Black people in Poland

Are you referring to me or Riff ?

riff... i know youre special... :)

uh.... Jasiu=riff now?

fisz... dont be silly... :)

Fish is this th esame Riff I am thinking about?

Yes...I believe so

the one who almost bit your head off, called both of us names a number of times and tried to pick up a teenage girl off the forum?

Yeah....same guy. Funny huh?

what can I say:)

i thought it was to control women?

and jesus is the son of god...they are not one in the same.

You don't know your trinity then do you bud? God the father, God, the son and God, the holy spirit (he got put on light clerical duties for having his fingers in the till or something) :)

when i used to cross myself at church it was the father, the son and the holy ghost.

or there is this slab of information that doesnt draw too many conclusions:

Is Jesus God? The Historical Dispute
Is Jesus God? The answer to this question is the only real dispute surrounding the historical Jesus. No legitimate scholar today denies that Jesus is a historic figure that walked on this earth about 2,000 years ago, that he did remarkable wonders and acts of charity, and that He died a horrible death on a Roman cross just outside Jerusalem. The emotionally-charged dispute focuses specifically on whether Jesus was God incarnate who rose from the dead three days after His Crucifixion.

Is Jesus God? The Only Alternatives
Is Jesus God? Many people have dealt with this "spiritual" dispute by intellectually accepting Jesus as a great man, great teacher, or great prophet. However, Jesus and His inspired followers didn't mince words when they declared Him to be God (John 10:30-38, Matthew 16:13-17, Mark 14:61-64, John 14:6, Hebrews 1:8, Colossians 1:16, John 12:40-41 [quoting Isaiah 6:1-10]). Therefore, any type of intellectual compromise calling Jesus a "good man" is logically inconsistent. Why? Because there are really only three legitimate alternatives for the identity of Jesus Christ. He is either a liar, a lunatic or our Lord and God. Since Jesus claimed to be God, His claims are either true or false. If false, He must have been a liar, deliberately misleading the multitudes. Or, He was a lunatic, sincerely believing Himself to be God, when in reality He was just a man. However, if Jesus was a "good man," as most people now agree, how then could He be both good and crazy, or good and a liar? There is only one logically consistent alternative - He must have been telling the truth. In addition to the logical inconsistency, the remarkable historical, archaeological and manuscript evidence shows that Jesus was neither a liar nor a lunatic. Again, the only position left is that His claim is true. Jesus is Lord and God.

The only real argument that remains, is that Jesus was just a legend or myth. There is little likelihood that Jesus' claims are legend. There just wasn't enough time for any legendary development of the story to replace what really happened. For instance, we now know that the Gospels were written 30 to 50 years after the crucifixion of Jesus. More dramatically, we now date some of the early Christian creeds, proclaiming the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, to 3 to 10 years after His crucifixion. This includes Paul's letters to the Corinthians, Romans and Galatians. Finally, if Jesus' claim of deity was a myth, the early Jewish opponents of Christianity would surely have presented the fact that these claims never happened. Unlike modern skeptics, the Jewish rabbis never denied that Jesus made the claim that He was God. Instead, they called Him a liar, and tried Him for blasphemy.

Is Jesus God? The Only Answer
Is Jesus God? Once you have asked all your questions, weighed all the evidence, and tested all the arguments, you will ultimately be confronted with this question. In Mathew 16:15, Jesus put it this way, 'But who do you say that I am?' One of His disciples, Simon Peter, replied: 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' What is your reply?

I asked you first, but have it your way. No, I can’t give you a 100% proof of his existence… But neither can you give me a 100% proof that he doesn’t exist. :) For your every argument stating that He (or She as you wrote :) ) is just a product of someone’s wicked imagination I will have an contra-argument, and vice versa, for my every attempt to persuade you that he is real you will find some facts against it. We will only know who’s right after our time has come. Until then we can only believe in his existence or lack of existence. Yeah, believe, and that’s the key word. That’s what it’s all about. That’s why it’s called faith. It’s this uncertainty of existence that’s actually the biggest test for people.


Can you prove that religion was only created by people to control masses and not that it became a weapon of manipulation somewhere in the process? I want some hard scientific proof, and not assumptions. Assumptions are good for silly religious nutters, like me, and not for rational thinking people like you. :)

Oh boze...we might have to get a religion thread going.

From a brotha wanting to go to Poland to The Holy Trinity. Don't you guys think you've strayed a wee bit? :) :)

Mate. Thanks to going to all that trouble, but really it wasn't necessary, no really it wasn't. :)


My reply would be that I once had to go see the school priest. He asked me what I would like to confess. I'd not actually done anything wrong (I was only 8 years old) but i'd been put under strict instructions from my teacher to think of at least three things that I needed to be absolved of. Well, tricky. But bless my little cotton socks, I tried.

I was, looking back, mightily impressed by the poker face the priest kept as I told him solemnly that i'd sinned and I hadn't actually changed my socks when I told my mum I had.

I got three hail marys and one our father (Got off lightly there!) and that was that. I was free from my evil doing. (phew)

But what is my point?

I think that by that point, even the priest knew how daft it all was. But we all went through the motions because we all believed that we had to, even though no one can prove to us that we do.

But isn't that the point? :)
Bertrand Russell said that there is a teapot orbiting the earth. Does that mean I should be out in my garden night upon night, telescope trained to the heavens trying to catch a glimpse of Haley's Wedgewood?

Of course not!
It's not up to me to prove that there isn't a large tea cup who's spout we only see once every 365 days. No, it's up to him to prove to the rest of us that there is. Same with this. The one that is so convinced about there being a creator and a divine trinity and all that should have the onus firmly placed on his shoulders, to back it up and show you they're right.


