Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Debate:Were Judas' actions necessary and foreordained?

2008-07-10T19:14:41Z

BillyJ:

Judas Iscariot's betrayal of Christ ranks as the largest betrayal of all time, sufficient to make his name synonymous with "traitor." However, given that it was part of God's plan for Christ to be delivered unto the Pharisees and sacrificed for the redemption of many, it is also arguable that Judas' actions were part of that same plan. Was Judas' betrayal of Christ a necessary, foreordained part of God's plan, or an unplanned act of free will on the part of Judas?

== Yes ==
Yes to both. I twas a foreordained plan on God's part, but Judas still made the free will choice to do it. [[User:BillyJ|BillyJ]] 15:14, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

== No ==

Debate:Did God create evil?

2008-07-10T19:08:42Z

BillyJ: /* By definition */

Of course God made everything, but man sinned and that means evil came into the world by one man. Actually [[Satan]] sinned first but you could say that God created the opportunity for him to sin. Why do you think an omnipotent, omiscient God allowed Satan to rebel in the first place?
Better yet, why do you think God didn't just start over after Adam and Eve ruined his plans for a perfect society? [[User:StevenM]] Oct 20 2007 18:10

In terms of Adam and Eve you really have to ask where was god when they were talking to the talking snake. Also the basic logic being that if god made man and man sins then it would be the biproduct of god. [[User:Concretemuncher]]

One of the greatest gifts God gave his intelligent creations (angelic or human) was the capacity of free will ... the ability to make choices and to serve Him out of love and desire. Blaming God for the choices made by intelligent people would be like blaming parents who provide the best environment for their child, including an abundance of love and ensuring that nothing is lacking - including a positive purpose in life, and whose child then becames a criminal. The problem is not with the parent ... it is with the child. James 1:14-15 warns that sin is the result of someone allowing an improper desire to develop. Satan wanted the worship of humans, Eve wanted to be like God (able to independently decide what is good and bad), and Adam valued being with his wife more than obedience to God.

* God himself acknowledges his ability to foreknow the future. (Isaiah 46:10) Apparently He chooses to be selective when he uses the ability as is evidenced in other Bible accounts (e.g.., the test of Abraham's faith re: Isaac (Genesis 18:19; 22:11, 12)) and the fact that He extends the opportunity to ''all'' mankind to be reconciled to Him. (Acts 17:30, 31) It would be grossly unfair of God to invite ''all'' mankind to repent if He already ''knew'' which ones would not succeed.
** By selectively using his foreknowledge, God dignifies each of us with the opportunity to prove ourselves loyal to Him and provide an answer to Satan's challenge (Proverbs 27:11) and has the ability to find joy in His own life. Consider how boring your life would be if you knew every facet (the good, the bad and the mundane) of how others would treat you. What might seem advantageous to begin with would quickly grow dull.
* Why not start over after the rebellion in Eden? Satan called God a liar and challenged God's sovereignty (His ''right'' to rule), implying that mankind would be better off without God's rulership. Wiping out the three rebels at that time would not have answered the questions raised by Satan in a setting viewed by millions of angels.
** So God has allowed both Satan and mankind the opportunity to prove whether or not they can successfully rule independently of His guidance. (Jeremiah 10:23) At the same time he has made arrangements to allow those that want to serve Him an opportunity to learn about him (the Bible), to come into an approved relationship with him (the sacrifice of Christ Jesus) and enjoy the prospect originally offered to Adam & Even (eternal life in paradise on earth).
** Not to be overlooked is the fact that God immediately provided a means by which he would undo the effects of this rebellion. In the Bible's first prophecy (Genesis 3:15) God foretold that he would provide a Seed that would crush Satan (Romans 16:20). 1 John 3:8 tells us that Christ was made manifest to break up the works of the Devil. In short, there is no evil act that has been done or can be done that will not be undone. Isaiah 65:17 foretells that the "former things will not be called to mind" and Revelation 21:1-5 promise an end to tears, death, mourning, outcry and pain.
[[User:Brentleigh]]

I believe God ALLOWED evil to exist but did not CREATE it. He allowed Satan to rebel and for evil to exist in order that God be glorified. It's hard for mere mortal man to fathom such a concept. Without evil, Christ would not have needed to come to earth and die on the cross for the salvation of man. But in the end, God will become the ultimate victor, Satan will be destroyed, and God will be glorified for all eternity. --[[User:Watchman|Watchman]] 23:27, 8 January 2008 (EST)

This is the biggest issue with the whole bible, and christianity.
If you say that God is all powerful, and that there isn't anything he can't do..
Why did he then (if he created everything) create men on earth which were evil in their nature (at least after a while) and began to both destroy themself and everything else on earth, if god was allpowerful, he should have been able to create humans who did not have any hate in them and nothing of evil at all.

But since thats not the case, that only leave's us with two possible answers:
1) Good isn't allpowerfull and was newer able to create a perfect world, and the statement's in the bible most is obviously wrong.
2) The worst one, God is evil.
If God had all the powers in the world to create whatever he'd wanted, why did he create a humanity which has so many bad sides about them, like killing each other, killing other animals, torture, rape and everything like that.
If God truly is allpowerful and have the abilty to create whatever he want,
then God must, without no denying be the biggest sadist in the enitire world. --[[User:Nabroon|Nabroon]] 06:20, 5 March 2008 (EST)

It’s neither of those. God originally created the world and humanity in a perfect state. There was no evil at first. But, then people made the choice to sin and commit evil deeds. It’s because people have the freedom to choose that evil exists. God could have created a world where evil could not arise in it, but then He would have had to take away free will. Anytime you give a person a choice, you have to accept that fact that they may make the wrong choice. If you take away free will, then people would simply be pre-programmed robots. God want’s people to love Him, but He doesn’t want to force them to. God could either have robots who love Him only because they have no other alternative, or He could have people who love Him and freely choose to. Which would you prefer? Just about everyone would agree they would prefer somebody to choose to love them. That’s how God wants it, too. But that works under the premise that some will choose not too, and that people will choose evil. [[Ultimahero]] March 20 2008.

How, then, do you reconcile the Serpent? Did he not exist prior to man's choice? Was he not evil prior to that choice? I suppose an argument could be made that the Serpent was meant metaphorically, but that doesn't jibe well with the position that Genesis is meant to be read literally. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 17:28, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

The serpent, which is Satan, was created before the rest of the creation. And there was a was in Hevean where Satan and some of the angels rebelled, which caused them to be kicked from Hevean. Same kind of thing. They had a choice, they chose wrong. That's not God's fault. [[User:Ultimahero|Ultimahero]] 20:39, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

:...but it does establish that evil existed prior to the choice by humans. Moreover, we are still faced with the difficult quandry of why God created a universe in which evil was possible. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 20:45, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Well, let's first define what evil is. God is good. So anything that goes against God's holy character is evil. Man sinned, which allowed evil to enter this world, affecting us and everything around us. But, evil did exist before that in the sense that Satan had already rebelled and chose to go against God. As far as when evil first began, I suppose it would be whenever the first choice to disobey God was made. Pressumabley this was Satan. And God createda world where evil exists because He wanted us to have free will. If people have the ability to choose, then they invariably have the ability to make wrong choices. God could have not given free will and eliminated the problem with evil, but then all He would have would be little robots who can't really choose Him. [[User:Ultimahero|Ultimahero]] 20:52, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

== No ==
...but he created [[Liberal|Liberals]]. (poor attempt at fun by [[User:Leopeo|Leopeo]] 14:51, 10 December 2007 (EST))

== By definition==

If God is everything , thus God is good and evil - [[User: tehliberator| tehliberator]]

Who said that God is everything? [[User:Ultimahero|Ultimahero]] 16:26, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Well, if God isn't everything, or if not everything is of God's creation, than there must exist other powers than God.
Mabye God is just created by some higher powers of creators and that he is just a pice of a puzzle in their play...
Or perhaps god is more of a way to express everything which exists, and which in its divine prinsiple, both gives life and takes life, both allows happyness and wisdom, but also allows sadness primitivity.
Life couldn't be either "White" or "Black", but to allow every being existing in God's creation to live and learn, they must feel both the dark sides of life aswell as the light sides of it, and the dark will allways come from our own mistakes and not anyone elses. And Jusus also explained it so very well by his well known statetment that; "What you sow you will reap".

