Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:Facebook

2019-07-11T05:54:59Z

PiousOne: Was in college at the time.

[[talk:facebook/archive1|archive 1]]
__TOC__

=Page Archived=
[[User:JonM|JonM]] 15:06, 21 December 2011 (EST)

== Wepluribus ==

Does Wepluribus still exist? I can't find it.--[[User:Gentenaar|Gentenaar]] ([[User talk:Gentenaar|talk]]) 10:41, 5 February 2017 (EST)
No, the domain is for sale. The site was destroyed, presumably because it demanded money from its users.--[[User:Abcqwe|Abcqwe]] ([[User talk:Abcqwe|talk]]) 18:49, 25 April 2017 (EDT)

==Instagram==
Could this article mention Instagram. that is owned by Facebook? [[User:Carltonio|Carltonio]] ([[User talk:Carltonio|talk]]) 13:09, 18 April 2019 (EDT)
:Sure. Put it in. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 19:03, 18 April 2019 (EDT)

==Here to help==
I have a Facebook account from 2005 that I've mostly forgotten about. If you need to know things about it, I can help. --[[User:PiousOne|PiousOne]] ([[User talk:PiousOne|talk]]) 01:54, 11 July 2019 (EDT)

Anthropophagy

2019-07-11T05:33:27Z

PiousOne: I can source this but I really don't want to.

'''Anthropophagy''' is an academic term for [[cannibalism]]. Most often, anthrophagy is done in a [[ritual]]istic setting as one person or group of people attempt to take the "[[spirit]]" or "life force" of another person through symbolically or physically eating the flesh of that other person.

Cannibalism is taboo in most all cultures, except where it fulfills this sacred role. In non scientific or medical definitions, cannibalism is also associated with generalized insanity, both as a "cause" for the mentally insane, and as a way to determine if someone is insane. Cannibalism can cause an actual mental disease, known as Kuru. Kuru (sometimes known as laughing sickness) is transmitted by the eating of the brains of other humans and the ingestion of the diseased [[prions]] in those brains. There were incidences of Kuru in [[New Guinea]] in the 1950s and 1960s.<ref>[http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/kuru/kuru.htm] [[NIH]] page on Kuru</ref>

Cannibalism is generally performed as a last resort in environments where it is literally the only option for survival. However, human flesh, even cooked, is usually toxic and therefore unsafe to eat; thus, those resorting to cannibalism tend to perish as well.

Anthrophagy can be compared to a similar concept, [[Theophagy]], or "eating of the god"; a ritual in most all pre-modern religions where some symbol of the god (for example, corn for the goddess Demeter or tobacco in ancient Native American religions) is eaten in the same understanding of trying to "bring the spirit of the god" into the body of the person "consuming" the god.
[[Category:Anthropology]]

== References ==
<references/>

Age of consent

2019-07-11T05:15:17Z

PiousOne: I was already on this page, and happened to know a bit about the topic.

'''Age of consent''' is a term referring to the age at which a person becomes competent to consent to sexual acts with an adult. In the vast majority of jurisdictions this is set at 14-18, but ages as low as 13 and as high as 20 also exist. There are also sometimes exemptions from this law allowing children below the age of consent to have to sex with other people below a certain age, but not above that age, known informally as "Romeo and Juliet" laws. In the United States, marriage usually exempts a couple from the age of consent laws; however, said marriage requires the full consent of the parents of the man and woman in situations where they are under the age of 18, in order to sign a legal contract. In Muslim countries, it is common to require marriage, oftentimes with the bride having no consent in the matter, and as young as 12.

==Historically==
England's statutory rape laws, first enacted in 1275, originally protected females under the age of 12. In 1576, during the reign of Elizabeth I, the protected class was reduced to females under the age of ten. In the United States, many states had ages of consent as low as 10 or 12 until the late 19th century. The statutory rape victim's being unchaste, promiscuous, or not a virgin was codified as a defense in every state, since the goal of the law was to protect premarital chastity. These laws were raised to at least 14 in most states by 1920, and made sex neutral later.
U.S. Federal law currently criminalizes [[prostitution]] of people under 18 and [[pornography involving minors]]. 18 U.S. Code § 2243 criminalizes sexual acts with persons under the age of 16 who are at least four years younger than the defendant if the acts involve transaction between state lines.<ref>http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2243</ref> 18 U.S. Code § 2241 criminalizes sexual acts, or crossing a state line with the intent to commit sexual acts, with a person under the age of 12 as "aggravated sexual abuse" without regard to the age of the defendant.<ref>http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2241</ref>
In the United States in the early twentieth century, the age of consent was generally 10-12. But it had been raised to at least 14 in almost every state by 1930.<ref>{{cite news|newspaper=The New York Times|date=October 15, 1895|title=[[:s:The_New_York_Times/1895/10/15/Purity_Congress_Meets|PURITY CONGRESS MEETS; A Great Gathering for Moral Work in the City of Baltimore. AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE MOVEMENT Determined to Prevent State Regulation of Vice and to Rescue Fallen Men and Fallen Women.]]|location=BALTIMORE, Oct. 14.}}</ref>

==Age of consent in law==
In law the age of consent is the age at which a person is deemed to be competent to give consent to an activity, such as sexual intercourse or medical treatment, which would be otherwise be unlawful without [[informed consent]].

