kidlewis

Basically, yes. so if he has indeed created all, everything and all that will ever be. He created all religons, therefore all religious beliefs are indeed correct. Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Christians are all correct in their beliefs. No. What he "created" was free will. You believe what you want. You make up stories and tell lies if you want. so why create the 10 commandmants if he created free will? or is that a made up story? There wouldn't need to be any commandments if free will did not exist would there? He created them so that they would know what to do, or not to do. It was their free will that chose wither to obey them or not. (And btw, for the most part, they did not obey them, not even close) And on the point of the ten commandments... just to set aside a common misconception!... there were actually a lot more than 10, and they were all for the benefit of the Jews at the time, and not so much for the rest of us anymore. Although ofcoruse, most of the main 10(if not all), do still apply. Well why do they need to exist if we have free will? there is no point in rules if you give free will to people. They will make up their own minds regardless of rules laid out by God.

Basically, yes. so if he has indeed created all, everything and all that will ever be. He created all religons, therefore all religious beliefs are indeed correct. Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Christians are all correct in their beliefs. No. What he "created" was free will. You believe what you want. You make up stories and tell lies if you want. so why create the 10 commandmants if he created free will? or is that a made up story?

Basically, yes. so if he has indeed created all, everything and all that will ever be. He created all religons, therefore all religious beliefs are indeed correct. Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Christians are all correct in their beliefs.

Err... all medicine is created by things that where put on this earth to begin with. If a scientist falls ill, he should not be given anything, because what does it matter if he lives or dies? His life means nothing, and neither does anyone elses, so why go through the effort to save a meaningless life? er....because he will be dead and people will get upset? plus as human beings we have emotional and moral standing to do something about it?

is that the quote "energy cannot be created or destroyed but can only be transfered"? so what believers think is "energy cannot be created or destroyed, but can only come from God"?

not neccesarily because they will believe god is in all of us and created everything. Therefore they should get whatever they want. Although am not sure why Jehova's and other faiths don't accept blood transfusions. if that something to do with contaminating the "soul"?

Darwin was a charlatan ..see George Combes "the constitution of man" 1828 .... what Darwin really did was bring it to the masses due to him being a leading scientist of that day thanks to his "journal of research " (or the voyage of the beagle , to you ) is he the dude that worked out the brain considted of different bits each did their own thing? cannot remember what it's called now. We have a model in our science lab that broke down the brain....

You - sin bin for quoting Hitchens. :winkold: Off you go now. Very, very naughty. He always sounds like Kevin out of Kevin and Perry "Shut UP I can make my own decisions ya know!". he basically doesn't like anyone or anything to try andaid him make up his own mind. He acts as though he doesn't need to learn anything.

Seen it loads of times, funny as fook. not just funny, but it also makes you think too. to be fair, if anything I would worship the sun. Doesn't matter about God, if we didn't have that we would die pretty darn fast.

Watch

I gather from Jondaken's stance is that computers were created by man, whose thoughts and actions come directly from god. He told the people to create the computer, becuase everything both physical and mental comes from him regardless if it is man made or not. God is the creator of all and everything and we are NOT free thinkers, because god is in all of us and everything we touch and see and feel and smell and think about. he even created the devil and evil. he judges us all through his own eyes. I guess my description is a very simplistic view, but religion in itself is incredibly simple. God is ALL, end of discussion and I just cannot agree with that. It means he created rape, harold shipman, hitler and allowed all those things to happen.

I think good old Stevie Hawkx is of the same belief as Einstein, and I think Sir Robert Winston has a similar view (although he was and is still a practicing Jew). Because they are the pioneers of science, they are venturing into the unknown when it comes to human perception of "what is" and I think have to be completely open about existence in order to come to a conclusion.

I always thought his view was more agnostic. just taking one quote as an example: "A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty - it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man." that to me is a statement from an agnostic not of a believer in a God.

And why can't God and Science be the same thing? because the text faith is based upon contradicts science in about 1000 different ways, and which faith is the "true" god? only one of the religon's is correct, so which one? (big brother voice) Ewe Decide!