Said plainly and easly, the best thing you can do for yourself is to do as much good as you possibly can do to others, that is the way of God, and that is the way that man will appear in "God's immage, after his likness".--[[User:Nabroon|Nabroon]] 21:37, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

How are you defining "other powers"? I would argue that evil is result of man's choice to rebel against God. So, man could fit into the "other powers" section, by that definition. But nothing exists that God didn't either directly bring about or allowed to come about. (Ex: Man is a result of God directly bringing him into existence; man's evil is a result of God allowing man to choose to sin.) But this doesn't mean that God '''is''' everything. I can paint a picture, but that doesn't make me the painting. God can create but that doesn't make Him the creation. [[User:BillyJ|BillyJ]] 22:04, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Well...
I think the biggest mistake all of you on this site has made, and that counts for every christian person which have the same view too, is that God once upon a time in the beginning of his creation chose to abandon the human race because of an error they persumably made.
Allthough you talk about free will, if God had all the possible powers in the world to create whatever he wanted, than one would think that the first highly intellegent creature he created (namely humans), should have been been a little more wise and perfected than what was obviously the case (since they choosed to go against the will of god and to be cast out from the Garden of Even, which in some way can be looked on as heaven).

Either it really sounds like God wasn't fully capeable of creating only divine creations, or else, the darkness which came when the humans choose to abandon god (which I think you mean is only for as long as humans exists on this earth) wasn't either a mistake from god, and neither from the humans.
Because, if god created us with minds that are only capeable to think selfishly and ruthlessly, then it isn't we that should be blammed. (I hope some of you can see the logic in that).

I think that god created us in the unperfect way we were in from the beginning, so that we could experiance what the effects of our mistakes would be, and so, gradualy, to become more in harmony with the world, and in absolute, more in harmony with god.

I think that it is the misson of "free will", so that the humans can learn what is right and what is wrong, and the more you understand this, the closer to god you will get.

A lot of wrabble mabye, but I see the creation of everything god has made as a complete logical creation, which in you viewpoint normally is totally oppisite, since you feel that all humans have been born with guilt and are obviously not a creation that god is proud of, so you hope that god can forgive you be pleeding him for forgivness.

Btw, that thing I said about "other powers" was just an example to show that god isn't so much a existing person or angry being as he is both a prinsiple of all that is created and also the divine creator of all. --[[User:Nabroon|Nabroon]] 10:18, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Alright. I think you’re misunderstanding what Christians (or at least what I) believe. You make it sound like the Christian perspective is that God made people, they sinned, and He abandoned them. But that’s not true. The Christian perspective is that God created people with the knowledge that they would sin. He didn’t cause it, but He knew it would happen. He used His knowledge to take it into account. So, God’s plan from the beginning and purpose in creation was to show His mercy by being merciful to man. People sin and have no possible way to escape from it, so God takes on flesh as Jesus Christ and dies on the cross for sin. God never abounded people. He provided them the way to escape.

People are responsible for sin. God isn’t, because He doesn’t make us sin. We just choose to sin. It’s our fault, as we are responsible for the decisions we make.

I would agree that creation is logical and makes sense. I don’t know why you feel that I wouldn’t accept that, seeing as I never said that it wasn’t. All people are born sinners, yes. Is God proud of His creation? I don’t know that “proud” is the best descriptive word. He was pleased with it in the beginning, saying it was “good”. And we know He doesn’t want people to sin, but He cares enough about His creation to go through the process of redeeming them.

I agree that God is the divine creator of all. But He is an actual being with emotions like anger. May I ask you what religion, if any, you are of? [[User:BillyJ|BillyJ]] 13:23, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

I am NOT of any religion, neither am I any kind of atheist, allthough I am very interested in finding the truth, or at least, as far as my mind is able to perceive.

And will tell you, so that it can stick hard enough into your brain, it is NOT your or anyone elses fault that god created you with a "weakness".
If God in the beginning created you with an intellegence and wisdom that wasn't sufficient enough to keep you in the "track" or "path" that god whished you to stay in, than it WAS god's fault.

Our free will is actually not as free as you would have liked it to be, becouse how free we are to think, and how logically we are able to percive, is directly tied to how "evolved" or "completed" our mind is.
God could have used his ablility to create a world of only brilliant, god and angel like beings, were no form of violence or hate could ever have existed.
But since that is not the case, he must have had a reason to why he didn't create our world into such a place, and it is not becouse God didn't have the ability or skill to do it, and it is neither becouse his creation "rebelled" on him, becouse if that was so, than it would have meaned that his creations wasn't so perfect, since they didn't mannage to do what god had wanted them to do.

But that is the way that the normal christian person looks at it, only that he chooses to look away from one half of it, namely the part were god's acts could only have been a evidence of weakness...

In reallity, god created absollutly everything in the most perfect way that you could have ever imagined.
And as I partly said earlier, the apperance of darkness on this planet, in the form of violence, hate, murder and everything of damaging form, is not a evidence of anyone's rebellion against god or his whishes, but is in fact a part of god's plan.

And in trying to make you understand this, I am gonna give you an example which wasn't really made by me:
But lets say that the entire world was a picture, (a picture made by god) then it wouldn't be a specially interesting picture if it was only painted white, as you could not really see anything.
Likewise, the picture would be just as meaningless if it was only painted black, as nothing could really be seen in it.

However, if you suddenly painted it full with all kinds of collors, and used just all kinds of variations, the image could suddenly become quite interesting to look at, since the were plenty of variations to the two main collors: Black and White.

That is also in a way how life exists, and the only way it could exist, since if you got to a point in life were it was allmost so dark and full of pain and missery that it was allmost impossible to see anything else, life would allmost have ceased there and no experiance could have been made becouse there was no variations to the light that was let down there.

The same is with the fact that if you got to a place were you only experianced the "heavenly" passion all the time and only could see and feel the pure light, there would be nothing to make a contrast to it, and therefore where there is no contrasts there is not sensing, and where there is no sensing there is no life.

And the final key to life is this; that if life is to exist, and if the beings which life consists of is to be allowed to live and experience, then life must be an ever changing cycle between darkness and light, and the degree of how close you are to god is the direct deciding factor to how much light your life consists of, just as how far away you are from god, decides how dark you life and fate will be.

It is an endless cycle, and to experience, there must allways be a change in the object of which is experienced, and from forever past to forever in the future, you will allways experience both sides of god's creation and will allways have the chance to feel the light which is closest to him.
--[[User:Nabroon|Nabroon]] 09:36, 9 July 2008 (EDT)

It would be man’s fault for sinning, not God’s. God creates people with free will. If they choose to do something that is against God, it that their fault or God’s? It’s theirs. They make the choice, they did it. God gives people the ability to choose, but man is still responsible for his choices.

