Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

Politics, Government, or Religion Chat Bring your flamesuit!







Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 10th, 2010, 12:11 PM   #61
brewmenn
Grumpy old man.
 
brewmenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Inkster, MI
Posts: 10,298
iTrader: (9)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGoodBuzz View Post
I believe there was a "creator" too. Carbon being one of them. I don't, however, believe there was a conscience involved, nor an intent. So where does that leave us?
It leaves us with very different definitions of "creator". I can't claim to know what the original author meant.
brewmenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 12:28 PM   #62
L4CX
Out for the Summer!
 
L4CX's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-16-07
Location: Hillsdale, MI
Posts: 4,872
iTrader: (5)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGoodBuzz View Post
I believe there was a "creator" too. Carbon being one of them. I don't, however, believe there was a conscience involved, nor an intent. So where does that leave us?
Quote:
Originally Posted by brewmenn View Post
It leaves us with very different definitions of "creator". I can't claim to know what the original author meant.
I honestly don't see how someone could think "Creator" when they think of a Chemical "Accident". I just think that a Creator entitles an Intelligence of some sort. It's a Large Stretch. IMO.
L4CX is online now   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 12:39 PM   #63
AGoodBuzz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 12-09-07
Location: Canton, MI
Posts: 1,557
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FORD FLARESIDE View Post
What is wrong with you?

I've stated that twice.

I've never met you and you post hate speech about my beliefs. Its obvious you know nothing about Chistianity, but try to destroy it by spewing hatred here on a daily basis. Do you realize your mentality is that of terrorist? Your actions are that of someone trying to destroy Christianity, which for a believer, is their life. One more step for you, and you're actions will be crossing that line of insanity. Seriously I don't want to read about you walking into a church with a loaded gun. Hmmmm.... Sure sounds like you think you are a better and morally superior person to me. What do you say all?


Dude, get some help. Please............

I suspect there are a lot of avid Christians on this site that would think that what you said is a bit.... Exteme.

Hate speech...

So asking questions is hate speech...

Wow...

So asking questions are the actions of a terrorist...

Wow...

It sounds like what you would endorse is a country ruled and governed by the Christian religion...

A theocracy...

Like the countries our founders fled...
AGoodBuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 12:42 PM   #64
AGoodBuzz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 12-09-07
Location: Canton, MI
Posts: 1,557
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by L4CX View Post
I just think that a Creator entitles an Intelligence of some sort. It's a Large Stretch. IMO.
I agree. An intelligent creator does seem like a stretch.
AGoodBuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 12:43 PM   #65
disorder xj
Happy,happy,joy,joy
 
disorder xj's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-13-06
Location: Mio MI.
Posts: 2,899
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FORD FLARESIDE View Post
What is wrong with you?

I've stated that twice.

I've never met you and you post hate speech about my beliefs. Its obvious you know nothing about Chistianity, but try to destroy it by spewing hatred here on a daily basis. Do you realize your mentality is that of terrorist? Your actions are that of someone trying to destroy Christianity, which for a believer, is their life. One more step for you, and you're actions will be crossing that line of insanity. Seriously I don't want to read about you walking into a church with a loaded gun.


Dude, get some help. Please............
This one brings the funny. So asking someone to prove that the USA was founded as a christian country( which it was not ) is hate speech . I think Your the one that needs some help. Ever here of freedom of speech?

So You think be questioning You religion is trying to destory it? You must not have much faith in it holding up to debate.

Last edited by disorder xj; June 10th, 2010 at 12:48 PM.
disorder xj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 12:45 PM   #66
L4CX
Out for the Summer!
 
L4CX's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-16-07
Location: Hillsdale, MI
Posts: 4,872
iTrader: (5)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGoodBuzz View Post
I agree. An intelligent creator does seem like a stretch.
Huh, Out of context. What a Surprise. .
L4CX is online now   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 12:56 PM   #67
AGoodBuzz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 12-09-07
Location: Canton, MI
Posts: 1,557
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by L4CX View Post
Huh, Out of context. What a Surprise. .
What context? I took it verbatim.
AGoodBuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 01:00 PM   #68
L4CX
Out for the Summer!
 
