Do Atheists die more difficult than Believers

[Alan McDougall]

Now it's you with the opinion. I could care less who and for how long something has been taken literal. That dosnt mean it was meant to be. I leave that to the people who study ancient literature, history, archiology, anthropology etc etc.., and that is not the consensus. You are still makeing the same mistake as the literalist. Why is it that you think you know better than they do? Catch you latter bed time.

It seems to me that in the US there is a serious lack of English teaching. especially spelling. Of course maybe English is not your home language and if so my apologies to you sir.

[Guest]

Now it's you with the opinion. I could care less who and for how long something has been taken literal. That dosnt mean it was meant to be. I leave that to the people who study ancient literature, history, archiology, anthropology etc etc.., and that is not the consensus. You are still makeing the same mistake as the literalist. Why is it that you think you know better than they do? Catch you latter bed time.

Every single one of those people who study the Bible in its literal context diminish its power as a book of the word of God - they show how it borrows from older contradictory traditions, how it shows that Judism was a small insignificant regional sect, how historically most of the stories are fabrications based on flimsy primary facts. This is why real scholars rarely treat the Bible as anything other than a historical document to be studied in comparison to other historical documents. The further you go down the path of interpretation of the Bible the weaker its claim to be the word of God is shown to be. Ultimately this is why the Bible is in historic decline among the very educated people you reference. The only area where it hold a strong hold are those where it is treated as literal truth and followed by people who could best be described as fundamentalist.

Interpreting the Bible in the context of modern understanding can only ever serve to diminish its mystical power and weaken the faith of Christians. Its no surprise that a substantial proportion of Jews declare themselves secular in response to this inevitable trend.

Br Cornelius

[Rlyeh]

In my opinion we should approach the Supreme Being with a lot of respect, because if we continue to annoy him as we have in the past and as we are now doing, he might just swat us off like we do with an irritating bug.

God is why we exist, and like a bundle of clay he can just burn his mistake and start over with a better loaf.

So you're one of these people who believe God went around killing people in the past?

If you're so certain your god created us can you explain how he did it? Because God doesn't seem to know himself.

Edited September 4, 2014 by Rlyeh

[Jeanne dArc]

It seems to me that in the US there is a serious lack of English teaching. especially spelling. Of course maybe English is not your home language and if so my apologies to you sir.

At least his grammar is better than yours

[Jeanne dArc]

An honest answer, because we all fear the "cessation of our existence" after death!

No, we don't. And could you use a few less exclamation marks, maybe? It's kind of a quibble, I know, but it's just off-putting: it makes it seem like you're shouting everything.

[Davros of Skaro]

Here's a classic.

Neil Degrasse Tyson responds to a Religious Troll.

[eight bits]

OP

we all fear the "cessation of our existence" after death!

I am neither an atheist nor a believer, and I do not fear cessation of my existence.

Even if I did, then there would remain the question of whether clinging to some fairy tale would help somehow to manage the fear. Perhaps so, but the dominant fairy tale in my native culture tells me that the reason I must die is that a powerful spirit had a tree from which my remotest ancestors stole some fruit. The spirit killed them, after keeping them alive so that he could sexually torture the woman. Then he killed their children, and their children's children, ... somewhere along the line, he had a human child of his own, and killed him, too, with special cruelty, and the killings continued, ... and now it's my turn.

With all repsect, I find no consolation whatsoever in this fairy tale. Tautologically, there is nothing to fear in nothing. On the other hand, endlessly continued existence at the mercy of this boogey spirit would very much be something to fear. If it turns out that that is indeed what I shall have to deal with, then I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. In the meantime, I will cling to the hope that the worst that can happen is that I pass beyond vulnerability, and never suffer ever again.

Edited September 4, 2014 by eight bits

[Alan McDougall]

So you're one of these people who believe God went around killing people in the past?

If you're so certain your god created us can you explain how he did it? Because God doesn't seem to know himself.

I am not one of those people, however, if God exists then he could get rid of his worst known mistake, namely a virus that is killing the thing that gives it life, planet earth.

[Beany]

There is a polarization in Christianity.

Those who stick to a literal interpretation of the Bible - who might be called fundamentalists.

Then there are the rest who have gradually distanced themselves from the more unsavoury aspects of the Bible, till the faith becomes diluted to the point where a Christian of a few centuries ago would run a mile.

