DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> just another religious debate...
Pages:  
Showing posts 51 - 75 of 112, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 07/18/2007 10:33:03 PM · #51
Originally posted by theSaj:
a) Because I look at the world's complexity and I see design and intelligence. I see things that are not possible through mere random formation. Which the jumps from a to b would require stages that don't allow for the specimens to survive.


Bah! I was going to ignore this but ...

If you are speaking strictly about evolution, you will keep making this mistake if you continue to believe the evolution is a purely random process. Random mutation plus natural selection is the main driving force behind evolution. Repeat after me: "Natural selection is not a purely random process."

You'll probably ignore this and continue to say that evolution is a randon process and you will continue to be wrong. Here's a book recommendation for you to also ignore.
 07/18/2007 10:38:10 PM · #52
most people see evolution as something that happened in the past, or something progressing at a very slow rate. the truth is, it is happening all the time, and yes, even right now.
 07/18/2007 11:08:14 PM · #53
Originally posted by escapetooz:
SO YES. Religion affects my daily life. And it should not if I do not wish it that way.


Yeah it would be nice to eliminate all sources of irritation in life, especially those that I consider founded on idiocy. Unfortunately (or fortunately), people with more money, guns, prison camps and willpower have tried it before and it never works out. Best just to take it easy and not let it get you so worked up.
 07/18/2007 11:27:13 PM · #54
You all might be interested in this series of radio specials on the interplay between science and religion: Electrons to Elightenment -- tonight's episode is Awe and Wonder

More info here

Message edited by author 2007-07-18 23:38:03.
 07/19/2007 12:30:03 AM · #55
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Originally posted by escapetooz:
SO YES. Religion affects my daily life. And it should not if I do not wish it that way.


Yeah it would be nice to eliminate all sources of irritation in life, especially those that I consider founded on idiocy. Unfortunately (or fortunately), people with more money, guns, prison camps and willpower have tried it before and it never works out. Best just to take it easy and not let it get you so worked up.


I knew when I typed that I was gunna get some flack for it. What I meant was that there is supposed to be a separation of church and state and there isn't. Not that I want to rid my world of all annoyances. If that was true I'd get rid of about 90% of the cars on the roads of LA. ;)
 07/19/2007 12:43:14 AM · #56
not sure you can ever really seperate church from state, because you can't seperate religion from the individual who believes. Be like trying to seperate the urge of a salmon to spawn, in an evolutionary way of thinking. They'll just change and adapt.

Message edited by author 2007-07-19 00:47:59.
 07/19/2007 03:22:08 AM · #57
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by Matthew:
I don't know how much you think about it but IMO religion is almost solely a mechanism for dealing with death.
...
As I see it, religion provides a very nice and easy answer - it is very seductive because it: a,b,c,d,e

Religion also allows social, hierarchically inclined animals such as human beings to organize themselves into ways that are innately satisfying. For the majority of people, it seems the need to follow the alpha leaders of the pack is overwhelmingly strong. Combined with the ultimate hierarchy of god-man-other, the desire to believe and have faith, and interpret the universe in this narrow way, is simply too attractive to resist.


Wow. That's pretty judgmental. And, from what you've said, I seem to be doing religion all wrong.

If I recall properly, science is about testing those things that can be "proven", not making judgments on those things that cannot yet be.

I would also like to mention that such dismissiveness bears too much resemblance to assurances that I'll be facing a firey eternity.

In regards to Church and State - we should have enough separation between them that it isn't only one faith or philosophy running the show, but, at the very least, reasonable accommodations made for all of them.
 07/19/2007 03:41:38 AM · #58
Originally posted by EducatedSavage:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by Matthew:
I don't know how much you think about it but IMO religion is almost solely a mechanism for dealing with death.
...
As I see it, religion provides a very nice and easy answer - it is very seductive because it: a,b,c,d,e

Religion also allows social, hierarchically inclined animals such as human beings to organize themselves into ways that are innately satisfying. For the majority of people, it seems the need to follow the alpha leaders of the pack is overwhelmingly strong. Combined with the ultimate hierarchy of god-man-other, the desire to believe and have faith, and interpret the universe in this narrow way, is simply too attractive to resist.


