[Replying to the remark that we as a human species are not weak, but robust as shown by our scientific advances]

Scientific advances? Like polluting the environment and inventing cancer!?

Most politicians and religious leaders are members of secret societies. Masonry and the Vatican control the power of the world. These societies and the Vatican practice satanism. They have created international terrorism with the purpose of creating the third World War. They want to make it appear that all conflicts have been caused by conflicts and divisions between world countries and religions to establish a one world government and religion ruled by a leader who will claim to be the prophesied Messiah and to rule by divine authority. They will quote Bible verses to deceive people into thinking this is the Kingdom of God, and they will make all kind of signs and wonders. The UFO phenomenon and New Age Movement have been created for this purpose. This is the kingdom of the beast prophesied in the Bible in which all nations will gather. All people will worship the beast and all true followers of Yeshua will be persecuted. The aliens are fallen angels and hybrids, the gods worshipped by the ancient civilizations. Of course they will present great benefits to the population and they will relase new technologies and promises of peace and prosperity but do not believe them, they are only lying. This will be a fascist government, where all the people will be implanted with mind control chips and the useless eaters put to death. They have planted many lies to keep us away from the truth. God is not of any religion or denomination, because all are controlled and have substituted God because they claim to be the Truth, the Way and the Life. God is in our heart and teaches us individually, we must only understand and do what He commands. The Only Way is Yahshua the Messiah. What the majority believes is always the lie. Where the carcass is (false Christ), the vultures will gather (multitudes). <<<a href="http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/" target="_blank">http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/</a>>> <<<a href="http://www.sherryshriner.com/" target="_blank">http://www.sherryshriner.com/</a>>> <<<a href="http://www.mt.net/~watcher/" target="_blank">http://www.mt.net/~watcher/</a>>>

I was an atheist most of my life, since the age of about 12. After ditching the tooth fairy, easter bunny and santa claus, God was next in line. This was my liberation. I was of the opinion that there was no God, and that all rational people should draw the same conclusion. The only thing that could possibly budge me from my position was EVIDENCE.

Well, in September 2004, I got the evidence. Absolute proof in fact. I got it shortly after I wrote message 666 on the 3rd anniversary of 9/11. Message 666 was the culmination of my 37 years of searching for the words to describe my ideology/religion (as an atheist I was STRONGLY supporting freedom and human rights). You can read about message 666 here (I've posted it before):

<a href="http://antisubjugator.blogspot.com/2005/07/sign-of-beast.html" target="_blank">http://antisubjugator.blogspot.com/2005/07/sign-of-beast.html</a>

However, as you have probably guessed already, the proof that I was given was not independently scientifically verifiable. Which means you have no option other than to dismiss it. Or at most, you can only accept it as a theory. So anyway, here is the "theory":

We are living in a computer simulation, and God is the computer programmer. This model does not require supernatural powers. All it requires is for us to have computer technology more advanced than we have at the moment - Artificial Intelligence for starters. In a 15 billion year history, don't you think it is quite improbable that we happened to be born just when computers, nukes and the internet were invented? And also just when the USSR collapsed opening the way for worldwide freedom. And on a millenium year as well. A mere 1 million years either way would have drastically altered the simulation. Hell, even 1000 years either way would have drastically changed things.

I believe the universe is only a few decades old. God didn't sit around twiddling his thumbs for 15 billion years waiting for us to evolve. The whole thing is simulated. The whole universe is just a "virtual reality". We're probably really on a space ship, and this simulation is being run for entertainment purposes (can you think of anything better than a virtual reality to keep yourself entertained?).

And the reason God doesn't want to prove his existence is so that people will become atheists and be totally free. This is what he wants. He doesn't want to tell people how to live their lives, he wants us to make up our own rules. The only way we can be totally free is if we believe there is no God, or at least, that there's no God who's going to sit in judgement. In actual fact, we are all NATURAL ANIMALS. None of us are sinners. We all act in accordance with our genes, reacting to our environment, and using our imperfect logic skills. None of these things are our fault.

Anyway, my point is that there is definitely an intelligent entity in another dimension to us. So if you're a hard-core atheist, think again, because you're actually wrong (even though I can't scientifically prove that to your satisfaction). You need to update your model and allow for the possibility of a God, and convert to agnosticism instead. BTW, a computer simulation gives a logical reason why we can't reproduce life from raw ingredients - the properties are defined in software, which we don't have access to.

