That's very true. It is implied as a person's opinion. Good point.
I thought she was a guy too... until I read a break-down of the secret movie (it goes so quickly I can't see a lot of what's happening) and the writer referred to Aqua as "the blue-haired female".
That's true, someone could show me. But I wasn't saying that the color of the sky wasn't provable. My point was actually that stating something is not the same as proving it. Daxma said that God was just something people conjured up in their minds. It was his opinion, but he was stating it as fact. If I said "I believe God exists." then that would be stating my opinion. If I said "God exists." that would be stating my opinion as fact, which you can't really do. Likewise, if I said "I think the sky's polka dotted pink." (let's pretend I'm colorblind or something) that would be stating what I think. If I said "The sky's polka dotted pink." then I would be stating the sky is polka dotted pink, not that I thought it was. So, yeah. That's what I was trying to say. But it would definitely be a poor analogy otherwise.
Ah... I did, didn't I? Touche :) Yes, no one knows. I think God created them. You think He didn't. There's really no way to know and I highly doubt we'll ever figure it out. Why shouldn't He be? Why couldn't a being of such complexity have existed in the very beginning? It's not like science just supports the Big Bang, either. If you try researching a little, you'll find there are some that do support the God/Big Bang too. And yes, God wanted to create us in His one image. What's your point? It's possible that God is a metaphor. However, I think He exists. You don't. We believe different things; there's nothing wrong with that and I don't think we'll ever know who's right. Okay. I never said it had to be different, I said it might have been. But good point anyway. That's true. But like I said before the flood could have been metaphor. It didn't necessarily have to cover the entire world. But you're implying it. You say that "you" cannot do this or that, implying that therefore God must not be able to. God is not a wizard, either. I don't know where that word came from, but it's a very bizarre word to use when talking about God. That's true. That's why I said it could've been metaphor. Or did you miss that part? Also, I think the water could just be recycled and used for rain. You know, evaporation? The flood didn't necessarily have to be extremely deep and come from an endless supply of water. Again, it was most likely metaphor. Since this is indeed in Discussion and not Debate, and I have already stated my opinion on the subject many times, I will say no more except this: I have respect for your belief. I understand why you hold that belief. I am not mocking your belief by saying things like "Are atheists aware of this and that? After all, they're not idiots." or "Please excuse me for choosing the most probable choice." Even though I disagree with your belief, I respect it. From what I've seen, you do not hold the same respect for mine. You may want to think about that a little.
That's true. Why is it illegal? That seems a little strange. I don't think the doctor would be hurting the patient by putting them out of their misery. On the contrary, I think the doctor would be hurting the person more by keeping them alive and suffering. But it's not murder, it's simply a way to help a loved one stop suffering. You're right, that is pretty unfair. I agree completely. The person does need to be terminally ill. Either that, or something along those lines (like my great-grandfather had a stroke, but ended up not doing well and was never going to recover. The only thing keeping him alive was the medication designed to keep him more alert and feeding/breathing tubes). And of course it should be the decision of the patient whether they want to do that or not. It also would be a wise decision to make sure the patient is mentally stable and able to make the right decision. And not just the right decision, but for the right reason as well. (i.e. because they're really suffering vs. not wanting to, but doing so because they think it would make things easier for the rest of the family). So, no. It should not be illegal. It shouldn't be used lightly or on a whim, but it shouldn't be banned either.
I said that evidence exists that supports His existence. I also said that evidence exists that supports Him not existing. I said there's no way to prove it in either direction. How is that contradicting myself? Before anything else, I will say that I have never, ever heard God being referred to as a "wizard" before. That's a very strange word to use for God. Okay, then. How were all those unknown components created? They just came out of nowhere, and just happened to fuse in the right way the create the universe? Right. Exactly. That's where God comes in. He created the Big Bang. The "origin" is God. You're right. The flood probably wasn't like it was depicted in the Bible. Some of it was metaphorical, and some of it was just meant to be interpreted a certain way. For instance, the flood did not necessarily cover the whole world. At least, not the world we know today. But how do we know it was the exact same when the flood occurred as it is now? Even if it is the same, it didn't have to cover the whole entire world. Like I said, the Bible cannot be taken literally all the time, otherwise it repeatedly contradicts itself. The probability of it happening for no reason is very small, I'll give you that. But it didn't happen for no reason. God made it rain that long on purpose. You seem to think that God is just like us, with our human limitations and imperfections (please tell me if that's not what you think). He has much greater power than we do. Why is it the most probable option? Because of what you think? In that case, you'll have to excuse me for choosing the "most probable option", because I think God exists and I have reasons for it. We all have reasons for what we choose to believe, but nobody can say their belief is the "most likely option".