Wow. That's pretty judgmental. And, from what you've said, I seem to be doing religion all wrong.

If I recall properly, science is about testing those things that can be "proven", not making judgments on those things that cannot yet be.

I would also like to mention that such dismissiveness bears too much resemblance to assurances that I'll be facing a firey eternity.

In regards to Church and State - we should have enough separation between them that it isn't only one faith or philosophy running the show, but, at the very least, reasonable accommodations made for all of them.


I'm sorry but I science (and common sense) proven beyond a resonable doubt that the earth is older than 6,000 years or whatever people say the bible says that life began. Not saying all christians believe this, but some do, and it is rediculous.

With or without evolution, I think science can prove there was not intelligent design the way it goes on in the bible. You want to believe that god planned out evolution, then I have no problem with that.
 07/19/2007 03:52:29 AM · #59
i think the world NEEDS religion - regardless of whether you believe in it, or not.
 07/19/2007 07:44:22 AM · #60
Hey,

I did not read all the replies here, but thought I'd add in my opinion. I'm a Christian, but I do believe that all the religions of the world has more in common than we know.

FACT: You cannot PROVE the existance of god, heaven, hell, etc.

No doubt, we can't prove any of this. Hence religion and faith that it all does exist.

knowing this fact... why is religion so often pushed on others?

I thinkmost religions have an instruction from whomever they serve to spread that religion to all others. I think that is why you find people who will deny you choice and force their religion on you.

another question. Why is it such a bad thing to question the existence of God when supposedly "he"'s the one that gave us the brain and free will to do so? Wouldn't "he" be glad that we were thinking for ourselves and reflecting on life instead of following a pastor around like sheep and basing our lives around a some stale old passages?

It certainly is not a bad thing to question God. I question Him all the time when I don't get things my way.

Now onto the "he". Why is God gendered? If god has no figure, wouldn't "he" actually be "it" some other worldly being instead of some "dude" with a robe or whatever other popular stereotypes are used.
To me using the term he just gives even more flame to the patriarichal fire. Well look... the most powerful being in the universe is a guy. And where are the women? Oh, ruining humanity's innocence with their damn want for knowledge and damning new born babies to original sin. Damn them women.

The bible tells us that God created man in His image, hence Adam was created, a guy. The Bible often speaks of God the Father, and God refers to Himself as The Father. So, God is male.
I think that men who blame woman for our eviction from paradise is looking for someone else to blame for their own sin. After all, the "Apple" was not shoved down Adam's throat...

I saw another question or comment about the age of the earth in relation to what the bible says. Here is what I believe:
Much of the bible was written in a way so that people would understand it. Now, we can speculate all we want about the IQ's of the people who lived on earth back then, but it seems they needed things explained in terms that they would understand. The bible says that in Heaven, time does not exist, thus, and I believe the quote is: "For God one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years is like one day" To my mind that means that the "six" days of creation was in fact not six days as we know it. It could very well have been six hundred billion years.

There are many thngs about the bible that is a mystery. But that is whay faith is all about, believing without having seen proof.

ETA: I actually believe that God planned out evolution. If we were created in his image, then it is fair to say that we would do things in a similar manner, meaning we build a house brick by brick. Why can it not be that God created everything on earth one cell at a time?

Message edited by author 2007-07-19 07:48:50.
 07/19/2007 08:09:52 AM · #61
Some interesting and valid questions here.

Originally posted by escapetooz:
knowing this fact... why is religion so often pushed on others? (not saying everyone does this, but for the ones that do.)

example... "if you don't believe ____ you are going to hell"


There are a couple of points to note here. Not all behaviours of people who subscribe to a religion are endorsed or encouraged by that religion, even when those behaviours are specifically related to that religion.

It is not a tenet of Christianity (or, as far as I am aware, the other major world religions) that one should go around pushing the faith onto other people. That is the behaviour of individuals, and the reasons that those individuals do it relate to the individuals and their motivations (which could be many and varied, positive negative or neutral - insecurity, a quest for power or influence, a desire to warn people about danger, understanding the Bible passages about the need to tell people but not the passages about how to, etc.). Yes, we Christians are told to "spread the word", but we are also told to do it "with gentleness and reverence" (or, you could say, respect).