Who is the more honest Christian, who has the right interpretation of the faith. Let me posit that the fundamentalist is the more honest follower of the faith, let me also suggest that we shouldn't follow the more moderate Christian when seeking a true understanding of what the faith actually is. The more modern and moderate Christian maybe embarrassed by his more fundamentalist brother - but who represents the core faith better ?

Of course personally I think it is an academic question since the core faith of Christ was hijacked by St.Paul in his quest to create a universal faith of Empire, and so almost none of the people who currently call themselves Christian, can really lay claim to the faith of Jesus.

Br Cornelius

The most authentic Christians may be those who live their lives in the way we are admonished to do so, with forgiveness, love, generosity, compassion, whatever their beliefs.

[Beany]

As a Pagan Druid you are as religious as the rest of us and just as frightened of the thought of ceasing to exist after death as everyone else. Your statement earlier that you have absolutely no fear of death, is absolute nonsense!

Alan, this comment shows an utter disrespect for others. Please read the guidelines for this forum before commenting further.

[White Crane Feather]

It seems to me that in the US there is a serious lack of English teaching. especially spelling. Of course maybe English is not your home language and if so my apologies to you sir.

No it's just me Alan. More of a disreguard for spelling rather than not getting enough education. I have a degree in economics and and indeed tutor and TA during my university years. Even for English and business writtiing. My business writting professor would have my head on a platter if he knew the disreguard I have now, but that was 14 years ago. I have always had a bit of a phonetic issue probably because of several factors mostly because I barely went to elementary school and got beat up several times for failing spelling tests, so psychologically it's probably a bit of a rebellion not to care. At the university level it was over come easy enough through the peer editing processes and spellcheck . Then there is the fact that I type 99% of my posts on UM from a tiny iPhone throughout my day. I try to do a bit of editing, but really I'm not a detail person, and my mind is fairly hyperactive most of the time. I miss a lot because its in more than several places at once. Put all of it together, and I can butcher a paragraph and spelling in the worst ways. My apologies. I did a quick FANBOYS check just for you

Edited September 4, 2014 by White Crane Feather

[+DieChecker]

I have a different view, that the Law does still exist, and that we as Christians should follow it. But HOW do we follow it? Immediately after saying that he came not to abolish the law but to fulfil it, he then goes on for quite some time talking about the Law. He uses a pattern of "you have heard it said *insert Law here*... but I tell you *insert new stuff here*". He's just said that not a jot or tittle will be removed but he then changes it about. I argue that this is Jesus "fulfilling the Law". He is offering a newer spiritual meaning for the physical laws.

Alright, but Jesus didn't go over every single line of Deutronomy and Leviticus, so what do we do when confronted with... required sacrifice laws, required food laws, cleanliness laws.... No one follows these laws, so are we all sinning all the time? Or, if the laws are redone, then where are they posted? How can I follow what hasn't been passed down?

To use an example that Jesus used, he said "you have heard it was said, 'do not commit adultery', but I tell you that whoever looks at a woman with lustful intentions has already committed adultery in his heart". Jesus is essentially arguing that keeping the letter of the law is not all there is, we have to keep the spirit of the law. The physical laws such as adultery are meaningless if you are still thinking about lusting after a woman (that is why Christians are against pornography). That's just one law Jesus refers to, he addresses many others, both explicitly and indirectly.

So when it comes to the Law, we Christians must uphold it. It is still very much relevant in a Christian's life. But it's not applied the same way as it was in the Old Testament, and certainly it was not how the Pharisees were doing it, They not only upheld the very strict letter of the law, but they added their own extra set of laws to strictly follow, to ensure that they wouldn't even accidentally break the letter of the actual Law, all the while not realising the letter of the Law is meaningless if it's not backed up with the right spiritual mentality.

OK, but what are the laws? Where are they written? Which ones did Jesus edit? The Pharisees took Mose's Law and made it their religion. Should we do the same? Or, are we (mostly) freed from such legalism?

[+Liquid Gardens]

I have always had a bit of a phonetic issue probably because of several factors mostly because I barely went to elementary school and got beat up several times for failing spelling tests, so psychologically it's probably a bit of a rebellion not to care.

On the good side, sometimes your infrequent spelling issues teach me a new word, like 'littoral'.

[Alan McDougall]

Alan, this comment shows an utter disrespect for others. Please read the guidelines for this forum before commenting further.

Sorry I retract my comment, maybe a bit of "Soap Boxing" by me!

