No it isnt

It was at the time you posted it - perhaps the host was down.


1. It contradicts the Bible.

2. It contains false prophecy.

3. It has undergone enormous change

4. It is guilty of plagiarism.

5. Archaeological verification is absolutely lacking.

6. Recent DNA Research has disproved a major claim in the Book of Mormon.

7. It is permeated with scientific problems.

8. Joseph Smith was a false prophet.

If you remove the Mormon-centric words here (and delete reason #1, of course), you get the reason I tossed out the Bible too.

Oh, aside from "has undergone change". I really don't understand the people whose perspective is that change is BAD. BAD BAD BAD.

I don't know a whole lot on the subject, but I do know that God didn't simpyl have his people going out and killing in war without reason. no, not at all.

You'd probably have to have a fairly good grounding in the Bible to truly understand this, but here is what I've come to understand about wars and the flood. I'll use the flood as an example.

Back in biblical times, the B'nai Elohim (Which were essentialy fallen angels) came down and took the Daughters of Adam (human women) as wives and had intercourse. From this the Nephilim were bread, which were giants crossbread from the fallen angels and the Daughters of Adam. Goliath from the Bible was a Nephilim. They were wicked beings.

Satan was litterally trying to throw off the human gene-pool. Jesus had to be the perfect sacrifice and be completely human for the atonement to work. So when the Nephilim came about, the human race was poluted.

Now this ties in because when God sent his people off to wars it was against nations who were tainted by Nephilim blood and were wicked. God knows who will become saved long before they are even born, and he knew that no one from these nations would repent. You might also look at it as an act of mercy. These people are going to hell no matter what and God already knows they will not repent, so when they are slain they no longer would have children who would also go to hell. Young children automatically go to heaven and if these nations were to continue on, more and more people would be born going to hell. So you may look at it as an act of mercy that God had his people go to war with these wicked people who would never repent.

Even the Nephilim though had an opportunity for salvation. Even to them God gave a chance. When Noah built the Ark, his was the only family left on the planet who were completely human. The flood would wipe out these Nephilim. But it took Noah well over one-hundred years to build the Ark and durring this time he tried to get people on the Ark but no one would. At that point NO ONE on earth would repent and turn to God except for Noah and his family and God made sure anybody who would turn from their ways had the opportunity. So the flood was to clean the human gene-pool of the Nephilim, but he even gave them an opportunity for salvation.

All of the wars, the flood, they were against people who God knew would NEVER repent. He gave everyone the opportunity but when not one single person would change their ways God wiped them out and saved future generations of children from going to hell. These wars may be looked at as terrible things from the outside perspective, but when you REALLY look into it, you find that God did this to save future children and keep the human genes pure without being tainted by the fallen B'nai Elohim (angels).

I may be wrong on some if this but that is my general understanding. I hope this gave some insight as to the wars of the Bible.

@ DS
Sheez. You know, there are list like that for Catholics too yet when Catholics see it its all "Oh, that wrong because this and that" but when one is made for another sect or religion its right :\



1.Accepted the church councils as Divine Authority

2.a. Changed Seventh Day Sabbath to Sunday;
b. Changed Passover to Good Friday;
c. Changed First Fruits of Barley (Resurrection Day) to that of the goddess Easter (Ishtar, Astarte, Asherot)
d. Changed birth of Messiah from Feast of
Tabernacles to the pagan solstice (Christmas)

3.Claimed Torah (God's Law) was not valid anymore as a standard for Christians

4.Depicted Messiah Yeshua (Jesus) as effeminate, non-Jewish, and breaker of Torah

5.Turned the glory of Messiah over to Popes; Mary as the "Queen of Heaven"

6.Gave more importance to Paul's words than Yeshua's words

7.Messianic Jews forced into Gentile assimilation

8.Replaced Israel with non-biblical concept of church

9.Anti-Semitism: Called Jews "Christ-killers" and relegated them to a reject

Look on Goggle, theres hundresds of list like that.

@David Hayter: Change is bad because God is perfect, and if you have to change what He told you then it wasn't perfect and could never have come from Him.

@R_D: That's why I'm non-demoninational. I just go by the Bible. And on that list:
1: is a Catholic thing, but the Bible says that the Scriptures are the only Supreme Authority

2a: Sunday is the Seventh day. the week in the Holy Roman Empire (now Italy) begins with Monday)
b: We no longer need a Passover because of Jesus, He is our Passover
c and d: No one wrote down the resurrection/birthday of Christ, so we based it on things that were precedented. Although the Scripture does say soemthing about Jesus being born at the time when the sheperds would be herding their flock, so more towards springtime

3: Who said that? There are verses in the New Testament and even quotes from Jesus that state that the law will never pass away until the entire Will of the Father is fulfilled.

