
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_slav3.htm
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_slav2.htm

Okay, maybe you don’t find anything wrong with slavery. Maybe for you guys, there is such a thing as “good” slavery. How about murder?

Here are some additional examples of people whom God killed:

1. A man who refused to impregnate his brother's widow (Ge 38:7-10).

2. Two men who offered God incense that he had not authorized (Le 10:1-2).

3. A group of about 300 people who opposed Moses politically (Nu 16:1-35).

4. Another group of 14,700 who sympathized with the first group (Nu 16:49).

5. More people who complained about the food and other matters (Nu 21:4-6).

6. 24,000 more because of some who worshiped Baal (Nu 25:3,9).

7. The Amorites who besieged Gibeon (Jos 10:10-11).

8. Seventy men who looked into a box (1Sa 6:19).

9. Another man who, with good intention, touched the box (2Sa 6:6-7).

10. A man who refused to use his weapon against another man (1Ki 20:35-36).

11. Forty-two children who called Elisha "baldy" (2Ki 2:23-24).

12. 185,000 Assyrian soldiers (2Ki 19:35).

God also killed all of Pharaoh's horsemen in the Red Sea (Ex 14:26-28). He could instead have simply made their horses lame, which would have been far more effective than removing the wheels from the chariots so that the horses had to drag the chariots slowly along the ground (Ex 14:25). That would have also spared the horsemen.

In addition to killing people directly, God also ordered several people killed (despite his commandment not to kill). Here are some examples of people who died by God's order (and in some cases with God's help):

1. Three thousand of the Levites' brothers, friends, and neighbors, who had become unruly (Exodus 32:27-28).

2. All the men, women, and children in all seven of the tribes who were the Israelites' neighbors (Dt 2:34, 3:6, 7:1-2,16, 20:16-17). [Some Biblical verses imply that the Israelites numbered 2-3 million, which would make the total population of their neighbors more than 14 million. What God was here ordering, then, if we could go by those verses, was a kind of Holocaust.]

3. All the men, women, and children of the cities of Jericho, Ai, and dozens more cities and towns (Jos 6:21, 8:24-26, 10:26-42, 11:10-23, 21:44).

4. All the Amalekites, including children, and even animals (1Sa 15:3,18), [where Saul was severely punished for sparing some of them].

5. All the members of the house of Ahab and ministers of Baal within Israel, the latter accomplished through deception (2Ki 10:11-25), though approved by God (10:30).

6. All the citizens of Jerusalem, including children, who did not grieve and lament over sins committed in it (Eze 9:4-6).

It seems quite unethical for God to order the execution of so many people, whatever their offense might have been, especially in the case of the children, who were presumably innocent.

Closely related to the above is the extravagant use of capital punishment among God's chosen people. God ordered people put to death for such minor offenses as the following:

1. Consulting a witch (Le 20:6; Dt 18:11).

2. Blasphemy or merely having a different religion (Ex 22:20; Le 24:10-23; Dt 13:1-15, 17:2-5, 18:20; Jos 23:7,16; 2Ki 18:40).

3. Gathering sticks or kindling a fire on the Sabbath (Ex 31:14-15, 35:2-3; Nu 15:32-36).

4. Eating the wrong food (Ex 12:15,19; Le 3:16-17, 7:22,25-27, 17:10-16).

5. Being a disrespectful or disobedient child (Le 20:9; Dt 21:18-21).

It seems unethical to have laws that [are so] harsh. The laws of the ancient Israelites are hardly the model of morality that advocates of Dominion Theology (or Reconstructionism) make them out to be. It would have been impressive if the Bible had gone against the prevailing cultural norms and had forbidden slavery and the oppression of women. But it did not do that. The Bible condones slavery. [21] It also contains many rules that are discriminatory against women. [22] It is hard to find anything in the Bible that stands out as ethically noble from our point of view today.