Actually, everyone I know has the same outlook. They respect other people's beliefs and religions, and other people respect theirs. So I don't think "most" people think other religions are crazy. But yes, there are quite a few people who, sadly, are unwilling to look outside their own religion and who think anyone else who doesn't believe in what they do has lost their mind. And yes, I am a Christian :)
That's your opinion. What you think doesn't decide what is or isn't. I think God does exist, but that doesn't mean He does. If I said the sky was yellow with pink polka dots, would that make it true? You don't believe in God, that's fine. I don't have a problem with that. But you can't accuse people who do believe in God of being insecure, that's not fair. I could easily say that because you don't believe in God, you're an idiot. But that wouldn't necessarily be true, and it wouldn't be fair. I know nothing about you, therefore I cannot say things about you just because of something you believe. If I said anyone who didn't think the sky was yellow with pink polka dots was delusional, would that be either true or fair?
There is no way to prove God exists. It's just not possible. But there is no way to prove he doesn't exist. That's not possible either. That is a rather silly thing to ask people to do. There is no way of knowing whether God exists or not. That's the whole point of religion. You choose to believe in something because you like it and agree with it. Nobody can prove anything in either direction. There is plenty of evidence that God exists. There is also plenty of evidence that he doesn't exist. Neither side outweighs the other. You say "Prove God exists." I could just as easily say "Prove God doesn't exist." (I won't because it'd be a stupid, impossible thing to try and do, but let's pretend that I have said that) and neither of us would get anywhere. Yes, I do too. I think that God created all those unknown components and caused them to fuse, therefore creating the Big Bang. I think it is highly unlikely that God just "poofed" it into existence. Seriously, people, it's not just one or the other. God or the Big Bang. Use your imaginations a little. No, monkeys did not create us. That's correct. And all of what you said about evolution is also correct. And the Bible says there was a flood. There have been some scientific arguments that support the flood's existence. But there's really no way to prove it. But since you've seemed to deem it an answerable question, I'm going to assume you won't mind me turning the question back around at you and asking, who says there wasn't a flood? There have also been plenty of of arguments that support God's existence. Would you like to take a look? http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/1762 http://www.enlightennext.org/magazine/j11/goswami.asp Also, you may want to spend a good hour or so clicking around this site: http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/answers.html How on earth do you know that? Do you know "most" or "all" believers? Do you even know half the world's believers? Do not make a huge sweep like that. (It will almost certainly come back to bite you later on.) If one "dares" (like it's some heroic deed) to ask how God created the flood, then I think quite a few people would answer "rain" and walk off thinking you were a bit soft in the head. I don't know about you, but where I come from, rain causes floods. The Bible said it rained for forty days and forty nights. Figure it out :\ Most Christians I know are well aware that floods are caused by excessive rain. We're not idiots.