The age of consent is one of several legal principles that govern the rights and responsibilities of minors in [[common law]] systems, such as:
*The ''age of license'' is the minimum age that a person must obtain to be permitted to undertake an activity, such as driving a motor vehicle on public roads.
*The ''age of criminal responsibility'' is the age at which a person is deemed to be fully responsible for their criminal actions.
*The ''age of majority'' is the age at which a person is deemed to have the rights and responsibilities of an adult and the age at which parental rights and responsibilities cease.

==American States/Territories and their Corresponding Age of Consent==
The most common age of sexual consent in the United States is 16. But some states have an age as high as 18. Some states allow exceptions for minors to have sex with each other, but not with adults, others have exceptions that allow a minor to consent to sex with an adult if they are married to each other legally, but not if they are fornicating.
==Europe==
In Europe many countries have an age of sexual consent of 14 or 15.

==Activities by leftists and homosexual interest groups to lower the age of sexual consent==

Steve Baldwin notes, "Homosexual leaders repeatedly argue for the freedom to engage in consensual sex with children, and blind surveys reveal a shockingly high number of homosexuals admit to sexual contact with minors."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://sdn.altervista.org/ensis/Pedophilia_And_The_Homosexual_Movement.php|title=Pedophilia and the Homosexual Movement|author=Baldwin, Steve|publisher=ensis wiki}}</ref> According to political scientist Harris Mirkin, "Though pedophile organizations were originally a part of the gay/lesbian coalition, gay organizations distance themselves from pedophile organizations in the same way as feminist leaders sought to separate themselves from lesbians."<ref>{{cite journal|author=Mirkin, Harris|date=1999|title=The Pattern of Sexual Politics: Feminism, Homosexuality and Pedophilia|url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10207822|journal=Journal of Homosexuality|volume=37|number=2|pages=1–24|doi=10.1300/J082v37n02_01}}</ref> As part of this distancing, some gay rights groups have encouraged the terminology "male-male molestation" be used in place of "homosexual molestation".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html|title=Facts About Homosexuality and Child Molestation|author=Herek, Gregory|publisher=University of California}}</ref>

However, there have occasionally been signs of a backlash within the movement against crackdowns on pedophilia activists. In 1996, after the North American Man Boy Love Association and two similar European groups were expelled from the International Gay and Lesbian Alliance in order to satisfy the [[United Nations]] requirements for granting consultative status, intense internal pressure from ILGA's member organizations nonetheless impelled ILGA to drop a three-year-old requirement that its member groups sign a letter stating they do not condone pedophilia. More than half of ILGA's 450 members refused to sign an anti-pedophile pledge.<ref>{{cite journal|author=Jenkinson, Michael|journal=Alberta Report|title=Back into the bedrooms of the nation|volume=23|issue=40|date=16 September 1996|pages=35|issn=0225-0519}}</ref>

In 2013, [[Rush Limbaugh]] warned, "Don't Pooh-Pooh the Left's Push to Normalize Pedophilia".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2013/01/07/don_t_pooh_pooh_the_left_s_push_to_normalize_pedophilia|title=Don't Pooh-Pooh the Left's Push to Normalize Pedophilia|date=7 January 2013|author=Limbaugh, Rush|publisher=The Rush Limbaugh Show}}</ref> In 2013, the [[German Green Party]]'s most prominent politician disavowed his past support for legalizing sex with children.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324492604579083123751192430|title=Painful Past Plagues German Greens|author=Troianovski, Anton|date=18 September 2013|publisher=Wall Street Journal}}</ref> The Greens nonetheless did poorly in the September 2013 election.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://thechristians.com/?q=node/822|title=The brief, unhappy greening of German pedophilia|date=7 November 2013|author=Byfield, Link|publisher=TheChristians.com}}</ref>

== See also ==
*[[Age of majority]]

==References==
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Law]]

Talk:Age of consent

2019-07-11T05:05:16Z

PiousOne: Epstein is gonna have people searching for AOC. Make a disambiguation page.