L4CX's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-16-07
Location: Hillsdale, MI
Posts: 4,872
iTrader: (5)
Quote:
Originally Posted by L4CX View Post
I honestly don't see how someone could think "Creator" when they think of a Chemical "Accident". I just think that a Creator entitles an Intelligence of some sort. It's a Large Stretch. IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGoodBuzz View Post
I agree. An intelligent creator does seem like a stretch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGoodBuzz View Post
What context? I took it verbatim.
Verbatim = Excluding sentences that make the original text fit to your means? Because I mean it's a large stretch to think that a Chemical Reaction could be considered a Creator. it's an Accident (if anything). No creation, just...er....oops.
L4CX is online now   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 01:13 PM   #69
brewmenn
Grumpy old man.
 
brewmenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Inkster, MI
Posts: 10,298
iTrader: (9)
Quote:
Originally Posted by L4CX View Post
I honestly don't see how someone could think "Creator" when they think of a Chemical "Accident". I just think that a Creator entitles an Intelligence of some sort. It's a Large Stretch. IMO.
I agree. I have a tough time believing that the author of that document intended it to refer to a chemical accident.

I did a little research and found this:

http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration...nt/compare.htm

First Draft:
Quote:
We hold these Truths to be self evident; that all Men are created equal and independent; that from that equal Creation they derive Rights inherent and unalienable
Reported Draft:
Quote:
We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with inherent & inalienable rights
Engrossed Copy:
Quote:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights
It appears to me that in the development of this document it progressed from a neutral statement of creation to a more religious one.
brewmenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 01:24 PM   #70
AGoodBuzz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 12-09-07
Location: Canton, MI
Posts: 1,557
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by L4CX View Post
Verbatim = Excluding sentences that make the original text fit to your means? Because I mean it's a large stretch to think that a Chemical Reaction could be considered a Creator. it's an Accident (if anything). No creation, just...er....oops.
Check your facts. The definition of create does not require a conscience being or intent. It can happen entirely by accident. "The rain created many dangers to drivers that day."....
AGoodBuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 01:27 PM   #71
AGoodBuzz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 12-09-07
Location: Canton, MI
Posts: 1,557
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by brewmenn View Post
I agree. I have a tough time believing that the author of that document intended it to refer to a chemical accident.

I did a little research and found this:

http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration...nt/compare.htm

First Draft:


Reported Draft:


Engrossed Copy:


It appears to me that in the development of this document it progressed from a neutral statement of creation to a more religious one.
Then why is it that the only references to the word Christian are negative comments about the Christian King? Doesn't sound religious to me at all.
AGoodBuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 01:59 PM   #72
brewmenn
Grumpy old man.
 
brewmenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Inkster, MI
Posts: 10,298
iTrader: (9)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGoodBuzz View Post
Then why is it that the only references to the word Christian are negative comments about the Christian King? Doesn't sound religious to me at all.
And that reference was removed in the final copy, further backing up my point that it progressed from a position less supportive on religion to one more supportive of religion.
brewmenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 02:01 PM   #73
AGoodBuzz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 12-09-07
Location: Canton, MI
Posts: 1,557
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by brewmenn View Post
And that reference was removed in the final copy, further backing up my point that it progressed from a position less supportive on religion to one more supportive of religion.
I'mj reading it again and still don't see where it supports religion. Please show me exactly where it specifically supports religion.
AGoodBuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 03:37 PM   #74
brewmenn
Grumpy old man.
 
brewmenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Inkster, MI
Posts: 10,298
iTrader: (9)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGoodBuzz View Post
I'mj reading it again and still don't see where it supports religion. Please show me exactly where it specifically supports religion.
At the risk of completely wasting my time I’ll try.

The first draft said “…all Men are created equal and independent; that from that equal Creation…” which could easily be interpreted to mean a creation by chance. The next version said “…all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with inherent & inalienable rights…”, which would imply an intentional creation by a sentient being. This view would be further reinforced by the capitalization of the word creator in the final version.
Also, as you pointed out, the first two drafts contained a negative reference to a Christian King, which was removed in the final version, thus moving it in the direction from less to more supportive of religion.
I realize that these are subtle changes, and after reading a few of your other posts lately I can see that you have all the subtly of a sledge hammer so I don’t expect you to understand any of this.
brewmenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 03:42 PM   #75
AGoodBuzz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 12-09-07
Location: Canton, MI
Posts: 1,557
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by brewmenn View Post
At the risk of completely wasting my time I’ll try.

The first draft said “…all Men are created equal and independent; that from that equal Creation…” which could easily be interpreted to mean a creation by chance. The next version said “…all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with inherent & inalienable rights…”, which would imply an intentional creation by a sentient being. This view would be further reinforced by the capitalization of the word creator in the final version.
Also, as you pointed out, the first two drafts contained a negative reference to a Christian King, which was removed in the final version, thus moving it in the direction from less to more supportive of religion.
I realize that these are subtle changes, and after reading a few of your other posts lately I can see that you have all the subtly of a sledge hammer so I don’t expect you to understand any of this.
Actually I understood it just fine, and thank you for providing a detailed explanation. Very well said.