I don't need to. To quote Christopher Hitchens. "What can be asserted without evidence, can also be dismissed without evidence."

King Sobieski and Matyjasz are obviously not American. I find them to be very friendly people. The Christians in America have a reputation for being mean and for not making sense when they talk about Christ which only turns people away.

First of, I didn't start this whole conversation. I'm not here to convince people that they are right are wrong, but I don't like to be called an "Ignorant dumbass sheep". I really couldn't care less if other people believe in God or don't. I respect point of view of people from all religions as well as atheists, but I'm not too fond of situations where people try to force on me their one and only truth. Especially when they preach science and rational thinking, but simply can't scientifically and rationally prove their right.

You're sounding a bit annoyed M. Which is most unlike you. :) No offence intended and if you've taken any then you should definitely give it back immediately. :)

I take an evangelical dislike to those evangelical people who insist that god exists, praise the lord and if you're not as convinced as they are, you'd better get your factor 50 on as it's going to be a hot old timein the after life. :)

As you have so rightly said, you didn't start this discussion and discussion is what I hope it will remain, though as always, when you (meaning people in general not you personally) :) touch on religion, it usually ends up being a bit of a flame fest. :)

Just a side note for all you science minded, rational thinkers---Albert Einstein believed there is a God, and I doubt any of you were more intelligent than him.:)


I was wondering the same thing.....I had to go back several posts just to figure out how it started.:)

So too does Dr Stephen Hawking and that guy is so smart, he can manage to lose me with the mere title of one of his books. "A brief history of Time" (if time is infinite, how can it be brief?) Lost already. Thanks Bill. :) So what hope does that give me :)

I have my own personal beliefs which I don't wish to share, I merely can't abide people who love to claim they are right, when they have nothing but belief to back them up and they lure the gullible and the vunerable. :)

And one more thing. This lack of evidence is basically crucial in the whole idea of faith. I believe that the whole life is just a huge test. What would be the purpose of this test if we already knew the answer to the questions?

"There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Huegel, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” :)

And one oe from father Tischner : “Wiara jest w gruncie rzeczy smutną koniecznością. Gdybyśmy mogli mieć wiedzę, nie potrzebowalibyśmy mieć wiary. Rzecz w tym, że nie możemy mieć wiedzy. Są rzeczy, które przerastają możliwości ludzkiego rozumu. Jest światło, które oślepia. Tak jest z Bogiem.”

Translation: „ Faith is basically a sad must. If we could have the knowledge, we wouldn’t need to have faith. The point is that we can’t have the knowledge. There are things that overgrow the capabilities of human mind. There is a light that blinds. This is the case with God.”


I guess religious people in general have a reputation for not making much sense when talking about Christ. I can see why actually. :)


I'm not annoyed. :)

I agree with most of what you wrote, except the last part only because I don't think anyone on this forum is so gullible and vulnerable that they would drop their beliefs to go along with what someone on here says about religion. Now in the real world, I understand your point. Personally, I don't care for evangelical types, but I just ignore them. I really don't care if someone believes I'm going to hell if I'm not "saved". Like you, I have my own beliefs and do not to push them on anyone. I may state what they are, but I don't expect to change how anyone else feels.

As for Hawkings, you are right about his intelligence. I was watching a biography of him about a week ago, and I was still confused by some of his theories.:)

You make perfect sense when you talk about it. Here in the US some people speak differently. They call it Christianese because it's like a different language. I guess you'd have to hear it to see what I mean. :)

I have never heard that term. Who are the ones that use it?

In Poland there's a saying (I think it was father Tischner who said it first) :

"Można być dobrym człowiekiem nie będąc katolikiem, ale nie można być dobrym katolikiem nie będąc człowiekiem."

Translation: "You can be a good human not being catholic, but you can't be a good catholic not being a human." :)


Once I watched a Christian TV program… I think it was called TBN... About 30 words Christ being said in 2 minutes and something about the hellish flames that will digest the sinners, etc.. I think I know what you are talking about. :)

Most people who use Christianese are Christians who don't often associate with others outside of church or their circle of friends. They all use unique words or sayings that makes sense to only them. And they turn around and use those same words to try and explain their beliefs to others and they don't get it. You can even find stuff about it on google.

Good lad! :)


Is that why we don't get a resit but buddhists do? I want to complain to OFGOD :)


I guess that is the problem though. This lack of evidence and reliance upon faith. I suppose it all comes down to how much we're prepared to believe without proof. I'm human, I make mistakes. I might have always fancied myself as an Airline pilot but I won't just jump into the cockpit of a 747 tomorrow and really and truly believe I can pilot it to Australia.

Why?
Because, I know that there is a fair chance I might not be as good as I think I am.
I'd rather question my beliefs and be open to the possibility that I might not be right.

Perhaps, I am wrong and what you say is 100% absolutely the truth. Part of me hopes that to be true, I mean wouldn't it be great??

But I won't blindly therefore dismiss the possibility it might not be.

I admit it, i'm an empiricist. (Allbeit a rather relaxed one)

If a tree falls in the forest but no one is around to see it, does it make a noise? Well, how can we know for sure?

We can't.
I'm prepared to say that I don't know on that one. I hope it does, but I won't tell you all absolutely, 100% that tree made a noise, because that one time it might not have.

Yep, TBN has a lot of people who talk like that.

I remember that process well.

i wasnt actually asking for your reply, that was part of the text i found.

Were you saying that the onus is on me to prove that Jesus is God?