Generally the age of consent is taken to mean the age when a person can legally consent to sexual intercourse with an older person without the older person being guilty of statutory rape. This article should be changed to reflect that. --[[User:Pnt|Pnt]] 17:02, 20 August 2007 (EDT)
:The first section seems to have taken care of that. Try a different wording to better suit your ideas about this subject. [[User:Samwell|Samwell]]

==Disambiguation==
AOC links to [[Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez]] currently. I found this on the front page, and was a bit confused as to why that was a thing on the front page as well as being linked there. I have never heard of this woman until very recently. People trying to search this site for information might be similarly confused if they were meaning to query this page, so why not have a disambiguation page for AOC? --[[User:PiousOne|PiousOne]] ([[User talk:PiousOne|talk]]) 01:05, 11 July 2019 (EDT)

==Table==
Just to let everyone know - I thought the table was a bit too long, so I shortened it a bit - I would've made it even shorter - but having 4 columns alphabetically ordered vertically would just be to complicated for a new editor or an editor that hasn't mastered tables. Also, I added Puerto Rico as DC was on the list--[[User:Iduan|Iduan]] 18:02, 21 August 2007 (EDT)

== Fixes ==

I've fixed this article to remove a number of false statements. I can't understand why someone would say TWICE that the most common age of consent in the USA (and the average worldwide) is 18 when in fact only 11 US states have that age, compared to 31 that set it at 16. This is not a close-run thing; it's very, very obvious. --[[User:SamTC|SamTC]] 18:42, 9 November 2011 (EST)

:::But I did used to believe that most states had an age of consent of 16...and I was wrong, and Malke2010 tried to get me banned from wikipedia for repeating that false belief. Most jurisdictions set it at 18, not 16. Malke set me straight. --[[User:Burke39|Burke39]] 01:56, 10 November 2011 (EST)
::::Can you provide a reliable source for the age of consent in each state, per Conservapedia Commandment 1? State statutes are online nowadays. Thanks. [[User:DavidE|DavidE]] 15:51, 23 December 2011 (EST)

Talk:Antimatter

2019-07-11T04:51:58Z

PiousOne: Light isn't matter.

=Copied from CERN: [http://livefromcern.web.cern.ch/livefromcern/antimatter/kids/AM-kids02.html]=

This article appears to have been copied wholesale from a [http://livefromcern.web.cern.ch/livefromcern/antimatter/kids/AM-kids02.html page aimed at children] from CERN. I notice this has been flagged before, but inexplicably [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antimatter&diff=697401&oldid=627725 reverted]. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 16:18, 18 May 2011 (EDT)

== Overhaul ==

I've pretty much redone the entire article, I've added facts and dates, and improved the style to get rid of the 'talking to children' tone, I've also deleted the part about natural sources of antimatter, but I'll rewrite that and add it in again next time I log on. KBeer 21:31, 3 May 2013 (EDT)
:Removed the "everything seen" part, since light isn't matter. --[[User:PiousOne|PiousOne]] ([[User talk:PiousOne|talk]]) 00:51, 11 July 2019 (EDT)

Antimatter

2019-07-11T04:43:36Z

PiousOne: Big clean-up.

'''Antimatter''' is composed of fundamental particles that have the same magnitude but opposite sign of [[electric charge]] as those of [[matter]].

[[Matter]] is made out of particles of nature. These particles can be divided into fermions (matter) and bosons (responsible for forces such as electromagnetism and strong nuclear force). Fermions can be further subdivided into baryons and mesons. Hadrons include the proton and neutron, and leptons include the [[electron]], [[muon]] and tau as well as the corresponding neutrinos. For simplicity, the overwhelming majority of matter in the universe is comprised of protons, neutrons and electrons. Antimatter is matter formed from antiparticles, which have the same mass but opposite sign of [[charge]] to their corresponding particles. When antimatter is brought into contact with normal matter, both particles are destroyed, resulting in an explosion that is, in terms of mass to explosive power, the most powerful release of energy known to mankind. This is because the mass of the particles is totally annihilated. Such an annihilation (e.g. an [[electron]] and a [[positron]]) produces two photons. These two are required to satisfy the laws of conservation of both energy and momentum. The total mass of the particles is converted into energy, as described by [[E=mc²]].

== Discovery ==

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, antimatter had been the cause of much speculation within the scientific community, With William Hicks, Karl Pearson and Arthur Schuster discussing the idea. The current theory of antimatter was set down in a paper by [[Paul Dirac]] in 1928, when he created his version of the Schrödinger wave equation, designed to be compatible with the [[Theory of relativity]]. This equation for electrons also raised the possibility for the existence of anti-electrons; electrons that had the same mass but opposite charge and spin. Naturally, all the other particles of matter should also have their opposites.

The anti-electron was first observed by Dmitri Skobeltsyn in 1929, using a Wilson cloud chamber, and again by Chung-Yao Chao in the same year. However, they were first discovered (meaning in this case observed and ''labeled'') by Carl Anderson when he separated the electrons from other types of high energy particles present in cosmic rays based on their mass-to-charge ratio. He found some particles with the same ratio as electrons that moved in the opposite direction when under the influence of a magnet. He had found the anti-electron, which he called the positron.

The anti-proton was first discovered in 1955, by physicists Emilio Segrè and Owen Chamberlain. The first anti-neutron was discovered shortly thereafter in 1956, by Bruce Cork.