4: Artists were white =P They pictured Jesus that way.

5: Mary being the "Queen of Heaven" is actually referenced, saying she'll have the Moon under her feet and a crown with twelve stars on her head. But the Popes do not have God's glory, that's stupid.

6: Pauls words were given more importance? Perhaps because he used logical arguments in his letters? But that doesn't make him more important.

7: Don't know what thats about.

8: Yeah they did screw up and made it philosophical when all they had to do was read

9: The only people who are anti-Semetic are hypocrite Christians. The Jews were the first to hear the Word of God, Jesus was a Jew Himself, and had they not crucified Him the purpose of His life would be nullified.

You did it know (like I said you would) now do that for the never ending amount of list just like those. You already found some you cant answer.

Religion is just BS. Unlike science, math, FACTS, you can change things in religion and have it accepted.

That I cant answer? Science cannot answer everything either. And half of them that you say I 'cant' answer are wrong in the first place. Just because Catholics messed up doesn't mean the whole religion is.

Just because your math teacher is mean doesn't mean all math teachers are mean

Science is based on observed assumptions. As is religion (mainly in the form of prophecy, beat that).

A prophecy isnt an observed assumption. A prophecy is anything but an observed assumption because you cant prove it to be true till it happens.

Theres a diffrence between knowing 1+1=2 and hoping 1+1(44^(23!(1)))/77.3=2.

@David Hayter: Change is bad because God is perfect, and if you have to change what He told you then it wasn't perfect and could never have come from Him.

Who says an unchanging state is desirable? God changes his mind multiple times, Biblically and in pretty much any theology you can think of.

The translation of the Bible is based off of copied texts which are themselves altered from the originals simply by the nature of imperfect human copying. It's not as though the Pope has the original Gospels lying around in the Vatican's attic. There are numerous "errors" in the Bible of the type described in the article - that is, grammatical inconsistencies and number copying errors. But of course, the fact that the Bible gives different numbers for how many children Bebai had doesn't mean that the Bible is false any more than the fact that Joseph Smith wrote the wrong name down once makes the Book of Mormon a lie (they are false for much more solid reasons, the kind you don't like to get into because you can't pin it down to a silly bullet list or summarize with a copy-paste from a website).

As a sidenote, does anyone else find it hilarious that instead of taking issue with the absurd idea of Joseph Smith using magic to translate a text, you take issue with the fact that his magic should have worked better!


Unlike science, math, FACTS, you can change things in religion and have it accepted.

You have an incredibly terrible understanding of the way science words if you think that the physical sciences and mathematics are the same type of discipline or that the physical sciences do not undergo constant change.


Science is based on observed assumptions.

This sentence is just so damn bad.

You have an incredibly terrible understanding of the way science words if you think that the physical sciences and mathematics are the same type of discipline or that the physical sciences do not undergo constant change.

And that constant change, such as a half life, is part of the facts of science.

And like I have said before, science can easly be wrong, but unlike religion it is true based on what we currently know.

And that constant change, such as a half life, is part of the facts of science.

So did your split personality write your previous post in which you stated that "unlike science... you can change things in religion and have it accepted", which means you thought that change in science is bad?

I guess im not saying it good.

When I mean change I mean somthing more then half life. Something like water is no longer h20 because you say so or that carbon is not what all living things have; no facts to back you up only that you say so. Get my drift now?


Does anyone else know about Buddhism? I want to know about Nines Fold Incarnation (or what ever its called...).

This sentence is just so damn bad.
:lol:

Against common beliefs science and religion can go hand in hand. With a basic knowledge of science and Darwinism it may seem the idea of a creator is an absurd concept, but as you truly delve into science and search deeper one may come to realize that science points toward a creator.

As science continues to advance and we realize how complicated even the most basic life forms really are, the concept of Random Chance, that these non-living materials pulled together in order to become life is seen as even more unlikely.

Some scientists-both Christian and Non-Christian- are beginning to conclude that the complexity within even the most basic life points not toward random chance (or evolution rather), but to Intelligent Design.

If you'd like me to post the reasoning these scientists have come to such conclusions I'd be more than happy to. I'd like to point out though that it is untrue that significant evidence pointing toward a creator is absent in the scientific community.

http://www.creationdesign.org/If%20you%20believe%20in%20evolution.html

:D

http://www.creationdesign.org/If%20you%20believe%20in%20evolution.html

:D

A very interesting link that appeals to the heart and to the guts.