In addition, according to the Bible, God also deceived people and caused evil. Some examples of that are the following:

1. He created communication problems between people (Gen, 11:7-9).

2. He sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and certain citizens for the purpose of vengeance (Judges 9:23-24).

3. He sent another evil spirit to torment Saul (1Sa 16:14).

4. He put a lying spirit into the mouths of all his prophets (1Ki 22:22-23).

5. He admitted creating disaster ("evil" in the KJV) (Isa 45:7). [See also Amos 3:6.]

6. He permitted people to have "statutes that were not good and laws they could not live by" (Eze 20:25).

7. He sent certain people a powerful delusion so that they would believe a lie (2Th 2:11).

God also apparently ordered stealing by having the Israelites plunder the Egyptians (Ex 3:22). He ordered the plundering of cities far away from Israel and the enslavement of their people (Dt 20:10-14). [The seven neighboring tribes were to be dealt with still more harshly, as indicated above.] He also ordered 32,000 female virgins to be taken as war plunder (half to go to the soldiers and half to the people) and 32 of them to be for himself (Nu 31:18-40). All of this is highly unethical, to say the least.


Notes:

[21] Ge 9:25; Ex 21:2-6,20-21; Lv 25:44-46; Dt 15:12,17, 28:68; Jer 27:8,12; Joel 3:8; Eph 6:5-7; Col 3:22; 1Ti 6:1; Tit 2:9; 1Pe 2:18-21.

[22] 1Co 11:5-6, 14:34-35; Eph 5:22-23; 1Ti 2:9-14; Tit 2:5; 1Pe 3:1.

Now, regarding the issue of the Bible being better than the Dharma, here’s a question:

Given religious text T1 and T2 which claim, respectively, that beliefs B1 and B2 is the real truth, can you guys provide us a criteria by which we can evaluate T1 and T2? What are the questions we need to ask, what are the things we need to do in order to find out which of the two texts is objectively true, which belief is the true one? Let's not bother with the ethical dimension of religions--injunctions on what is right and wrong. Let's just concentrate on the theological claims/beliefs of T1 and T2. Is there some objective way of finding out, once and for all, which theology, which texts, which beliefs is/are the “true” ones?

Cheers,
M_Y

Nice point M_Y,

So @ MR. Nobody (AKA Anonymous), kindly read and answer the issues presented by M_Y. Oh please get your Bible in your house and...wait a second there. Are those gossips true that a common member of the INC doesn't own a copy of the Bible in their house? Well I hope that it's not true

Anyway, please be free to answer the issues so we can have a Bible study here.

ciao!
Pinoy Atheist

The fool said in his heart, "There is no God", the wise say it to the world.

How can you understand CSI if you don't use logic and intuition? Diba yan ang laging sinasabi ni Dr. Gim Grissom ng Las vegas Crime Lab? I never saw an episode ng CSI: Where the whole forensic team solved a crime by praying to God.

Oh by the way ang favorite characters ko sa CSI is Dr. Gim Grissom and Greg Sanders. Sa CSI:Miami naman si Det. Horacio Cane always use intuition. Tawag nga nya dyan eh "gut feeling".

Well I leave you with a famous Gim Grissom quote.
"The evidence do not lie."

Ciao! (Music: Who are you by The Who...then fade.)

Pinoy Atheist

The fool said in his heart, "There is no God", the wise say it to the world.

You can leave even without saying goodbye buddy

Let's see the meaning of intuition then

Cambridge Online Dictionary
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=41759&dict=CALD

intuition: (knowledge obtained from) an ability to understand or know something immediately without needing to think about it, learn it or discover it by using reason:

In simple words it just a judgement or what you say as "gut feeling"

The ancients believed that there were only a very few stars in the heaven. In 150 B.C. Hipparchus said that there were less than three thousand...After the middle ages and the invention of the telescope, men discovered that the stars are innumerable.

Did man need to wait for a Galileo to invent the telescope for him to know that the stars are countless? The Bible states the following:

"And the stars cannot be counted nor the sand upon the seashores meaured..." (Jer. 33:22. Living Bible)



hmmm..