Remember, for every Christian that is trying to force it down peoples' throats, there are one hundred others that aren't - but the 100 don't provoke rants. :)

(In a related theme, just because some prominent and vocal Christians, particularly in America, are politically conservative and aim to impose certain political beliefs, doesn't mean that Christianity itself is politically conservative or endorses the wielding of political power in this way.)

Originally posted by escapetooz:
another question. Why is it such a bad thing to question the existence of God when supposedly "he"'s the one that gave us the brain and free will to do so? Wouldn't "he" be glad that we were thinking for ourselves and reflecting on life instead of following a pastor around like sheep and basing our lives around a some stale old passages?


I believe critical thinking is a Good Thing. Some people seem to think Christianity means checking your brain in at the door, but I believe God wants us to use our brains. Also, even if our leaders are wise we are still supposed to be responsible for evaluating what they say. My pastor would be very disappointed if I simply did everything he told me without thinking. (By the way, staleness is in the eyes of the beholder. Some say that Ecclesiastes is a very postmodern book, written around three millennia before "postmodern" was even a word!)

For that matter, significant portions of the book of Job involve Job ranting and questioning God about all sorts of things. And when God answers, he doesn't condemn Job for questioning.

Originally posted by escapetooz:
Now onto the "he". Why is God gendered? If god has no figure, wouldn't "he" actually be "it" some other worldly being instead of some "dude" with a robe or whatever other popular stereotypes are used. To me using the term he just gives even more flame to the patriarichal fire. Well look... the most powerful being in the universe is a guy. And where are the women? Oh, ruining humanity's innocence with their damn want for knowledge and damning new born babies to original sin. Damn them women.


God (or, at least, the Christian/Jewish God) isn't male. Calling him male probably reflects some patriarchal cultural factors, but God is spirit (not a dude in a robe :) and, I believe, is both male and female; certainly both genders (not just Adam/men) were created in God's image (Genesis 1:27), and God applies both paternal and maternal images to himself/herself. As someone else mentioned, English doesn't really have any good words for sapient entities of no gender - or, more accurately, both genders. I tend to use male language when talking about (or to) God - and that probably reflects patriarchal culture - but don't have any problem with people using female language to talk about (or to) God.

It's a common misconception that humanity's fall is the fault of women/a woman. In the Genesis 3 story, both genders are at fault and God doesn't take Adam's weak "she gave it to me" excuse as anything other than buck-passing.
07/19/2007 08:10:00 AM · #62
Originally posted by Louis:
A conclusion formulated from hard evidence (or, in the case of god-belief, a profound lack of hard evidence), is not simply an opinion. Your "view" is a reasonable conclusion drawn from intelligently surmised data. Religious views, that is, "faith", is belief without evidence. Reason and logic are not required (and are in fact demonstrably frowned upon).


I'm going to have to call you out on this one. Please demonstrate to me that/how reason and logic are frowned upon in religion. I know that some religious people encourage "just do what I say" instead of thinking, but as far as I'm concerned this is far from universal. Certainly most of the church pastors and leaders I have known have been quite happy for people to question and even disagree with them - and to learn things from other members of the congregation.

Also, religious views/faith might not have demonstrable incontrovertible proof, but that doesn't mean they entirely lack evidence. It would be illogical and unreasonable for me to expect the ways God has revealed himself to me to serve as proof/evidence for you, but it would be equally illogical for me to ignore them as evidence for myself.
07/19/2007 08:10:10 AM · #63
Originally posted by Louis:

Religion also allows social, hierarchically inclined animals such as human beings to organize themselves into ways that are innately satisfying. For the majority of people, it seems the need to follow the alpha leaders of the pack is overwhelmingly strong. Combined with the ultimate hierarchy of god-man-other, the desire to believe and have faith, and interpret the universe in this narrow way, is simply too attractive to resist.


I'm not sure if you intended this to be offensive, but it comes across that way to me (unlike Escapetooz's original questions, which I do not find the slightest bit offensive).

