Amazon Vehicles Beauty Return your textbook rentals STEM nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc PCB DG Limited time offer Wickedly Prime Handmade Wedding Shop Book House Cleaning twinpeaksv2 twinpeaksv2 twinpeaksv2  Introducing Echo Show All-New Fire HD 8 Kids Edition, starting at $129.99 Kindle Oasis Trade it in. Fund the next. Spring Savings Event on Ellen
Customer Discussions > Movie forum

The Alibi Lounge

This discussion has reached the maximum length permitted, and cannot accept new replies. Start a new discussion

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 1000 posts in this discussion
Posted on Jun 5, 2013, 2:43:16 PM PDT
Goodbye, everybody. I've tried not to hog the spolight on this thread and, overall, I think I've succeeded remarkably well. Have a great summer! We're going to need a new alibi.

Last one out, please turn off the lights...oops, that would be me.

Posted on Jun 5, 2013, 1:22:06 PM PDT
KatieHepburn says:
BGT: You must be careful when using 'simple rationalization' regarding a generalization. That is what Hitler did to rationalize his actions, that is what religion did in the name of Christ to rationalize some dastardly behavior and so on... 'Simple rationalization', I have learned over all my years, is a way of saying, 'I don't have the facts, this is just what I think/believe and so I will base all my behavior and decisions thusly.'

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 1:05:19 PM PDT
re: "And what would the relevance be before that?"
Merely ten or twenty thousand years of human existence.

(The Church) "set boundaries on its (knowledge) advancement"
Simple rationalization.

"I call them as I see them,"
Be cautious, William, ere you consume yourself in your hatred and

Posted on Jun 5, 2013, 12:48:38 PM PDT
KH's quote from Einstein, above, shows his deeply spiritual nature.

Einstein never accepted quantum mechanics. It was his biggest blind spot as a scientist. It was the only area in which he was dramatically wrong. (His other error was in introducing, then rejecting, the cosmological constant in the equations of general relativity. It turns out that you do need it after all.)

There are many things about Einstein that we must love, however, and not the least of them was the fact that he was Kurl Godel's only real friend when they were both at the Institute for Advanced Study.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 12:44:00 PM PDT
BGT: And in stating that "all people alive believed the world to be flat", in any year after say 350 BC--you would be wrong. And what would the relevance be before that?

And in what ways did the Roman Church set back knowledge, eh? Certainly it set boundaries on its advancement--and has learned from that mistake. There are so many other factors, besides the Church, that were set again the initial flowering of modern science in the 15th and 16th century that it is narrow and bigoted to blame the church for all of it.

I call them as I see them, and your ignorance of the history of science and religion is profound. Not to mention your ugly anti-religious bigotry.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 11:50:35 AM PDT
KatieHepburn says:
BGT: It was a double entendre..

Posted on Jun 5, 2013, 11:42:24 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 5, 2013, 11:46:19 AM PDT
KatieHepburn says:
This segment from Viereck's book is reasonable thinking, in my estimation. I would love to have had a conversation with him (Einstein) in his last years...

Einstein had previously explored the belief that man could not understand the nature of God. In an interview published in 1930 in G. S. Viereck's book Glimpses of the Great, Einstein, in response to a question about whether or not he believed in God, explained:

Your question [about God] is the most difficult in the world. It is not a question I can answer simply with yes or no. I am not an Atheist. I do not know if I can define myself as a Pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. May I not reply with a parable? The human mind, no matter how highly trained, cannot grasp the universe. We are in the position of a little child, entering a huge library whose walls are covered to the ceiling with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written those books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books, a mysterious order, which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of the human mind, even the greatest and most cultured, toward God. We see a universe marvelously arranged, obeying certain laws, but we understand the laws only dimly. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that sways the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza's Pantheism. I admire even more his contributions to modern thought. Spinoza is the greatest of modern philosophers, because he is the first philosopher who deals with the soul and the body as one, not as two separate things.[19]

Posted on Jun 5, 2013, 11:36:51 AM PDT
i am out of here. lucky y'all

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 11:36:10 AM PDT
bgt re: black president

I started to write the Mets winning the World Series, but I remembered they used that in a movie.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 11:33:02 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 5, 2013, 11:34:55 AM PDT

re: "besides a black man being elected President."

Cute, Thomas, cute -- you old rascal.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 11:30:50 AM PDT

I'm not a mathematician, but I am confident that Einstein was not a believer in religious dogma. His statement "God does not play dice" was a metaphor in rejecting the theory of the quanta which relies on probability which he, at least at first, did not accept.