Here's another "gut feeling"

The ancient Greeks and Romans were most advanced peoples of their time, yet they believed that the earth was held in place by poles or by the neck of Atlas. Others believed that Atlas had the earth on his shoulders. The Greeks and the Romans had the most advanced civilization during their time. Yet, they believed in something which today would be considered absurd, if not funny. But had the ancient Greeks and Romans consulted the Book of Books, they would not have embraced such peculiar concept of the earth. The Old Testament book of Job, which the Bible scholars estimate to have been written between 600 and 400 B.C. (New Bible Dictionary, p. 578), has spoken if this ultimate truth:

"He strecthed out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing." (Job 26:7, KJV)

God had alrady stated beforehand what man discovered hundreds of years later: that nothing supports the earth contrary to man's earlier beliefs.



hahaha intuition.,in Tagalog sayings "marami ang namamatay sa maling akala"

"For though although we walk in the flesh we do not war in the flesh for the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly but the power of God to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every proud obstacle to the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ." - The Apostle Paul

hahahahahaha...

seriously, you make me laugh...

here let me help you further:

INTUITION:

1. direct perception of truth, fact, etc., independent of any reasoning process; immediate apprehension.
2. a fact, truth, etc., perceived in this way.
3. a keen and quick insight.
4. the quality or ability of having such direct perception or quick insight.
5. Philosophy. a. an immediate cognition of an object not inferred or determined by a previous cognition of the same object.
b. any object or truth so discerned.
c. pure, untaught, noninferential knowledge.

LOGIC:

1. the science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.
2. a particular method of reasoning or argumentation: We were unable to follow his logic.
3. the system or principles of reasoning applicable to any branch of knowledge or study.
4. reason or sound judgment, as in utterances or actions: There wasn't much logic in her move.
5. convincing forcefulness; inexorable truth or persuasiveness: the irresistible logic of the facts.


in your post you said im using "LOGIC AND INTUITION"(take note, you didn't put LOGIC "OR" INTUITION, meaning combined cla db?), and then, when you replied, you posted the meaning of INTUITION only. a not so clever move my friend. it's obvious how desperate you are in proving that we're wrong. logic and intuition is different from intuition only. that's why pinoy replied that people in CSI need logic and intuition because of course it helps in their investigation. duh... you dont seem to remember what you posted. did you take ur medication today? hahahahahahahahahaha!!! it's amazing how i tooled your post without even reading the entire verses from the bible that you gathered. im sorry if you wasted your time researching those quotes and even typing them, for it didn't help you at all.

im not pushing the movie LOL. I'M JUST SHOWING HOW YOU PEOPLE ARE DUCKING QUESTIONS THAT WE'RE GIVING OUT. when you guys give opinions and questions, we answer. but when you guys are faced with a question you can't answer, you start joking around. yawn . no more ammo my friends?? .. now i see who's leaving..

DISMISSED!!! NOW GO TO YOUR ROOM!!!

SuperPwet
(Login SuperPwet)
Re: My cents worth
No score for this post January 30 2007, 2:58 PM

hahahahahaha...

seriously, you make me laugh...

here let me help you further:

INTUITION:

1. direct perception of truth, fact, etc., independent of any reasoning process; immediate apprehension.
2. a fact, truth, etc., perceived in this way.
3. a keen and quick insight.
4. the quality or ability of having such direct perception or quick insight.
5. Philosophy. a. an immediate cognition of an object not inferred or determined by a previous cognition of the same object.
b. any object or truth so discerned.
c. pure, untaught, noninferential knowledge.

Why don't you just help your self more rather than laughing and perceiving that you're in the right senses

READ AND BE INFORMED:

Not all perception is correct, everyone would agree on that!!! So when I say that you are using your loagic and intuition that means it maybe right but mostly it was wrong.

During an apparitional experience, for example, the correspondence between how the subject is perceiving the world and how the world really is at that moment is distinctly imperfect. At the same time the experience may present itself to the subject as indistinguishable from normal perception.

