waterproof
New member
hiphop12345;5139844 said:
well a genetic bottleneck then happen with the floods and all but i am going to go along with this game of yours
- Status
well a genetic bottleneck then happen with the floods and all but i am going to go along with this game of yours
Disciplined InSight
New member
LMAO and SMH @ this certain HIP HOP discussion on blasphemy in the culture brings out the atheist/evolutionist trolls heavy...the shit's gone waaaay overboard.
Went from talking about how some of the artists lyrical blasphemy to genetic bottlenecks. I swear half of these niggas read from the book of KTULU.
Went from talking about how some of the artists lyrical blasphemy to genetic bottlenecks. I swear half of these niggas read from the book of KTULU.
Last edited:
hiphop12345
New member
Disciplined InSight;5139833 said:
I gave examples of examples on how your god is anthropomorphic not humanistic(come on now, don't confuse your words now.), if you want to avoid that by calling me white then go ahead.. Also #2 was a response to your question "How does religion or peoples belief have an affect on your life", not blaming god for all the world ill.
What is spirituality? Hell, what's a spirit? There I go with my Greek questions and shit. Answer it though.
Evolution is "more" of a fact that gravity, so yes it's a fact.
Disciplined InSight;5139850 said:
The topic was jacked. Question was answered on the first page. 1. Artist been doing it and 2. More and more artist no longer believe in these old religions.
Last edited:
hiphop12345
New member
waterproof;5139848 said:
What?
waterproof
New member
hiphop12345;5139868 said:
lol, man come on now.. U is the all knowing I mean adam means man so enlighten us all knowing give us the answer
Disciplined InSight
New member
Lol @ atheist12345 "the topic was jacked"...at least one atheist troll admits it.
The artists themselves have embraced the dark side of the entertainment and doing it for shock value, attention and to the pleasing of their corporate label heads to undermine anything spiritual and bastardize it and speak against. It's always been part of the plan.
It would also be better if some artists themselves would admit their stance of their non-belief.
You're embarrassing yourself once again with the evolution being a fact...those anti-creationists got your mind bleached. Now you put yourself in the seat of proving that. Oh wait...
Smh @ you asking what spirituality is and you have the tools to research it yourself.
The artists themselves have embraced the dark side of the entertainment and doing it for shock value, attention and to the pleasing of their corporate label heads to undermine anything spiritual and bastardize it and speak against. It's always been part of the plan.
It would also be better if some artists themselves would admit their stance of their non-belief.
You're embarrassing yourself once again with the evolution being a fact...those anti-creationists got your mind bleached. Now you put yourself in the seat of proving that. Oh wait...
Smh @ you asking what spirituality is and you have the tools to research it yourself.
hiphop12345
New member
That's why the topic was jacked, the artist are not embracing the dark side of entertainment, at least not for what this topic was created for.Disciplined InSight;5139887 said:
Evolution has tons of facts, tho evolution does not disprove a god(s). At least not directly. You're embarrassing yourself for not thinking it's a fact. You're a flat earth'er 400 years from now.
Also I asked YOU what a spirit is but you're not going to answer it of course.
Waterproof you're shook.
Disciplined InSight
New member
hiphop12345;5139892 said:
Atheists love to play on word and you're no different..amateur at best. I never said I believed the earth was flat. That's YOUR own jackass opinion.
Spirit is the root word of spirituality, yet you have the tools to look that up yourself.
Last edited:
waterproof
New member
hiphop12345;5139892 said:
Lame you just another one, we had this conversation millions of time in race and religion, I mean come on you cant tell me shit about the torah,
I love how niggas in here breaking down all the easy passages in the Bible but skipped mine.... so the Re-up for the Do u wanna go to Heaven dude.
Dont just cherry pick which passages u believe in and ignore the blatant contradictions.
Where do u wanna start? Genesis?
God created light and darkness on day one (And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.) Genesis 1:5
and the sun and the planets didn’t appear until DAY 4. So where did the light come from? No sun, no
light. Oops!
On day three he creates all the earth’s vegetation, the plants and the trees, but as we
now know God didn’t create the sun until the following day, so how can there be plant
life without photosynthesis? Oops!
At the start of the second chapter, where it is said, God
made man before all the plants and trees, we are in led into confusion again. This in
complete contradiction to the first chapter’s claim that plantlife was made on day three
and man on day six. Here is the incriminating passage:
“When the Lord God made the earth and the heavens – and no shrub of the field had yet
appeared on the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprung up – The Lord God formed man
from the dust of the ground.” (Genesis 2:4-7 NIV)
A further mistruth is the Genesis claim that all animals and man were made on the
same day, the sixth. We now know this simply to be utterly false through evidence and
understanding of palaeontology, carbon dating and radiation dating. 97% of the world’s
leading scientists concur that dinosaurs became extinct at least 65 million years before man
inhabited the earth.