Einstein stated publicly more than once that he did not practice any organized religion.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 11:27:43 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 5, 2013, 11:35:03 AM PDT
What is the POINT of natural law if you are going to contravene it?

And why did all these miraculous things occur so long ago? I mean, besides a black man being elected president.

I just have to laugh at the people who consider themselves intelligent and rational, and in many cases are, and yet will vehemently--and maniacally--defend outlandish statements that they have absolutely NO proof for. None. They are simply regurgitating ridiculous ideas implanted in their heads by the cynical and self-serving years ago. And they are, presumably, so frightened of the real world that they cling to this dogma past all limits of logic and reason.

If it weren't so destructive, it would be a lot more humorous. But then we know how much Hate the prince of peace seems to have generated in his illogical followers.

The power of propaganda is awesome.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 11:22:37 AM PDT

re: The Virgin Birth: "It would be true even if no one believed it."

It's also possible for it to be false even if everyone believes it.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 11:21:28 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 5, 2013, 11:24:43 AM PDT
KatieHepburn says:
Cav: It could be... The old question of if a tree in the forest ... The ability that our brains possess in the grand scheme of things, let alone comparatively, is ridiculous, not in a good way. Einstein said "God does not play dice." I'm not entirely sure of the context of his remark, but it does enlighten me regarding his belief system. We already know his IQ, round-a-bout. As far the virgin birth, maybe it had something to do with what Einstein called a "spooky action at a distance". Makes sense to me...

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 11:17:07 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 5, 2013, 11:19:56 AM PDT
cav:It would be true even if no one believed it."

Obviously you do not choose to use the reasoning abilities that your god gave you, presumably for you to use them to think.

I STILL know no intelligent person who believes in procreation without intercourse (in vitro aside,per KH)

The problem with believing in the supernatural is that it makes it very difficult to take a person seriously. When you stop using your ability to reason, there isn't much left.

I have errands to run. I think I will fly out the window here and take care of them. I have to buy five loaves of bread and two fish to feed the first five thousand men I see.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 11:13:29 AM PDT
KH: Women can achieve pregnancy and birth without ever having had intercourse."

Do they believe that angels come and talk to them too? (Paranoid schizophrenic would be the diagnosis.)

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 11:06:23 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 5, 2013, 11:09:10 AM PDT

Strictly speaking "from whence" is redundant. "Whence" alone means "from what place" although "from whence" is common usage.

All I said in my post was that there was a time when all the people alive believed the World to be flat and I stand by that statement.

I think it is historically accurate to say that the Christian Church represented a significant setback of scientific knowledge and logic in the Western World.

You'll note that I didn't see the need to resort to derisive remarks.

Posted on Jun 5, 2013, 11:02:52 AM PDT
Cavaradossi says:
Thomas A. Stith

It's not a requirement that everyone on earth believe in the virgin birth for it to be true. It would be true even if no one believed it.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 10:59:20 AM PDT
KatieHepburn says:
As far as 'in vitro' is concerned, I was only referring to your statement that no one believes in virgin birth. I was applying that to today. Today, I most certainly believe in virgin birth as a fact. Women can achieve pregnancy and birth without ever having had intercourse. Thus, I believe!

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 10:46:52 AM PDT

If Jesus lived, I have no doubt he was sincere. I cannot disagree with anything I know of that he said. However--we have only the word of fanatical followers who had much personally to gain by his enthronement. They were fighting to establish a new religion, not an easy thing to accomplish.

That is the reality. What I don't get is why people cling to the dogma that makes no sense--like the Joan of Arc nonsense that I mentioned before--and use their brains (that their god gave them) to look at the REAL events and the reality of what MOST LIKELY happened.

What is Most Likely? That a man walked on water and raised the dead or that his followers pumped up his image to further their own ambitions?

Forget the dogma and use your head.

A virgin birth is NOT possible. That is not debatable. So how can so many people believe it? And, as I said, what does it say about their religion that this is a tenet of it? What bizarre concept of sex did they have? They wanted their hero to exist with out, for gosh sakes. Why?

Try your in vitro theory on the next Holy Roller you meet. Heck, try it on some posters here.

The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
Ain't necessarily so...

