funhusker

Do you honestly think this is what a Unicorn is? It's nothing like the Unicorn of the common myth. Your story shows this: We're all talking about this: Unless you're saying "god" isn't what you think it is, and that the glorious figure of god, like the unicorn in the second image, is actually a very mundane earthly creature from a bygone age as in the first picture? Because there's several problems with that, ranging from the evolving image of god to suit today's ideal, the glorious god people believe in compared to the actual shabby god there is, the fact that the god of the Bible says, "I'm the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow" meaning what we believe is god today can't be different than what god is, or that if god is different than what we believe, the fault lies somewhere with an omniscient god's lack of communication and willful allowance of such errors to be made... I mean, if we're claiming that the legendary unicorn was, in fact, a rhinoceros, don't we also have to acknowledge that what ancient Israelites thought was "god" was, in fact, something else? This really isn't a road we want to go down, is it? Some people think that "if there is a God" why would he make us live here in this mess to "prove ourselves". They paint a picture of what they assume God 'should be' and then claim he doesn't exist because it doesn't match their own observations. When, possibly, God does exist He just doesn't match what our parents or our Church has made us believe or feel that we deserve. Yes our churches and all the major religions of the world are based on theology. These differing theologies create different images of God. The original question doesn't even ask about the God of the Israelites, it just mentions "omniscient, all-powerful, God". Those of us that said yes to that option, happen to be Christian, whether that be by geography or whatever. Those of you that said no, are spending a lot of time discounting the God we believe in. My point is, you are picturing a certain God and stating why you believe that "one" can not exist. One thing about this thread I know for sure, at least from what I've read, is that we all have a desire to ask questions. No one here discounts science, and everyone would be excited to hear of discoveries of our origin. We all want to be kind (well, most of us), and we all want the world to be a better place. I'm starting to look at this as fans of two teams trying to explain why there team is better the week before the game is actually played. No one knows "for sure" now, but someday we will. For now, I'm just going to enjoy the beer and wings before kickoff....

Sometimes we think we know exactly what a unicorn is and what a pretty unicorn looks like. Sometimes we discover we were wrong about our belief of what a unicorn should be.... http://www.foxnews.com/science/2016/03/29/giant-siberian-unicorn-existed-much-more-recently-than-previously-thought-experts-say.html

Humans didn't know where the first molecules came from, so they created a god to explain it. Just like they didn't know what lightning was, or earthquakes were, or the sun is. Wait a minute. I thought we were close to proving there is no need for believing God created the earth. Well....this needs to be answered before that happens and I don't think we are anywhere close to coming up with some scientific proof of where the very first molecule of matter came from......without a higher power. And once we figure out where the first molecule came from, we will still be faced with the question, "what caused that?" It's a neverending cycle. And I don't mean to say that we should just break down and say, "God did it!" Personally, I am very curious to see "how" God did it. And whether you believe or not, we all should want to follow that same trail.

Because there's gathering evidence that it's true. http://www.space.com/20710-stephen-hawking-god-big-bang.html That what's true? So the poll question should read, "Is it more likely a supernatural entity created millions of universes" or "millions of universes popped up out of nothing for no reason?" I like Hawking, but describing alternate theories isn't "proof' that God isn't needed. The questions in the poll are both "unlikely" if we want to be honest. Humans seek for reasons why things happened, it's what we do. No matter what option you sided with, if we walked it all back the the very beginning, whether that be 13.8 billion years or "1 bazillion, million, trillion, 00000000 to the 100th power years" we would get the very first step and say "why?" We are all overgrown 3-year-olds, always with the questions.....

Hillary isn't going to jail, guys... or is it "guise"? not sure...

Nah. Just didn't grow up with it. It's a tradition (or lack there of) we tend to inherit from our parents. Nothing against those who did; we are nothing if not bound by social and cultural traditions. It's really not that empty or different over here, though. We're living in the same world; that is, with each other. And you didn't have to spend an hour at Church before opening presents on Christmas... In the words of Napolean Dynomite: LUCKY!!!