Experiences of this kind appear to meet all but one of the normal criteria of hallucination. For example, Slade and Bentall proposed the following working definition of an hallucination: ‘Any percept-like experience which (a) occurs in the absence of an appropriate stimulus, (b) has the full force or impact of the corresponding actual (real) perception, and (c) is not amenable to direct and voluntary control by the experiencer.’ (Slade and Bentall, 1988, p.23)

The experience quoted above certainly meets the second and third of these three criteria. One might add that the ‘presence’ in such a case is experienced as located in a definite position in external physical space. In this respect it may be said to more hallucinatory than, for example, some hypnagogic imagery, which may be experienced as external to the subject but located in a mental ‘space’ of its own (Leaning, 1925; Mavromatis, 1987, pp. 29-30).

That which is not universally valid cannot be called right perception.


LOGIC:

1. the science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.
2. a particular method of reasoning or argumentation: We were unable to follow his logic.
3. the system or principles of reasoning applicable to any branch of knowledge or study.
4. reason or sound judgment, as in utterances or actions: There wasn't much logic in her move.
5. convincing forcefulness; inexorable truth or persuasiveness: the irresistible logic of the facts.


in your post you said im using "LOGIC AND INTUITION"(take note, you didn't put LOGIC "OR" INTUITION, meaning combined cla db?), and then, when you replied, you posted the meaning of INTUITION only. a not so clever move my friend. it's obvious how desperate you are in proving that we're wrong. logic and intuition is different from intuition only. that's why pinoy replied that people in CSI need logic and intuition because of course it helps in their investigation. duh... you dont seem to remember what you posted. did you take ur medication today? hahahahahahahahahaha!!! it's amazing how i tooled your post without even reading the entire verses from the bible that you gathered. im sorry if you wasted your time researching those quotes and even typing them, for it didn't help you at all.

Again be GAY and happy?

You are putting words into somebody's mouth, if I replied only about intuition it does not mean I'm forgoing the logic thing that you wrote. You can't even fight with descency, maybe it's you who was in twighlight zone, hallucinating and percieving things blindly



im not pushing the movie LOL. I'M JUST SHOWING HOW YOU PEOPLE ARE DUCKING QUESTIONS THAT WE'RE GIVING OUT. when you guys give opinions and questions, we answer. but when you guys are faced with a question you can't answer, you start joking around. yawn . no more ammo my friends?? .. now i see who's leaving..

DISMISSED!!! NOW GO TO YOUR ROOM!!!

Hmmm...let see your answer? Please don't laugh at this guy

---

SuperPwet
(Login SuperPwet)
Re: Pinoy atheist: a supporter of Eli Soriano and his Ang Dating Daan?
January 30 2007, 4:03 PM


"right now, i dont think science has the "ULTIMATE TRUTH" yet, i dont think i need any reference to this, because really, no one has proven scientifically where we all came from, but science is on the way of finding out. "

---

Everyone would agree that he answers like a joker

I said don't laugh at this guy....he was just giving out his DETACHED PERCEPTION




LISTEN TO WHAT THE BIBLE EXPLAINED:


Job 12 (New International Version)

7 "But ask the animals, and they will teach you, or the birds of the air, and they will tell you;
8 or speak to the earth, and it will teach you, or let the fish of the sea inform you.
9 Which of all these does not know that the hand of the LORD has done this?
10 In his hand is the life of every creature and the breath of all mankind.

Who would disagree that nothing in this world is greater than life itself? Is it not life that gives meaning and color to the other creations of God? What would the world look like without life in it? Would it not be so desolate and empty? Still, God's creation of inanimate objects redily found in this planet alone even extends to the universe. The Bible further says:


Psalm 19 (New International Version)
1 The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands.
2 Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they display knowledge.
3 There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard.
4 Their voice goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world. In the heavens he has pitched a tent for the sun,


The heavens indeed have myriads of unreachable stars sorrounding our solar system. Our encounter with what is plainly visible already elicits inexplicable admiration. What more if we see every thing that God has made?