Yes God could create a world with no evil. No problem. But, He decided He wanted a world where people have the free ability to choose. As long as people choose, they can choose wrong. To take away evil, God must take away our ability to choose evil. God could do that, but didn’t feel like it.

That’s not an imperfection on God’s part. It’s just not.

So evil is part of God’s creation? He wants there to be evil? Does God like murder and rape? Of course not. This was never part of God’s desire.

I don’t see the how your painting example has any logical implications. Your saying that if there’s too much good or too much evil, then it wouldn’t be “specifically interesting”. Well, so what? (Forgive me if that comes across as rude.) Just because it wouldn’t be interesting doesn’t mean that it is logically impossible. Tell me why it is logically impossible for there to be all good or all evil. God is all good. Why Can’t he be? Man is all evil. Why can’t he be? Give me a logical reason that makes it impossible.

Finally, let me ask you something. You said that you don’t belong to any religion. Fair enough, that’s fine. But, how then do you know that anything you say is true? Someone might ask me how I could know Christianity to be true, and I could point out that Jesus is a historical figure, that the resurrection account is incredibly reliable, etc. The validity of the Bible is a debatable issue, but at least I have something to point to that’s outside of myself. At least I have some objective standard to look to. But what do you have? Where are you deriving your views? Are you just getting everything from your subjective opinions and feelings? And, if that’s the case, do your feelings determine truth? [[User:BillyJ|BillyJ]] 15:08, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Debate:Did God create evil?

2008-07-08T17:23:17Z

BillyJ: /* By definition */

User:Ultimahero

2008-07-08T02:09:40Z

BillyJ: New page: Mormons need Jesus.

Mormons need Jesus.

Debate:Did God create evil?

2008-07-08T02:04:26Z

BillyJ: /* By definition */

Conservapedia:Debate Topics

2008-05-27T05:17:23Z

BillyJ: /* Religious debates */

'''Debate topic suggestions, organized so that it's not necessary to delete them.'''

(Note: If some topic is miscategorized, it can be cut and pasted without affecting the relevant links.)

==Philosophical debates==
# [[ Can conservapedia become the next wikipedia, is this good or bad]]
# [[Conservapedia:If there is no objective truth, then is the claim "there is no objective truth" also not an objective truth?|If there is no objective truth, then is the claim "there is no objective truth" also not an objective truth?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Does History Matter?|Does History Matter?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is a first cause of a process necessary, always possible, or sometimes impossible?|Is a first cause of a process necessary, always possible, or sometimes impossible?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Can Objectivism develop beyond Ayn Rand's original formulation?|Can Objectivism develop beyond Ayn Rand's original formulation?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Can any man live without some code of morality?|Can any man live without some code of morality?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Does the universe include everything, or does something outside the universe exist?|Does the known physical universe exhaust all that can exist, or does something exist beyond known physical boundaries?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Why is there something rather than nothing?|Why is there something rather than nothing?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Stem Cells| Embryonic Stem Cells: Why or why not?]]
# [[Debate:Why Reason?]]
# [[Debate:Why does the conservative media often an ugly undertone?]]

==Religious debates==
# [[Debate: Should certain books be banned from libraries?]]
# [[Debate: Is communism founded on Christian doctrine?]]
# [[Should the first story of creation be read allegorically or literally?]]
# [[Debate:Is Scientology a false religion]]
# [[Why do Moses, Ezra, Jesus, and Paul all disagree on divorce? Moses allowed divorce, Jesus disallowed it and also allowed it, Paul allowed it, and Ezra actually commanded it to appease God (Ezra 10)??? im confused!! whats a christian to do??]]
#[[Did Jesus ever claim to be God?]]
# [[Conservapedia: Grave errors/inconsistencies in the Bible make literal translation worthless.]]
# [[Conservapedia:Was Jesus born in the right time and place?| Was Jesus born in the right time and place?]]
# [[Conservapedia : What does Christianity say about homosexuality?]]
# [[Conservapedia:If God does not exist, can anything be morally wrong?|If God does not exist, can anything be morally wrong?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is it wrong to have a Christmas tree?|Is it wrong to have a Christmas tree?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Did God create evil?|Did God create evil?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Which Christian denomination is the most true to the central teachings of Christianity?|Which Christian denomination is the most true to the central teachings of Christianity?]]
# [[Debate:If Jesus were alive to day, where on the political spectrum would he fall?|If Jesus were alive to day, where on the political spectrum would he fall?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should Religion Play a Large Role in Modern Societies?|Is religion relevant in todays society? / Should Religion Play a Large Role in Modern Societies?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Does the Bible (Old and the New Testament) have the infallible words of God?|Bible (New and Old Testament) Words of God]]
# [[Conservapedia: AntiSemitism|AntiSemitism]]
# [[Does Intelligent Design deny the Existence of God?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Could God create a rock so heavy that he himself could not lift it?|Could God create a rock so heavy that he himself could not lift it?]]
# [[Conservapedia:If there were no religion, would we find another reason to kill each other?|If there were no religion, would we find another reason to kill each other?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Natural Disaster versus Act of God|Natural Disaster versus Act of God]]
# [[Conservapedia:What is the Sabbath day?|What is the Sabbath day?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is it possible to be a conservative and not a religious person or even an atheist?|Is it possible to be a conservative and not a religious person or even an atheist?]]
# [[Debate:Why do we still perform Baptisms?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Does_the_Resurrection_negate_Gods_Sacrifice_of_his_only_son%3F|Does the Resurrection negate Gods Sacrifice of his only son?|Does the Resurrection negate God's Sacrifice of his only son?]]
# [[Conservapedia:If_most_Muslims_learned_their_religion_from_their_parents%2C_just_like_us_Christians%2C_they_will_probably_be_hard_to_convert._So_what_can_we_do_to_save_their_souls%3F|If most Muslims learned their religion from their parents, just like us Christians, they will probably be hard to convert. So what can we do to save their souls?]]
# [[Conservapedia:If_most_Christians_learned_their_religion_from_their_parents%2C_just_like_us_Muslims%2C_they_will_probably_be_hard_to_convert._So_what_can_we_do_to_save_their_souls%3F|If most Christians learned their religion from their parents, just like us Muslims, they will probably be hard to convert. So what can we do to save their souls?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Does_mainstream_Islam_endorse_violence%3F|Does mainstream Islam endorse violence?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is religion morally wrong?|Is religion morally wrong?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Does the Bible display poor ethics and morals?|Does the Bible display poor ethics and morals?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Why the Bible|What makes the Bible a reliable source of knowledge besides tradition?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Why should we be afraid of God?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Do conservative Christians have an unquestioning faith which is comparable to that of the Party in the book 1984?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Antisemitism]]
# [[Conservapedia:Are Christianity and the Bible superior to other religions and scriptures?]]
# [[Conservapedia: Is "Coercive Interrogation" consistent with Christian Values?]]
# [[Should all access to Conservapedia be banned on Sundays?]]
# [[Either God is indecisive or the world's major religions have ALL got it wrong]]
# [[Mary Magdalene - First Witness to the Resurrection - Significance?]]
# [[Debate:Was Christ a fundamentalist?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Atheism vs. Deism]]
# [[Atheism vs. Pastafarianism]]
# [[Why is homosexuality so bad?]]
# [[Debate:Are Young Earth Creationists detracting others from the Faith?]]
# [[If Noah only brought two of every animal on the ark, wouldn't subsequent generations of animals have become increasingly inbred?]]
# [[Debate:Is there 1 God or are there many gods?]]
# [[Debate: Can you be a true Christian and believe in evolution?]]
# [[Debate:Should gay marriage be allowed?]]
# [[Debate:Is atheism a religion]]
# [[Adoption and Abortion]]
# [[Debate: If not naturalism, how do we decide which supernatural explanation is correct?]]
# [[Debate: Are Mormons Christians?]]