You seem to be accusing the vast majority of those of us who have some sort of faith as being scared rudderless people that need someone to tell us how to live. The best Christian leaders I've known have not been stereotypical alpha males (or alpha females!) looking for devotees, but men and women who have been willing to sit with people and wrestle with difficult questions/issues - including learning from other people. The model of leadership that the Bible encourages is serving others, not being served by others.

07/19/2007 08:10:18 AM · #64
Originally posted by escapetooz:
To clear up an confusion This:



Is a lot of what I'm talking about. I'm not going up to little old ladies at church and picking fights. These people are out there screaming holy hell, but no, the athiests are the bad guys for trying to defend themselves.


As a Christian, I'm embarrassed when I see things like this. Jesus' harsh words were not aimed at thieves or adulterers or gays, but at the religious leaders of the time such as the Pharisees. The (rough) modern-day equivalent would be (theologically, not necessarily politically) conservative evangelicals. If Jesus were on Earth today, he'd be likely to criticise me for not doing enough to help the poor - not for not doing enough to ban gay marriage.
07/19/2007 08:10:24 AM · #65
Originally posted by escapetooz:
I'm sorry but I science (and common sense) proven beyond a resonable doubt that the earth is older than 6,000 years or whatever people say the bible says that life began. Not saying all christians believe this, but some do, and it is rediculous.

With or without evolution, I think science can prove there was not intelligent design the way it goes on in the bible. You want to believe that god planned out evolution, then I have no problem with that.


Well, actually, plenty of Christians DO believe in evolution, and very few intelligent Christians (hope that's not a tautology!) believe the earth was created only 6,000 years ago. Christianity is not fundamentally incompatible with either evolution or geological timescales - and even Christians who reject evolution don't have to accept the 6,000 year thing. The Hebrew word for the "days" of Genesis 1 can mean "periods of time", not just 24-hour periods.
07/19/2007 08:21:38 AM · #66
Originally posted by escapetooz:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:


Originally posted by escapetooz:

Now onto the "he". Why is God gendered? If god has no figure, wouldn't "he" actually be "it" some other worldly being instead of some "dude" with a robe or whatever other popular stereotypes are used. To me using the term he just gives even more flame to the patriarichal fire.


I don't think it has anything to do with men asserting power over women, but, as Matthew suggested, it is more of a result of the way language works.

Perhaps the question you should ask is why does it matter so much to you? You are free to worship as you wish, or not at all.


Well I already answered this question but I will adress this again. First, at least where the bible is conscerned (and from what little I know about other religions) men ARE valued over women. Yes, these writings were written when men were extremely dominant, and they were written by men. SO it is more than just semantics and using "he" as a neutral. It was the way society was, and still is to a degree.

You cannot claim that because I can worship how I want that the worship of others does not affect me, it does. Look at gay marriage, for example. Some people don't believe in it, and they have the power to ban it. Religious beliefs spill over into others rights all the time. That is mostly the basis of the post that I was trying to get at in a roundabout way.


In the bible and other religious texts, there are plenty of examples of strong women. The fact that most churches seem to pass them over in favor of the more traditional male figures and emphasize women as the source of original sin and therefore inherently more "evil" and prone to temptation than men is sad. I also thought this discussion was about religion, not simply Christianity. As a counter example, take Wicca, which can hardly be classified as male dominated. There are other non gender preferential faiths as well.

Peoples' faith, spiritual and religious beliefs, like it or not, inform their moral compasses and individual sense of what is right and wrong. You can no more expect them to disregard their beliefs any more than they should expect you to disregard yours.

As far as gay marriage goes, that's a legal matter, there are gay people getting married all the time. The music director in the church I attend speaks often of his husband. I also believe they were married there as well. The unfortunate fact that government does not recognize those marriages is not simply a matter of faith.

Message edited by author 2007-07-19 08:28:50.
 07/19/2007 08:33:11 AM · #67
Originally posted by paddles:
Originally posted by escapetooz:
To clear up an confusion This:



Is a lot of what I'm talking about. I'm not going up to little old ladies at church and picking fights. These people are out there screaming holy hell, but no, the athiests are the bad guys for trying to defend themselves.