I really wanted to beat Everton and go through but we didn't perform on the day. We gave the ball away far more than in the past 10-11 games. We created chances and we could have won the game, but we didn't execute them well at all. Lets hope we can raise it for Moscow on wednesday.

Ferris Buellers Day off

but we don't have a fit bird, we have just been chatting to her and we aren't sure if she wants us yet. and they aren't ugly bird, one is pretty decent.

I wouldn't because we already have 4th in my opinion, we have already done enough. Its Feb!!?? Not May! Im with BCV 100% Arsenal will only get 6 maybe 7 points from their last 5 games. Says who? BBC predictor? We MAY lose to chelsea, get knocked out of UEFA Cup, knocked out of the FA Cup and then we have - Man U away, Liverpool away, Man City away, Everton home, Spurs home We COULD by the end of March have blown everything and season be over. Not saying we will, but it is a possibilty. At the end of the season, if we have win the FA Cup and you go to Wembley and Villa finish 5th- I will PM you and ask you this " do you wish we got knocked out by Everton, or do wish we beat Chelsea? " The answer will be easy yeah I will take the F.A cup thanks. All of this is hypothetical situations, your hypothetical guess work holds as much water as mine.

sorry meant a maximum of 9 points in their last 6. forgot about Portsmouth

I wouldn't because we already have 4th in my opinion, we have already done enough. Its Feb!!?? Not May! Im with BCV 100% Arsenal will only get 6 maybe 7 points from their last 5 games.

I wouldn't because we already have 4th in my opinion, we have already done enough.

Nick, there's a difference between having an opinion, and ridiculing the poll and poster because you don't agree with either option. No-one's having a go at you for not wanting either option, that's a fair point, people are having a go at you for being such an arse about it. and it's even more awkward because it looks like I am arguing with Bill Murray I don't want to argue with Bill Murray....

I know what you are saying but it's just a hypothetical situation. All football fans hypothesise, it's what genertates so much banter. If there was no hypothesised discussions about football the banter would be halved.

He was only trying to make a point, no one makes the same point in exactly the same way. Just because I am against Ian's opinion on this matter doesn't mean I go "eggy mental" at him because he portrays it in a different way to what I would do.

I went with option B obviously. I think we already have 4th, Arsenal are NOT going to beat United, Liverpool & Chelsea in their last 5 games, I would quite happily stick £100 on them NOT to win all of those. We have Chelsea, Liverpool and Man United to play. I think we are more likely to get more points out of those than Arsenal. I know Liverpool and United are away, but no reason why we cannot draw with both Chelsea and United and even beat Liverpool. So the question is about 3rd, if we beat Chelsea we have a bit of room, but the main point about people putting the league over the cups is because of injuries and tiredness. Well they'd be pretty **** already because we have played since july and the schedule we have had so far hasn't been lax has it? People get injured in training, out and about etc, you cannot worry about injuries going into a game, because that is negative thinking, something that Martin DOESN'T do. He is reserved but not negative. I agree to change players if we have someone equal to the man going out, Heskey and Carew, NRC & Cuellar, I could even cope with Sidwell and petrov being replaced. But not the likes of Delf, Shorey, Gardner etc. Perhaps I am not giving the bench enough thought that they can actually do as good a job as the starting 11. Do we even have a set starting 11 like we used to? perhaps not. I want to go to a final, win it and tell all my spurs mates, Everton mates, West Ham mates, and especially newcastle mates, you won **** all we won the UEFA cup, further proof we are bigger than all of you. Finishing 3rd and 4th means nothing unless we get through the group stages of the champions league in terms of success. All it brings is money and the chance to bring in some big names, but big names aren't going to arrive because we finished 3rd once. Maybe if we do it twice or three times we might get Ribery or some big name like that to join us, but not just the once. Silverware is the only thing people look at when talking about big clubs, it's the main reason why Villa are still talked as a big club, because we have won the league and the european cup back in the early 80's. Not because we finished 3rd and qualified for the group stages once. What if we do a cup double then? you'd rather the champions league than a cup double? I think to be honest players will look at that and go "jeez they won on two fronts" they must be one hell of a team.