==Historical debates==
# [[Conservapedia:Was Benjamin Franklin a deist?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Did racism play a role in the decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?|Did racism play a role in the decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Was the European colonization of the Americas good for the native people?]]
# [[Was President George H. W. Bush wrong to leave Saddam in power in 1991?]]
# [[Conservapedia: Which was worse? the Civil War and it's effects or slavery?]]

==Political debates==
# [[Debate: Is communism founded on Christian doctrine?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Why do we still have an embargo on Cuba?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Has Britain Declined?| Quoting Conservapedia's front page; "The British government just affirmed its ban on mentioning Intelligent Design to students.[3] No one there seems to notice how Britain's decline coincided with its promotion of evolution frauds like the Piltdown Man." - Has Britain REALLY declined?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is illegal immigration control the answer to illegal immigration?|Is illegal immigration control the answer to illegal immigration?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Has Britain become the 51st State of the US?|Has Britain become the 51st State of the US?]]
# [[Conservapedia:You think these Phd's are nuts?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Does the European Union pose a threat to the United States?| Does the European Union pose a threat to United States Security?]]
# [[Which is true; progressive Liberal or regressive liberal]]
# [[Define torture]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should the United States have entered World War I?|Should the United States have entered World War I?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should the United States have entered World War II?|Should the United States have entered World War II?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should the United States have eliminated communism in North Korea|Should the United States have eliminated communism in North Korea as General Douglas MacArthur wanted?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Was the United States right to drop atomic bombs so quickly on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?|Was the United States right to drop atomic bombs so quickly on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Was it wrong for him to allow the attack in order to wake up the American public and motivate Americans to fight and win the war?|If President Roosevelt had known about the Pearl Harbor attack in advance, would it have been wrong for him to allow the attack in order to wake up the American public and motivate Americans to fight and win the war?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is gun-control the answer to crimes involving guns?|Is gun-control the answer to crimes involving guns?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Was world war inevitable?|Was world war inevitable?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Does "free trade" increase wealth rather than simply redistribute it?|Does "free trade" increase wealth or simply redistribute it?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is it even possible to install democracy in a Muslim country?|Is it even possible to install democracy in a Muslim country?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is democracy even possible in Iraq?|Is democracy even possible in Iraq?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should we have given the Panama Canal back to Panama?|Should we have given the Panama Canal back to Panama?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should the United States leave the United Nations?|Should the United States leave the United Nations?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Crusades... Good or Bad?|Crusades... Good or Bad?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Was American soldier Michael New right to refuse to fight wearing part of a United Nations uniform?|Was American soldier Michael New right to refuse to fight wearing part of a United Nations uniform?]] See [[Michael New]]
# [[Conservapedia:Which is a more powerful ideology, Islam or communism?|Which is a more powerful ideology, Islam or Communism?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should the United States intervene in small countries to defeat communism there?|Should the United States intervene in small countries to defeat communism there?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should public displays of the 10 Commandments be allowed under the constitution?|Should public displays of the 10 Commandments be allowed under the constitution?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Which has the best philosophy of education: the public school system, private schools, or the home school movement?|Which has the best philosophy of education: the public school system, private schools, or the home school movement?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should people genetically engineer a cure for homosexuality?|Should people genetically engineer a cure for homosexuality?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should Bush pardon Scooter Libby?|Should Bush pardon Scooter Libby?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should We Support Democrats For Life.org?|Should We Support Democrats For Life.org?]]
# [[conservapedia:Women in the Military?|Women in the Military?]]
# [[Conservapedia: Should students learn a foreign language?|Should students learn a foreign language?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Why does the right side of the political spectrum tend to be more religous?|Why does the right side of the political spectrum tend to be more religious?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should there be a consistent standard on human rights applied to left and right?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should American companies be allowed to send their own troops into a war which America is participating in?|Should American companies be allowed to send their own troops into a war which America is participating in?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Giuliani's lack of social conservative viewpoints should not stop you from voting for him.|Giuliani's lack of social conservative viewpoints should not stop you from voting for him.]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is_President_Bush_good_for_America?|Is President Bush good for America?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is_the_Iraq_War_a_success%3F|Is the Iraq War a success?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Does_single_sex_schooling_promotes_homesexuality%3F|Does Single sex schooling promotes homosexuality?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is_the_murder_of_3%2C000_people_just_a_few_or_is_it_a_lot%3F_Does_it_make_a_difference_if_the_murdered_people_are_Americans%3F|Is the murder of 3,000 people just a few or is it a lot? Does it make a difference if the murdered people are Americans?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Does the media really have a liberal bias?|Does the media really have a liberal bias?]]
# [[Who was the last Democrat to quit due to ethics and what year was it? Is it fair for Republicans to due the same?]]
# [[What kind of leader will Democrats make if they run from debates on Fox?]]
# [[Are the Democrats capable of fighting terrorism?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Porn or guns?|Does porn actually cause (not merely correlate to) violence?]]
# [[Can a rogue nation be thought of as a sovereign nation?]]
# [[ Has Russia reinstalled stealth communism?]]
# [[Do we all know what Democrat Presidential candidates stand for yet?]]
# [[Define Civil War]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should gun sales to terror suspects be allowed?|Should gun sales to terror suspects be allowed?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Who would you support for President in 2008?|Who would you support for President in 2008?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is Darwinism liberal or is it conservative?|Is Darwinism liberal or is it conservative?]]
# [[Debate:Why did God place most of the world's oil in politically unstable places?|Why did God place most of the world's oil in politically unstable places?]]
# [[Restoring the USA image in the world, just a fancy phrase that means zilch?]]
# [[Placing the blame on how America got polarized]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is most government criticism really patriotic?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is environmentalism mostly about preserving natural resources?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is the conservative stance on illegal immigration going to loose the Hispanic vote for the GOP in the 08' election?]]
# [[Should President Bush Condemn Armenian Genocide? ]] ''New as of October 10, 2007''
# [[Third Party Debate]]
# [[Debate:Who kills more innocent people: religious believers or atheists?]]
# [[Was congress right to override president Bush's veto on the water projects bill?]]
# [[Is opening the borders the solution to the social security crisis?]]
# [[Debate:Preferred Democrat for the White House?]]
# [[Does Republican equal conservative? Does Democrat equal liberal?]]
# [[Obama's preacher.]]
# [[Is president Bush ignoring human rights violations in China?]]
# [[Debate:Should the United States begin Colonizing Space?]]
# [[Debate:Should the federal government have the power to define marriage?|Should the federal government have the power to define marriage?]]

==Scientific debates==
# [[Conservapedia:Why haven't intelligent designists published a single scientific article?|If intelligent design is just as valid as evolution, where are all their scientific findings and publishings?]]