"For though although we walk in the flesh we do not war in the flesh for the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly but the power of God to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every proud obstacle to the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ." - The Apostle Paul

WHAT???

Eagle eye says:

Not all perception is correct, everyone would agree on that!!! So when I say that you are using your loagic and intuition that means it maybe right but mostly it was wrong.


MY REPLY:

how the hell that logic combined with intuition will always come up with mostly wrong answers??? hahahaha! so when deciding on something, then what do you use? do you pray to God to give you the right decisions? of course you use your own judgment silly. of course not all perception is correct, but with good logic and intuition combined, of course there's a very good chance it is right. stop making yourself look silly Eagle eye.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eagle eye says:

During an apparitional experience, for example, the correspondence between how the subject is perceiving the world and how the world really is at that moment is distinctly imperfect. At the same time the experience may present itself to the subject as indistinguishable from normal perception

MY REPLY:

and you even choose to use an "apparition" as an example??? this makes this post sillier than ever! now you're telling us that we're hallucinating? did we ever mention something about ghosts or whatever apparitions? of course the existence of apparitions is still being debated if it's true or not. how dare you set an example over something that isn't even considered real. sheeesh.. stop twisting and complicating things eagle. your just hoping that i might say something that you can counter. we gave you facts and answer with examples of apparitions. that's so weak!

APPARITION:

a supernatural appearance of a person or thing, esp. a ghost; a specter or phantom; wraith: a ghostly apparition at midnight.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

now your telling me im not fighting with decency when you were the one who tried twisting things by saying that we're only using intuition! hahaha. you think you can pull those little tricks on me? NOT. clearly stated that we were using intuition only by even saying " maraming namamatay sa maling akala ". now say you didn't forego of the logic?? puh-leese...

and yet again, you keep on babbling about bible verses, but fail to answer Pinoy and my previous replies. so now those verses you gave are your "ULTIMATE TRUTH'?? i dont see anything there but a bunch of thoughts.if you want i can create verses like that myself. you better try harder than that if you're going to convince someone. we have already posted some irregularities in the bible but once again you failed to even mention them or defend the authenticity of the bible. you keep on avoiding the topic by putting bible verses that do not answer our previous posts. i asked you if im cruel, then what do you call that guy in the movie, but once again you avoided. you failed to answer Pinoy's post that if all complex things are made by God, then who made God? now who's the joker?

ANSWER ALL OUR PREVIOUS REPLIES PLEASE. STOP DUCKING!

quack! quack! quack! quack! quack! quack! quack! quack!

You mean you can really create Bible verses...WOW!!!

Well, It seems you can, when you created an alter login here in this forum as Sticky88. You can even create a dummy guy for you to talk with hmmmm...

Maybe you and Stinky88 were the ones Eli Soriano was pertaining to who does "Caucus sa Langit"

Excuse me for that joke!!! just can't help having this smile on face.

Dude you just been exposed here in this thread trying to cheat the readers of your dual login:

http://www.network54.com/Forum/261121/thread/1169867314/last-1170155353/Pinoy+atheist-+a+supporter+of+Eli+Soriano+and+his+Ang+Dating+Daan-


"For though although we walk in the flesh we do not war in the flesh for the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly but the power of God to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every proud obstacle to the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ." - The Apostle Paul

ok then read my post in that thread hahaha. I ALREADY OWNED YOU IN THAT THREAD. THERE'S NO USE PROVING THAT WE'RE TWO PEOPLE. YOU'LL JUST LOSE 100%.

stop ducking and just answer my responses. once again ladies and gentlemen, eagle eye avoiding to answer!

QUACK! QUACK! QUACK! QUACK! QUACK! QUACK! QUACK! QUACK! QUACK! QUACK! QUACK! QUACK! QUACK! QUACK!