Dont just cherry pick which passages u believe in and ignore the blatant contradictions.
Where do u wanna start? Genesis?
God created light and darkness on day one (And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.) Genesis 1:5
and the sun and the planets didn’t appear until DAY 4. So where did the light come from? No sun, no
light. Oops!
On day three he creates all the earth’s vegetation, the plants and the trees, but as we
now know God didn’t create the sun until the following day, so how can there be plant
life without photosynthesis? Oops!
At the start of the second chapter, where it is said, God
made man before all the plants and trees, we are in led into confusion again. This in
complete contradiction to the first chapter’s claim that plantlife was made on day three
and man on day six. Here is the incriminating passage:
“When the Lord God made the earth and the heavens – and no shrub of the field had yet
appeared on the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprung up – The Lord God formed man
from the dust of the ground.” (Genesis 2:4-7 NIV)
A further mistruth is the Genesis claim that all animals and man were made on the
same day, the sixth. We now know this simply to be utterly false through evidence and
understanding of palaeontology, carbon dating and radiation dating. 97% of the world’s
leading scientists concur that dinosaurs became extinct at least 65 million years before man
inhabited the earth.
Last edited:
And stop preaching these fear doctines about HELL....
First of all I do not believe in hell, just another pagan word. I do believe in the three Greek words Hades, Gehenna and Tartatus, and the Hebrew Sheol; but they simple mean the place of the dead.
The word hell is not in Greek or Hebrew or Aramaic the language the Bible was written in; but it comes from an Angle Saxon word “hel” meaning to bury. It is more then a mis-translation it a premeditated deliberate assault on scripture to in introduce the pagan word.
Tar-ta-rus (tart rs) [[ Gr Tartaros ]] Gr. Myth. 1 an infernal abyss below Hades, where Zeus hurls the rebel Titans, later a place of punishment for the demons and devils not people. (mentioned only once in the Bible)
Ha-des (hadez) [[Gr Haides ]] 1 Gr. Myth. a) the home of the dead, beneath the earth b) the god of the underworld 2 Bible the state or resting place of the dead: name used in some modern translations of the New Testament
She-ol (eol) [[Heb shaal , to dig]] a place in the depths of the earth conceived of as the dwelling of the dead Note: translated in KJV about haft of scriptures as hell, the other haft as grave
Gehenna: Mentioned twelve or thirteen times in the gospel. This is the word the fundamental preachers love to use to burn up the sinner. They are the first to yell foul if something does not fit in context; BUT: Gehenna: Referring to the Valley of Hinnom, or Gehenna which is the city dump outside the walls of Jerusalem; a place of constant burning of refuge. Those who go to Gehenna are not sinners of the world; but are sinners of God’s people. (how precious is this a type of purification outside of God’s holy city. All things that are not of God will be purified bf God’s holy judgment. This word is used not for sinner, murders or liars; it is used with the word “BROTHER”.
First of all I do not believe in hell, just another pagan word. I do believe in the three Greek words Hades, Gehenna and Tartatus, and the Hebrew Sheol; but they simple mean the place of the dead.
The word hell is not in Greek or Hebrew or Aramaic the language the Bible was written in; but it comes from an Angle Saxon word “hel” meaning to bury. It is more then a mis-translation it a premeditated deliberate assault on scripture to in introduce the pagan word.
Tar-ta-rus (tart rs) [[ Gr Tartaros ]] Gr. Myth. 1 an infernal abyss below Hades, where Zeus hurls the rebel Titans, later a place of punishment for the demons and devils not people. (mentioned only once in the Bible)
Ha-des (hadez) [[Gr Haides ]] 1 Gr. Myth. a) the home of the dead, beneath the earth b) the god of the underworld 2 Bible the state or resting place of the dead: name used in some modern translations of the New Testament
She-ol (eol) [[Heb shaal , to dig]] a place in the depths of the earth conceived of as the dwelling of the dead Note: translated in KJV about haft of scriptures as hell, the other haft as grave
Gehenna: Mentioned twelve or thirteen times in the gospel. This is the word the fundamental preachers love to use to burn up the sinner. They are the first to yell foul if something does not fit in context; BUT: Gehenna: Referring to the Valley of Hinnom, or Gehenna which is the city dump outside the walls of Jerusalem; a place of constant burning of refuge. Those who go to Gehenna are not sinners of the world; but are sinners of God’s people. (how precious is this a type of purification outside of God’s holy city. All things that are not of God will be purified bf God’s holy judgment. This word is used not for sinner, murders or liars; it is used with the word “BROTHER”.