# [[Conservapedia:Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that bigotry is a necessary self-defense mechanism?|Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that bigotry is a necessary self-defense mechanism?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that homosexuality is bad for the survival of a species?|Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that homosexuality is bad for the survival of a species?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is Darwinian natural selection compatible with Marxism?|Is Darwinian natural selection compatible with Marxism?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is the theory of macroevolution true?|Is the theory of macroevolution true?]]
# [[Conservapedia: Is Giving Birth the Bible Way Better?| Is Giving Birth the Bible Way Better?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should Creationism/Intelligent design be taught as a scientific alternative to evolution in public schools?|Should Creationism/Intelligent design be taught as a scientific alternative to evolution in public schools?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is global warming evident, and if so, is this the fault of man, and how must man stop it?|Is global warming evident, and if so, is this the fault of man, and how must man stop it?]]
# [[Conservapedia:If the universe is young and it takes light millions of years to reach us from far off stars, how can we see them?|If the universe is young and it takes light millions of years to reach us from far off stars, how can we see them?]]
# [[Conservapedia:God, Earth and Global Warming|God, Earth and Global Warming]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is the evidence in favor of evolution convincing?|Is the evidence in favor of evolution convincing?]]
# [[Conservapedia:If the Bible didn't contain a creation story, would anyone even consider the idea of a young earth?|If the Bible didn't contain a creation story, would anyone even consider the idea of a young earth?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is Relativity in direct conflict with the Genesis account?|Is Relativity in direct conflict with the Genesis account?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Who feels that scientific related articles should only reference published research papers instead of websites when dealing with research instead of application?|Who feels that scientific related articles should only reference published research papers instead of websites when dealing with research instead of application?]]
# [[Conservapedia: If it could be unambiguously demonstrated that man is NOT the most evolved animal, then would this support or refute ther idea of Creation by God?| If it could be unambiguously demonstrated that man is NOT the most evolved animal]]
# [[Why are God's works always questioned?]]
#[[Conservapedia:Are there any elements of choice, when it comes to carrying out homosexual acts?|Are there any elements of choice]]
# [[Listing the Earth's most pressing needs in urgent order of fixing]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is homosexuality a mental illness?|Is homosexuality a mental illness?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Can the science of evolution be separated from the philosophy of it?|Can the science of evolution be separated from the philosophy of it?]]

==Debates about Conservapedia==
# [[Conservapedia:Is Conservapedia representing a conservative POV or a Young Earth Creationist POV?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is Conservapedia anti-British?|Is Conservapedia anti-British?]]
# [[The liberal quotient of Conservapedia; what is it? Does it matter?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Does bias impair Wikipedia's reliability?|Does bias impair Wikipedia's reliability?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should the term list entries be included in Conservapedia's entry count?|Should the term list entries be included in Conservapedia's entry count?]]
# [[Conservapedia:How should Conservapedia work to avoid having a conservative bias?|How should Conservapedia work to avoid having a conservative bias?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Can Conservapedia Succeed?|Can Conservapedia Succeed?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is Conservapedia fair and balanced?|Is Conservapedia fair and balanced?]]
# [[Conservapedia:How can we protect Conservapedia by distinguishing real conservative encyclopedia articles from satires written by liberals?|How can we protect Conservapedia by distinguishing real conservative encyclopedia articles from satires written by liberals?]]
# [[Conservapedia:What exactly is Conservapedia?|What exactly is Conservapedia?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Was the media attention needed?|Was the media attention needed?]]
# [[Conservapedia Debate Topics full of far left liberal netroots]]
# [[Which is true; progressive Liberal or regressive liberal]]
# [[Conservapedia:Where do you personally look for facts and information on topics "When did Brahms live" or "Why did Monet paint grainstacks?"]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is it okay for Conservapedia to have biased articles?]]
# [[Conservapedia:On whether certain articles on human anatomy should be pre-emptively blanked and protected]]
# [[Conservapedia:Who deletes entire discussion items from here? And why?]]
# [[Why do users, who contribute substantially, choose to leave this community?]]
# [[Why do the creators of Conservapedia see Wikipedia as un-American?]]
# [[Is the use of copyrighted photographs without permission stealing?]]
# [[Conservapedia: Are there too many debates on Conservapedia? | Are there too many debates on Conservapedia?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is it tasteless for Conservapedia to critique the Virginia Tech poem on the Main Page?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Has anyone ever been been banned for pointing out that many of the other entries on this site are in need of citation and evidence to back up statements?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Does an encyclopedia define complex subjects, or insert more bias into them?]]
# [[Conservapedia: Do sysops block editing on pages when it seems their opponents are making strong points?]]
# [[Conservapedia: Is Conservapedia a 'Trustworthy Encyclopedia'?]]
# [[Conservapedia: Does altering the record of debate in a wiki 'Encyclopedia' render the entire thing a farce?]]
# [[Democrats next move, link more stories of heartache like those from Kansas to Gulf Coast.]]
# [[Do quotes used to support a theory just make an article look stupid?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is Conservapedia blinkered?|Is Conservapedia blinkered?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Does Conservapedia censor opponents the way Expelled says ID advocates are censored?]]
# [[Debate:Is the Conservapedia Logo in violation of US Flag Code?]]
# [[Conservapedia:The 90/10 rule exists soley to squash debate, and should be eliminated]]

==Funny, maybe?==

# [[Conservapedia:Are cats just useless Dogs|Are cats just useless dogs?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is the Platypus evidence that God has a sense of humour?|Is the Platypus evidence that God has a sense of humour?]]
# [[Conservapedia: Was the shooting at Virginia Tech somehow President Bush's fault?|Was the shooting at Virginia Tech somehow President Bush's fault? (kind of like he caused hurricane Katrina)]]
# [[Are video games getting better or worse as graphics, sound, and gameplay complexity improve?]]
# [[Debate:Favorite old time radio show]]

==Other==
# [[Conservapedia:Are alcohol, marijuana, and nicotine gateway drugs?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Is Rap music torture?]]
# [[Conservapedia:Should weed be legalized?]]
# [[Debate:What are the lessons that we should take away from the Milgram Experiment]]
# [[Conservapedia:Does the Theory of Evolution promote atheism?]]
# [[Discussion:Colorado Mall Shootings]]
# [[Discussion:Creationist]]
# [[Debate:Is the Theory of Evolution a conspiricy?]]
# [[Debate:How should we view the fact leading scientists do not believe in god?]]

[[Category:Conservapedia]]

Los Angeles Dodgers

2008-05-27T05:02:01Z

BillyJ:

[[Image:DodgerStdm GNU Free Documentation License.jpg|right|250px|Dodger Stadium]]
The ''' Los Angeles Dodgers ''' are a [[Major League Baseball]] team in the [[National League]] Western Division. Before they were the [[Brooklyn]] Dodgers.

They are based in [[Los Angeles]], [[California]] and play at the Dodger Stadium.

Rivals: [[San Francisco Giants]], [[New York Yankees]], [[Los Angeles Angels]].

World Series Titles: 6. (1955, 1959, 1963, 1965, 1981, 1988)

==See also==

* [[Atlanta Braves]]
* [[Colorado Rockies]]
* [[San Francisco Giants]]
* [[Milwaukee Brewers]]

== External links ==
*[http://dodgers.mlb.com/ Official Team Website]
*[http://espndeportes.espn.go.com/mlb/deportes/clubhouse?team=lad ESPN - Team News]

{{Nb_sl_mlb_national}}
[[Category:California]]

Los Angeles Dodgers

2008-05-27T04:57:20Z

BillyJ:

[[Image:DodgerStdm GNU Free Documentation License.jpg|right|250px|Dodger Stadium]]
The ''' Los Angeles Dodgers ''' are a [[Major League Baseball]] team in the [[National League]] Western Division. Before they were the [[Brooklyn]] Dodgers.

They are based in [[Los Angeles]], [[California]] and play at the Dodger Stadium.

Rivals: [[San Francisco Giants]], [[New York Yankees]], [[Los Angeles Angels]].