But Jesus can. You can't make that happen. Nor can I or anyone else. Jesus is the only one with that kind of power. But even if he was unable to do that, an awful lot of the Bible is metaphor. You can't take it completely literally all the time. If the Bible is taken literally, it contradicts itself. I read in one of your earlier posts that you haven't read the Bible because all it tells you is that you're going to Hell for your sins, including procreation. You should try actually reading it before telling everybody what it says. Genesis 9:7 "As for you, be fruitful and multiply; Populate the earth abundantly and multiply in it." I have never read anywhere in the Bible that God doesn't want you to have sex. Again, everyone sins. It's part of being human. And just because you sin or don't believe in God doesn't mean you're going to Hell. Belief in God is not mandatory to go to Heaven; neither is perfection. The problem is when people say things like "Hey, we're all going to Hell anyway, what's the point?" and they get completely caught up in ideas or behaviors that are actually more likely to get them sent to Hell. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
That is a very good question. I don't think anyone created Him, I think He's just existed all along. You know, he just was for a while before he created everything else. There is no easy answer to that question, but that's my guess. I have to disagree. Of course God is a higher being. He's certainly not the same "level" as us human beings (couldn't think of a better word). Not everyone goes to Hell, that's bullcrap. Everybody sins once in a while, slipping up just once or even several times will not get you a one-way ticket straight to Hell. I am guilty of envy, pride, and anger, but overall I am a good person. You sound like you're a good person too, and you won't go to Hell just because you've sinned. Self-esteem is not the same as pride. You can be confident about your abilities without being arrogant about them. And why on Earth can you not get married and have kids? You think there are no Christian families who don't spend all their time worrying about whether they're going to Hell or not? Also, what you mentioned about there possibly not being a God... that's true. But God also might exist. I don't think we'll ever know. I will say, however, that most Christians "live their life" and don't think things like "Hey, I just imagined that guy without his shirt, I'm going to Hell." That's an idiotic thing to think. I don't know anyone who has that mindset or who takes the Bible that literally.
I checked on Amazon and you can buy it for $9.99. It said it came out December 30th. I don't know why Border's says that... maybe that just when Border's will have it in stock? Although that does seem kind of late, if it was already released 4 days ago.
Well, since December last year I've had two great-grandfathers, one aunt, and one great-grandmother die (the first great-grandfather actually died on Christmas last year). And since October of last year my grandfather has had terminal brain cancer, and was expected to die within nine months (but he's still alive right now, which really is a miracle). When the first great-grandfather died, I was sad, but didn't realize how sad until I was writing about it in my journal and suddenly started sobbing. The thing was, he was expected to recover perfectly and live, but he just died kind of suddenly. No one was expecting it. So, I guess for me, it has to be something really sad, but also sudden and unexpected. I've also come close to crying while watching "The Ultimate Gift". Close, but no actual tears. Sorry for the rant. /endrant
That's a very good question. I think they should give last names to the main characters since they're so important. But, who knows? Maybe they're saving the last names to be released later in the series for some random epic-ness of some kind. (OMG Xehanort and Riku have the same last names! They're related!!! :p) But... I really don't know why they haven't given out last names yet.
I've been pushed off of ledges/cliffs/paths at inopportune moments so many times by Donald and Goofy that I don't even mind it anymore. I just climb back up to where I was and keep going. But yes, the first several times they did it I was extremely annoyed at them.
I don't know why so many people dislike Kairi, I think she's fine. I guess some people don't like the whole "damsel in distress" thing about her, but I don't think it's that big a deal. *shrugs* I personally don't mind her at all.
There's really no particular order for me. I usually try to play the world that have bosses you can only attack at certain times (like Oogie Boogie) first, so they'll have less HP. I also always save The Hundred Acre Wood for last because it's a fun and easy world that I can look forward to after battling through all the others.
I actually think the PS2 version is a little easier than the GBA, simply because you have better range of movement and you have some better attacks. I had to struggle through the GBA game (especially GBA Reverse/Rebirth... UGH) but I beat RE: CoM without too much trouble on Proud Mode my first run through. Guess I'm just weird XD
Yes, definitely. I felt sorry for both Zexion and Vexen during their death scenes. You also have to remember that Zexy just lost a battle and was probably very tired and weak. He was also shocked by Riku's strength, which was probably why he panicked when he first saw the replica. And I'm 99% sure that the Riku replica was draining Zexion's energy too, not just strangling him, making poor Zexion even weaker and unable to defend himself.
The only boss I ever really had trouble with was Ansem in R/R. I always came so close to beating him, but he would always manage to kill me before I could deliver the final blow. I couldn't figure out what I was doing wrong, either. I was using strong sleights, I had good cards, I even had a good supply of Mickey friend cards most of the time. Then... I remembered dodge roll. And then I beat him :D