Probably going to have to let this one go. You're apparently unwilling or unable to look at it in the same manner that I do. I'm not hedging my bet. If anything, I am hedging the bet for other people. I know for a fact that God was the cause. Don't ask me to prove it or explain it any further. It is a deeply held belief of mine based on my cumulative experiences. The one God creator does not have to be the specific of any one religion. You think he does yet you don't believe in him. I find it somewhat amusing that a self professed non-believer feels compelled to tell others how they need to believe and what's what with that belief. You tried it for years, attending church, leading Bible studies, etc. and you failed at it. Somewhere along the way you adopted some thoughts or beliefs that preclude you from looking at it in the same manner I do and now you actually think you've got it right and I and others have it wrong. I can't look at this natural world and think there was not an intelligent designer. Quite frankly, I don't understand how others can. IMO, belief in a creator, one creator is easy and almost unavoidable. And that belief has nothing to do with any specific God or any specific religion. Once a person accepts that there must have been a first cause, then yes, we will attempt to explain that first cause as best we can and that is where different interpretations of God and the multitude of religions come from. Have you ever wondered why people forever have felt compelled to explain his existence. Maybe it's not as simple as the non-believers like to claim it is. Maybe it's not just pushing the easy button for things we haven't fully figured out. Maybe we do have a soul and maybe there is something in it compelling us to find God. At least that seems a lot more likely to me than a few cells crawling out of the pond and here we are today having these in depth discussions but yet having absolutely no purpose whatsoever. It has been my experience that most every person who does not believe in God has some earthly reasons for it. Many did believe at one time but became angry with God for one reason or another. Usually due to the death or suffering of someone close to them. Those are hard things to deal with and some people bail out because they can't justify those things with a loving father figure of God. They take their human limited thoughts and try to understand why a loving father would let these things happen. They think, it could be so easy if he would just do this or that or the other thing. I've just come to accept that God did not intend for it to be that easy. Sure it would be easy if he would show up weekly, 4000 feet tall riding a cloud and talk to us. If he would remove all pain and suffering from our lives. If he'd just come sit down in our living rooms and explain it all to us in person. That seems to be what so many nonbelievers think should happen. I'm just not arrogant enough to think I know better than an all powerful God and I can accept his existence even with the limits that are in place. I recommend the book "When Bad Things Happen to Good People" by Harold Kushner for those that haven't read it. Easy read, takes a couple hours. He's a Rabbi that lost a son at a young age, and ministered to many others experiencing grief. Takes interesting views of bad things that happen in the world. For example, a child dies in a drive by shooting (familiy mourns) and his organs are donated to multiple families (prayers answered). To be clear, he states without question that he doesn't believe God intended for the young child to die in a "master plan", that wouldn't be "just". Just an example of the types of things he writes about.

I'd say they're equally easy depending on your point of view and your nature and what happens to you. It's easy to believe in God if you don't suffer horrible tragedy. It's hard to believe in God if you suffer horrible tragedy. It's easy to believe in God if you're scared of death and want comfort. It's easy to not believe in God if you're not scared of death. Obviously these aren't the only options. Anyhow, as a Christian my biggest issue has been similar to what someone else already posted. How can you think everyone who doesn't believe in Jesus and what he did is going to hell when you have tribes living in the jungles of Brasil with no chance of ever seeing a Bible? Maybe there are several religions that are fine and you're just not supposed to be a horrible person very often. Although that flies in the face of Jesus dying for people's sins and not needing to earn our to heaven. So I think I can believe what I believe about Jesus and let God deal with the other people if he wants to instead of forming an opinion and judging others. I'm more scared of death as a believer than I would be if I wasn't.... Kind of like high school graduation. There is no reason my diploma wouldn't have been signed. But there was still a very tense second walking of the stage where I peaked to make sure the Superindtendent of Schools and my principal signed it. That "tense second" wouldn't exist if there was no such thing as graduation Other than that, +1 to you!

TG for President!!! Seriously, great post!

^^^^really? I'm not complaining, just haven't heard that.

Because it becomes the answer for anything too difficult or complex. Ancient man asked, "What is lightning?" They didn't have an answer for that, so they decided it was the weapon of some god - Zeus, in that case. Ancient man asked, "What is that crazy shiny thing up in the sky?" They didn't have an answer, so it became a god - Aten, Apollo, Helios, Freyr, Sol, etc. Ancient man asked, "Why does the ground shake?" They didn't know, so they invented another god - Vulcan, Neptune, Poseidon, Cabrakan, etc. It's a cop-out answer. Lightning is caused by differences in electric polarity between cloud and ground. The sun is a star. Earthquakes are tectonic activity. Once man reasoned these puzzles out long enough, they discovered the answer. If anything you can't understand is answered by "god," you're just pushing the Easy Button. I think all the believers in this thread have said that they believe in evolution and scientific research. You ask the question, "how does nature do it?", most believers ask the question, "how does God make nature do it? what's the difference? I agree that people who ignore observable science, and sound theoretical science for that matter, are blind to the world. But I don't think that is a large population of believers. The Catholic Church and Lutheran Churches (that is a big chunk of Christians) believe in the scientific methods and are happy to use discoveries to better humanity.

OF COURSE that's what the religious want to believe. Because the alternative is too scary for them to comprehend. So they take the easy way out, and it allows them to sleep at night. Why is choosing to believe in God the "easy way out"? Believers and non-believers will both die. Odds are it will happen in either a tragic or painful way, if not both. Life isn't easier for either group because they believe a certain way. We all need food, shelter, and relationships. We all, hopefully, have a set of moral standards. I'm just not sure what you mean... Edit: For instance, there are things that I would love to do but don't because I chose to believe. Something as simple as sleeping in on a Sunday morning or not volunteering a week of my summer break to help at Vacation Bible School. These are just simple time issues. I tried to ignore my beliefs in my 20's because I thought it would make life easier and more fun. Nonbelievers can volunteer as well; many do. We all face the same hurdles and desires to help the community. The only difference is our driving force.