==See also==

* [[Atlanta Braves]]
* [[Colorado Rockies]]
* [[San Francisco Giants]]
* [[Milwaukee Brewers]]

== External links ==
*[http://dodgers.mlb.com/ Official Team Website]
*[http://espndeportes.espn.go.com/mlb/deportes/clubhouse?team=lad ESPN - Team News]

{{Nb_sl_mlb_national}}
[[Category:California]]

Los Angeles Dodgers

2008-05-27T04:56:44Z

BillyJ:

[[Image:DodgerStdm GNU Free Documentation License.jpg|right|250px|Dodger Stadium]]
The ''' Los Angeles Dodgers ''' are a [[Major League Baseball]] team in the [[National League]] Western Division. Before they were the [[Brooklyn]] Dodgers.

They are based in [[Los Angeles]], [[California]] and play at the Dodger Stadium.

Rivals: [[San Francisco Giants]], [[New York Yankees]], [[Anaheim Angels]].

==See also==

* [[Atlanta Braves]]
* [[Colorado Rockies]]
* [[San Francisco Giants]]
* [[Milwaukee Brewers]]

== External links ==
*[http://dodgers.mlb.com/ Official Team Website]
*[http://espndeportes.espn.go.com/mlb/deportes/clubhouse?team=lad ESPN - Team News]

{{Nb_sl_mlb_national}}
[[Category:California]]

User talk:DeanS

2008-04-30T17:44:35Z

BillyJ: /* Block */

<blockquote style="background: #F9F9F9; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; padding: .3em;">
'''IF YOU NEED IMMEDIATE HELP AND I AM NOT HERE PLEASE GO HERE FOR A LIST OF Administrators/Sysops''': [http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Listusers%26group%3Dsysop Sysop list]
</blockquote>

{| align=center border=3 cellspacing=0 style="border-width: 5px; border-color: #f0c0c0; background: #e0e0e1; margin: 2em;"
! width=40% style="text-align: center; padding: 10px 40px 10px 40px;" | No Ping-ponging Conversations!
! style="text-align: center; padding: 10px 40px 10px 40px;" | Archive Policy
|-
| width=40% style="text-align: center; padding: 10px 40px 10px 40px;" | Conversations are easier to read if they stay on one page. If I leave a message on your talk page, please respond there; I'm watching it. If you start a conversation here, I'll reply here, so please watch this page.
| style="text-align: center; padding: 10px 40px 10px 40px;" | Conversations which have not had additions in 14 days ''may'' be archived. Or just deleted and recreation prohibited. My "castle", my rules. A 'conversation' is a group of messages delimited by a heading. Hopefully this will allow conversations to stay in one place long enough for people who are interested to read the whole thing, without leading to an overly long page. Make sure you sign your posts, please.
|}

[[User talk:Crocoite/Archive1|Archive1]]
[[User talk:Crocoite/Archive2|Archive2]]
[[User talk:Crocoite/Archive3|Archive3]]

==Block==
Changed name from Kiss20 to AndrasK as per your request. AndrasK 22:59 April 27 (EDT)

:Thanks Andras. --[[User:DeanS|DeanSformerly Crocoite]] 23:03, 27 April 2008 (EDT)

==Bible==
Do you know of any Bible related articles that need to be created?[[User:Kuli|Kuli]] 20:26, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

:You can start with all the red links in the [[Bible]] article. Thanks for asking. --[[User:Crocoite|Crocoite]] 21:18, 18 March 2008 (EDT)
==Email==
I have repeadetly tried to get my email confirmation code, but I still haven't recieved it yet, as such, using the email this user, is not available to me yet--[[User:Kuli|Kuli]] 16:03, 19 March 2008 (EDT)

== URGENT ==

[[Apage]] did something bad to [[Al Gore]](d*** that spam filter!!!!)

:He was blocked by another sysop. --[[User:Crocoite|Crocoite]] 18:01, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

I don't know how to revert [[User:MCollins|MCollins]] 17:16, 20 March 2008 (EDT)
:What do you mean? --[[User:Crocoite|Crocoite]] 18:01, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

== Unlock request ==

Crocoite, could you please unlock [[theater]]? I'm not sure why it's locked (there's never been any vandalism) and a user wants to make some corrections. Thanks. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 20:51, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

:Another sysop unlocked the article. --[[User:Crocoite|Crocoite]] 23:01, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

==User==
I would like to request that you look at [http://www.conservapedia.com/User:FellowChristian16 This user's] page. It seems to be a large advertisment. thank you [[User:DrCB|DrCB]] 21:25, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

:I removed the references to the personal wiki. Thanks for the alert. --[[User:Crocoite|Crocoite]] 23:00, 20 March 2008 (EDT)
::No problem, glad I could help [[User:DrCB|DrCB]] 23:18, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

== Why do you deleted Final Fantasy article? ==

I'm very curious, I check the history, you said it was vandal, and I fail to see why, [http://www.conservapedia.com/Final_Fantasy Final Fantasy article] . I know you are very powerful guy and please don't ban me, I just very curious T_T. --[[User:TagoPagdaluhong|TagoPagdaluhong]] 08:41, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

:The game is filled with highly offensive material and the article was not appropriate for this website. The article also attracts vandals. --[[User:Crocoite|Crocoite]] 01:27, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

(Looking the history again) Oh! My bad, AlbertaFarmer mess up, he put lot '''UNnecessary''' stuffs.
I will make better version WITHOUT spoiler info and warning for famliy-friendly reason.

Thanks, I was about to make Final Fantasy article, but I was in fear of banning. Now I know the reasons.
--[[User:TagoPagdaluhong|TagoPagdaluhong]] 08:22, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

==News==
Since you seem to be The News Guy at CP, I'll post this here...[http://wtol.com/Global/story.asp?S=8225422&nav=menu34_2_10 This] might be a good story for the front page (to wit: a bunch of high school students were suspended for wearing shirts with a pro-life message).--[[User:RossC|RossC]] 13:35, 26 April 2008 (EDT)

:Thanks for the suggestion Ross. The article is posted. --[[User:Crocoite|Crocoite]] 17:43, 26 April 2008 (EDT)

==Feminism==
Why? It is an eloquent demonstration of the anti-family, anti-man agenda of so-called "feminists". [[User:FlowerpotMan|FlowerpotMan]] 14:45, 27 April 2008 (EDT)

:That reference crossed the line from exposing feminism to bashing women. --[[User:Crocoite|Crocoite]] 14:55, 27 April 2008 (EDT)

== Flowerpot man... ==

Drops a link to pictures of naked people in an article and gets a "welcome template" from you- and I get banned for a month making jokes about the "largely defensive weapon of gun?" How does that work? [[User:AliceBG|AliceBG]] 15:14, 27 April 2008 (EDT)
:The welcome template was before I saw that link (check the time stamp). I'm going to review his other edits before I decide further action. --[[User:Crocoite|Crocoite]] 19:24, 27 April 2008 (EDT)
:Your "largely defensive weapon of gun" line was pure parody, and pure stupidity, which you reverted again and again after being removed. That was why you were blocked, and that kind of nonsense is not going to be tolerated here, Alice. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 20:41, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

==McCain==

I'll tell you the same thing I told Chippeterson: If you're going to keep reverting my McCain edits, then you better remove the same information from the Barack Obama picture. And if you're going to try and validate the inequality by saying that "it's become a campaign issue" for Obama, and that he's been evasive about it, I would submit to you the fact that McCain had an interview with Charles Gibson or Tim Russert or some other such media "luminary", and simply laughed off the question when asked by a viewer why he didn't wear one. This isn't fair to omit. [[User:LinusWilson|LinusWilson]] 15:50, 27 April 2008 (EDT)

== Names ==
After looking at the recent changes I am wondering if you will change the Conservaedia commandments to reflect the name rule you are imposing?
[[User:AdenJ|AdenJ]] 00:56, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

==Al Gore==

Al Gore's Nobel Prize-winning theory is not actually his own. The reporter you quoted made an error.