When we got to the [Mexican] border, it was raining and really gloomy outside. I prayed for some sunshine for the duration of my stay in my mom's hometown. When we finally did get there, it was sunny and the sky was blue with only a few clouds. It stayed that way until the day I left. That morning, it began to rain and the sky became cloudy again. There isn't any rational explanation I can offer as to why this happened, but it did happen.

Writers are payed liars! Think about it. People who write novels are actually lying through their teeth. We applaud them and pay money for their lies, encouraging them to lie even more! Lying is endorsed by society...

How do you dress up an idea that makes no sense, get it accepted as science, and even as a scientific fact? Well it isn't easy. You'll have to stretch the truth in several different ways. First, and most obviously, you have to direct attention away from the fact that your idea is nothing more than handwaving...

If Jesus chose it, then it can't be torture, Jesus is more like a s/m kinda guy. God said, if you wanna do some good for humanity, these are the terms. You don't have to, but if you really want to do some good... God didn't make him do it.

Another trick that comes in handy is to shift the burden of proof... it never hurts to put'em on their heels by asking them to falsify our theory...

The site is entitled '29+ Evidences for Macroevolution' but I came away thinking it is a real misnomer. Though it proposes to be an objective approach to the subject, it is actually a clever attempt to hoodwink those less knowledgable readers...

Ahh, but who are we fooling?... You're not creating anything new. But bird's beak changes shape and size... Same bird. But since allele frequencies do change, therefore the giraffe came from the fish?

I was wondering if Atheists are attatched to their dead. If an Aunt dies, does an atheist mourn?

Perhaps by some magical process species transform themselves into other species.

[On the Internet Infidels board] "Why are there so many Atheists on this forum. Both in the Religion section and the Political section? Because Atheists tend to like to mock Jesus and Atheists also like to bash the president. Is this a common denominator for Atheists?

As Christians, {the other poster} and myself can actually say that slavery is actually wrong, everywhere and for everyone, even while recognizing there is disagreement about it.

I would never say something like that because I don't want Jews to find me offensive. I don't care if liberals find me offensive or not. I find them offensive.

the motivation of those who ignore all the science that creates problems for evolutionary theory is clearly based not on scientific reasoning... but instead on the negation principle i.e.- it's either evolution or creation, i don't accept creation,therefore evolution must be correct.

Right, now as an atheist, you just have to accept that humanity is a destructive plague on the Earth!

then we have the problem of transition species in the fossil record, to be facetious we can't find pigs that fly. we can't find fossils of intermediate stages of mutation or morphology, no cat-dogs, bird-rats, cows with feathers, etc.

I'm sorry, but you're confusing mythology for science, but what's new? Next, you'll have to narrow the scope of your theory. Defending the absurd is hard enough as it is...

If I valued conformity, keeping in mind that I live in America, then I wouldn't be a Muslim. I am as non-conformist as they come. If you are a liberal, then you are a conformist.

According to my theology, the gods' primary influence on the world is chance events. And what's more of a chance event than gambling? Therefore, each god must strive very hard to be the one who controls the state lotteries, and even standard casino gambling must be valuable.

How is it that there are so many happy, joyous, and fufilled nuns in the world? These women have given up freedom, possessions, children, and marraige, and yet, they are joyful... Does this speak to any athiests in support of the existence of God? If not, to what do you attribute their happiness?

It would be hard to imagine a more inverted view of reality. *Evolution* (!?) is a compelling explanation for biology? You've got to be kidding. Have you been living in a cave or something?

This entire board is a rebellion against God, whether you realize it or not.

I know your type and a mountain falling on your head wouldn't convince you. Just remember, if you can, the following word : 'Ooops'. It'll be most appropriate for you on a certain special Day.

... and yes, male gays do molest the vast majority of children...

One of you linked to this S.A.L. list of over one-thousand Bible discrepancies/errors... I just laughed! I'm not even close to what one would consider a scholar in this field and I'm aware of over 31,000 (!!) 'discrepancies'... Hence, I'm afraid that those of you mounting the 'Bible-error-horse' are, relatively speaking, in pre-Kindergarden insofar as this topic is concerned. There's no nice way to put it, you are clueless as to the extent of this topic and the studies that are behind it. Frankly, those of you smart enough to have understood what I've posted here should simply say to yourself, 'I'm not discussing this subject any further until I find out what the heck this is all about.'

The homosexual movement wants to perpetuate the lie that being gay is normal, and it is genetic, because the movement needs new people to replace the overwhelming amount of homosexuals who kill themselves or die from disease...