I did read the guidelines but got a bit carried away by the topic, it had a much greater response than I anticipated!

[White Crane Feather]

Every single one of those people who study the Bible in its literal context diminish its power as a book of the word of God - they show how it borrows from older contradictory traditions, how it shows that Judism was a small insignificant regional sect, how historically most of the stories are fabrications based on flimsy primary facts. This is why real scholars rarely treat the Bible as anything other than a historical document to be studied in comparison to other historical documents. The further you go down the path of interpretation of the Bible the weaker its claim to be the word of God is shown to be. Ultimately this is why the Bible is in historic decline among the very educated people you reference. The only area where it hold a strong hold are those where it is treated as literal truth and followed by people who could best be described as fundamentalist.

Interpreting the Bible in the context of modern understanding can only ever serve to diminish its mystical power and weaken the faith of Christians. Its no surprise that a substantial proportion of Jews declare themselves secular in response to this inevitable trend.

Br Cornelius

Cornelius..... You are still not listening. I'm not debating those things. I am not a Christian. I believe the movie "Frozen" is just as divinely inspired as the bible, the illiad, the bahgavagita, and "Joe vs the Volcano". And I believe they are indeed divinely inspired. I'm not being sarcastic. My points have been aimed at the sillyness of militant atheism not Christian apologetics.

Hahahahaha I hope you enjoy this as much as I did. I needed a good laugh this morning and this bit always makes me laugh but this time it was somehow realavent which made it even more funny.

[White Crane Feather]

On the good side, sometimes your infrequent spelling issues teach me a new word, like 'littoral'.

And sometimes I'm embarrassed enough to remember to spell it and say it correctly.

Edited September 4, 2014 by White Crane Feather

[+DieChecker]

In your opinion.

In my opinion - when Christ says "till heaven and earth pass away" - that's exactly what he means.

After all - is there not to be a new heaven and a new earth?

Jesus also said the mustard seed is the smallest of seeds, yet that is not true. He also said numerous things that he meant only as exaggeration to make his point. That is what he was doing here.

2 Peter 3:10-13

But the day of the lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with a fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up. Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for a new heaven and a new earth in which righteousness dwells

How can everything possibly be fulfilled prior to the Day of the Lord's coming?

Everything is not fulfilled, just the Law of Moses, which is exactly what Jesus said he was there to do.

There will be a new Heaven and a new Earth, after the Final Judgement. But we live today under Jesus's commandments, not Moses'.

Again. In your opinion.

Yes, and you have a different opinion. Based on your own bias', fulfilling your own agenda?

In several other opinions, Jesus didn't actually break any of God's law.

See here, for example: http://www.tektonics...usignorelaw.php

Or here: http://www.new-life....did-he-do-that/

If you believe otherwise, then the real question you need to ask yourself, is why would Jesus deliberately break his father's own laws?

If you don't have an answer - then that's probably all you need to know, right there.

Ah, so you are saying Jesus didn't break any of the laws Moses actually decreed, only those that were created by men? That could be true, but in effect then Jesus fulfilled and negated much of the Laws of Moses, as the Pharisees upheld them.

I'd agree that the 10 Commandments, and the Golden Rule should be upheld. But it seems very clear that Jesus did break several traditions that are written in the OT as being commanded by Moses. (I see the excuse in one of your links that the link author thinks these OT laws must have been added later? Handy excuse, no? If the Bible doesn't agree with you, claim it was edited at some point to remove your own, "True" interpretation.) Thus they are part of the Laws of Moses. People, like in your links, can turn linguistic somersaults to try to rationalize each thing he did. They HAVE to, because otherwise, to their limited thinking, Jesus wouldn't be Sinless. Yet, if Jesus came to fulfill those laws, breaking them wouldn't be a sin, it would be what he needed to do.

You do realize that you are taking the side of people who think the Earth was created only 6000 years ago, right? You are arguing on the side of people who quote the OT and say hating gays is super duper fine?

Edited September 4, 2014 by DieChecker

[Tiggs]

Jesus also said the mustard seed is the smallest of seeds, yet that is not true.

It's true within the context of his audience in Palestine.

He also said numerous things that he meant only as exaggeration to make his point. That is what he was doing here.

In your opinion. In my opinion, there's nothing in those sentences which look even remotely like an exaggeration.

They are as clear and plainly spoken as can be.

"For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled."