== Artificial Antimatter ==

Antimatter is made in super colliders such as the [[Large Hadron Collider]] by smashing beams of highly charged particles together. This results in pair production; the creation of a particle and its antiparticle. One of the aims of modern physics is the creation of larger and more complex forms of antimatter. In 1995, CERN announced that it had produced 9 anti-hydrogen atoms. Anti-helium was created in 2003. Physicists are now working on the creation of 'cooler' anti-atoms, as the ones produced so far are more energetic than atoms on the surface of the Sun, thus making them extremely hard to study. Another issue being studied is that of containment; since antimatter annihilates on contact with normal matter, it is difficult to hold it for study. Smaller particles are held in place by carefully managed magnetic fields, but the larger anti-atoms, being magnetically neutral, are much harder to contain.

== Natural Antimatter ==

Antimatter is naturally produced by both (β+) decay and by high energy collisions between particles. Antimatter makes up a very small percentage of [[cosmic ray]]s, and is occasionally produced when those rays collide with the earth's atmosphere. Antimatter has also been spotted in the [[Van Allen radiation belt]]s and forming above thunderstorms.

[[Potassium]] 40 will (very) occasionally undergo beta decay, producing an anti-electron. As such, the average banana (rich in potassium) will produce a small particle of antimatter every 75 minutes.<ref>http://tertiarysource.net/ts.cgi/anti-banana</ref>

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Particle Physics]]

Talk:Marijuana

2019-07-11T04:16:24Z

PiousOne: Thinking for myself. When was the last time you saw a liberal do that?

My largest concern is of a huge hypocrisy between two articles. In the "Liberalism" article it mentions how liberals in the U.S. demand government intervention much like socialism. But then this article claims that Liberals do not want marijuana to be regulated by the government. So...which is it, more or less government involvement? Or is that not pertinent to their view because it is constantly changing between all the concerns?

Is this entry a joke? "Favored by many liberals, especially hippies"? Yes, I can guess I can envision some liberals liking marijuana, but that doesn't mean that they all, or even most of them favor it conclusively. And do hippies really even exist anymore? It seems to be an antiquated/obsolete/broad term. And I seem to recall our President having used marijuana and cocaine. Hrm. Essentially, this entry strikes me as a hilarious joke. --[[User:WOVcenter|WOVcenter]] 18:17, 10 March 2007 (EST)
:Where are the citations for this article? Marijauna was not illegal until the Roosevelt administration. [[User:Cracker|Cracker]] 13:46, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

Where to start? Firstly Marijuana, or more correctly, Cannabis, is a Schedule I drug in the United States because all Tetrahydrocannabinols aside from synthetic THC are Schedule I. Many conservatives and liberals alike favor the legalization of Cannibis, and I agree with Cracker about the term hippie being rather antiquated. The effects of Cannabis can include the effects listed, along with others. It is no longer considered a gateway drug by the majority of researchers, this label is primarily only used by those opposed to its legalization. It's medicinal use is still hotly debated, but I think that the current information on its use in medicine is rather limited and should be expanded. Lastly, why does in matter if Clinton smoked marijuana? This seems to be gossip at most. --[[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 16:10, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:It is well-known and well-sourced that legalization of Marijuana is a political position favored almost exclusively by liberals. Hmm, do you think perhaps they want to legalize it because they smoke it? --[[User:NVConservative|NVConservative]] 16:12, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
::I'm pretty sure NORML which is a advocacy group for the legalization of Marijuana includes many conservatives and Libertarians in its ranks. And almost all Libertarians seek the legalization of Marijuana on the basis of principle not because they're users, after all less government interference is what they seek. --[[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 16:25, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
::Ron Paul, Larry Elder and William Buckley are not liberal.--[[User:Nomine Cervus|Nomine Cervus]] 00:54, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

Funny how the source given for liberals favoring legalizing marijuana is about Libertarians supporting its legalization. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 16:32, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

Oh, I definitely take the Libertarian view on this issue. If tobacco is going to be legal, this should be too. Needless regulation. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 04:09, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
:Hooray for another supporter. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 04:10, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

== Illegal drug ==
Who keeps calling it an "illegal drug"? It is possible to get federal approval for using it, under the Controlled Substances Act. Furthermore, many states allow it under medical marijuana laws. Yes, the drug is commonly abused, and sold illegally, but it is not an illegal drug. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 20:18, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

:In nearly every concievable use, it is an illegal drug. Lots of illegal things can be done by people with a permit/approval, but that doesn't change the fact that they are almost always illegal. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 20:19, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

:: That is just not true. There are 1000s of legal medical marijuana users in California. There are some in other states as well.
:: The existence of illegal use does not make it an illegal drug. A lot of the Viagra use is derived from black-market purchases, but you would not call Viagra an illegal drug. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 20:48, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

:::How about "illegal in most states", or "legal in some states with prescription"; or "has been decriminalized in some states". Something to that effect. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 23:02, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

:::: 1000s of legal medical marijuana users in California, as opposed to California's population of 33.8 million. The U.S. kills hundreds, if not thousands, of death row inmates every year, in a perfectly legal manner. This doesn't mean that wanton killing is legal. And I really think it's usually considered an illegal drug. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 23:08, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

:::::Technically it is a "Controlled Substance" not an "Illegal Drug." That way some people can use it, but if you don't have the proper authorization, it is illegal.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 23:09, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

