Danger: Offensive to all ... religions

[Catfish]

The tale of the monkeys, pretty much summing up my view, and offensive to all ;) :

http://www.ernestcline.com/dmd/dmd.swf
or
http://www.ernestcline.com/dmd/
(faster but smaller)

Greetings,
Catfish

[jumpy]

bravo!

[Deamon]

Cool stuff. I especialy like the oppening. Can it be somehow downloaded ?

Deamon

[Perilscope]

Cool stuff. I especialy like the oppening. Can it be somehow downloaded ?Scroll down the page…:up:
http://www.ernestcline.com/dmd/

[Catfish]

GOD'S WORD

Background: Laura Schlessinger is a US radio personality who dispenses advice to people who call in to her radio show. Recently, she said that as an observant Christian, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22 and cannot be condoned in any circumstance. The following is an open letter to Dr. Laura penned by a US resident, which was posted on the Internet:)


Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to follow them.

a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord (Lev.1:9). The problem is my neighbours. They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.

d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

e) I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

g) Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27. How should they die?

i) I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev.24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)



I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your devoted disciple and adoring fan,
Jake.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rock:

Greetings,
Catfish

[Skybird]

Good one! ;)

[jumpy]

priceless :lol:

[The Avon Lady]

Ignorance is bliss.

[STEED]

Ignorance is bliss.


One of many flaws in the Human Race :yep:

[Catfish]

Hello,
now this should even be corrrect for muslims :hmm: :

http://www.jesuschristsuperstore.net/lfigurespages/lfallah.html

Greetings,
Catfish

[Skybird]

Hello,
now this should even be corrrect for muslims :hmm: :

http://www.jesuschristsuperstore.net/lfigurespages/lfallah.html

Greetings,
Catfish
Holy vision laser sight... :lol:

[Catfish]

Hello Skybird,
" ... "the world revolves around me." (Nietzsche)"
If you saw the video you know that Nietzsche is ... just a monkey lol.

Gives me the opportunity for a shamelaess bump :lol: - sorry but all should see this video.

Greetings,
Catfish

[STEED]

all should see this video. Catfish


I did :P

[Iceman]

Maybe God is a monolith?
http://cecelia.physics.indiana.edu/life/video/2001/monolith.JPG

If the world is so hopeless like is pointed out then if a person or monkey was truly intelligent he would realize there is no hope and why continue on in this monkey exsistence....what folly... take the easy way out....a bullet...a rope....some cyanide.

Return to the dust...monkeys....or take a leap of faith....seek and ye shall find.

[STEED]

Hey the Blackmonolith is back in town :lol:

[Catfish]

Hello,

let me say i respect everyone's view of things, be it political or religious - as long as they do not hurt others - which is sometimes not easy to see. This is just my view of things. I do believe, but not in a wise old man with a beard, or in one of the thousand churches, sects and whatnot that contradict everything a religion should stand for, if it really fulfilled its own ethics. My opinion, and i know i'm instantly stoned when i said this in Beirut or wherever.

Iceman wrote:
" ...If the world is so hopeless like is pointed out then if a person or monkey was truly intelligent he would realize there is no hope and why continue on in this monkey exsistence....what folly... take the easy way out....a bullet...a rope....some cyanide.
Return to the dust...monkeys....or take a leap of faith....seek and ye shall find. ..."

I guess i understand what you mean. This is just what i cannot say for myself - why should there be no hope, why not continue, why return to dust, kill myself - because we are now what we are ? Life can be beautiful, think of sunshine, love, eating, learning, researching, discussing - why do we always need a higher "something" to have faith in us, to go on with our life, research and resolve the riddles of the universe, and to see that others have a right to live too ?

For me there is ethics even without religion. It makes perfect sense to me that beating up someone,killing someone, hurting feelings (also religious ones, ok) etc. is wrong. If i say or claim there is a higher being that made all, sees all, and controls all (well not that maybe, you have your choice to live a sinful life or not), then think of billions of planets, suns, galaxies and imagine someone who listens to your prayer. What i tell those that are honest in their belief: Don't be so arrogant and full of hybris in thinking all this is done for you. What i say to those "TV preachers" is ... better not said here.