ReppinTime
New member
hiphop12345;5137554 said:
aint a such thing as a more worthless poster than a reason nigga that posts like trash from the social lounge. all huff and circular logic for the sake of ego, not to actually come to a conclusion.
1. Wrong again, the word for both circle and sphere is the same in hebrew.
but I'm sure a whitetrash cavedog like yourself wouldnt have any idea about any language other than hickboy
Even still, "The circle of", to anyone with half a brain is an acceptable description when referring to the shape of the earth. Only a moron completely infatuated with trying to split hairs would even attempt to nitpick this. 2,000 years ago if someone looks at the moon or sun they will describe it by mentioning its round circle shape, and yet you throwing your panties at the wall in a blind rage cause the world circle is used to describe Earth. the fact that you are still arguing this is a pathetic attempt to distract from your erroneous claim that they thought the earth was flat. and the fact that you just said the earth isnt a sphere as if you are somehow helping your argument is further proof of how far you'll go to deflect and distract from the fact that you are wrong.
2. Stupid post from a typical social lounge reject. The point of the writing in question is not to debate or illustrate fucking astrophysics, its to get a simple concept across to people whose main form of travel still involved animals. So once again, yes a man off handedly describing the earth could say "the circle of" and no one would bat an eye. Bottom line, "they thought the earth was flat" is false and you hair splitting is pure deflection.
3. Shut the fuck up.
4. More smokescreen diversions. Anybody who was observant? and yet you just claimed they thought the earth was flat. Moron you are not capable of telling me shit about Greeks studying in Egypt. Yet another diversion tactic, throw enough random shit in the air and hope people forget what the argument is even about. and yes dumbfuck the greeks did study the horizon and it was one of the main factors in them accepting the fact that the earth was not flat.
"Every portion of the Earth tends toward the center until by compression and convergence they form a sphere."
"Travelers heading south see southern constellations rise higher above the horizon"
both those are quotes from Aristotle btw, now you can write him a dissertation telling him the earth isnt a sphere
Last edited:
ReppinTime
New member
hiphop12345;5137216 said:
Word, now prove gravity exists.
Then prove the big bang. I'll wait.
Last edited:
blackamerica;5132428 said:
This is false and an argument that theists should abandon. Plenty of non theists have spiritual beliefs, moral beliefs, political beliefs, social beliefs, etc. etc. Buddhism, for example, is a non theistic spirituality or religion without any belief in a creator god but still its adherents follow a system of beliefs.
blackamerica;5138742 said:
This is also a flawed argument. I do not believe in a god but I believe that we are accountable for ourselves and our actions.
Last edited:
Disciplined InSight;5134842 said:
You're just repeating things you heard and thought sounded good but really don't work out on paper and I'll explain to you why. You use the argument that atheists are stuck in a greco-roman mindset by not believing in an anthropomorphic being, which if we look closely, logically, you are also stuck in a greco-roman mindset if you yourself do not believe in your god being anthropomorphic. Luckily for you, your argument is flawed. It would make more sense to say that BELIEVERS are stuck in that G-R mindset given that they believe in the anthropomorphic being. Non belief in an anthropomorphic being isn't the G-R mindset.
Whether you believe your creator god is anthropomorphic or not, your belief is still theistic. Being atheist has nothing to do with Greek/Roman/European mindsets. Have you forgotten that the greeks and romans were largely theistic? An anthropomorphic deity isn't exclusive to European thought. Take the African Vodun spirits and the Egyptian gods for example. And even then, all greeks and romans did not think alike.
The Greek philosopher Xenophanes (570–480 BCE) said that "the greatest god" resembles man "neither in form nor in mind".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropomorphism#In_religion_and_mythology
I would also like for you to explain how you believe your god is not anthropomorphic, being that, to what I understand, you believe that your god is able to think (including judging and forgiving) and make plans like a human would. The definition of anthropomorphic is: described or thought of as having a human form or human attributes, or ascribing human characteristics to nonhuman things.
Maybe your argument is really supposed to be directed at believers of an anthropomorphic god, seing that assumingly, you don't believe in a god with such traits. That would make perfect sense IMO; what you're saying now doesn't, which leads me to believe that you heard someone else say that, thought it was cool to say and fucked up and got it switched around.
Disciplined InSight;5137467 said:
Belief has an effect on people worldwide, directly or indirectly. Example? United States politics. The republican opinions on abortion are influenced by religious beliefs.