::::::I think we can agree upon that wording? --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 23:11, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

:::::::Perfect. And blatantly factual. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 23:53, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

::::::::Actually, despite legalization by some states for medicinal purposes or private use in small quantities, it still remains a controlled substance by the federal government and is not allowed for medicinal or recreational use. Though it disappoints me, it still remains more or less illegal in the U.S. ([http://blog.washingtonpost.com/offbeat/2007/03/terminal_illness_is_no_excuse.html see here]) [[User:ColinR|ColinR]][[User_talk:ColinR|talk]] 01:56, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

How can something put here by our Lord be made illegal? What grounds do we really have to override God? Marijuana has proven Medicinal, entheogenic and social benefits, and also promotes creative and abstract thought. In the Bible there is a possible reference to cannabis

“And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.” -- Genesis 1: 29-30

Doesn't it seem slightly blasphemous to make one of Gods herbs illegal? [[User:Entheogenicorder|Entheogenicorder]] 16:53, 31 January 2008 (BDT)

== Angel Raich ==
This section has been copied from wikiepedia and so I am removing it not only as a copyright violation but this is conservapedia and just brionging stuff from wikipedia defeats the point, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 13:27, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

DOES NOBODY HERE OWN A DICTIONARY? "Colloquial" means "slang" or "casual speech." Marijuana is or is not an illegal drug, but it is not "colloquially known" as one. Marijuana is "colloquaily known"
as pot, grass, weed, etc.

:As of now, you are correct. As of the 1930s, you are not. "Marihuana" was indeed slang around the time of the word's origin. Cannabis was considered to be the proper word, and in fact, the AMA took a while to realize that marihuana and cannabis were the same plant. Marihuana is actually notable in world history as "the first drug to be banned by its slang name".

== Appraisal of its effects/consequences ==
RobS is on one, ''again''. He just reverted this eminently sensible addition below. Does anyone else feel that this honest appraisal ''promotes'' its use?

:In low doses, marijuana induces mild euphoria followed by a sense of general relaxation and well-being. Users often report heightened perceptions of music, colours and taste. Its effects at these doses are best likened to those of moderate alcohol consumption, but without the same degree of motor impairment and without the disinhibition towards aggression. Indeed, it is virtually impossible to start a fight when stoned.

:In higher doses, marijuana can induce mild to moderate hallucenations. Unlike the direct distortions of sense perception produced by [[LSD]] or [[psilocybin]], these hallucenations are mostly "internal," i.e. they are simply functions of the user's hyper-stimulated imagination. There is a small risk of adverse side-effects and their likelihood increases with the dosage. They range from the merely inconvenient (short-term memory loss), through to the somewhat unnerving (paranoia/anxiety) and finally to the downright unpleasant (overwhelming disorientation/vomiting).

:Chronic misuse of marijuana has been widely recognised as a significant risk factor for those with a predisposition towards developing various mental illnesses, particularly [[schizophrenia]]. Even for those without such a predisposition, chronic misuse oftens results in the user becoming both very bored and very boring. The key seems to be remembering what the word "recreational" means and moderating one's level of use accordingly.

--[[User:Robledo|Robledo]] 18:07, 13 May 2007 (EDT)
:Conservapedia is not going to use sales pitches to induce people to use illegal drugs. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 18:20, 13 May 2007 (EDT)

What the sweet ____ are you on about? I simply say what it does - from direct first hand experience, I might add. Have you ever been stoned, RobS? One of the key things in teaching kids about drugs is that you need to be truthful about ''why'' people use it. If you focus purely on the negatives, then your message is flatly contradicted by a wealth of anecdotal evidence from the child's peer group. You end up looking like an idiot and being completely ignored. --[[User:Robledo|Robledo]] 18:32, 13 May 2007 (EDT)

I agree: you really can't start a fight when stoned, just try the "left handed cigarette" once!
[[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]

''Allegedly'' harmful affects. Would somebody please make the change. Unfortunately it would be unethical to perform an experiment that could conclude its harm, as it is a controlled substance. Kind of convenient for conservatives, eh? --[[User:TrueGrit|TrueGrit]] 22:44, 30 June 2007 (EDT)

Can we unlock this article now so factual information may be added? It is rather annoying to see an article as important as this be locked for so long for reasons that amount to nothing.

Yeah, most of the stuff seems... suspect. Especially the driving claim. A comparison against legal things, such as, say, alcohol would be nice. [[User:Barikada|Barikada]] 19:13, 16 January 2008 (EST)

"harmful medical and emotional effects and its likelihood of harm to third parties due to drug-related crime and reckless driving"
citation needed citation needed a thousand times CITATION NEEDED

==Request==

this page is locked, but I wanted to make a few changes. I wanted to remove the link from Larry Elder, as that page does not exsist. I would also like to add a few things about the referendums in Colorado [[User:DrCB|Doctor CB]][[User_Talk:DrCB|The Doctor is In]] 18:40, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

== Reefer Madness ==

You should add in something about the film "Reefer Madness" into this article. There is, in fact, a page on it. You can get there by clicking [[Reefer Madness|here]]. I think that this should be added because there is too much, well, negatives on the drug, and, I think that it would be humorous to add something about a very crappy, yet funny film. --[[User:Rocky|Rocky]]

== Why locked? ==

The sections on this page about marijuana effects is incomplete (it seems that there are only unpleasant effects listed). There is also very little information about the chemical compound THC itself, which I think would add a lot to the article.

