tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post4184590998117443655..comments2023-09-05T04:09:28.653-04:00Comments on Sacred Space: 'Sin tax' misses the biggiesUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger131125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-12490306848070753552008-06-01T06:50:00.000-04:002008-06-01T06:50:00.000-04:00The California Adult Entertainment Tax Proposal wo...The <A HREF="http://pornstudies.net/news/Constitutional-Concerns-Internet-Porn-Tax.htm" REL="nofollow">California Adult Entertainment Tax Proposal</A> would tax the sins of lust, fornication and, if the sex biz is inherently degrading, the degrading of people.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-76243522270621407502008-05-30T09:22:00.000-04:002008-05-30T09:22:00.000-04:00Danbo - "I guess if 'feeling' love is proof of lov...Danbo - "I guess if 'feeling' love is proof of love, you've just proven the existence of the soul."<BR/><BR/>You think the feeling of love and soul are the same thing?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-78779593871982910882008-05-30T08:44:00.000-04:002008-05-30T08:44:00.000-04:00Iztok wrote, "Danbo: BTW: your ad hominem attacks ...Iztok wrote, "Danbo: BTW: your ad hominem attacks are really something (eyes but not see etc...)! Add well to the discussion."<BR/><BR/>Hits close to home, perhaps?<BR/><BR/>Yes, you've offered quite a bit on love -- unfortunately nothing that holds up to scrutiny.Catholic101https://www.blogger.com/profile/09155134213650587054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-84576065408190236912008-05-30T08:37:00.000-04:002008-05-30T08:37:00.000-04:00Danbo: BTW: your ad hominem attacks are really som...Danbo: BTW: your ad hominem attacks are really something (eyes but not see etc...)! Add well to the discussion.Iztokhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13990010837424705188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-57635160402567106782008-05-30T08:36:00.000-04:002008-05-30T08:36:00.000-04:00Danbo, people have been wrongly pronounced dead in...Danbo, people have been wrongly pronounced dead in the past.<BR/><BR/>I've shown way more that we know about love then you've shown about soul.<BR/><BR/>Even if I would give you that clinically dead are your proof of eternal soul (which I don't as they still need a living body for soul to work at minimum). You still didn't prove #1 and #2 by any stretch of imagination not even close to what I've posted about love.Iztokhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13990010837424705188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-40163265230174362812008-05-30T08:29:00.000-04:002008-05-30T08:29:00.000-04:00Anonymous (5/30 12:25 AM) said..."Christians spend...Anonymous (5/30 12:25 AM) said...<BR/><I>"Christians spend billions of dollars trying to spin-doctor that book into something palatable to whatever market they are trying to reach."</I> <BR/><BR/>Sadly, you're right. It's disgusting.<BR/><BR/><I>"There's an interpretation for just about every viewpoint that craves Biblical justification for whatever it is that almost anyone wants to do."</I><BR/><BR/>Again, you're spot on. Name a desire, and you'll find a Biblical spin-doctor who'll affirm it for you.<BR/><BR/><I>"I'm really not surprised anymore at what the Bible can be used to argue for or against."</I><BR/><BR/>Me either. Just when you think you've seen it all...<BR/><BR/><I>"And I'm just not in the market for that kind of justification."</I><BR/><BR/>Likewise. Your critiques are on the money, and they need to be heard. I don't want someone's spin designed to sell me a product. The infomercials on TV will talk their ears off trying to tell me why I need a product and how fantastic it is. I don't need that junk. However, all the spin in the world can't change the reality of a product - either it works or it doesn't. In the same way, all the Biblical spin-doctors in the world mean nothing - the real question is, when we let the Bible speak for itself (which, like all communication, is possible if we listen carefully), is it truth? I don't care what you think about my opinions. I tend to talk too much. But please, don't let all the charlatans and screamers turn you away from the Bible. Ignore the sales pitches. Just opt for the test drive. <BR/><BR/>Soli Deo GloriaD.J. Williamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01261952245281286440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-41447880160459601742008-05-30T08:28:00.000-04:002008-05-30T08:28:00.000-04:00Iztok, it is true of those like you -- They have e...Iztok, it is true of those like you -- <BR/><BR/>They have eyes but do not see; have ears but do not hear; minds but do not comprehend.