Everything is not fulfilled, just the Law of Moses, which is exactly what Jesus said he was there to do.

The Law of Moses is the Torah - the entire first five books of the Old Testament - including the creation of the Universe.

I'll check, but I think you'll find the Universe is still here, it's purpose still to be fulfilled.

There will be a new Heaven and a new Earth, after the Final Judgement. But we live today under Jesus's commandments, not Moses'.

Jesus says that the Law still stands until the passing of the Heavens and the Earth.

Which event do you believe that he was figuratively speaking of, exactly?

Yes, and you have a different opinion. Based on your own bias', fulfilling your own agenda?

Which agenda? The agenda where I agree with one Christian interpretation over another?

How wickedly atheist of me.

Ah, so you are saying Jesus didn't break any of the laws Moses actually decreed, only those that were created by men? That could be true, but in effect then Jesus fulfilled and negated much of the Laws of Moses, as the Pharisees upheld them.

Jesus rebuked the incorrect Pharisaic interpretation of the Torah, not the Torah itself. That's not negation.

I'd agree that the 10 Commandments, and the Golden Rule should be upheld. But it seems very clear that Jesus did break several traditions that are written in the OT as being commanded by Moses.

I honestly believe otherwise.

(I see the excuse in one of your links that the link author thinks these OT laws must have been added later? Handy excuse, no? If the Bible doesn't agree with you, claim it was edited at some point to remove your own, "True" interpretation.) Thus they are part of the Laws of Moses. People, like in your links, can turn linguistic somersaults to try to rationalize each thing he did. They HAVE to, because otherwise, to their limited thinking, Jesus wouldn't be Sinless. Yet, if Jesus came to fulfill those laws, breaking them wouldn't be a sin, it would be what he needed to do.

From the passage we're discussing:

Matthew 5:

19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Which of those do you think Jesus is? Least, or Great?

As for the links - I listed them purely as being example of serious hand-on-heart Christians who disagree with you. I don't vouch for their particular reasoning skills - but I do agree with their conclusions.

If you have a specific instance, I'll gladly address it myself.

You do realize that you are taking the side of people who think the Earth was created only 6000 years ago, right? You are arguing on the side of people who quote the OT and say hating gays is super duper fine?

And when, exactly, have you ever seen PA do either of those?

[Sakari]

Faith can be a tricky thing. It is easy for anyone to claim they have Faith and would walk through fire, or jump from a plane, or handle a rattlesnake, but it is another thing entirely to demonstrate Faith and DO those things. Most people have very little Faith, and so they have fear. Fear of dying, fear of failure, fear of being judged....

Myself, I try to practice faith every day, and I often fail at it. Often it is small things. Like I put change into a soda machine and no soda comes out. At which I just shrug and decide that maybe I'm not supposed to have that soda today. That may seem illogical, but faith is illogical isn't it?

If I was you, I'd not worry about Heaven or Hell. Clearly you are not a Hellion, or have long repented of any ills you may have done once upon a time. You seem to be a good man, and I'd expect to see you with an Eternal Reward after dying. The only thing you should worry about regarding dying is those who will be left behind.

Just my opinion as a follower of Christ. Myself, I believe in following Christ, and what he taught, and not necessarily what the Church has come up with over the last 2000 years.

Thank You

[Alan McDougall]

No it's just me Alan. More of a disreguard for spelling rather than not getting enough education. I have a degree in economics and and indeed tutor and TA during my university years. Even for English and business writtiing. My business writting professor would have my head on a platter if he knew the disreguard I have now, but that was 14 years ago. I have always had a bit of a phonetic issue probably because of several factors mostly because I barely went to elementary school and got beat up several times for failing spelling tests, so psychologically it's probably a bit of a rebellion not to care. At the university level it was over come easy enough through the peer editing processes and spellcheck . Then there is the fact that I type 99% of my posts on UM from a tiny iPhone throughout my day. I try to do a bit of editing, but really I'm not a detail person, and my mind is fairly hyperactive most of the time. I miss a lot because its in more than several places at once. Put all of it together, and I can butcher a paragraph and spelling in the worst ways. My apologies. I did a quick FANBOYS check just for you

I did not mean to be hurtful and bad spelling does not mean someone is not highly intelligent, a fact that I could easily see by reading your various comments on the forum. (With profound respect have you considered that you might be dyslectic)

https://www.google.co.za/search?newwindow=1&site=&source=hp&q=example+of+great+men+who+could+not+spell&oq=example+of+great+men+who+could+not+spell&gs_l=hp.12...6125.27183.0.31550.41.40.0.1.1.0.414.9812.2-29j7j1.37.0....0...1c.1.53.hp..24.17.4101.0.2tOmGo_0EvA

Examples of famous people who could not spell correctly

1. Jane Austen

Luckily, the author of Emma and Pride and Prejudice was always fortunate enough to find editors who could weed out her various alphabetical mishaps. An early work, written when Austen was 15, was called Love and Freindship.

