you do understand that you are drinking the same water that the dinosours drank right

Yes and isn't it funny that so many people reject recycled sewege water! all water is recycled anyway! all open air water bodies in the world get crapped in by fish and other animals already. The true question is, what isn't recycled sewege water?

isn't that what the bible says god said

I have read the bible, and from what i remember it does say somthing along those lines. I certainly am not one of those people who can remember chapters though, i remember just enough to know if somthing sounds familiar or not.

There are no true 'rules' for the Universe. The Ten Commandments are more moral guidelines than anything, and you need to brush up on your culture. There are plenty of religions that go against many Christian views. Nothing was an acident true, but i dont think any of it was planned, if it was then why all the instability in the world before we came along. And even better why did the world start without us. I mean on geological scale, we have existed for less that 1% of the world's total history. If something did create this world then it had to go through quite a lot of chances and testing to create us. Some all powerful being didnt just raise point at the land and said "LIVE!!". I mean if i was something that powerful i would get bored and go off to do something else, but it matters if this 'being' has a concience or anything, does it feel or think? Who knows, we cant ask it.

Interesting statement, the great emperor is a thinker!

The ten commandments are more than a moral guideline, i believe they are primarily an educational tool, It is God saying in no uncertain terms that this is it, the final frontier! Thus far and no father! a line has been drawn in the sand, let there be no mistaking that. This is in an educational sense not a destructive one, God just dousn't wan't us to be too badly missled or missguided in life, doing the wrong things not because we chose to sin but because we had decieved ourselves or had been decieved by others.

Christian views... hmm what are Christian views? That got me thinking? I guess i see alot of christian 'doctrine' in the church. To be honest christian doctrine dousn't interest me much, the thing that interests me is Christ's sacrifice and the holy spirit. What i do notice about Christian doctrine is that it seems to lead you to do exactly the oposite to what you wan't to do at least half the time!! Me, i am definately not a 'turn the other cheek' person, i don't even think turning the other cheek is very wise in certain circumstances. but i certainly am a 'good samaratin' type of person. What is interesting about Christian doctrine is that it seems to apply to a persons emotional states. It is not a logical faith but an emotional one.

Nothing was an accident? In terms of the begginings of life yes, but since the fall of man, God's participation in the world of men has been severely deminished. I like to use the analagy of the street kid who ran away from home. On the streets this child does not have the assistance of the parents, lucky for us that God is slightly more powerful than parents, he can still help us even though we ran away from his official care and responsibility. My point is that most of what happens in the world is completely random, basic cause and effect etc etc, most but by no means 'all'.

Did God simply say 'live' and created us? I'll say yes. What puzzles me though is the rest of creation. If God had intended for man to stay in the garden of eden then why did he create everything ouside the garden? It wasn't really meant for man, earth as we know it today wasn't really meant for us, so it is puzzling??

1 adam had to fall

No. Fate does not command choice, choice commands fate.

if adam had not fallen we would not be here

Even if Adam or eve had chosen not to eat the fruit, even if their children had chosen not to eat the fruit, one day eventually, some descendant would have!

Choice is the link between a perfect creation of God, and evil. There is just no getting round it.

Freedom of choice + time and chance = sin

We can keep discussing religious morals and opinions for years and still get nowhere. Nothing you can say can reconvince me to change my views, and nothing i can say can reconvince you to change yours. What i offer is more open discussion, i accept your opinion you state a 'reasonable' counterstatement or agreement to mine(sorta like what Mystikmind did).

Agree, i think the first step to getting any message accross is to open your ears first.

Why should anyone respect what you have to say, if you do not respect what they have to say. Keeping in mind that respect does not mean agree, so for a Christian to respect the words of an athiest, dousnt mean he no longer believes. I dunno, some Christians are scared or agitated by hearing 'blasphemy' but that's the wrong attitude altogether. Listening and respecting = get listened to, get respected.

I'm not personally into conventional religious debate, not that i dissaprove, it is just kinda booring. I prefer to disturb everyone with unconventional ideas hehehe

It will always stay civil, i have no reason to bash any religion, that happens enough in the real world for it to be brought here to disgrace these forums.

You made a point that pretty much proves my earlier statement, religion has become so complicated in todays world. There are just so many rules and regulations(not as bad as in the past), some of them utterly ridiculous.

Respect is due to everyone and everyones view or opinion. But, i dont think that we should take things on these forums to offensively, one problem with the worldo of today is everyones want to be politically correct, to always stay on the 'good' side of things. Also, some of the Christian fate have grown quite arrogant in my opinion, they listen only to their teachings reverting back to the narrow-mindedness.