<BR/><BR/>None of your arguments prove that "love" exists. Yet I know it does, as does the immortal soul. If you want "scientific" proof, ask those who have been clinically dead and brought back to life. Ask them what they experienced.Catholic101https://www.blogger.com/profile/09155134213650587054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-74431898908035285352008-05-30T08:15:00.000-04:002008-05-30T08:15:00.000-04:00Danbo, you failed to prove eternal soul. I can giv...Danbo, you failed to prove eternal soul. I can give you the feeling that you perhaps have soul as in feeling of love but you still failed to prove few things.<BR/><BR/>1. That animals don't have it.<BR/><BR/>2. That it is gift of God.<BR/><BR/>3. That it is eternal.<BR/><BR/>So start working on those. (You are the one qualified the above properties so I am sure you will have some good evidence of it outside the scripture, like any scientific research papers etc...)<BR/><BR/>Even fMRI tests that show it would do. If you tell us which chemicals are responsible for it would be good too. Basically any tests you can provide to back the above (esp. eternal part).Iztokhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13990010837424705188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-70191003671885533322008-05-30T07:33:00.000-04:002008-05-30T07:33:00.000-04:00I guess if "feeling" love is proof of love, you've...I guess if "feeling" love is proof of love, you've just proven the existence of the soul. Thank you for your help. Case closed.<BR/><BR/>As to Iztok's claim of the chemicals that "cause" love to be felt, that's poppycock. You can't inject someone with all those chemicals and all of a sudden expect them to say, "I feel love." You might as well throw together all the chemicals contained in a human body into a pile on the floor and say, "Look, a human being."Catholic101https://www.blogger.com/profile/09155134213650587054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-12745049865957362842008-05-30T00:25:00.000-04:002008-05-30T00:25:00.000-04:00Relax, DJ, you won't find me making uninformed com...Relax, DJ, you won't find me making uninformed comments about the "meaning" of the Bible because I don't really care. <BR/><BR/>Christians spend billions of dollars trying to spin-doctor that book into something palatable to whatever market they are trying to reach. <BR/><BR/>There's an interpretation for just about every viewpoint that craves Biblical justification for whatever it is that almost anyone wants to do.<BR/><BR/>I'm really not surprised anymore at what the Bible can be used to argue for or against.<BR/><BR/>And I'm just not in the market for that kind of justification.<BR/><BR/>From this point forward, everyone can take any quote I ever use or explain from the Bible as being of absolutely no value to anyone.<BR/><BR/>You can take it as a joke.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-84653697796865959082008-05-29T17:42:00.000-04:002008-05-29T17:42:00.000-04:00Sounds like proof to me.Sounds like proof to me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-87795951954784119162008-05-29T16:57:00.000-04:002008-05-29T16:57:00.000-04:00Danbo, chemicals involved in love are: testosteron...Danbo, chemicals involved in love are: testosterone, oestrogen, dopamine, serotonin, norepinephrine, oxytocin, and vasopressin. One can observe brain reactions using fMRI.<BR/><BR/>It is physical in a sense electricity is physical. We can see reactions to it and know what the basic requirements for it are.<BR/><BR/>Love is a feeling by definition. It can't stand alone (re: your "feeling of love" vs. "love" attempt.<BR/><BR/>Yes "may lose ability". If you do not understand the terms in scientific manner then there is no point. As with any scientific approach may/can/should and other words are pretty well defined when it comes to descriptions of things.Iztokhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13990010837424705188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-61491566747898878992008-05-29T16:42:00.000-04:002008-05-29T16:42:00.000-04:00Love's ProofDo you feel the emotion of love Danbo?...Love's Proof<BR/><BR/>Do you feel the emotion of love Danbo? If you do, then this is your proof that it exists.<BR/><BR/>Danbo might say, "Yes, I do feel the emotion of love. But I didn't ask you about feelings."<BR/><BR/>"Do you experience love Danbo? If you do, then this is your proof that it exists."<BR/><BR/>Danbo might say, "Yes, I experience love. But it can't be proved."<BR/><BR/>"You don't have to prove it, Danbo, we feel it too."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-36672352938857036352008-05-29T16:10:00.000-04:002008-05-29T16:10:00.000-04:00So, where will this lead? Assuming there will be n...So, where will this lead? Assuming there will be no satisfactory proof of love for Danbo:<BR/><BR/>Iztok could say, "There is no proof that love exists. Shoot, I guess it doesn't exist after all."<BR/><BR/>Iztok could tell Danbo, "Your just too uneducated (or another fault) to understand."