As a Christian, I'm embarrassed when I see things like this. Jesus' harsh words were not aimed at thieves or adulterers or gays, but at the religious leaders of the time such as the Pharisees. The (rough) modern-day equivalent would be (theologically, not necessarily politically) conservative evangelicals. If Jesus were on Earth today, he'd be likely to criticise me for not doing enough to help the poor - not for not doing enough to ban gay marriage.


Perhaps a better, though non-Christian, modern-day equivalent would be the Muslim extremists that teach hatred and violence in the name of Allah.
 07/19/2007 09:02:42 AM · #68
It really strikes me as funny when people take the bible, especially the old testament, so literally. First off, its not much more than a pre-science explanation for a lot of mystery in the natural, physical world- much like greek mythology. What a wrath filled God, destroying whole towns for sodomy, idolotry, and/or usury- or creating plague and floods and generally torturing people, ie. Job, as well as all the demi-heroes, killing off their families, etc (I say this tongue in cheek- God didn't do this stuff, no way- just guys writing things down.)

Just about anybody could walk out of the woods with a stone tablet and say "God told me not to eat pork" or some farsical nonsense)- nothing against non-pork eaters. In the days before refrigerators, it was a good idea to stay pork free.)

Religion and the ten commandments were necessary when there were no police, and truly do serve to pacify the people; I can't believe that Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, taoists, Mormons, etc, all think that they are the followers of the one true religion; The concept that millions of others would go to hell or achieve some lesser heaven because they were born somewhere else and don't convert is utter bullshit.

Iv'e said it before, but really, the belief that there is no evolution is really just a justficiation and rationalization for a lot of hatred and bigotry. The Noah's arc story does explain exstinction but is not to be taken literally!

People evolved from one common ancestor. We were not created white, black Asian, etc in the form we are now- we all come from subsaharan africa- thats where life started. Don't let yourself think the races are different in any way but skin color. Did you ever notice how the disabilities of Dwarfism and Down Syndrome make people of all races look identical? Oh yeah- and we are 99.9% pygmy chimpanzee, our closest relative, and we are 99%percent similar to other mammals, such as the housecat. Get over the creation story, your a grownup.
 07/19/2007 09:20:01 AM · #69
Originally posted by David Ey:
Those of you who are non-believers have yourself "eaten from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" and are, perhaps, too smart for your own good. Rest in peace....if you can.


somethings don't change here.
07/19/2007 09:20:04 AM · #70
Originally posted by paddles:
Originally posted by Louis:

Religion also allows social, hierarchically inclined animals such as human beings to organize themselves into ways that are innately satisfying. For the majority of people, it seems the need to follow the alpha leaders of the pack is overwhelmingly strong. Combined with the ultimate hierarchy of god-man-other, the desire to believe and have faith, and interpret the universe in this narrow way, is simply too attractive to resist.


I'm not sure if you intended this to be offensive, but it comes across that way to me (unlike Escapetooz's original questions, which I do not find the slightest bit offensive).

You seem to be accusing the vast majority of those of us who have some sort of faith as being scared rudderless people that need someone to tell us how to live. The best Christian leaders I've known have not been stereotypical alpha males (or alpha females!) looking for devotees, but men and women who have been willing to sit with people and wrestle with difficult questions/issues - including learning from other people. The model of leadership that the Bible encourages is serving others, not being served by others.

I appreciate how my opinion may come off as high-handed and offensive, and it probably smacks of some kind of superiority complex, but as you might expect me to say, I assure you that wasn't my intention. First of all, I was speaking globally, and such an opinion does not take into account the thousands of acts of goodness people do in the name of, not because of, religion every day (those acts are human acts of kindness, and would be committed even if there were no religion to blame). Just as Matthew was formulating an opinion on the possible origin of religion to assuage the fear of death, so I was looking more globally, and bringing into account human beings' propensity to organize into hierarchies, and to follow a strong leader as paths to the formulation of religions. If anything, in my example, the "strong leaders" are the ones who began things, like Mohammed, or Paul, and not the current religious leadership.
07/19/2007 09:28:53 AM · #71
Originally posted by paddles:
I'm going to have to call you out on this one. Please demonstrate to me that/how reason and logic are frowned upon in religion.