But not to the brain, which is a pity. I have found that most arguments based on the rejection of statistical probabilities to be flawed.

Just because an event is a statistical outlier does not mean that it is excluded from reality.

But before I begin to challenge the article, I'd like to probe your understanding of the workings of DNA.

Does our genetic code specify the nature and position of every capillary in the body or every neuron in the brain?

Even if Evolution could possibly happen, I wouldn't stake my beliefs on it due to the sheer unlikelihood of it. Here's something interesting I read recently. (I'm now going to be paraphrasing and putting it into my own words as to not make it as lengthy, as well as adding my own bits and pieces (such as the "from what I understand")

From what I understand it would take about 100 amino acids lined up in the correct fashion to produce a single protien molecule. Now you have to bring together about 200 or those protien molecules that were made from the amino acids, all with the precise and proper functions to get one typical living cell.

The odds of doing that even under the optimized conditions are, as what I read had described as "astronomical". If you took all of the carbon dioxide in the entire universee and put it on the face of the earth, allowing it to chemically react at the most rapid rate possible, and left it there for billions of years, the odds of creating just one functional protien molecule would be one chance in a 10 with 60 zeroes after it.

Also, even if amino acids could be naturally produced there's no explanation as to how they could have become assembled into a living cell by themselves. No theory made at this point has stood up to scrutiny.

"That's why some scientists---both Christian and non-Christian---are concluding that the orderliness and complexity of life points not to random chance but to an intelligent design in both the origin and development of life"

(This information was taken from a conversation between origen-of-life-scientist Walter Bradley and Lee Stroble in the book, "The Case For Faith (student edition)" pages 46-47)

If that 10 followed by 60 zeroes fact is accurate, I'd far rather stake my beliefs on an intelligent designer, on God, than a theory of which the chances of likelyhood are so slim and unlikely that it is based on mere "chance" alone.

Even if Evolution could possibly happen, I wouldn't stake my beliefs on it due to the sheer unlikelihood of it. Here's something interesting I read recently. (I'm now going to be paraphrasing and putting it into my own words as to not make it as lengthy, as well as adding my own bits and pieces (such as the "from what I understand")

From what I understand it would take about 100 amino acids lined up in the correct fashion to produce a single protien molecule. Now you have to bring together about 200 or those protien molecules that were made from the amino acids, all with the precise and proper functions to get one typical living cell.

The odds of doing that even under the optimized conditions are, as what I read had described as "astronomical". If you took all of the carbon dioxide in the entire universee and put it on the face of the earth, allowing it to chemically react at the most rapid rate possible, and left it there for billions of years, the odds of creating just one functional protien molecule would be one chance in a 10 with 60 zeroes after it.

Also, even if amino acids could be naturally produced there's no explanation as to how they could have become assembled into a living cell by themselves. No theory made at this point has stood up to scrutiny.

"That's why some scientists---both Christian and non-Christian---are concluding that the orderliness and complexity of life points not to random chance but to an intelligent design in both the origin and development of life"

(This information was taken from a conversation between origen-of-life-scientist Walter Bradley and Lee Stroble in the book, "The Case For Faith (student edition)" pages 46-47)

If that 10 followed by 60 zeroes fact is accurate, I'd far rather stake my beliefs on an intelligent designer, on God, than a theory of which the chances of likelyhood are so slim and unlikely that it is based on mere "chance" alone.
Yeah, I've mentioned that book at least 4 other times. If anyone is truly genuinely interested in this subject, (s)he should read that book. A book that logically points towards an Intelligent Designer, and then shows that Intellegent Designer is God and Jesus is His Son.

If there's indeed something like a higher power that created us, then who created that power? Or was it just suddenly there? I mean, if human life is already complex, a grand power like that has to be the most complex thing ever. Surely it must have been made by something even bigger.

Of course, they don't have an answer for that.

If there's indeed something like a higher power that created us, then who created that power? Or was it just suddenly there? I mean, if human life is already complex, a grand power like that has to be the most complex thing ever. Surely it must have been made by something even bigger.

Of course, they don't have an answer for that.

if God was made by something bigger, according to your logic, something would have had to created that, etc.
ONE of them would have to be there already
Christian explanation: God is smarter than us. Our limited human understanding won't let us know everything

if God was made by something bigger, according to your logic, something would have had to created that, etc.
ONE of them would have to be there already
Christian explanation: God is smarter than us. Our limited human understanding won't let us know everything
No. christian explanation: There was a point of Origin. God is that first cause.