<BR/><BR/>Iztok could say, "There is no proof that love exists. So?"<BR/><BR/>Iztok could say, "I can't prove love exists. So?"<BR/><BR/>Iztok could say, "I can't prove love exists. Maybe that's how it is with God."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-4563864836851211252008-05-29T15:53:00.000-04:002008-05-29T15:53:00.000-04:00The love definition at http://www.merriam-webster....The <A HREF="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/love" REL="nofollow">love definition</A> at http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/loveAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-68607914803919129302008-05-29T15:46:00.000-04:002008-05-29T15:46:00.000-04:00DJ, I never said anything about the definition of ...DJ, I never said anything about the definition of Yom. I just gave you a reason why I don't want to spend much time studying the Bible. <BR/><BR/>Now, to the L-O-V-E definition:<BR/><BR/>Love is four letters. Love is a word. Love is something people talk about. Love is something I feel. Love is something I do.<BR/><BR/>The four letters of love are L, O, V and E. The word love can be either a noun or a verb. As a noun, the word love has nine definitions; as a verb it has four. The definitions are here.<BR/><BR/>Sometimes people may argue that love doesn't really exist because, as with all feelings, it can't be touched with our senses. Love, as a verb, though can be seen; except an observer wouldn't know the motive of an action and, therefore, wouldn't know if the action observed is really love.<BR/><BR/>The word love is spoken and heard (or talked, written and sung about) often. Most everyone would say love exists because they experience it. Sometimes a person would want another to prove its existence in order to prove something else exists.<BR/><BR/>The feeling of love is pleasant. Usually the most pleasant feeling of love is felt for other people and, to a little lessor extent, to other animals. Part of loving others is wanting them to be happy. From wanting those we love to be happy, love becomes something we do.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-64349248352153547432008-05-29T15:22:00.000-04:002008-05-29T15:22:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-42093233324139956842008-05-29T13:03:00.000-04:002008-05-29T13:03:00.000-04:00Iztok wrote, "Love can be defined both as type of ...Iztok wrote, "Love can be defined both as type of feeling and as demonstration of certain types of actions."<BR/><BR/>"<I>...can be</I> defined...?" No, no, you must prove. No <I>can be's</I> allowed in a proof.<BR/><BR/>Iztok wrote, "Love is a physical thing...."<BR/><BR/>Please explain. If it's physical, can I touch it? See it? Hear it? Taste it? Smell it?<BR/><BR/>Iztoke wrote, "...we know the chemicals responsible for the feeling of love."<BR/><BR/>We do? Please list. Also, who is <I>we</I>? "...<I>feeling</I> of love...."??? No, no, I am talking about <I>love,</I>, not the <I>feeling of love</I>.<BR/><BR/>Iztok wrote, "It is also dependent on the brain structure. Person with a lobotomy or other type of brain damage may lose the ability to feel love."<BR/><BR/>May lose the ability? Hmm, why do some lose it and some don't? I didn't ask for you to discuss whether or not a person can "feel" love. I asked you to prove it exists. I may never "feel" something, but that doesn't prove or disprove that <I>something</I>.<BR/><BR/>Iztok wrote, "It is confined to our physical brains this further emphasizing it's physical nature."<BR/><BR/>That says absolutely nothing. Wishful thinking.<BR/><BR/>Iztok finished, "It is not an entity that exists outside of our brains however."<BR/><BR/>Huh? You haven't proven <I>it</I> exists yet, so how can you prove where it does and/or does not exist?<BR/><BR/>Your turn (still).Catholic101https://www.blogger.com/profile/09155134213650587054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-78789525236103492042008-05-29T12:21:00.000-04:002008-05-29T12:21:00.000-04:00Danbo: "But first, you prove that "love" exists"Lo...Danbo: "But first, you prove that "love" exists"<BR/><BR/>Love can be defined both as type of feeling and as demonstration of certain types of actions.<BR/><BR/>Love is a physical thing and we know the chemicals responsible for the feeling of love. It is also dependent on the brain structure. Person with a lobotomy or other type of brain damage may lose the ability to feel love. It is confined to our physical brains this further emphasizing it's physical nature. It is not an entity that exists outside of our brains however.<BR/><BR/>Your turn.Iztokhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13990010837424705188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-87843468398137674332008-05-29T12:11:00.000-04:002008-05-29T12:11:00.000-04:00Iztok asks, "Can you show any evidence of such thi...Iztok asks, "Can you show any evidence of such thing?"