blackbird
-
Posts
7,907 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by blackbird
-
-
7 minutes ago, Omni said:
No buddy, most wars occurred due to mindless people being indoctrinated into this weird club of religion. Various versions of course, but mindless fear nonthe less. Thank god we have had the good sense to separate "church" and state. Although it seems we still have some way to go. They still use the bible in some courts of law.
There have been lots of wars partly due religion and possibly false religions. But there have been wars that were not due to religion such as WW1 and WW2. Atheists such as the communists Stalin and Chairman Mao killed millions of people. This had nothing to do with religion. There have been wars all through history for various reason. That is the nature of man because of his fallen nature (rebellion against God).
-
1 minute ago, hot enough said:
As I have mentioned, how could, why would such an all knowing, all seeing, all perfect creature put such a crazy, nutty, amoral, ... paln into place. It makes no sense whatsoever. He has a plan that ensures there are vast swaths of people, the majority of the world's people destined to live a life of poverty, sickness, hunger, deprivation while his plan ensures a tiny minority has it all.
To put it in pedestrian terms - It's simply nuts.
I don't claim to have all the answers. God created a perfect world with the Garden of Eden. He created Adam and Eve and put them in the paradise. The could have continued to live and multiply in this paradise. He only gave them one instruction, that is, not to eat of a certain fruit in the garden. The serpent came along and tempted Eve to eat the particular fruit. She didn't have to. Nobody forced her. But she chose to eat the fruit and offered some to Adam and he ate. In that moment they were in transgression against God and the future of the world and mankind was determined. Forever after that fall, everyone is born with a fallen nature and an imperfect fallen world. God did not create it to be a fallen world. But mankind rebelled and that's what happened. However, God in his mercy, sent his Son to die for the sins of a fallen man and by faith in this Son of God and his sacrifice for them, man is redeemed.
-
Just now, Omni said:
Apparently you got sucked in. Can you explain all the murders that followed this bible bullshit?
Murders happened from the beginning of man on earth. It did not follow the bible. The first murder is recorded in the bible in Genesis. The bible is opposed to murder. Jesus is opposed to it. It cannot be blamed on the bible. Ever since Adam and Eve rebelled against God, their descendents (us) were born with a fallen nature in rebellion against God. That is why there are murders, wars, crime, and hatred in the world.
-
1 minute ago, Omni said:
If life is eternal why are you so gullible to believe some bs story created by dictators to make you think they have the controls toward the path to that eternal life? They hijacked you it seems and you let them do it.
Not true. There was no dictator involved. God inspired men to write the bible under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. These were not dictators. They were ordinary men that God chose to use for this purpose. The revelation of God was thereby given to men. Ordinary men were chosen to be prophets, apostles, and disciples who then spread the message. It is not bs. It is God's written word we have today in the King James Authorized Version. It tells the way of salvation. What a person does with this message will be the most important decision in life. It will determine where a person spends eternity. Not trying to scare anyone but just passing the message along which God gave man in the bible.
-
What is true knowledge (or wisdom)?
The answer is in Proverbs ch1 vs7
"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction." KJV
-
God doesn't save everyone. That should be obvious. He desires that all will be saved. It is not wise to put off dealing with God and seeking salvation. We don't know if we will even be alive tomorrow. That's why the bible says "now is the accepted time. Now is the day of salvation."
-
Just now, BubberMiley said:
Yes, but if he existed before the beginning, then that wasn't the beginning.
Not sure what you mean. God is eternal or everlasting. At a point in time, he created the universe and created mankind.
-
3 minutes ago, hot enough said:
Nope, that is impossible to do.
Why would a real god pick a couple of western names that hadn't even been invented yet? The rest of that nonsensical story also makes no sense. But have at 'er, live a life of delusion.
God is a person albeit divine. He thinks, acts, etc. So yes, it is possible to say or act against God.
What do you mean western names? It's not nonsensical. It's not that complicated. Why reject the chance of eternal life? Life is short and we don't know if or when God will give us a chance to live forever with him.
-
2 minutes ago, hot enough said:
The very people that are made in his [sexist devil] image are "born in a state of sin and death and is in rebellion against God".
Why wouldn't such a perfect creature wipe us all out and start over again? How could a perfect creature who is all knowing and all seeing have set in place such a monstrous mess?
How do so many people get so badly duped? One only has to look at "[unspeakable date]" to see that.
Are you speaking against God?
The world is a mess because your first parents, Adam and Eve, were deceived by the serpent and rebelled against God in eating the forbidden fruit. Thus they received a fallen state which is passed upon all their descendents. So everyone is born in a fallen state. That's why the world is a mess.
-
"All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, he is pleased, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ;" - The Westminster Confession of Faith Chapter 10 X. Effectual Calling. See bible, Romans 9:16, 9:18 Salvation is entirely a work of God.
This tells us man by his nature is born in a state of sin and death and is in rebellion against God. But God works through his Spirit and his written Word in the human heart and causes them to believe in Jesus Christ unto salvation. Praise God!