That's the damn explanation they give for everything. It's utter bullshit, sorry for saying this but it's just the same as me banning you and when you ask me why I'll say "You're too puny to understand my logic". It's retarded to say that, sorry if I offend you but it fucking is. Just saying that something is like that because it is and you would't understand otherwise is stupid and it shows how ignorant the people who say it really are. Ignorant fools, sorry again if I offend anyone but really, come with real arguments or shut up.

And according to my logic there was no god. According to the logic of people who believe in intelligent design there would be one being on top of another, creating an infinite amount of "intelligent designers". This alone shows that intelligent design is impossible, because you either have to admit that those beings are being created by another being, which is impossible, or you'll have to admit that the being came from nothing, which is automatically admitting that it's possible for the life on earth to have come from nothing.

His answer was wrong. Refer to mine.

No. christian explanation: There was a point of Origin. God is that first cause.

thank you for correcting me

Angelic:n()m
figure out what it is
(lol not realy meant but thought it was funny)

His answer was wrong. Refer to mine.

Where did God come from then? Ah yes, human minds to explain what they couldn't explain a long time ago. Thunder used to the work of a God, nowadays we know it's static electricity travelleling between the Earth and the clouds. According to the Church, the earth is flat. They only changed their view on this a few years ago, while it was known that the earth was in fact round for centuries. Who in a right state of mind believes all that bullcrap when there's scientific evidence that contradicts what the church says?

Where did God come from then? Ah yes, human minds to explain what they couldn't explain a long time ago. Thunder used to the work of a God, nowadays we know it's static electricity travelleling between the Earth and the clouds. According to the Church, the earth is flat. They only changed their view on this a few years ago, while it was known that the earth was in fact round for centuries. Who in a right state of mind believes all that bullcrap when there's scientific evidence that contradicts what the church says?
That was the Catholic church, which was corrupt, even had three popes at the same time. The Bible never said the world was flat, nor did it say it was at the center of the universe. nor did it say God made it thunder. Your post proves nothing.

That's the damn explanation they give for everything. It's utter bullshit, sorry for saying this but it's just the same as me banning you and when you ask me why I'll say "You're too puny to understand my logic". It's retarded to say that, sorry if I offend you but it fucking is. Just saying that something is like that because it is and you would't understand otherwise is stupid and it shows how ignorant the people who say it really are. Ignorant fools, sorry again if I offend anyone but really, come with real arguments or shut up.

And according to my logic there was no god. According to the logic of people who believe in intelligent design there would be one being on top of another, creating an infinite amount of "intelligent designers". This alone shows that intelligent design is impossible, because you either have to admit that those beings are being created by another being, which is impossible, or you'll have to admit that the being came from nothing, which is automatically admitting that it's possible for the life on earth to have come from nothing.(In regard to your later post about the thunder and flat earth and such) Please do not confuse Catholisism with Christianity, there is a HUGE difference. The Catholic church believes in many non-biblical concepts which Christianity does not agree with at all. I go off of the Bible, not what any church says.

----------
You continue to talk about how in Christianity we say wouldn't be able to comprehend God's origin. If he truly is outside of time though, than we just have to accept it though we may not understand it.

But fine, if you don't want to look at it that way let me try to get a better understanding of your view. How do you believe the universe was created? The Big Bang? How did matter get here? How did the energy needed for these theories to happen get here? How did ANYTHING get here? People have told me before, "We don't currently know this or that or how this works, but we'll find out eventually." Don't tell me that, saying so would be just as bad as what you critisize Christians for claiming. Enlighten me, please. I'm willing to be open minded if you can prove your views with fact. I'm looking for truth, after all.

That was the Catholic church, which was corrupt, even had three popes at the same time. The Bible never said the world was flat, nor did it say it was at the center of the universe. nor did it say God made it thunder. Your post proves nothing.

Then who the hell is right then? I would assume the oldest church would be right, but you probably say no.

You say your church is right, right?

Ladies and gentlemen, I had a small poll in the IRC today and in that poll it was decided (5 against 0) that this thread is stupid, causes conflicts and flames, generally is about nothing and for that reason, I'm going to lock it up for good.

If you have a problem with this, too bad. Don't bother complaining cos I'm not listening. If you want to discuss religion (or more correctly, the matter about whether the bible's correct or not) I'm sure there are Christian forums/ sites out there.