Is Science getting closer to God and the Bible?

[Darth Rotor]

[nitpick]A bullock is a castrated bull.[/nitpick]

Good point. Perhaps I should say "A bullock is bull sans bollocks."

Come on over to the house, Taffer, we're having prairie oysters and cold beer.

DR

 

[wahrheit]

I have a feeling that that president (who we know believes in God since an atheist can't get elected president in the US) will pray to God for guidance.

We know that the US president believes in God and will pray to him for guidance, because an atheist can't get elected president?

Your line of argument is an insult to the intelligence of a 5 year old.

 

[Cleon]

You are hoping that the US will use nuclear weapons just to make a biblical prediction apparently come true? Only a horrible person would think that way.

I read it the same way.

DOC...Whenever I think you can't possibly say something more bizarre and disturbing than what you already have, you go and outdo yourself. Congratulations.

 

[Slimething]

Let's say a US president decides to nuke people who want to fight against Jerusalem and to destroy Israel. (aka Iran's leadership) I have a feeling that that president (who we know believes in God since an atheist can't get elected president in the US) will pray to God for guidance. If the US uses nuclear weapons first, God will be a part of that decision (in my lifetime anyway).

First: Why would the US be involved at all when Israel has The Bomb already?

Second: Jerusalem and Israel are not synonymous. Jerusalem does not depend on Israel being around for its existence.

Third: Assuming the President may believe in a god, what makes you believe it's your god s/he worships?

Fourth: Did you skip your meds?

 

[six7s]

If the US uses nuclear weapons first, God will be a part of that decision (in my lifetime anyway).

In your dreams

And in the nightmares of those who can think for themselves

 

[H3LL]

(who we know believes in God since an atheist can't get elected president in the US)

Says who? You?

Is this more Lying for Jesus?

There is nothing, to my knowledge, that prevents and atheist becoming president...Where in US law or elsewhere does it state such a thing?

There were at least 4 presidents that were not members of any church and 6 who's religious views were doubtful.

For all you know Bush is an atheist.

Would anyone be surprised to discover a politician lied to get votes?

Some people Lie for Jesus even though the bible specifically says it's a bad thing.

.

 

[DOC]

We know that the US president believes in God and will pray to him for guidance, because an atheist can't get elected president?

Your line of argument is an insult to the intelligence of a 5 year old.

I don't mean to insult. I'm just speaking reality. A publicly admitted atheist can't get elected president in the US and probably not a US Senator either. That's just the reality in America 2007.

 

[joobz]

I don't mean to insult. I'm just speaking reality. A publicly admitted atheist can't get elected president in the US and probably not a US Senator either. That's just the reality in America 2007.

Interesting you bring taht up in in a thread that has nothing to do with this topic. It is obvious you are a simple troll attempting to provoke.

 

[DOC]

You are hoping that the US will use nuclear weapons just to make a biblical prediction apparently come true?

No, if I had my way, I would have "hoped" sin would have never entered this world. But since it has, God will deal with it.

 

[kmortis]

Interesting you bring taht up in in a thread that has nothing to do with this topic. It is obvious you are a simple troll attempting to provoke.

Well, there's a shock....

 

[joobz]

Well, there's a shock....

Yeah, I try very hard to give the benefit of the doubt. I've been willing all this time to assume DOC truly was an honest person trying to learn or participate. But you can only read the exact same nonsense before you realize that this isn't a person who is capable of reasonable thought or honesty. I'd rather assume he is a troll than to think that he is truly that terrible of a person.

 

[lysdexia]

I learned to spell "fonetiklee" and vowels have been my Achilles heel to this day. I guess lysdexia didn't have a point to make after all.



Bulls are ruminants.

Let English be English, and Latin, Hellènic, Hibiru, and Thewdish be their own. However, English has been dead for over 1000 years, and what you and ye speak today is muttish, where none know what sounds any kinney or foreign vowel or consonant cluster makes without soundun or writun lik a illiterate retard.

I'll PayPal you $200 if you know how to say "juxta".

 

[kmortis]

Yeah, I try very hard to give the benefit of the doubt. I've been willing all this time to assume DOC truly was an honest person trying to learn or participate. But you can only read the exact same nonsense before you realize that this isn't a person who is capable of reasonable thought or honesty. I'd rather assume he is a troll than to think that he is truly that terrible of a person.

po-TA-to, po-TAA-to...

Actually, I think he is that horrible of a person, just he doesn't see it that way. God made this place, ya dig, and it's his to do with as he pleases. End of story. If it's all god's doing, it removes all ultimate culpability from us.

 

[Ducky]

I don't mean to insult. I'm just speaking reality. A publicly admitted atheist can't get elected president in the US and probably not a US Senator either. That's just the reality in America 2007.

Not familiar with Ernie Chambers then?

 

[lysdexia]

po-TA-to, po-TAA-to...

What's this about vowel length?

 

[wahrheit]

I don't mean to insult. I'm just speaking reality. A publicly admitted atheist can't get elected president in the US and probably not a US Senator either. That's just the reality in America 2007.

DOC, I'm perfectly aware of the fact that an outspoken atheist is quite unlikely to become the next President of the United States.

The problem is, that this has absolutely nothing to do with my previous reply to your post. My reply was complaining about your absurd line of argument. You might try rereading it.

 

[wolfgirl]

Let's say a US president decides to nuke people who want to fight against Jerusalem and to destroy Israel. (aka Iran's leadership) I have a feeling that that president (who we know believes in God since an atheist can't get elected president in the US) will pray to God for guidance. If the US uses nuclear weapons first, God will be a part of that decision (in my lifetime anyway).

So your "loving" god would command the president to kill, maim and deform millions of people because their leader is bad? What a guy!

 

[H3LL]

I'll PayPal you $200 if you know how to say "juxta".

"Fish".

I'll take cash.



.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Let's say a US president decides to nuke people who want to fight against Jerusalem and to destroy Israel. (aka Iran's leadership) I have a feeling that that president (who we know believes in God since an atheist can't get elected president in the US) will pray to God for guidance. If the US uses nuclear weapons first, God will be a part of that decision.

The Bible is quite good at distinguishing between direct acts of God and people working through God. God didn't destroy Jericho and carry out a genocide of its population - Joshua, under the influence of God, did.

And I still have no clue as to why you still think it's a nuclear weapon - except, of course, from the fact that you want it to be, so that the Bible will contain at least one 'reference to modern science'.

 

[Tanstaafl]

Maybe DOC is ready to admit that god has no supernatural power, and needs the technology (and the hands) of mere humans to accomplish anything at all?