<BR/><BR/>Sure can! But first, you prove that "love" exists.Catholic101https://www.blogger.com/profile/09155134213650587054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-39495530587691469072008-05-29T12:01:00.000-04:002008-05-29T12:01:00.000-04:00Pornstudent said..."My point in the link was to sh...Pornstudent said...<BR/><I>"My point in the link was to show that Biblical experts don't agree with what the word "day" meant in Genesis, so if I spent years studying Hebrew I wouldn't know either."</I><BR/><BR/>I don't think I ever claimed universal agreement (in fact, I've admitted the opposite). I simlply claimed that it is a valid and possible interpretation that fits the language, genre, and context of the passage. I never said you'd know, I said you'd plainly see that there is more than one lexical meaning for <I>yom</I>. <BR/><BR/>Pornstudent said...<BR/><I>"The reason for the quote is because I wanted to show that even some Christians agree with me in thinking that many Christians use complicated, imaginative, and convoluted excuses for God."</I><BR/><BR/><I>Yom</I> can (and often does in Scripture) mean something other than a solar day. The structure of Genesis 1 is poetic rather than straight narrative. This leads me to believe that the passage may not be intended as literal play-by-play. Wow. That's pretty convoluted. I'm surprised I understand it.<BR/><BR/>Soli Deo GloriaD.J. Williamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01261952245281286440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-71726247965416856512008-05-29T11:58:00.000-04:002008-05-29T11:58:00.000-04:00Danbo: "soul -- Our divine essence, imparted by Go...Danbo: "soul -- Our divine essence, imparted by God, that continues existence after death of the human body."<BR/><BR/>Can you show any evidence of such thing? Other then human wishful thinking?<BR/><BR/>Certain animals are self-aware. Chimpanzees for example identify themselves and understand the mirror image when handed a mirror. This implies not only self-awareness but also intelligence (thinking).<BR/><BR/>Monkeys can manage mathematics. Dolphins can be decisive. Crow can bend a wire to form a tool. These all are signs of thinking.Iztokhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13990010837424705188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-74991777339252078072008-05-29T11:43:00.000-04:002008-05-29T11:43:00.000-04:00DJ,My point in the link was to show that Biblical ...DJ,<BR/><BR/>My point in <A HREF="http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/301" REL="nofollow">the link</A> was to show that Biblical experts don't agree with what the word "day" meant in Genesis, so if I spent years studying Hebrew I wouldn't know either. I'm inclined to agree with the article I linked to insofar as the writer of Genesis probably meant the usual definition of the word "day." <BR/><BR/>The reason for the quote is because I wanted to show that even some Christians agree with me in thinking that many Christians use complicated, imaginative, and convoluted excuses for God.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-13760068288088822012008-05-29T11:42:00.000-04:002008-05-29T11:42:00.000-04:00soul -- Our divine essence, imparted by God, that ...soul -- Our <I>divine</I> essence, imparted by God, that continues existence after death of the human body.<BR/><BR/>Animals cannot "reason." Animals are not "self-aware." Animals cannot "think." Animals cannot "choose."<BR/><BR/>Stating that man <I>can</I> act on instinct and conditioning does not prove we are equal to animals!! The point is we can do otherwise. Animals cannot. What you're saying is like saying we can't be superior to animals because both defecate. Absurd!<BR/><BR/>As for wishful thinking, it's not -- it's fact.<BR/><BR/>Same old tired arguments is all you bring to the table.Catholic101https://www.blogger.com/profile/09155134213650587054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2954933932670299796.post-63855866018824177942008-05-29T11:02:00.000-04:002008-05-29T11:02:00.000-04:00Danbo: "We have self-awareness, intelligence and a...Danbo: "We have self-awareness, intelligence and a soul. Animals act out of instinct and conditioned response. Only man can think, reason and choose."<BR/><BR/>Animals have self-awareness and intelligence.<BR/><BR/>Please define "soul" so we can discuss it.<BR/><BR/>Humans do act out of instinct and conditioned response as well. I think that use of tools also fits into think, reason and choose category and we've seen animals using tools.<BR/><BR/>So all you have left is "soul" so please define this in scientific way so we can see weather we can find it in other animals.<BR/><BR/>"Sorry --you may be only an animal but I certainly am more than that."<BR/><BR/>Wishful thinking not based on facts.Iztokhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13990010837424705188noreply@blogger.com