YEAH IF YOU'RE THAT GOOD WITH COMPUTERS THEN YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE THAT THE IP COMES FROM A SINGLE COMPANY RIGHT?? and a single company has how many people?

stop fooling yourself Eagle. stop avoiding the topic of the threads. you cannot beat me by doing that.

quack! quack! quack! quack! quack! quack! quack! quack!

You can not escape the thruth that you cheat by making those squeaky post.

Definitely, you got caught...perceiving you can get away with your dirty tricks. Your intuition drag you deeper down the drain.

"For though although we walk in the flesh we do not war in the flesh for the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly but the power of God to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every proud obstacle to the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ." - The Apostle Paul

STOP THE ACCUSATIONS AND JUST TRACE THE IP AND SEE THAT IT'S FROM ONE COMPANY. WHAY AREN'T YOU DOING IT THEN? IT'S BECAUSE IT WILL PROVE THAT YOUR ACCUSATIONS DONT CARRY ANY WEIGHT AT ALL.

IF YOU WANT TO BET MONEY THAT THE IP IS FROM ONE COMPANY, THEN LET'S DO IT! HOW MUCH DO YOU WANT TO BET? IF YOU CHICKEN OUT ON THIS BET, THIS WILL JUST MEAN THAT YOU HAVE NOTHING TO PROVE. COME ON BET A LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY AND I'LL PROVE TO YOU THAT THIS IP IS FROM ONE COMPANY ONLY.

ALL YOU HAVE ARE ACCUSATIONS WITH NO WEIGHT. AND STOP DUCKING PLEASE. YOUR DUCKING TECHNIQUES WILL NOT HELP YOU IN THE LONG RUN.

im waiting for your reply Eagle Eye! dual logins eh?

trace the those IP's that you have and you will see that it's from one company.

thus the reason why we have the same IP address. you keep on telling me that im a liar? then like i said, trace the IP man. gimme your price! there's no way we can change our IP here. talk to our IT admin and maybe they can help you with that haha.

AND MOST OF ALL, BETTER START ANSWERING OUR POSTS DUCKER!!!

NOT Just Dual Login. Count how many times you cheated the readers )

Your CENTS is worthless - you cheater!!!

>SuperPwet
(Login SuperPwet)
Re: To Sheriff_Atheist
No score for this post January 30 2007, 11:36 PM

im waiting for your reply Eagle Eye! dual logins eh?

trace the those IP's that you have and you will see that it's from one company.

thus the reason why we have the same IP address. you keep on telling me that im a liar? then like i said, trace the IP man. gimme your price! there's no way we can change our IP here. talk to our IT admin and maybe they can help you with that haha.

AND MOST OF ALL, BETTER START ANSWERING OUR POSTS DUCKER!!!


Readers please see who is the real DUCKER!!!

He says the "two" of them belongs to the same company

Footprinting your traces will show how many mutations did you make to fool the readers here.

Readers here's the OTHER of his multiple Login's

1) Re: Sheriff_Atheist let's talk about Science and Bible

63.95.64.254 - by login: Sheriff_Atheist

2) Pakiusap kay Login bitchslayer - 63.95.64.254 - by login: bitchslayer

3) Para kay cute08 (kaanib sa Ang Dating Daan)
63.95.64.254 - by login: Sheriff_Atheist

4) Kira Vs. Sheriff_Atheist: May Diyos O Wala?
63.95.64.254 - by login: zhaigler

5) Re: Kira Vs. Sheriff_Atheist: May Diyos O Wala?
63.95.64.254 - by login: stinky88

6) Inutil
63.95.64.254 Sheriff_Atheist

7) Inutil
63.95.64.254 - by login: SuperPwet

8)Letter from Willy Santiago to all Ang Dating Daan members pakikalat lang sa NET 63.95.64.254 - by login: Sheriff_Atheist


The more dishonest this guy would be the more shall I peel his identity.

"For though although we walk in the flesh we do not war in the flesh for the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly but the power of God to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every proud obstacle to the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ." - The Apostle Paul