1. The mere existence of "Intelligent Design 'Theory'" was what I was chiefly thinking of when I wrote that.
2. The very basis of the majority of religion, especially Catholicism, which is what I have experience with, is "faith without questions", where reason, logic, and even evidence is diametrically opposed to faith, which is belief without the need for these things. Routinely using words like "Mystery", "Divine Plan", "Knowledge is evil", and other such code words for the eschewing of logic and reason is proof positive of this.

Originally posted by paddles:
Also, religious views/faith might not have demonstrable incontrovertible proof, but that doesn't mean they entirely lack evidence. It would be illogical and unreasonable for me to expect the ways God has revealed himself to me to serve as proof/evidence for you, but it would be equally illogical for me to ignore them as evidence for myself.

Well, this contains the rebuttal to your argument I think. You can't expect to claim to have evidence for something, while at the same time admitting that it's no kind of evidence for anyone but yourself. I'm afraid your personal experiences are not even evidence enough for you, strictly speaking.
 07/19/2007 09:48:21 AM · #72
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.
 07/19/2007 05:02:34 PM · #73
Originally posted by jan_vdw:


The bible tells us that God created man in His image, hence Adam was created, a guy. The Bible often speaks of God the Father, and God refers to Himself as The Father. So, God is male.
I think that men who blame woman for our eviction from paradise is looking for someone else to blame for their own sin. After all, the "Apple" was not shoved down Adam's throat...

I saw another question or comment about the age of the earth in relation to what the bible says. Here is what I believe:
Much of the bible was written in a way so that people would understand it. Now, we can speculate all we want about the IQ's of the people who lived on earth back then, but it seems they needed things explained in terms that they would understand. The bible says that in Heaven, time does not exist, thus, and I believe the quote is: "For God one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years is like one day" To my mind that means that the "six" days of creation was in fact not six days as we know it. It could very well have been six hundred billion years.

There are many thngs about the bible that is a mystery. But that is whay faith is all about, believing without having seen proof.

ETA: I actually believe that God planned out evolution. If we were created in his image, then it is fair to say that we would do things in a similar manner, meaning we build a house brick by brick. Why can it not be that God created everything on earth one cell at a time?


That is the problem I have. "God created man in his image." When its completely the other way around. Same with anything, greek gods, etc. We create Gods in our image so we can relate to them and feel special. There is absolutely no way to know what god is or looks like so it is all just specualtion, weither you believe or not that god exists.

You made a good point there... and I've actually tried to say that since I was very young. In middle school my 3 best friends were really religious and as soon as I told them I was athiest it was a year long crusade to "save me". 2 were nice about it, one got really mean sending me emails about sharks eating athiest and praying before their meal, crap like that. She would not read a worksheet on evolution in science class. That was beyond my boiling point.

What is wrong with LEARNING about it. If you read all the facts and don't believe, then fine... I think you are a bit nutty but at least you gave it a fair shot. If you don't even want to read it, I think you are scared to question your faith, so it must not be that strong in the first place.

Anyhow off track. I'd always ask them why they took the bible so literally? If it was just used as fables and guidelines instead of a history book, things would be a lot better, and people wouldn't CARE if evolution was true. Just like I said in the evolution thread about Galileo being tried as a heritic for saying the earth went around the sun. Now that we know it does, that fact does not threaten religion.

07/19/2007 05:07:55 PM · #74
Originally posted by escapetooz:
That is the problem I have. "God created man in his image." When its completely the other way around.


You are railing against the preconceptions of a 4-6,000 year old society. It has influenced the modern society, but I just cannot see any point in getting cross about it. The religion is what it is. Entrenched sexual discrimination is just one more reason to object to certain religions.
 07/19/2007 05:12:26 PM · #75
Originally posted by Matthew:
Originally posted by escapetooz:
That is the problem I have. "God created man in his image." When its completely the other way around.


You are railing against the preconceptions of a 4-6,000 year old society. It has influenced the modern society, but I just cannot see any point in getting cross about it. The religion is what it is. Entrenched sexual discrimination is just one more reason to object to certain religions.

If not all of them. It might be useless to try to find meaningful discourse with certain individuals, but I think it's right to get offended at such high-handedness.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/04/2025 05:12:15 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/04/2025 05:12:15 AM EDT.