Jump to content
NEurope

navarre

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    591

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by navarre

  1. Posted

    I'm pretty sure the modern day definition of "Father" derivates slightly from the one 2000 years ago. I don't think you can use it as a counter argument; also, translation discrepancies.

     

    How do we know what he is? A spirit seems just as likely as anything else. And being omnipotent means beign able to do anything, but thats anything in the world. Death may not physically exist as something that is possible to his "species". In the same way that he can only make a massive rock because mass exists, or walk on water because buoyancy exists. In the same way that the human brain cannot comprehend colour beyond what they know - we couldn't describe any other colours, because all we can use to describe a colour is another colour - who are we to say that "death" is a physical thing that could affect such a being?

     

    I am atheist / agnostic, depending on your definition. I do not believe in God, or any other similar thing. I am a Physicist, essentially. Give me evidence for a God, and I will believe you, in the same way that I believe in gravity even though I can't see it.

     

    You're still missing the point. If God is omnipotent, he could make his species die, because he has the power to do anything. If he was another species, or not a living thing, is beyond the question. Fact is, he could kill himself because he is all powerful. He is either eternal or omnipotent; he cannot be both.

    Gravity may not be seen, but at least we can measure gravity:- such an ability does not exist for God.

     

    Isn't this another variation of that stupid "If God is all powerful, can He create a rock so heavy that He himself cannot lift it?" question?

     

    Struck a (theists) nerve, have I?

     

    The fact of the matter is that the Bible is complete shite, and if there is a higher being then it's 99.999999% likely that she is nothing like she is described in the Bible.

     

    Actually, that is complete shite. The Bible is a fantastic book, irregardless of religious beliefs. I've found myself turning to it despite being an atheist more and more over the past few years for moral guidance. And the history in the Bible is fantastic, and some of the books provide some the best historical records of their time around.

  3. Posted

    This thread is likely to be locked. Try not to descend into crazy religion bashing, or go totally off-topic and it will not.

     

    I think everyone here is both perfectly aware and compliant with the rules, thank you.

     

    Just because he is the "Father" doesn't mean he can die. In fact, probably the contrary: he is called the "holy spirit", and isn't the whole point of Christianity that after death our spirit lives on? Hence, spirits do not die, and God cannot then commit suicide.

     

    Being a parent, such as a father, is a biological term applied to living things. By definition, living things die, so as such it is possible God could commit suicide.

     

    Yes, but God isn't a spirit surely? And if is, he's allegedly omnipotent- so and omnipotent spirit that can't kill itself? Well, it isn't omnipotent then, is it?

  4. Posted

    Who is to say that "God" is a creature that has a life/death cycle?

     

    That is the sort of argument I was looking for.

     

    But doesn't it say, or at least imply, that in the holy books God is a living thing? He's almost always referred to as 'He' and Christians call him the Father.

     

    Of course, God could be an entity that is not part of any religion- ie any religion that we know right now hasn't actually got across the true message of God or know God.

  5. Posted

    This is a pretty rubbish anti-omnipotency argument. Worse even than the "immovable object" theory.

     

    Actually, it's a pretty strong argument. If God can do anything, then why can't he kill himself? Surely that defeats the meaning of being omnipotent?

  6. Posted

    Question for all the Christians/Jews/Muslims/Hindus/Sikhs/Bahais on this forum.

     

    Could God, if he so chooses, commit suicide? I mean, if he could then he wouldn't be immortal. But if he couldn't, then he isn't omnipotent.

     

    I'm just interested to know.

  7. Posted

    I voted BNP.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Not really, I put my votes towards the Liberal Democrats. Despite being a bit of a Euroskeptic myself, the Liberal Democrats have the best policies out of all the parties. And besides, if we do become part of some sort of 'Eurostate', at least we'd be the most powerful nation on Earth.

     

    so...wut. UKIP are a bunch of xenophobes.

     

    They're still a million times better than the BNP, and at least some of their policies make sense. I can understand why some their concerns abour Europe are felt by them.

     

    Scotland voted for SNP last elections, and we're no closer to being independent at all...

     

    Oh no, not the SNP...

     

    I actually can't believe why anyone in their right minds would vote for the SNP. Or the BNP for that matter.

  9. Posted

    You say they suit the DS, yet arguably WW is one of the best-looking Zelda's to date. How many 'casuals' do you know that bought WW and how was WW a more 'casual' game than TP anyway. "We harcore gamers" just makes me cringe as well:indeed:. Please speak for yourself.

     

    I apologise if other hardcore gamers such as yourself prefer the WW. Yes, it was a stroke of genius. But the graphics... in my opinion, were just too cartoonish.

     

    The reference wasn't directed at WW; it was Phantom Hourglass. I couldn't help but feel let down after WW and TP. Nintendo added the tedious Ocean King dungeon to go back to time and time again, and that felt like the only real challenge in the game- and it was boring.

  10. Posted

    There's a sequal so soon due to the amount of ideas the team wasn't able to put in the original. These ideas look fantastic. I wanna go play Galaxy again.

     

     

    I always think that, but whenever I play a completed game, it's always boring.

  11. Posted

    Same. Please, please let this game be down the streets of OOT and TP and not the cel shaded adventures of late. They're great, but they suit the DS, and are more casual. We hardcore gamers need a more involving and darker adventure!