2. George Washington

According to Richard Lederer in his book More Anguished English, the man who would become the first American president wrote "we find our necessaties are not such as to require an immediate transportation during the harvist" while complaining about a supply shortage during the Revolutionary War.

3. Winston Churchill

Though he later became universally regarded as one of the greatest orators of all time, one of Churchill's early report cards said "Writing is good, but terribly slow — spelling about as bad as it well can be."

4. Agatha Christie

"Writing and spelling were always terribly difficult for me... an extraordinarily bad speller and have remained so until this day." It's incredible to think that this humbling statement came from the pen of one of the greatest mystery authors of all time: A woman who would later be celebrated as "The Queen of Crime." Christie's dyslexia made accurate spelling difficult, and she'd occasionally even misspell the names of her own characters: in An Appointment with Death, Colonel Carbury's name is later written as "Colonel Carbery."

5. Andrew Jackson

Examples of Old Hickory's seemingly innumerable botched spelling attempts include "devilopment," the continent of "Urope," and performing before a "larg" audience. This ineptitude even went on to become a political punchline. His perennial political rival John Quincy Adamsonce denounced him as "a savage who can scarcely spell his own name." Jackson's retort? "It's a damn poor mind that can think of only one way to spell a word."

6. Albert Einstein

In Einstein's defense, English was his second language. It's therefore easy to understand why spelling and grammatical errors in his works were a constant source of frustration to the physicist. "I cannot write in English," he said, "because of the treacherous spelling."

7. Ernest Hemingway

Hemingway seemed to have difficulty with present participles, as "loving" became "loveing" and "moving" turned into "moveing" in his manuscripts. Whenever an editor complained of these bloopers, however, Hemingway would snap "Well, that's what you're hired to correct!"

8. F. Scott Fitzgerald

The original draft of The Great Gatsby contained literally hundreds of spelling mistakes, some of which are still confounding editors. These include "yatch" (instead of "yacht") and "apon" (instead of "upon"). One of his most famous gaffes, which occurs toward the end of the novel, inspires debate to this day.

9. Olivia Clemens

Samuel Clemens — better known by his pen name "Mark Twain" — delighted in his wife "Livy's" frequent compositional errors. After receiving one of her letters, in which she miraculously made virtually no such bloopers, he wrote, "Oh you darling little speller! — you spelled 'terrible' right, this time. And I won't have it — it is un-Livy-ish. Spell it wrong next time, for I love everything that is like Livy." Despite Samuel's playful jabs, he relied upon his beloved wife as a "faithful, judicious, and painstaking editor" until her death in 1904.

10. William Butler Yeats

According to biographer David A. Ross, "Yeats' spelling, indeed, seems at times a matter of wildly errant guesswork." Ouch. The great Irish poet and senator's idiosyncratic writing style resulted in some distinctively misspelled words cropping up throughout his works, such as "feal" instead of "feel." Despite this Achilles' heel, Yeats won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1923.

11. Dan Quayle

No list of famously bad spellers would be complete without mentioning the 44th Vice President's infamous "Potatoe Incident."

[Alan McDougall]

Here's a classic.

Neil Degrasse Tyson responds to a Religious Troll.

Neil is a renowned physicist I have often read his work and also watched his latest very interesting TV Documentary on the cosmos. I know his position on religion and have listen to his debates on atheism as apposed to theism, however he cant prove his position on religion or God scientifically.

[Jeanne dArc]

I did not mean to be hurtful and bad spelling does not mean someone is not highly intelligent, a fact that I could easily see by reading your various comments on the forum. (With profound respect have you considered that you might be dyslectic)

https://www.google.c...1.0.2tOmGo_0EvA

Examples of famous people who could not spell correctly

1. Jane Austen

Luckily, the author of Emma and Pride and Prejudice was always fortunate enough to find editors who could weed out her various alphabetical mishaps. An early work, written when Austen was 15, was called Love and Freindship.