How can people use technology to spread their opinion (internet, silicone and plastic made from oil that began to build up 160 million years ago) - a technology they contradict in every sentence they say.

"I am not writing here, believe me".

Greetings,
Catfish

[The Avon Lady]

And another thing - Avon lady quoted someone who studied physics at the MIT - this man is also a creationist who says it is evident the world is 6000 years old, and the evolution of man is directly guided by "him". As a physicist this man must have read Steven Weinbergs "The first three minutes" of the universe - or not ? How can people use technology to spread their opinion (internet, silicone and plastic made from oil that began to build up 160 million years ago) - a technology they contradict in every sentence they say.
I believe the article you are referring to, which I once linked to, is Evolution: Rationality vs. Randomness (http://www.aish.com/societyWork/sciencenature/Evolution_Rationality_vs._Randomness.asp), by Dr. Gerald Schroeder.

In this article, he does not discuss the age of the universe. Where are you quoting him from?

[Catfish]

Hello,
no it indeed is not in this link - however i thought to have read this from Schroeder (?)
Please excuse me, i rest my case as long as i do not find it, if ever.
Remark has been edited.
Best wishes and greetings to Israel,
Catfish

[The Avon Lady]

I'm curious. What's your opinion of this article:

Charlie Darwin's Angels (http://www.aish.com/societyWork/sciencenature/Charlie_Darwins_Angels.asp)

[STEED]

I'm curious. What's your opinion of this article:

Charlie Darwin's Angels (http://www.aish.com/societyWork/sciencenature/Charlie_Darwins_Angels.asp)

Boring this sort of thing has been going on for years.

[Iceman]

I'm curious. What's your opinion of this article:

Charlie Darwin's Angels (http://www.aish.com/societyWork/sciencenature/Charlie_Darwins_Angels.asp)

It is intresting to see scientists dismiss creationism having no "proof" of it's non-exsistence or God ...while holding true to there own doctrines of evolutiuon while at the same time having not enough hard evidence to prove it conclusive....

Guess they have more in common with people of "faith" than I realized...Go Monkey Boys... lol :) jk

[The Avon Lady]

I'm curious. What's your opinion of this article:

Charlie Darwin's Angels (http://www.aish.com/societyWork/sciencenature/Charlie_Darwins_Angels.asp)
Boring this sort of thing has been going on for years.
Thank you for that highly constructive and intellectual assessment.

:nope:

[STEED]

I'm curious. What's your opinion of this article:

Charlie Darwin's Angels (http://www.aish.com/societyWork/sciencenature/Charlie_Darwins_Angels.asp)
Boring this sort of thing has been going on for years.
Thank you for that highly constructive and intellectual assessment.

:nope:


It has so live with it :yep:

[Wim Libaers]

I'm curious. What's your opinion of this article:

Charlie Darwin's Angels (http://www.aish.com/societyWork/sciencenature/Charlie_Darwins_Angels.asp)

It is intresting to see scientists dismiss creationism having no "proof" of it's non-exsistence or God ...while holding true to there own doctrines of evolutiuon while at the same time having not enough hard evidence to prove it conclusive....

Guess they have more in common with people of "faith" than I realized...Go Monkey Boys... lol :) jk

Not really. This is just a consequence of misconceptions about science. Science creates models of the world. All of these models are wrong, in the sense that they do not give exact answers, but only approximations (and even if one of those models were exactly right, we'd never know it because we can't measure with infinite accuracy).

The goal of scientific research is to make the models less wrong, i.e. making them correspond more closely with observable reality. This means that there is a continuous effort to experimentally prove that the current models are flawed. If a scientific theory such as evolution survives for a long time, it could mean that it is simply not interesting enough to research (not the case here), or that it has survived an enormous amount of critical investigation.

This process is not at all comparable to declaring an article of faith that everyone is supposed to accept without proof.

For details about the theory, have a look at this:
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html
The third Q (I thought evolution was just a theory. Why do you call it a fact?) will be interesting.