One more thing on Adam and Eve, if they were the only ones present when it all occured, can we trust the accounts. Could they write things down, or did they transfer the story by word of mouth? How much of it was exagerated then? How much was misinturpreted? How much of the original was corrupted or lost?

We are not even sure of the historical relevance of the Flood, lest the true technological progression of the human race before it(if the theory is true). Now the human race has existed for about 100,000 years based and crossrefranced by geological and archiological data which is widely considered true. However, the first and oldest civilization started about around 10,000 C.E.(common era), most likely it was the first cities of Egypt that were built around this time. However, most debate that this kind of advancement and architectural knowledge was not present till 6,000 years later. So that leaves the debate about how the Egyptians were able to be 6,000 years ahead of their advancement to beggin with.

i believe that the true christian moto should be do unto others and most other religians also have something to this effect even the jewish tooth for a tooth kind of falls into that thing ie if you don't want someone to take your tooth don't take his

but the bible was inspired by god

I've been reasonably scoffed in a different thread for using a string if -ism/ist/etc. terms, and I suspect that was in no small part on the basis of my using the oddly-rare term "theist."

danielost's posts in this thread are far from what I expected to see around here, but have been very interesting nonetheless. I suspect both of us are getting somewhat short shrift from the less "mystik" minded around here b/c we are picking on the "rationalists," albeit from markedly different POVs.

My "faith" in the relative reliablity of scholarship has led me to believe that the "Golden Rule" was either devised during the Buddha's time or that the codifying crowd back then snuffed out any records of a predecessor. "Do unto others..." clearly predates any plausible accounts of Jesus. The "tooth for a tooth" stuff is the opposite of the golden rule, except possibly for serious sadomasochists.

In honor of the confessional impulses of the second-wave Semitic monotheists (yes, that's you Christian folks), I admit that I wanted to do some rudely feisty typing about danielosts's mention of carbon dating. But I'm pretty sure my greatest weakness in "this" debate is my affection for golden rule talk.

We are not even sure of the historical relevance of the Flood, lest the true technological progression of the human race before it(if the theory is true). Now the human race has existed for about 100,000 years based and crossrefranced by geological and archiological data which is widely considered true. However, the first and oldest civilization started about around 10,000 C.E.(common era), most likely it was the first cities of Egypt that were built around this time. However, most debate that this kind of advancement and architectural knowledge was not present till 6,000 years later. So that leaves the debate about how the Egyptians were able to be 6,000 years ahead of their advancement to beggin with.

Flood there was, Ark? hmmm problematic. I supose there is no reason to deny the possibility of the ark. I do most seriously understand how many animals can fit on one boat - which kinda strikes down the Ark story pretty solidly there's no denying that.... then again God helps those who help themselves, so who is to say God did not save the rest of the animals or replace them or other civilisations building arks who knows?

As for the rest, i have heard very intriguing theories which i won't even begin to go into!

anyway one thing i have learnt when studying history is how smart people were back then. Today there is kind of an impression that us advanced humans are so much more superior to ancient races. But the more i learn about ancient history, the more impressed i become and the more open minded i become to the possibilities and potentials of what could have happened in ancient times.

if you look at all of the land animals reptiles mammals and birdes mostly the mammals becouse they are now the large ones

they all fit into a small family i can't name them all off

but the deer family includeing the elk, and such the buffalo family, and you only take two of each of the families along then you could do it

which means that all of the different types of animals now on the planet evovled from this small sample

and crocs and gaters would not have had to be on board the ark nor most of the insects or the amphibians or any other animal that spends most of its time on the in the water or on it

this is totally my belief

adam and eve did die the day that they ate the fruit

ie that was the first day that man went to sleep

again this is totally my belief

according to science there is no reason for sleep

historically the first country was summeria that is where iraq is

but explain atlantis, masters of the air

which means that all of the different types of animals now on the planet evovled from this small sample

I considered this theory once, but what puts a stop to it is marsupials. Australia (one example)is packed full of wildlife that is simply not possible to have evolved from the ark animals. Somone else had to have saved marsupials definately not Noah. This is not just my belief but it also seems much more logical (in my opinion that is).

adam and eve did die the day that they ate the fruit ie that was the first day that man went to sleep again this is totally my belief according to science there is no reason for sleep

I like to think sleep is a guift from God, knowing in his great wisdom the cruelty of man... what rest would the slaves of the world have if it wasn't for sleep? NONE!

So are you saying that Adam and Eve were imortal before eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge?

I think it is a critical point if they were immortal or not. Because to suggest that death could occur without sin is a very unique concept?

danielost, your posts have given me pause to think. Anyway, i'm off to ponder what has been said so far, back in about an hour or so.

sorry he/I wasn't trying to be combative but inviting