Sometimes I think it would take an archangel to translate media "gold" ... --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 11:09, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

==Block==

Hey, I have another username and was blocked under it. I was wondering why I was blocked. The name is "Ultimahero". Please let me know. {{unsigned|BillyJ}}.
:BillyJ is a good username. Ultimahero isn't a preferred username and I wanted to get you to switch before you did a lot of editing. btw, sign your posts using 4 <nowiki>~</nowiki> signs like this <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>. --[[User:DeanS|DeanSformerly Crocoite]] 02:34, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

What's wrong with it, though? According to the rules, it's preferred that you use your real name, but not required. So why was I blocked for something that isn't mandated? [[User:BillyJ|BillyJ]] 10:23, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

:This was my own interpretation of the policy. I'm reconsidering this type of blocking in the future. --[[User:DeanS|DeanSformerly Crocoite]] 12:34, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

Well, considering that it's your own interpretation and it's a debatable issue, then will you please unblock me? [[User:BillyJ|BillyJ]] 13:44, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

== Directing you to... ==

...my [[User_talk:Aziraphale|talk page]], where Ed explained to me that what I thought was a defense of your actions against a charge of hypocrisy apparently sounded like I was the one accusing you of hypocrisy. I'll let you read the full conversation there, but the short version is: if it sounded like that to you, I apologize. [[User:Aziraphale|Aziraphale]] 11:47, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

:Thanks for the explanation. --[[User:DeanS|DeanSformerly Crocoite]] 12:28, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

User talk:DeanS

2008-04-30T14:23:38Z

BillyJ: /* Block */

Debate:Should gay marriage be allowed?

2008-04-30T06:15:06Z

BillyJ:

{{Debate-religion}}
{{Debate-politics}}
{{Debate}}
This is basically a forum. You can chat with your friends, and reminise with them about that special person that you will never meet because you were too busy here answering if gay marrage should be legaized. So, answer. The sooner you do, the faster you might meet that special someone. 
 
==Yes==
Yes, it should be allowed. For all too long, there has been discrimination in this country. For instance, racism was considered normal for a long time. However, although people might think that there is no discrimination going on in America today, there is prejudice against the homosexual population. The discrimination is that they are denied their free right to, well, equal rights. The right of being married. One of this country's fundimental principals was to have everyone come here and be equals. Although that promise wasn't nessicerally held up (slaves are still people, yet they were still imprisoned for many years after this country was founded), do we need to fight another war in order to try to get homosexual marrage allowed (a very long strech, but you get the point). Discrimination was tolerated at one point in America. Can't we leave that point behind us? --[[User:Rocky|Rocky]]

You say it should be legalized because of equality. But, it’s because of equality that it shouldn’t be legalized. Homosexuals already have the exact same rights as heterosexuals. A homosexual man can marry any woman he chooses (assuming that she is of legal age and is consenting) just as any heterosexual man can. They already have the exact same rights. Allowing homosexuals to marry one another would be giving them special rights based on a behavioral preference. They choose to engage in homosexuality. Note that when I say they’re “choosing”, I’m not talking about whether they’re born that way or not. I mean they’re choosing their lifestyle. Born that way or not, they still choose to engage in that particular sexual behavior, just like heterosexuals choose to engage in their sexual acts. So, it is a behavioral choice, and legalizing it would be giving them a special right based on a behavior. That is inequality. [[User:BillyJ|BillyJ]] 01:44, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

Debate:Is there 1 God or are there many gods?

2008-04-30T05:57:44Z

BillyJ:

{{debate}}

Yes. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 00:30, 16 February 2008 (EST)

According to the Bible there's one. - Ultimahero. March 8, 2008.

How do Christians reconcile the fact that only one region of the world has any beliefs similar to those described in the old testament if there was such a small human population after the flood. There for every human civilization should have some story of the flood or ark, a very similar god, and similar languages. But this is not true. I would like to hear what other people think? [[User:Rellik|Rellik]] 23:36, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

There actually are several different stories of a "great flood" from many cultures around the world. As far as different languages, the Bible addressed this at the Tower of Babel. Everyone spoke the same language, yet God scrambled their languages so they couldn’t understand one another. And as far as different gods and religions go, I don’t think it would actually take that long to spread and differ. For example, in the US in the 1800’s, the majority of people were Christians. Yet then along comes Joseph Smith and before long he has taken on a bunch of followers into the new Mormon church. Now, only about 150 years later, Mormonism is pretty big. Just imagine that, only lots of people trying to come up with new theological systems. You could have tons of them in a relatively short time frame. [[Ultimahero]]

I can only think of one religion besides from christianity that mentions a great flood, and that is the Mayan creation myth. They believed they were the third race created by their gods with the first being made of mud and then being destroyed by a flood, the next being made of wood and an attempt was made to destroy them with another flood, but they lived and became monkeys. Not much similarity to the story of the ark. What other cultures have a story of a flood? [[User:Rellik|Rellik]] 23:40, 19 March 2008 (EDT)
:The Babylonians have the story of Upnapishtim from the Epic of Gilgamesh; the Greeks have Deucalion. There are possibly many more cultures that do. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 23:43, 19 March 2008 (EDT)

There’s the Sumerians, Babylonians, Chinese, Indians, Indonesia, Greek, and many others that have flood stories. [[Ultimahero.]]

I've been reading up on the Tower of Babel, and I can't tell does it deal with the differences in races too or simply language? [[User:Rellik|Rellik]] 20:06, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

Judging by the text, I'd say it's just language. God mixed up their languages, but it doesn't say anything about race. The number of different races is probably just a natural biological occurrence. [[Ultimahero]], March 20

How do we know there is even one God? May you please provide proof?-Gabriel131.

What I originally wrote was that according to the Bible there's one God. [[User:Ultimahero|Ultimahero]] 16:37, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

The proof for God is the existence of logical absolutes. Logic is governed by absolute laws, much in the same way that the physical world is governed by scientific laws. An example of a law of logic would be the ‘Law of Identity’. This laws states that something is what it is and is not what it’s not. Ex: A tree is a tree; a tree is not a cat. This law, among others, govern how logic works.

By nature, these laws are absolute. They are true regardless of whether or not people agree with them or not. They also transcend space and time. This means that no matter where you truth is still truth. For example, 2+2 is true here, it is true if you go 100 miles away, 1,000 miles away, to the edge f the universe, etc. No matter where you go, it’s still true. And it’s true whenever you are. Regardless of how far back in time you go or how far into the future you go, 2+2 is still a true concept. So the laws of logic are absolute. This also means that the laws of logic are independent of the physical universe. Where and when doesn’t affect logic. In fact, even if the universe ceased to be, 2+2 would still be true.

Secondly, the laws of logic are conceptual by nature. Logic only occurs in the mind. You can’t see logic, touch it, find it under a rock, etc. They aren’t physical items. They only exist in the mind and require a mind to exist. But, they aren’t dependent on human minds, because human minds are different and if that would mean that logic would be different for each person, which it is not.