:Yes, why is this locked? The article is missing lots of info; marijuana has ''already'' been decriminalized in parts of the U.S. [[User:Fantasia|Fantasia]] 19:41, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

== Reference no longer exists ==

http://www.lp.org/issues/lp-oss.shtml

It says the page no longer exists. Someone should remove or replace it. '''[[user:FernoKlump|FernoKlump]]''' 19:52, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

This article needs to be unlocked. Now. [[User:Jirby|Jirby]] 19:05, 16 August 2008 (EDT)

== Um? ==

When will this article be unlocked?[[User:Jirby|Jirby]] 23:40, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

== Allowed in the Bible ==

"every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things." (Gen 9:3).

"He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and herb for the service of man: that he may bring forth food out of the earth" (Psalms104:14)

This should be added for approval, or at least interpretation, for legalized Marijuana use, seeing as this is a Christian encyclopedia.

== Mistakes ==

I spotted some silly mistakes:

1. Marijuana is not a drug and neither is Cannabis. THC is the most active drug compound and 'Marijuana' is Mexican-Spanish slang for the Cannabis Sativa plant.

2. The full name for THC is more correctly known as Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol.

I feel the page is somewhat biased towards belittling the subject and why are no positive effects listed? Why only the supposed negative effects? Brum 21:25, 16 November 2008 (EST)

== Humor ==

I don't have a pony in this race, but both sides might find this funny.
:http://www.criminalbrief.com/?p=5445

== Cannabis is primarly a plant ==

This article lacks about the plant cannabis sativa l. At least you could add some information about origin, growth and historical use. The state of this article could lead to something like the extasy-plant.

== Edit request on protected page ==

Please will an administrator change the first paragraph to the following.

<nowiki>'''Marijuana''' is a drug that comes from the ''Cannabis'' [[plant]]. The main active ingredient in marijuana is [[Tetrahydrocannabinol|THC]], or tetrahydrocannabinol, an [[organic chemistry|organic chemical]] compound.</nowiki>

Reason: To direct link regarding an organic chemical to the appropriate page. Also correct typo.

Thanks. [[User:Barclay|Barclay]] 16:32, 1 September 2010 (EDT)

== Marijuana is illegal to possess, cultivate or consume ==

I'm not sure this is strictly true. Whilst it is indeed illegal to possess and cultivate cannabis in a large majority of the world I do not believe there are laws dictating what one can and cannot put into their body, not in civilised society at least. [[User:Sambiam|Sambiam]]

==Edit==

Removed information regarding 'amotivational syndrome' as reference did not exist.

==Psychosis in pre/early teens==
Pious, That's very interesting that even scientists admit what you posted! Do you by any chance have a source you can point to for that? --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 01:10, 17 July 2016 (EDT)
:EDIT: I did a little looking, and found that actually such reports are not hard to find. A couple I found are [https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/marijuana/there-link-between-marijuana-use-psychiatric-disorders] and [http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/schizophrenia/cannabis-psychosis-link] If you don't have a citable source, maybe we should use one of these for support. In general, any source of information you used while writing should be cited. If there is nothing to cite, it is a good idea to find a source which you can use to support your claim, especially if it is controversial. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 01:16, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

==Dronabinol==
I'd heard of this drug some time ago, but forgot the name shortly after. I'm glad you added a mention of this--now I have a name to go with my arguments. Thanks! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 01:31, 28 July 2016 (EDT)
:You're welcome, and I'm glad to work with you. If you visit the DEA's website regarding medical weed, they'll basically tell you you're an imbecile for trying to get it, and there's a legal way if you honest-to-God need THC. --Pious (talk) 12:47, 28 July 2016 (CDT)

== LPOV again ==

I've refrained from fully reverting your edits, DayDreamBeliever, but I'm still considering that option. Please refrain from inserting a liberal point of view here. For example, Marinol doesn't give a high, but offers the same benefits. Also, a few RINOs in support of "medical marijuana is not the same thing as conservatives pushing for this. Please check your facts, and feel free to discuss anything you are uncertain about. Thanks! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 03:42, 17 February 2017 (EST)
:I appreciate the consideration of your thoughts and actions. I regret my statement about marijuana smoke and lung cancer (& pulmonary effects), as various findings support the risk, but the concern varies relative to cigarette smoking. (A French review states, "Cannabis exposure doubles the risk of developing lung cancer," but then also says marijuana is generally smoked mixed with tobacco. Go figure!)
:Marinol should be distinguished from marijuana. DEA rescheduled Marinol from C-II to C-III, but keeps marijuana C-I. The difference is that the THC (the single API) is dissolved in sesame oil, making onset slow, reinforcing effects infrequent and minimal or even negative (dysphoria). I am hoping true medical marijuana can be presented without too quickly discounting it as LPOV. Thanks again my friend, [[User:DayDreamBeliever|DayDreamBeliever]] ([[User talk:DayDreamBeliever|talk]]) 00:32, 18 February 2017 (EST)

== Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs ==

This reference should be removed as this refers only to narcotics and does not include any legislation on marijuana
:I think you only tried to Ctrl+F marijuana. In the actual document, it is referred to as cannabis, and it is certainly illegal.--[[User:Pious|Pious]] ([[User talk:Pious|talk]]) 01:00, 4 April 2018 (EDT)

== Objections to presentation of lead ==

The lead currently has one "cited" sentence saying tumors are on the rise in a demographic that is also a demographic some weed users come from, and then immediately follows it up with a sentence that says that maybe weed stops cancer. I checked the first cite, and all it says in cancer prevalence by demographic, the ties to weed are just an inference by some editor. How do we know that editor made a correct inference? Did they find some study that shows actual correlation (much less causation) or is this just "some men eat apples, some men are criminals, thus apples are a leading cause of criminality?" This kind of "this... but this" waffling is exactly why people turn from Wikipedia, so we should hold ourself to a higher standard and not have a lead paragraph that is a sum-total of "zero" with contrasting claims.

Next, there is a full lead paragraph in the lead which promises sweeping conclusions about weed causing mass killings, and then spend the next several sentences talking exclusively about Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Does someone have a schoolgirl crush on the guy? It really weakens the whole paragraph to make a broad statement and then fixate on one example.

What I would suggest instead: Make a mass-killings section further down, come up with ''more than one example'' and once that section is properly fleshed-out, then put a summary of that section within the lead so the lead is a proper encapsulation of the full body of the text. Right now the reader gets "mass killings", then one guy, and then no further substantiation whatsoever. This undermines the credibility of the article, and is an easy fix. [[User:DavidLReyes|DavidLReyes]] ([[User talk:DavidLReyes|talk]]) 21:47, 3 April 2018 (EDT)
:I agree. Two of the four paragraphs in the lead are pretty much ''post hoc ergo proper hoc'', and that kind of false liberal reasoning has no place here. I struck them and relocated the little bit that was not full of fallacies to the medicinal part of the entry. As for the harm to innocent people, I have no doubt that marijuana causes this, but I believe the adverse effects section would be a better place in which to cover that. The paragraph can't stand on its own with just ''post hoc''.--[[User:Pious|Pious]] ([[User talk:Pious|talk]]) 00:50, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
::I see that Northwest [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Marijuana&curid=7524&diff=1412346&oldid=1412214 reverted] (without any explanation). I'm not very interested in the content, so I won't take sides (at least for now), but both of you should discuss this. I will say, however, that the sources don't seem unreliable, so maybe the content can just be moved further down? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:33, 4 April 2018 (EDT)
:::Hello '''Northwest''', you didnt' provide an edit summary, so can you let us know where we're off here? The passage about cancer, as noted, has a liberal wishy-washy "maybe this, maybe that" and fails to cite appropriate medical literature. And the passage about murders makes a broad statement and then over-focuses on one fringe example without even a clear connection made. Inarguably we can find some documentation of crimes and accidents caused under the ''influence'' of marijuana (the point at hand) so we weaken our argument by supporting a broad sweep with a sole example, particularly given that the terrorist's motivation was Islamism, when we could easily find better examples of killers operating under marijuana-influenced psychosis. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts. [[User:DavidLReyes|DavidLReyes]] ([[User talk:DavidLReyes|talk]]) 21:26, 4 April 2018 (EDT)

== Can we talk about taxes? ==
Marijuana is extremely comparable to alcohol in states where it is legal. Obviously, neither of these drugs would be legal in ideal circumstances, but does the tax revenue generated for the general good outweigh the costs to public health? I genuinely don't know. The liberals would say yes (they like to over-simplify things) but I'll be researching this soon and come up with a conclusion of my own- very well sourced, of course. --[[User:PiousOne|PiousOne]] ([[User talk:PiousOne|talk]]) 00:16, 11 July 2019 (EDT)

Torture

2019-07-11T03:48:22Z

PiousOne: Main-line clarification and a lot of clean-up.

The term '''torture''' refers to physical and/or psychological acts which inflict severe pain or mutilation on prisoners. Governments, armies and tyrants have inflicted torture on opponents throughout recorded history, chiefly against [[slave]]s and [[rebel]]s, but also against political or religious dissidents.

In the West, the best known cases of torture were inflicted by ecclesiastical and political authorities during the [[Middle Ages]]. A well-known example from historical fiction occurs in ''[[Ivanhoe]]'', and well-known examples from real history can be found in the [[Malleus Maleficarum]],<ref>[http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/ The Malleus Maleficarum]</ref> a manual for [[Witch Hunt|witch hunters]]. Opposition to torture on [[human rights]] grounds began in the 20th century, yet torture persists in countries as diverse as [[Saudi Arabia]], [[China]] and [[Sudan]]. 