-
5 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:
There's no evidence that God exists. ZERO.
The creation of the universe is absolute evidence, proof, whatever you want to call it. The complexity and laws of physics, the minutest particles making up the atoms, molecules, everything cannot have come into existence without a divine creator who designed it and brought it into being. There is no other viable explanation. Even great scientists like Isaac Newton believed in God. Science is not infallible either. Theories about things have often been found later to be incorrect and have been discarded. Theories such as the sun revolves around the earth, the cause of fire were discarded.
-
1 hour ago, Argus said:
The job of being a police officer is an odd one in that you're not allowed to make mistakes. Note, I'm not saying he did in this case, but he may have. We all make mistakes at work, we all do things which turn out wrong, and which, on occasion, might cause our bosses to question our judgement.
The difference with police is that your mistakes can get you charged under the police act, or even arrested and charged under the criminal code. There is little room for misjudgement when your job involves using physical force on people, even lethal force at times. They have to use their judgement, in an instant of high adrenaline, as to whether something is justified under the terms they've been given by society.
As far as I can see from the reports on this he didn't act much differently than any other cop in the same situation. That's probably what all the other cops are thinking, too. Police are tasked to bring order by using physical force. Human beings respond differently to that. Just as most of us can take a given drug with no consequences, while for others, there are bad side effects, so too can a blow from a closed fist sometimes cause a lot more damage than expected.
Yet we task police to use physical violence to enforce their orders, in the pursuit of an orderly society.
1 hour ago, Argus said:The job of being a police officer is an odd one in that you're not allowed to make mistakes. Note, I'm not saying he did in this case, but he may have. We all make mistakes at work, we all do things which turn out wrong, and which, on occasion, might cause our bosses to question our judgement.
The difference with police is that your mistakes can get you charged under the police act, or even arrested and charged under the criminal code. There is little room for misjudgement when your job involves using physical force on people, even lethal force at times. They have to use their judgement, in an instant of high adrenaline, as to whether something is justified under the terms they've been given by society.
As far as I can see from the reports on this he didn't act much differently than any other cop in the same situation. That's probably what all the other cops are thinking, too. Police are tasked to bring order by using physical force. Human beings respond differently to that. Just as most of us can take a given drug with no consequences, while for others, there are bad side effects, so too can a blow from a closed fist sometimes cause a lot more damage than expected.
Yet we task police to use physical violence to enforce their orders, in the pursuit of an orderly society.
There are many jobs where you not allowed to make mistakes. Doctors, surgeons, nurses, etc. Some jobs by their nature have serious consequences if you make a mistake. I guess that's part of the reason they are fairly well paid and have lots of benefits in their contracts.
Still I think the union would be better to keep a low profile in these cases. It would project a better public image. The union should be unbiased and neutral until they see what the outcome is. Then if they feel the decision is wrong or too harsh, they can appeal it.
-
4 minutes ago, hot enough said:
Let's get it straight what you are saying. Science has no place in determining the impossible collapses of three buildings.
I have seen the videos, many many many more than you, many many many more times than you. And here you are also suggesting, scientifically I suspect you think, that we should focus on something we have all seen many times, as if that will give us some great scientific insights.
Again, I told you that the video I linked you too addressed these issue of the planes hitting the towers, but you, like all the other science based MLWs refuse to watch or discuss it. Why?
I may watch it later. It's just that I have a lot of things I should be doing and must break off shortly and do some work. I am not sure why you are obsessed with these other things. Most people would accept a video of something as being the final, unquestionable account of something. Videos don't lie. It is possible for experts to tell if a video is doctored and I have never heard anything to suggest that. There is much other evidence to show the planes were hijacked anyway.
-
1 hour ago, BubberMiley said:
What was God before the Beginning? Did He exist at all or was He formed along with the Creation He Created? Science would suggest there is no evidence of things existing before things existed so maybe He Is Creation Itself? That seems redundant though.
I believe the bible teaches us that God always existed. The bible says God is a spirit. The bible tells us God is eternal, omnipresent (exists everywhere), and omniscient (infinite in knowledge), and infinite in power. He exists in a trinity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, but as one God.
-
1
-
-
I don't think the police union should be involved in taking a side.
-
1 hour ago, hot enough said:
You don't have time to address the science, with the direct link I provided you, but you want me to go searching for videos that support your non-science. That's just crazy. You don't even provide a link to a video you believe supports your "I don't even know what?". You just want silly goose chases to help with your distractions from the science.
Because the video I linked to addressed your point head on. You must have watched some until your cognitive dissonance drove you crazy.
This is supposed to be a discussion forum, not a scientific investigation or a scientific treatise posting. All I asked is a simple question about why you don't believe the video evidence that airliners flew into the twin towers on 9-11 and you reply with a video. It should be a simple thing to summarize your answer in a sentence to several. Unless you know, there is nothing to explain away the video and you want to brainwash people with an alternate theory. You are of course free to believe in conspiracy theories if you wish.