So, we conclude that logic is absolute, transcendent, conceptual, and independent of human minds and the physical universe. So, how do you account for this? As a Christian, I can say that God is the answer, because He fits all these attributes. He is absolute (unchanging), He transcends all of space and time, has a mind, and is independent of humanity and the universe. I can account for it, but it’s not possible to do so without God. That is the proof for God. [[User:BillyJ|BillyJ]] 01:32, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

::Why would a God be limited by something as puny as LOGIC? Even humans ignore logic 90% of the time.
::And observing the physical universe, I'd say that given the basic assumption of deific creation, the available evidence rather strongly supports the notion of a committee of bickering entities having been to blame, rather than one allegedly omnibenevolent God with humanity's best interests at heart.
::And as a [[Church of the SubGenius|SubGenius]] [[Discordianism|Discordian]] Fusion Paranoid(tm) who's also a roleplayer, I MAKE UP more deities in one day than most people will worship in their entire lifetime. :)
::Do You Believe That? --[[User:Gulik5|Gulik5]] 01:48, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

Who said God was limited by logic? God is logical. It's one of His attributes. Since God is perfect, He is perfectly logical. You said humans ignore logic 90% of the time. That's because they're not perfect and can be illogical. Only a being that could think perfectly and knew all could be perfectly logical. And logic is consitent through and through. I used the example of the Law of Identity, which is a law that is true always. That supports one God, because it's as though it's been authored by a single mind. If there were a committee of Gods, then the laws of logic would change from time to time and place to place. But they don't. And my point was the logic's existence points to God. If you disagree, then explain the existence of logic without God. [[User:BillyJ|BillyJ]] 01:57, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

User talk:DeanS

2008-04-30T05:47:18Z

BillyJ: /* Block */

Debate:Should gay marriage be allowed?

2008-04-30T05:44:15Z

BillyJ: /* Yes */

{{Debate-religion}}
{{Debate-politics}}
{{Debate}}
This is basically a forum. You can chat with your friends, and reminise with them about that special person that you will never meet because you were too busy here answering if gay marrage should be legaized. So, answer. The sooner you do, the faster you might meet that special someone. 
 
==Yes==
Yes, it should be allowed. For all too long, there has been discrimination in this country. For instance, racism was considered normal for a long time. However, although people might think that there is no discrimination going on in America today, there is prejudice against the homosexual population. The discrimination is that they are denied their free right to, well, equal rights. The right of being married. One of this country's fundimental principals was to have everyone come here and be equals. Although that promise wasn't nessicerally held up (slaves are still people, yet they were still imprisoned for many years after this country was founded), do we need to fight another war in order to try to get homosexual marrage allowed (a very long strech, but you get the point). Discrimination was tolerated at one point in America. Can't we leave that point behind us? --[[User:Rocky|Rocky]]

You say it should be legalized because of equality. But, it’s because of equality that it shouldn’t be legalized. Homosexuals already have the exact same rights as heterosexuals. A homosexual man can marry and woman he chooses (assuming that she is of legal age and is consenting) just as any heterosexual man can. They already have the exact same rights. Allowing homosexuals to marry one another would be giving them special rights based on a behavioral preference. They choose to engage in homosexuality. Note that when I say they’re “choosing”, I’m not talking about whether they’re born that way or not. I mean they’re choosing their lifestyle. Born that way or not, they still choose to engage in that particular sexual behavior, just like heterosexuals choose to engage in their sexual acts. So, it is a behavioral choice, and legalizing it would be giving them a special right based on a behavior. That is inequality. [[User:BillyJ|BillyJ]] 01:44, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

Debate:Is there 1 God or are there many gods?

2008-04-30T05:32:52Z

BillyJ:

Debate:Is there 1 God or are there many gods?

2008-04-30T05:32:22Z

BillyJ:

{{debate}}

Yes. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 00:30, 16 February 2008 (EST)

According to the Bible there's one. - Ultimahero. March 8, 2008.

How do Christians reconcile the fact that only one region of the world has any beliefs similar to those described in the old testament if there was such a small human population after the flood. There for every human civilization should have some story of the flood or ark, a very similar god, and similar languages. But this is not true. I would like to hear what other people think? [[User:Rellik|Rellik]] 23:36, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

There actually are several different stories of a "great flood" from many cultures around the world. As far as different languages, the Bible addressed this at the Tower of Babel. Everyone spoke the same language, yet God scrambled their languages so they couldn’t understand one another. And as far as different gods and religions go, I don’t think it would actually take that long to spread and differ. For example, in the US in the 1800’s, the majority of people were Christians. Yet then along comes Joseph Smith and before long he has taken on a bunch of followers into the new Mormon church. Now, only about 150 years later, Mormonism is pretty big. Just imagine that, only lots of people trying to come up with new theological systems. You could have tons of them in a relatively short time frame. [[Ultimahero]]

I can only think of one religion besides from christianity that mentions a great flood, and that is the Mayan creation myth. They believed they were the third race created by their gods with the first being made of mud and then being destroyed by a flood, the next being made of wood and an attempt was made to destroy them with another flood, but they lived and became monkeys. Not much similarity to the story of the ark. What other cultures have a story of a flood? [[User:Rellik|Rellik]] 23:40, 19 March 2008 (EDT)
:The Babylonians have the story of Upnapishtim from the Epic of Gilgamesh; the Greeks have Deucalion. There are possibly many more cultures that do. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 23:43, 19 March 2008 (EDT)

There’s the Sumerians, Babylonians, Chinese, Indians, Indonesia, Greek, and many others that have flood stories. [[Ultimahero.]]

I've been reading up on the Tower of Babel, and I can't tell does it deal with the differences in races too or simply language? [[User:Rellik|Rellik]] 20:06, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

Judging by the text, I'd say it's just language. God mixed up their languages, but it doesn't say anything about race. The number of different races is probably just a natural biological occurrence. [[Ultimahero]], March 20

How do we know there is even one God? May you please provide proof?-Gabriel131.

What I originally wrote was that according to the Bible there's one God. [[User:Ultimahero|Ultimahero]] 16:37, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

The proof for God is the existence of logical absolutes. Logic is governed by absolute laws, much in the same way that the physical world is governed by scientific laws. An example of a law of logic would be the ‘Law of Identity’. This laws states that something is what it is and is not what it’s not. Ex: A tree is a tree; a tree is not a cat. This law, among others, govern how logic works.
By nature, these laws are absolute. They are true regardless of whether or not people agree with them or not. They also transcend space and time. This means that no matter where you truth is still truth. For example, 2+2 is true here, it is true if you go 100 miles away, 1,000 miles away, to the edge f the universe, etc. No matter where you go, it’s still true. And it’s true whenever you are. Regardless of how far back in time you go or how far into the future you go, 2+2 is still a true concept. So the laws of logic are absolute. This also means that the laws of logic are independent of the physical universe. Where and when doesn’t affect logic. In fact, even if the universe ceased to be, 2+2 would still be true.
Secondly, the laws of logic are conceptual by nature. Logic only occurs in the mind. You can’t see logic, touch it, find it under a rock, etc. They aren’t physical items. They only exist in the mind and require a mind to exist. But, they aren’t dependent on human minds, because human minds are different and if that would mean that logic would be different for each person, which it is not.
So, we conclude that logic is absolute, transcendent, conceptual, and independent of human minds and the physical universe. So, how do you account for this? As a Christian, I can say that God is the answer, because He fits all these attributes. He is absolute (unchanging), He transcends all of space and time, has a mind, and is independent of humanity and the universe. I can account for it, but it’s not possible to do so without God. That is the proof for God. [[User:BillyJ|BillyJ]] 01:32, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

User talk:DeanS

2008-04-30T05:26:39Z

BillyJ: