chevan

Couldn't they have been a trap set by Uthar? He could have heard of the plot against him (wasn't Yuthura planning agaisnt him always happen in the game?). He could have planned on letting the terentateks loose to hopefully kill you, then kill Yuthura and keep his place. I think Enoch's idea makes more sense, though.

I think it's been explained enough already, but in case it didn't sink in, or if it needs strengthening, I'll leave this thought. I think I posted it earlier, but it might have been erased when the backup kicked in, and I'll post it again. Let's say that we hadn't happened, that something went different way back, and humans never evolved. Would we be around to look back and talk about the impossibility of us ever happening? Now, that's probably got large holes in it, and it requires that you accept evolution, but whatever.

Well, you never know, he could have gone to a forum populated entirely by medical students or full doctors. Don't know if any of those exist, but it could happen.

Craftsman, who exactly are you replying to?

So, humans came into being because God got lonely and wanted some friends? And, based on my personal experience, I'll say this. Let's say my friends and I are talking, when all of a sudden, one of them kicks me in the shin for no reason. Sure, I'd be angry, but I get over it. It's happened to me before, and it'll happen to me again. Let's say I'm at a friend's place, and he takes something I brought with me. After running around for half an hour, I got it back, and thought nothing of it. Those are both real occurences that happened to me. We didn't become enemies because one of us got hurt, we just dealt with it. That's what we (my friends and I) all see as a sign of friendship: When you can take each other's critisicisms and jests, and not care about it, either you're friends, or you really don't care what people think about you. For me it's both, but the first applies to most cases. Okay, so again, we were put here as an experiment from God, to see which of us would follow him? Seems like God is a little insecure. I agree with the idea of living your life according to good morals, but the rest isn't going to persuade an atheist. An atheist isn't going to even consider the possiblity of that, as they don't believe in it. This question itself is biased towards Christianity, and I doubt an atheist is going to answer a question that challenges their beliefs and stay civilized. A better question would be: A question for atheists. What would happen if it turns out that there is a God? That isn't working off the assumption that God exists, as the first question was. You're giving them a chance to express thier views, without accusing them. --------------------------------------------------------------------- You know what bugs me? The arrogance that many people share about religion. You ever ask or wonder about the other religions that all say they're the one true religion? Ask a priest and they'll probably say that all religions are the same, as there is only one true God. Doesn't that strike you as rather arrogant? Instead of saying to somebody that practices a different religion, "You're going to hell because you're not a Chrisitian," (they'd be nonbelievers, after all) you'd say, "Guess what? You're not going to hell! Turns out you really worship our god after all!" Where do we get off assuming that whatever religion we practice is the one true religion? That goes for them all, too, except the ones that don't believe in a god, if there are any. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Oh, and let's stop calling each other biased. We're all biased toward whatever side we're arguing for, so there's no insult in calling somebody else biased.

Yes, I agree. A big hand for Aegeri! (in no way was that meant to be sarcastic)

Decaf or regular?

Ah. Okay.

Did these boards go through a cleaning? It seems like posts and topics are missing. Was that because of the downtime, or were they deleted?

What do you mean by taking arguments apart? If you mean when we split up the different parts we're replying to, that's the only efficient way to do it. It's harder to write a single essay at the bottom. And I don't think we're taking stuff out of context. Usually, the piece itself is broken up into parts, and we (at least I) reply to the specific parts. We can also remember what was written before, so I think we'd recognize if something was out of context. Also, what do you mean by "your" arguments? Most of the stuff you've posted is copied/pasted from another site? Did you write them? Comparing your posts and the written pieces, I'd say no, but speak up if I'm wrong. There's no possible answer for this. An atheist would probably say, "Yes, the universe happened by chance." Someone more religiously minded would probably say, "No, the universe was not a chance happening." Notice also something here. Of course life as we know it is going to be different if those variables are different. But, how do we know we're the only possible form of life? Again, this relates to above. An atheist would probably say, "There's other possible forms of life," and a religious person might say either that or, "We are the only possible form of life." Their response depends on their beliefs. I would just like to ask one thing. At this time, I have no problem with this passage. But, I would like to know what the universe as we know it is being compared to. How exactly do we know it is all nice and balanced?

Oh. That. I saw those when I first joined here, but I haven't looked at them since, and forgot about that bit. Caffeine would be nice, though. Got thirty bucks I can have so I can go buy a lot of coffee?

Ah. Sorry, didn't know that.

Okay, this post is a test. I think my post counter's screwed up. Yep. For some reason, it's stuck at 4 posts.

I'm assuming you're saying "Stars and space did just 'exist'." You're talking about things having a beginning and end, so I'm assuming you're talking about the same thing the whole time. If not, just correct me. I don't see things existing as evidence of a divine being. I guess nobody here reads Discover. There was a cover story a month or two back, and although I can't find the issue itself, I remember the basic details of a new theory on the universe it gave. Basically, there's two three dimensional "membranes" right next to each other. But, we can't get to the other one because we don't know how. Over a great many years (trillions, I think) the universe expands to the point where the average amount of matter is so close to zero it doesn't even matter. Around that point, ripples in the membranes would result in the two membranes touching each other, causing massive temperatures that would incinerate everything, and everything would start over again. That's the gist of it. There's a couple small technical details about the info presented that I'd need the article to get, but basically, it means that the universe is a never ending cycle. This is disputed by other scientists who stand behind the other theories, such as the Big Bang and the Big Bang/Big Crunch, but I just thought you might want to know the other theories that are out there.

I'm going to see it with my local church. One thing I'm glad for is that they've put it in whatever language they're using. I'm tired of the stereotypes of a white, colorfully dressed, well treated, English speaking Jesus and followers. Once, in a church, I saw a statue of presumably Mary holding what I guessed to be Jesus. The thing is, Mary and Jesus were pale white, Mary was dressed in bright reds and blues, had a halo around her head, and was holding rosary beads. What? Granted, in the Passion, I think Jesus is still portrayed as white, but that's at least better than before.

I prefer boxers. They're more comfortable and less restricting.

Okay. Sorry, I didn't know that.

I'd say pro-gay basically means that you're not a homophobe.

Try looking up different school or church websites.

Wait, I'm confused. Was that site serious or not? It didn't really seem like it in some spots, but it did in others. My thoughts? Exactly what Fionavar said.

I think it has more to do with the fact that the books of the Bible are translated. Not sure what from, though. I think it might be Greek or Hebrew, but there's probably a couple others. And I'm surprised. For once, I actually agree with Hades_One. I'm not sure where I remember this from, so it might not be true, but I thought I heard somewhere that part of the anti-homosexual law was to protect the population, and to not waste "seed". (The source's word, not mine) Oh, and that site is one of the stupidest things I've ever read.

Came from Bioware because I want to know whether the rumors about Project X are true. I never left the old forums.

Name - Same name from Bioware boards. I took Revan, dropped the R and added ch. Avatar - It's Kimiko from megatokyo.com.

I think it's just to add realism. Like the options to shut down Manaan's power grid or change the Leviathan's course. You can't do it, but the suggestion that you could helps make it more real.