  12. Posted

    Does anyone remember back in the day when you'd have to wait for a completely new console for a 3D Mario game? I can't help but feel this is too soon.

     

    Nevertheless, it'll be brilliant. The graphics are looking superb, and any new ideas from Miyamoto will always go down a treat.

     

    I, for one, cannot wait.

  13. Posted

    OK, the trailer showed the game mostly in a 3rd person perspective, and there was a clip of a first person mission reminscent of Prime.

     

    Looks so good. Nintendo are completely spoiling us, and this is the sort of game that I deserve from my loyalties to Nintendo over the years. Sure, the Prime trilogy was great, but this looks set to completely take the Metroid genre forward.

     

    Brilliant.

  15. Posted · Edited by navarre

    But as a biologist you only study things that happen in the past. Biology can not predict the future so you cant rules out that such a thing is impossible you can only hypothesize.

     

    Btw Im not a creationist

     

    You mean by evolution? Hmm, if that did happen, man would have a bloody big dilemma on its hands. War is the triumph of the strong over the poor, almost always in relation to some sort of resources. We couldn't just hand over our weapons and then expect to get enough to eat- there'd be no war and far less killing to keep the population at bay, and besides, some people would be greedy and take more than they need- with no armies to stop them, there'd be no competition.

     

    *Edit- unless we evolved into creatures that didn't require nutrients or food, and then we wouldn't be living things by definition. But Physics says that can't happen with its laws of conservation, unless, of course, we developed chloroplasts and photosynthesised- but then we'd still need minerals and water.

     

    This is too complicated.

  17. Posted · Edited by navarre

    If every nation put all their armed forces funding towards reducing world debt and paying towards running water, education and health care for poorer nations then maybe, just maybe no-one would need an army.

     

    As a biologist, I understand such a thing is not possible. Unless you're some kind of crazy creationist, you should know that humans are animals, and animals fight, it's nature. Perhaps we may try and diguise it by claiming to be 'civilised', but history and biology have both deemed your suggestion impossible. If we gave up our armies, it'd be back to fighting with sharp sticks and blunt tools- we're never going to get any more pacifist than we are now, it's not in our nature.

     

    EDIT- I've never encountered any of those 10 member shambles of a group before, they're a complete joke. I live in a Conservative stronghold- no overtly Labour, Lib Dem or BNP supporters for miles around! It's always nice, especially when your MP refuses to resign depite wasting your hard earned notes on irrelevant commodities!

  18. Posted

    No, no, no. I agree with you mate. I'm just pointing out that people of the BNP's beliefs regard me as British because I was born here and, importantly to them, because I'm white. Merely pointing out that because I'm white and from Britian, I'm considered British.

     

     

    Oh, I see. I jumped to conclusions there.

     

    The BNP is actually pretty damn mild compared to some other Neo-Nazi groups. These openly white-supremacist parties (or groups, or pub gatherings, call it what you will) have criticised the BNP for being too mild and soft, although have far too few members and illegal opinions to ever be considered a threat. They've even said the BNPs moderation means the party is made up of 'conservatives on steroids'.

     

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Peoples_Party_(2005)

     

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_and_Honour

     

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_9th_Society

  19. Posted · Edited by navarre
    Automerged Doublepost

    Don't remember this guy being kicked out of the party. You know those gas chambers that killed the Jews in Nazi Germany? Lies apparently.

     

     

    See, this is why the BNP are so good. They're getting the truth out there! Hey, forget about the evidence and the 6 million less Jews in Europe after WW2- it makes perfect sense that they disappeared, or suddenly caught an infectious disease that only affects Jews! This man is our future- an educated speciman that is the epitome of the male species.

     

    I'm not British despite being white

     

    Oh yes, I love the way you say that as if being white would automatically qualify you for a British identity!

     

    My girlfriend is black, but she is British, you understand? She was born here to immigrant parents with British passports, and yet she is as British as I proudly am. Nationalities like British transcends race, buddy, hate to break it to you. There's no such thing as 'ethnic British'- no homo sapien evolved here, so we're all immigrants from Africa.

  20. Posted

    But...but...my dad did invent the beard?!

     

    Jokes aside, I totally agree with Mr.Brooker there, it's funny the contrast of that(and one that can't be easily raised due to Godwin's Law and such things), but interesting no less. I actually sit on two sides of the fence, there are growing problems with britain, but the BNP and such similar views are most certainly not the answer.

     

    (Also, totally agree with Pyxis on the Asian thing, never got why a term so broad is used to encompass south and east asians, I always find asian on tinternets to mean east asian, I have nothing to go with! Yet then there IS things like asian networks, referring solely to south asian, tis all strange)

     

     

    It's funny, the BNP seem to go against every liberal value that the Western culture they're so trying to preserve stands for.

  23. Posted

    Here's the BNP supporting our brave boys again :rolleyes:

     

     

     

    Full article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/5336891/BNP-war-hero-Johnson-Beharry-only-got-medal-because-he-is-black.html

     

    They've also been distributing leaflets headed "Gurkhas Must Leave" with the face of Kumar Pun, killed fighting for the British in Afghanistan, with his face crossed out. Only party to support British Troops indeed...

     

    Ah, further proof that the BNP is the only party that'll lead us forwards into the 21st century and not backwards...

×