Last edited:
And to @blackamerica and anybody else that keeps talking about biblical prophecy, first of all, prophecy does not necessarily prove the existence of a god. Many non theistic cultures predicted (or at least claim to) future events without any divine inspiration or assistance. But if we take prophecy as proof of a god and look at biblical prophecy for accuracy, we see that none of it is really specific enough to take seriously.
1. Birds spend most of their time in the sky. It's not strange to think that due to disease, old age or whatever, that they would sometimes drop out of the sky as opposed to just dying on the ground like ground dwelling animals do. Personally, I've never seen a bird fall out of the sky though. I suppose if this was prophecy that would mark the end of times, we would see this happening at an alarming rate but I haven't. Maybe you have.
2. The sea turning or appearing to be red is nothing new. There's a sea that the writers of the bible knew about, the red sea, that appears to be red sometimes, not surprisingly being where the name "red sea" originates.
The Red Sea got its name because of a type of algae called Trichodesmium erythraeum, which is found in the sea. When these blooms of algae die off they appear to turn the blue-green color of the ocean to a reddish-brown.
http://www.infoplease.com/askeds/red-sea-red.html
3. Give me the verse that talks about microchips being implanted in humans in the year ___ and we can discuss it.
4. As far as animals beaching themselves, we can be more specific and agree to talk about whales if that's fine with you.. As was the case with birds falling out of the sky, I will use the same argument and say that most whales spend their lives in the water, right? So when a whale dies, usually it dies in the water. Water is always moving and it's very possible that dead whales sometimes reach the shore, being pushed by the current. Beached whales is also nothing new. Take a look:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beached_whale
"Whales have beached throughout human history, so many strandings can be attributed to natural and environmental factors, such as rough weather, weakness due to old age or infection, difficulty giving birth, hunting too close to shore and navigation errors."
5. Wars have been waged for a very long time. The rising death toll is nothing more than more people on the earth (coincidentally to fight in any occurring war) and the rise of technology and thus bigger and more dangerous weaponry.
6. Homosexuality is also nothing new. It is a natural occurance; Non human animals sometimes engage in homosexual activity. Read this:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality#History (no homo)
1. Birds spend most of their time in the sky. It's not strange to think that due to disease, old age or whatever, that they would sometimes drop out of the sky as opposed to just dying on the ground like ground dwelling animals do. Personally, I've never seen a bird fall out of the sky though. I suppose if this was prophecy that would mark the end of times, we would see this happening at an alarming rate but I haven't. Maybe you have.
2. The sea turning or appearing to be red is nothing new. There's a sea that the writers of the bible knew about, the red sea, that appears to be red sometimes, not surprisingly being where the name "red sea" originates.
The Red Sea got its name because of a type of algae called Trichodesmium erythraeum, which is found in the sea. When these blooms of algae die off they appear to turn the blue-green color of the ocean to a reddish-brown.
http://www.infoplease.com/askeds/red-sea-red.html
3. Give me the verse that talks about microchips being implanted in humans in the year ___ and we can discuss it.
4. As far as animals beaching themselves, we can be more specific and agree to talk about whales if that's fine with you.. As was the case with birds falling out of the sky, I will use the same argument and say that most whales spend their lives in the water, right? So when a whale dies, usually it dies in the water. Water is always moving and it's very possible that dead whales sometimes reach the shore, being pushed by the current. Beached whales is also nothing new. Take a look:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beached_whale
"Whales have beached throughout human history, so many strandings can be attributed to natural and environmental factors, such as rough weather, weakness due to old age or infection, difficulty giving birth, hunting too close to shore and navigation errors."
5. Wars have been waged for a very long time. The rising death toll is nothing more than more people on the earth (coincidentally to fight in any occurring war) and the rise of technology and thus bigger and more dangerous weaponry.
6. Homosexuality is also nothing new. It is a natural occurance; Non human animals sometimes engage in homosexual activity. Read this:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality#History (no homo)
Last edited:
@DoUwant2go2Heaven? You ignored my post. Please respond. There is also a post in R&R you never responded to but I'll pull it up for you.
If god is all-knowing and all-powerful, there was no need for the death and ultimate sacrifice of jesus christ. Being all-wise and infinitely righteous, one would assume (and be correct) that forgiveness could come instantaneously without the need of blood sacrifice. Additionally, god did not really "die" as he is a spirit (he created a human that allegedly sacrificed himself for the good of humanity -- therefore, Jesus is not actually god; he is a creation of god just as any other being would be); all that was done was a magic/fire and light show to boost his ego and to get to what he could have done from the beginning; forgive without requirements to be forgiven or punishment, which is much more wise IMO. For god to go through a process or means to reach an end shows that he is not completely omnipotent, for with a completely omnipotent being, there is no means to and end. Also, emotions such as anger and resentment, for an all-good and all-wise being, do not make sense.