And let us not forget that most people on this planet do NOT believe in virgin birth. Although they DO seem to believe in zombies.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 10:25:06 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 5, 2013, 10:28:50 AM PDT
KatieHepburn says:
Thomas: You must realize that you are a fanatical atheist. That in fact, you have made atheism your god, in a way. You propound it and expound it into the ground until one almost feels as though one has been stalked by a fickle god. You say you know not one person of intelligence who believes that children can be born without sexual intercourse. I know many, myself being one. In vitro fertilization can be an example of virgin birth. But, I also know many people of high intelligence (my friend Al with an I.Q. of 160) who believe in the virgin birth. My belief system is in transition, and like you I tend towards the dark side, but as I suspect with you (because of some of the anecdotal evidence you have given re: your personal experiences) I have faced some major disappointments, or what you might call 'evidence to the contrary', regarding the promises in the good book. I do believe that Jesus lived and was sincere, as far as all the rest - my life was definitely better and happier when I bought the whole package/drank the kool aid/whatever - but I have now 'gazed into the abyss and abyss gazes into me.'

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 9:49:32 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 5, 2013, 9:50:53 AM PDT
cav: re: "As the Bible says: "With God, all things are possible." It's as simple, and as cosmic, as that"

It is no doubt important to remember that, worldwide, this is a MINORITY view. In fact, I don't know any intelligent person who believes that children can be born without sexual intercourse. And neither do heavier-than-water people walk on that element, nor do dead people rise--George Romero to the contrary. I guess Lazarus was the first Christian zombie?

There are 21 points that describe the elements that make up the myth of the Folk Hero. Only Oedipus has all 21 points. Theseus is second and Jesus is third with 18 out of 21. He even rates higher than King Arthur or Robin Hood!

Doesn't that tell you something?

When the first Christians were trying to get their young religion off the ground--against stiff competition--they obviously INVENTED a lot supernatural hogwash to impress the Great Unwashed of the time. Wow! Virgin Birth. (Thankfully free of the taint of "ORIGINAL SIN!" How backward WERE these yokels?) Let's invent some miracles: that impresses the illiterates.

The appalling thing is that this nonsense is still taken LITERALLY today, in an age when we all should--and do--know better. Jesus does not have to be Superman for his words to have relevance.

Dogma is not thinking. In fact it is the opposite.

The interesting question is WHY do some people NEED to believe in a "virgin birth"? What does that say about their attitudes?

It really is time to get out of the dark ages. What are you people afraid of?

Posted on Jun 5, 2013, 9:43:55 AM PDT
BGT: From whence do you get your history of science?

As to the earth, for instance: Eratosthenes, in the 3rd century BC, calculated the circumference of the earth, and its axial tilt, with remarkable accuracy. Recognizing, of course, that it was a sphere, and not flat.

The Roman church is far more willing to admit error than are you.

And, if you bothered to understand world religions, you would find that there are far more held in common between Christianity and Islam than points of difference.

You have a remarkably narrow reality tunnel. You and TAS are soulmates.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2013, 8:15:58 AM PDT

There was a time when 100% of the people on the Earth were convinced without a doubt that the World was flat; that the Earth did not move and was the center of creation and that the sun and all of the other astronomical bodies rotated around the Earth (Ptolemaic system), the latter being dogma that the Christian Church demanded that all Christians accept as fact and which got Galileo into big trouble for questioning it. We now know that each and every one of those people who believed those things either by choice or by dictum was incorrect in those beliefs, do we not? It was only a few years ago that the Vatican publicly announced that it regretted that Galileo had been so mistreated by the "Church".

I am sure that the 1.6 billion Muslim's of the World hold beliefs that those 1.2 billion Catholics would dismiss as being absurd.

As an atheist, I simply hold that what people believe is of no importance; all that matters is what is the truth.

Posted on Jun 5, 2013, 6:48:06 AM PDT
Cavaradossi says:
Bruce G. Taylor

"The concept of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ is still held today in spite of the fact that nearly everyone recognizes it as an impossibility."

"Nearly everyone"? Would that include the 1.2 billion Catholics, the Orthodox, and Protestants? You appear to be overreaching a bit in your attempt to normalize your anti-God view.

The idea that the virgin birth is an impossibility makes sense if you don't believe in God. If you do believe that God exists, that He created the universe with all its amazing complexities, not the least of which is man, it is no stretch to believe that He could cause the virgin birth. As the Bible says: "With God, all things are possible." It's as simple, and as cosmic, as that.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 400 Next ›
Discussion locked

Recent discussions in the Movie forum


This discussion

Discussion in:  Movie forum
Participants:  53
Total posts:  10000
Initial post:  May 8, 2012
Latest post:  Jun 5, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 9 customers