I don't see how it is in support of religion per se.

Again, I don't see how it implies any religioius foundation for our nation.
AGoodBuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 04:11 PM   #76
aber61
Senior Member
 
aber61's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-22-08
Location: Commerce Twp. Michigan
Posts: 5,984
iTrader: (3)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGoodBuzz View Post
You're still not getting it. I'm not asking them to justify their personal beliefs. I am asking for facts to support that our country was founded as a Christian nation. Facts. That's all I'm asking for.
Did you go to wallbuilders? Historical data you are looking for from our founding fathers
aber61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 04:16 PM   #77
L4CX
Out for the Summer!
 
L4CX's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-16-07
Location: Hillsdale, MI
Posts: 4,872
iTrader: (5)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGoodBuzz View Post
Check your facts. The definition of create does not require a conscience being or intent. It can happen entirely by accident. "The rain created many dangers to drivers that day."....
Creator per Dictionary.com


I. cre·a·tor
   /kriˈeɪtər/ Show Spelled[kree-ey-ter] Show IPA
–noun
1.
a person or thing that creates.
2.
the Creator, God.


II. cre·a·tor (krē-ā'tər)
n.

1.One that creates: the creator of a new television series; a born creator of trouble.
2. Creator God. Used with the.

Create Per Dictionary.com

cre·ate
   /kriˈeɪt/ Show Spelled [kree-eyt] Show IPA verb, -at·ed, -at·ing, adjective
–verb (used with object)
1.
to cause to come into being, as something unique that would not naturally evolve or that is not made by ordinary processes.
2.
to evolve from one's own thought or imagination, as a work of art or an invention.
3.
Theater . to perform (a role) for the first time or in the first production of a play.
4.
to make by investing with new rank or by designating; constitute; appoint: to create a peer.
5.
to be the cause or occasion of; give rise to: The announcement created confusion.
6.
to cause to happen; bring about; arrange, as by intention or design: to create a revolution; to create an opportunity to ask for a raise.

>> So, I don't see a thing about what you said in the Definition of Creator. I could see a stretch for create. But you still have to be a Creator to Create. You can't call something a Creator unless it's a thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AGoodBuzz View Post
Actually I understood it just fine, and thank you for providing a detailed explanation. Very well said.

I don't see how it is in support of religion per se.

Again, I don't see how it implies any religioius foundation for our nation.
The First draft would have been best for your argument because they didn't specifically include a Creator. The Final did. This could show that they were favoring a Creator over the other. Favoring a Being over an Accident. It makes sense to me.
L4CX is online now   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 04:21 PM   #78
AGoodBuzz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 12-09-07
Location: Canton, MI
Posts: 1,557
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by L4CX View Post
Creator per Dictionary.com




5.
to be the cause or occasion of; give rise to: The announcement created confusion.


>> So, I don't see a thing about what you said in the Definition of Creator. I could see a stretch for create. But you still have to be a Creator to Create. You can't call something a Creator unless it's a thing. Based on 5 above, yes you can.



The First draft would have been best for your argument because they didn't specifically include a Creator. The Final did. This could show that they were favoring a Creator over the other. Favoring a Being over an Accident. It makes sense to me.
My "argument" was that it in no way shows support of a Christian nation. You HAVE to agree with that.
AGoodBuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010, 04:36 PM   #79
L4CX
Out for the Summer!
 
L4CX's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-16-07
Location: Hillsdale, MI
Posts: 4,872
iTrader: (5)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGoodBuzz View Post
Actually I understood it just fine, and thank you for providing a detailed explanation. Very well said.

I don't see how it is in support of religion per se.

Again, I don't see how it implies any religioius foundation for our nation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGoodBuzz View Post
My "argument" was that it in no way shows support of a Christian nation. You HAVE to agree with that.
Technicality, I know. I'm allowed to play with your words too. It shows an Inclination of Belief in some form of Creator.

Number 5, BTW was in Create. Not Creator. I see that (very small part) of the definition of Create to more or less mean, Manipulate. Meaning, There has to be something there to already Manipulate. This is the Perfect example of the "being able to create people" discussion that was brought up before. They aren't Creating, they are Manipulating resources already Available.
L4CX is online now   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2010, 01:07 PM   #80
AGoodBuzz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 12-09-07
Location: Canton, MI
Posts: 1,557
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by L4CX View Post
There has to be something there to already Manipulate. This is the Perfect example of the "being able to create people" discussion that was brought up before. They aren't Creating, they are Manipulating resources already Available.
Is that what your god did?
AGoodBuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:24 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2005 - 2012 Cracker Enterprises - Powered by Linux
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=
Page generated in 0.29497 seconds with 50 queries