This is how I see the analogy:
A painter (your god) creates a painting (a human). The painter creates Satan and evil by tilting the painting and commands the painting not to run (sin) before it dries (dies). It is in the painting's nature to run because it is liquid. It is not in the painter's nature to run and being vastly more intelligent than the painting (because it is an inanimate object, of course), the painter should understand that it is in the painting's nature to run, especially when tilted (tempted). The tilting was done by the painter because the painter created that situation. If the painting runs (or sins), responsibility falls on the painter, not the painting. It is not wise at all for the painter to throw the painting away because it ran before it dried up when the painter himself tilted the painting giving the painting reason to run in the first place.
You sound like a cruel heartless dictator. If you truly loved the paper, you would at least listen to its request and if you were not to grant its wish, at least you would speak to the paper and explain why you chose to stick with your original plan. Do you have any children? Is that the way you treat them? Even in this hypothetical scenario, you've let your pride and ego as the creator affect your love, compassion and understanding toward your creation. You did not even give the paper time to explain why it requested markers rather than paint.
If god is all-knowing and all-powerful, there was no need for the death and ultimate sacrifice of jesus christ. Being all-wise and infinitely righteous, one would assume (and be correct) that forgiveness could come instantaneously without the need of blood sacrifice. Additionally, god did not really "die" as he is a spirit (he created a human that allegedly sacrificed himself for the good of humanity -- therefore, Jesus is not actually god; he is a creation of god just as any other being would be); all that was done was a magic/fire and light show to boost his ego and to get to what he could have done from the beginning; forgive without requirements to be forgiven or punishment, which is much more wise IMO. For god to go through a process or means to reach an end shows that he is not completely omnipotent, for with a completely omnipotent being, there is no means to and end. Also, emotions such as anger and resentment, for an all-good and all-wise being, do not make sense.
DoUwant2go2Heaven?;5140204 said:
This is how I see the analogy:
A painter (your god) creates a painting (a human). The painter creates Satan and evil by tilting the painting and commands the painting not to run (sin) before it dries (dies). It is in the painting's nature to run because it is liquid. It is not in the painter's nature to run and being vastly more intelligent than the painting (because it is an inanimate object, of course), the painter should understand that it is in the painting's nature to run, especially when tilted (tempted). The tilting was done by the painter because the painter created that situation. If the painting runs (or sins), responsibility falls on the painter, not the painting. It is not wise at all for the painter to throw the painting away because it ran before it dried up when the painter himself tilted the painting giving the painting reason to run in the first place.
DoUwant2go2Heaven?;5140204 said:
You sound like a cruel heartless dictator. If you truly loved the paper, you would at least listen to its request and if you were not to grant its wish, at least you would speak to the paper and explain why you chose to stick with your original plan. Do you have any children? Is that the way you treat them? Even in this hypothetical scenario, you've let your pride and ego as the creator affect your love, compassion and understanding toward your creation. You did not even give the paper time to explain why it requested markers rather than paint.
Last edited:
Too many words being dropped...ill try to keep it brief.
You are BORN athiest, how is that an influence of some one elses ideals? If anything accepting someone elses "truth" would be giving in to influence.
This dude disciplined is really saying evolution isnt real?? And reppin saying "give proof for gravity?" i mean i cant even take you idiots seriously.
After contraception, the mass resembles a FISH as it has gills and a more aquatic shape. Later, as its body forms it has a tail like a REPTILE. The tail draws in and finally the creature resembles a MAMMAL and is born a HUMAN CHILD.
This all takes place inside of a woman during a -9month cycle. HOW IS THAT NOT PROOF OF OUR EVOLUTION?
Its disgusting how much pride you take in your ignorance....i can't wait until the world majority is rid of such a plague.
You are BORN athiest, how is that an influence of some one elses ideals? If anything accepting someone elses "truth" would be giving in to influence.
This dude disciplined is really saying evolution isnt real?? And reppin saying "give proof for gravity?" i mean i cant even take you idiots seriously.
After contraception, the mass resembles a FISH as it has gills and a more aquatic shape. Later, as its body forms it has a tail like a REPTILE. The tail draws in and finally the creature resembles a MAMMAL and is born a HUMAN CHILD.
This all takes place inside of a woman during a -9month cycle. HOW IS THAT NOT PROOF OF OUR EVOLUTION?
Its disgusting how much pride you take in your ignorance....i can't wait until the world majority is rid of such a plague.
- Status