2. George Washington

According to Richard Lederer in his book More Anguished English, the man who would become the first American president wrote "we find our necessaties are not such as to require an immediate transportation during the harvist" while complaining about a supply shortage during the Revolutionary War.

3. Winston Churchill

Though he later became universally regarded as one of the greatest orators of all time, one of Churchill's early report cards said "Writing is good, but terribly slow — spelling about as bad as it well can be."

4. Agatha Christie

"Writing and spelling were always terribly difficult for me... an extraordinarily bad speller and have remained so until this day." It's incredible to think that this humbling statement came from the pen of one of the greatest mystery authors of all time: A woman who would later be celebrated as "The Queen of Crime." Christie's dyslexia made accurate spelling difficult, and she'd occasionally even misspell the names of her own characters: in An Appointment with Death, Colonel Carbury's name is later written as "Colonel Carbery."

5. Andrew Jackson

Examples of Old Hickory's seemingly innumerable botched spelling attempts include "devilopment," the continent of "Urope," and performing before a "larg" audience. This ineptitude even went on to become a political punchline. His perennial political rival John Quincy Adamsonce denounced him as "a savage who can scarcely spell his own name." Jackson's retort? "It's a damn poor mind that can think of only one way to spell a word."

6. Albert Einstein

In Einstein's defense, English was his second language. It's therefore easy to understand why spelling and grammatical errors in his works were a constant source of frustration to the physicist. "I cannot write in English," he said, "because of the treacherous spelling."

7. Ernest Hemingway

Hemingway seemed to have difficulty with present participles, as "loving" became "loveing" and "moving" turned into "moveing" in his manuscripts. Whenever an editor complained of these bloopers, however, Hemingway would snap "Well, that's what you're hired to correct!"

8. F. Scott Fitzgerald

The original draft of The Great Gatsby contained literally hundreds of spelling mistakes, some of which are still confounding editors. These include "yatch" (instead of "yacht") and "apon" (instead of "upon"). One of his most famous gaffes, which occurs toward the end of the novel, inspires debate to this day.

9. Olivia Clemens

Samuel Clemens — better known by his pen name "Mark Twain" — delighted in his wife "Livy's" frequent compositional errors. After receiving one of her letters, in which she miraculously made virtually no such bloopers, he wrote, "Oh you darling little speller! — you spelled 'terrible' right, this time. And I won't have it — it is un-Livy-ish. Spell it wrong next time, for I love everything that is like Livy." Despite Samuel's playful jabs, he relied upon his beloved wife as a "faithful, judicious, and painstaking editor" until her death in 1904.

10. William Butler Yeats

According to biographer David A. Ross, "Yeats' spelling, indeed, seems at times a matter of wildly errant guesswork." Ouch. The great Irish poet and senator's idiosyncratic writing style resulted in some distinctively misspelled words cropping up throughout his works, such as "feal" instead of "feel." Despite this Achilles' heel, Yeats won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1923.

11. Dan Quayle

No list of famously bad spellers would be complete without mentioning the 44th Vice President's infamous "Potatoe Incident."

Are you sure you still want to try and compile these lists of "facts"? Your track-record from the "last words" list wasn't exactly stellar

Neil is a renowned physicist I have often read his work and also watched his latest very interesting TV Documentary on the cosmos. I know his position on religion and have listen to his debates on atheism as apposed to theism, however he cant prove his position on religion or God scientifically.

His position on religion/God is entirely scientific, by definition.

[Opus Magnus]

Alright, but Jesus didn't go over every single line of Deutronomy and Leviticus, so what do we do when confronted with... required sacrifice laws, required food laws, cleanliness laws.... No one follows these laws, so are we all sinning all the time? Or, if the laws are redone, then where are they posted? How can I follow what hasn't been passed down?

If you are unsure of how to enact a law, or you feel that you are unable to enact a law then you should pray to Christ and God for wisdom and forgiveness.

[Likely Guy]

If you are unsure of how to enact a law, or you feel that you are unable to enact a law then you should pray to Christ and God for wisdom and forgiveness.

Which means what, with respect to Diechecker's queries? We should beg God for forgiveness for not knowing God's intentions despite the cryptic nature of the message?

Edited September 5, 2014 by Likely Guy

[Opus Magnus]

Yea.