'Mindless slaughter', you say? Do you have a direct hot-line into God's mind? Do you know His purpose and reasons?

And quite frankly, Secular Humanism is sooo yesterday.

Marriage is a bond of love and unifying sexual union. Two gays cannot have this, because there is no sexual union between two people, there is no procreation, or the sembelence thereof.

Answer me this, if the Bible contradictions represent such a clear proof of its unworthiness, then why is it that scholars on both sides of the fence continue spending entires lives investigating the matter? You don't see anyone spending their life investigating the phlogiston theory or the blood humors theory any more, do you?

Let's look at biology. The male and the female are designed tio have sexual intercourse with each other for the sake of procreation. Two males or two females cannot procreate, thus there is no sexual bond or activity, thus unnatural acts.

I oppose the Gay Rights Movement because their political agenda undermines family values and recruits young proteges into the depraved livestyle.

[Replying to 'But your post is so insulting and arrogant that any real discussion is unlikely to occur.'] "No, maybe my post is so 'to the point' that you are stopped dead in your tracks. Thus, all you have left is ad hominem - the catch-all strategy (i.e., if you can't beat 'em, toss dirt on 'em!).

A gay person CANNOT have sex. How do two men have sex? One sticking his {graphic detail deleted}? Is this sex? No. Why? Because ... [the structures involved] were not designed for this.

Specifically, you guys are up to around 1,000 alleged 'problems'. I (nowhere near being a full-fledged scholar in the subject) am up to 31,000. Yes, I would have to say that compared to even one as lowly as me you guys are in pre-kindergarden in this subject. Anyone that is objective and honest would have to agree with this statement.

A union is between a man and a woman only. If the USA legalizes marriage between two men and two women, what is next, polygamy? Marriage to animals? Marriage to children? What's next?

Similarly, even if you understood the details of how the gods control the weather, you still couldn't know what the weather would be without knowing the laws of meteorology, because other factors than the gods' actions are involved.

Even if a man and a woman do not want children, 99.9999999% still have sex with each other. Thus marriage=sexual union.

Maybe you read my original post. In it I said that my studies have made me aware of over 31,000 alleged problems in the Bible (instead of just the paltry 1,000 or so that are listed at some Bible-scoffing site). My point is this: suppose I were to respond to your question with my utmost ability and using all of my research notes. Guess what would come next? Here are three possibilities: 1. You'll be convinced that it actually wasn't a 'problem', and convert to Jesus Christ right on the spot. 2. You'll not accept my answer altogether or find some fault with it or have some 'yes, but...' 3. You'll accept my answer completely but then hit me with <u>another</u> one of the 29,999 that I'm aware of. Round-n-round she'll go... Now, my money is on two of the above three (care to guess which two?). <u>That</u> is why your question is not the right one.

I feel sorry about your (apparent) lack of intelligence... But that is not the point of this thread. You have still evaded the question -- Why are sisters happy?

We choose our sexual orientation. People are not born gay, alcoholic, or drug addicted. This is a choice that we have made during a period of our lives. Most gays choose this orientation after they reach puberty.

Well, if it makes you feel any better, the god in question might have chosen those numbers [in the lottery] on the basis of who he wanted to win the large runner-up prize. After all, every choice has a certain amount of by-product effect.

Hey, why mess around with religion, politics, the weather, and the populations of small animals (all of which are also excellent ways for the gods to influence the world) when you can just decide which numbers come up in the lottery? But anything that valuable must be a highly coveted commodity, so any given god doesn't control the lottery all the time. In this vein, it seems strange that Yahweh would forbid gambling. I think the likely explanation is that that was a non-inspired mistake in the Bible--an imperfection not put in by Yahweh at all.

[To another Christian]You really think so, don't you? [Some might want] 'Sincere answers' on Bible discrepancies from an 'Infidel' site? Lessee, next time I have a question on my automobile transmission, I'll go to a foot specialist... yeah... that'll be the perfect place! Please excuse the sarcasm, Haran, but you do see where your comment leads to, don't you?

Now to humanity. Unlike animals, we have feelings and emotions.

The difference between God and Santa is that God is real.

I am very much against gay marriage, and homosexuality in general. The original poster (OP) placed some arguments on the table which seem rational, but are truly irrational, dangerous and stupid.

Oral pleasure is simply masterbation between two people... Ergo, it is IMPOSSIBLE for two women to have sex with each other, it just cannot be done. All they can do is to masterbate each other.