-
41 minutes ago, Peter F said:
I don't think the video explains that at all. The video assumes God = good. It is a subjective assumption. I can imagine an existence without God and I expect good would still exist. The video shows misfortune befalling someone whose wallet is then taken by someone else. The victim feels a great injustice has been perpetrated and the video then proclaims the victim appealing to objective good. Therefore God. However that argument fails to recognize the good that fell upon the bandit who picked up the wallet. The video assumes that a personal or societal 'good' applies always and at all times to all people. Good is always subjective not objective. According to the video that means there is no God. Yet good befell the bandit and possibly his children and the sun still shone warming the earth, plants grew and people laughed.
In my subjective opinion, it doesn't matter one whit wether Good is subjective or objective. Without God, Good can still exist just as it can with God.
Depends on the definition of good.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, hot enough said:
Of what importance is it whether you believe or not. The important thing here is, and you are admitting it outright - you are categorically denying science. You refuse to look at the sources because you are afraid of what they will show you. Is this science? Are you a person of science, a person who believes in the scientific process?
And you see everyone else doing the same thing, and it doesn't twig anything in any of you folks' brains? If the US official story has science so solidly on its side, why all the palpable fear from the supporters of that theory?
Bush_Cheney throws up a big graphic but she won't explain what it even means. She brought up the Windsor Tower and the Interstate exchange collapse when both have nothing to do with how steel framed buildings react in fires. That she doesn't know what she is talking about is abundantly clear, because she won't and can't explain anything, yet MLW lets her go on in this fashion.
Is this, "Mapleleafweb operates these forums in the hopes that they will promote intelligent, honest and responsible discussion. We encourage you to speak your mind on relevant issues in a thoughtful way." ?
*You haven't addressed where the nanothermite found at WTC could have come from.
I posted a video where an unreacted particle of NANOthermite taken from WTC dust was heated to ignition point. The chemical signature is that of thermite, the only exception being that it is made up of nano sized particles, which is something that only the US has, being a 1996/97 patented explosive developed at Lawrence Livermore Labs. I provided a link to said Lab where they describe the wonders of these new super-explosives, these new super-thermites.
*You haven't addressed how the nanothermite found at WTC could be there in a legal/legitimate sense.
*You haven't addressed hI ow the steel girders came to be molten and vaporized.
Scientists from FEMA, a body of the US government, described the molten/vaporized steel. I have posted links to their Appendix C, which has pictures of said molten/vaporized steel girders.
*You haven't addressed all the firemen's testimony about explosions.
These testimonies were gathered by the city of New York, they were hidden until the NY TimYes got them released thru a FOIA lawsuit. You can view multiple videos of firemen describing these secondary explosions, multiple ones.
*You haven't addressed how WTC7 could fall at free fall speed.
NIST admitted free fall. You don't trust NIST? A top US forensic engineer says the NIST has a zero chance of being true, but you don't want to look at the science. See what I mean when I said how this is a massive cover up - when people won't even look at the science, giving lame excuses for not doing so, to a discerning person warning bells should be going crazy.
I asked you how you explain the videos of the airliners flying into the towers. You answered with a video. I don't have time to sit down and watch a propaganda video. Why can't you give an answer in a sentence?
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, hot enough said:
Likewise, the video of WTC7 falling at free fall in a classic controlled demolition doesn't lie. Did you hear all the people describe it as an implosions, a controlled demolition?
You still haven't answered about the video of the airliners flying into the towers. How do you explain that?
-
19 minutes ago, bcsapper said:
There's a name for that but it escapes me at the moment. Your God exists because the Bible says so, and The Bible says so because your God exists.
The Bible is one source of evidence. The other source is the creation of everything.
-
6 minutes ago, eyeball said:
Are you as open-minded about UFO sightings?
I'm quite serious even if this is also a trick question.
UFO claims may or may not have something to it. I have no way of knowing.
-
4 minutes ago, bcsapper said:
Eyewitnesses are unreliable, as is the transfer of information over time and languages. Plus, people lie sometimes.
The eyewitnesses were chosen by God and given a special role. That means they could not be unreliable in what they recorded. You have to remember the bible is a supernatural book produced by an infinitely powerful God.
You are unaware of the fact that God inspired men to write the bible and promised to preserve it. So he oversaw the preservation of it in the King James Authorized Bible in the English language. It is preserved in other languages as well of course. This overcame the problem of languages, time, and people's character. The KJV is with us today as clearly as it was in the original languages two thousand years ago.
-
1 hour ago, eyeball said:
My own conclusion about the bibles ficticiousness stems from the utter lack of any evidence for the supernatural phenomenon it routinely mentions right from page one on.
What is it that believers don't get about people's conclusions in this regard?
If you don't consider eyewitnesses as evidence then of course you won't see any. But maybe you haven't read it with an open mind.
-
1 hour ago, bcsapper said:
. All are works of fiction and as such, have no say in whether or not I am good.
Have you read part of it? How do you come to the conclusion it is fiction?
EVIDENCE FOR GOD
in Religion & Politics
Posted
Yes, I think so.