I voted for the first option, because it's what I believe (sort of).. My belief is that God (of Abraham) created the universe. But I also believe he created it in a way that follows laws, such as physics. These laws are constant. He may very well have created it from a singularity, and used the physical laws he created to carry out the second option. I don't believe Creation happened on a 24-hour day, and 7-day week schedule like the creation story of the Bible says. I think it could have if He wanted to, but instead He chose a way where humans can actually find His works in Science and witness His creation first hand.

Oops, I answered quickly as to when the 2nd Amendment was written. As I think about the question, has the government ever established an "individual's" right to own a gun? edit: well, I'll be......Learn something new everyday. Interesting.

+1'd before you requested, JJ And I agree with what your saying about the New Testament. But a person unfamiliar to the Bible and Christianity, just browsing the pages, wouldn't be aware.

Thanks for posting that. I tried my best to put disclaimers on what I was saying because I really do not know for sure what the real message of Christianity is as I have not studied it in depth at all. I had heard it stated often that the message of killing the adulterers was in the Bible and I had sort if come to accept it as part of their religion. But, like anything, if certain individual passages are taken out of context or applied too broadly, it is easy to become confused with the true message. I do stand by my statement that Islam does not teach it's followers to do most any of the things that people often claim makes it bad. One short article does not necessarily have me fully convinced that Christianity is a completely peaceful religion but I sure will hesitate to claim it proposes doing what members of Branch Davidian or the National Liberation Front of Tipura seem to do with it. It very well could be that their radical elements simply look at passages out of context much like some radical elements who claim to be Islam do. In that context, what you said is absolutely true. This is probably my biggest frustration with people who want to claim religion or Islam in particular is bad. The problem is with people not doing what the religion or the Koran is really teaching. Too many people won't acknowledge that important difference and choose to blame the religion for the actions of people who are operating outside the core of the religion. The message of Islam is all good. However some people, be they average Joes or bad Imams or radical Muslims, give the religion a black eye by mutilating the real message. Please don't take offense to me editing your post, JJ. You made a point very well, and I wanted to see what it looked like if everyone's perspective was changed a little. In the words of the famous Jake Brigance : "Now, imagine that girl was white..."

This is scarry and disgusting. I don't entirely blame the black man for cold cocking the guy in the American flag shirt. Not knowing his side of the story, I can easily see how he mistook him for the hooded individual and that would have enraged him. That was extremely distasteful on the protesters part. If all that about the chants is true, then that sends a chill down my spine. I hate saying this, but I don't know what else to compare it too but nazi rallies in Germany. I know this country could never become that, but it's still disturbing... huh? The black man could have acted like a normal human being and let the protesters continue to be escorted out by security. The blame lies squarely on that man, and only on that man...

Say what you want about this pope. A lot of people probably think he's in the limelight too much. But he's an OG. PR Pope. Christ called his followers to spread His message to as many people as possible. As long as Pope Francis is spreading a genuine message of Christ's teachings, he's doing it right. I believe the only people that think he might be "in the limelight too much", are the Christians who are uncomfortable with his message, or the non-Christians that are comfortable... Not that it really matters, but I'm an ELCA Lutheran, and I have a tremendous amount of respect for Pope Francis.

I miss the TeacherCD that used to post funny stories about getting drunk, and NOT getting laid.... At least Teach is consistent; he's always said hot girls were everywhere....However, I fear his "playful" frustrations have turned into "irrational" desperations....

^^^My opinion is "no", they were won in divisions made up of 6 teams. But it can make for interesting conversation. Winning a 12 team league is harder than winning an 8 team (Big8 vs BigXII/B1G). Which is why I can understand where people are coming from when they try to rationalize Nebraska's lack of Conference Championships in the last 16 years. Those people are usually faced with the argument that the "old Big8 was much harder than the BIG West or BigXII North" and I understand that also. But an 8 team division, especially one containing Oklahoma, would blow that argument out of the water.

I've thought this for a long time. If you have 9 team divisions, you basically will end up with two 9 team conferences that are tied together to have their champions play each other at the end of the year. I like it. Then, those championship games are basically the first round of the playoffs. I just want to put this question out for everyone then: Would it be okay if Nebraska hung BigTen West Championship banners next to the Big8 and BigXII banners then? I've been thinking of the same scenarios, and my opinion is, yes. Hang the divisional banners (of an 8 or 9 team division) right next to the old ones.

gotcha.. I have a quick trigger this week. I was going back and forth with a family member, and he would discredit whole articles I cited because one of the four authors happened to work for a Democratic President (never mind the years he also worked for Republican ones)

Thank you.... So you're not saying he is wrong....he just doesn't like men? I'm assuming, since the article really wasn't about "college men".

Oh man....Creighton Duke....hahahaha Sorry, but this type of attitude frustrates me. It is your right to dislike an author, and to let the thread know of your dislike. But if you feel the need to take the effort to tell us of your dislikes, or distrust, can you at least make the effort to explain "why"? As an indifferent observer, if I read Ezra's piece that includes quotes and assertions based on his observations, and your simple response of "ah, man, whatever"....I would tend to side with the person who at least attempted to participate in a conversation...

.