== Atheistic communism and torture ==

''See also:'' [[Atheistic communism and torture]]

[[Atheism]] was an integral component of Marxist–Leninist/Maoist [[communism|communist]] ideology (see: [[Atheism and communism]]).

The website Victimsofcommunism.org declares concerning atheistic communism and the use of torture:
{{cquote|Significantly, communists did not merely try to block or halt religious faith but to reverse it. This was particularly true for [[Romania]], even before the Nicolai Ceausescu era. This meant not just forbidding religious practice and jailing ministers and believers but employing torture to force them to renounce their faith. It was not enough to contain, silence, even punish believers in prison; it was decided they must be tortured in truly unimaginably degrading ways to attempt to undo religious faith.<ref>[http://victimsofcommunism.org/the-war-on-religion/ The War on religion]</ref>}}

For additional information please see: [[Atheistic communism and torture]]

==Iraq war==
In a raid on an [[al-Qaeda]] safe house in Iraq, U.S. military officials recovered an assortment of crude drawings depicting torture methods like "blowtorch to the skin" and "eye removal". Along with the images, soldiers seized various torture implements, such as meat cleavers, whips, and wire cutters. The images, declassified by the Department of Defense, also include a picture of a ramshackle Baghdad safe house described as an "al-Qaeda torture chamber." It was there, during an April 24, 2007 raid, that soldiers found a man suspended from the ceiling by a chain. According to the military, he had been abducted from his job and was being beaten daily by his captors. Earlier Coalition Forces freed five Iraqis who were found in a padlocked room in Karmah. The group, which included a boy, were reportedly beaten with chains, cables, and hoses.<ref>[http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0524072torture9.html Torture, Al-Qaeda Style]
Drawings, tools seized from Iraq safe house in U.S. military raid, May 24, 2007.</ref>

===CIA torture program===
[[File:John-brennan.jpg|right|450px|thumb|John Brennan was the mastermind behind the CIA [[torture]] program, the execution of [[bin Laden]] to aid [[Barack Hussein Obama]]'s re-election chances, the hacking into the Senate Intelligence Oversight Committee's computers to thwart investigators, and the man who decides who lives and who dies on Obama's kill list, instrumental in putting the plot in motion to destroy [[President Trump]]'s Presidency over a perceived insult and Trump's questioning why [[NATO]] has strayed from its stated mission of collective defense by engaging in aggressive war in Libya, and Trump's refusal to go along with the globalist agenda for a new Cold War with Russia.<ref>http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/03/20/conspiracy-president-trump/</ref>]]
The controversy over warrantless wiretaps was only cover for the real source where information was gained - Brennan's torture program. At the same time, it served as public notice that Americans had to surrender some freedoms and civil liberties to a group of insiders who knew what was best for them. Legalities didn't matter anymore.

During "a profanity-laced screaming match at the [[White House]]" in August 2009<ref>[https://abcnews.go.com/print?id=8398902 Obama White House v. CIA; Panetta Threatened to Quit Tensions Lead to CIA Director's "Screaming Match" at the White House], Matthew Cole, Richard Espisito, and Brian Ross, ''[[ABC News]]'', August 24, 2009.</ref> [[CIA]] Director [[Leon Panetta]] protested Obama's decision to create a team of interrogators overseen by the White House.<ref>[https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112169988 ''White House To Oversee New Interrogation Team''], Dina Temple-Raston, npr.org August 24, 2009.</ref> Responsibility for interrogations of suspects was shifted away from the CIA, and the White House National Security Council staff given direct control.<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/23/AR2009082302598.html ''New Unit to Question Key Terror Suspects - Move Shifts Interrogation Oversight From the CIA to the White House]'', Anne E. Kornblut, ''[[Washington Post]]'', August 24, 2009.</ref> Brennan was placed in charge of the program.

Unlike executive departments and agencies such as the [[Department of Justice]], [[FBI]], and CIA, the National Security Council staff are not subject to Congressional oversight, and operate outside the spotlight of public view.<ref>[http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/j-e-dyer/78202 National Security Council Reloaded], J. E. Dyer, ''Commentary blog'', 08.25.2009.</ref><ref>Tower Commission Report, p. 13.</ref> The [[American Civil Liberties Union]] made this point during the [[United States Presidential Election, 2008|elections of 2008]] when the George W. Bush NSC staff was involved only in decisions and authorizations and before the Obama NSC staff took on an operational role.<ref>[https://www.aclu.org/safefree/torture/35595prs20080610.html?s_src=RSS ACLU Urges Congress to Examine White House National Security Council as Central Decision-Maker on Torture], ACLU Press Release, (6/10/2008).</ref>

After some successful operations such as the [[Abbottabad raid]], Obama re-nominated Brennan to take over CIA in 2013.<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/01/07/the-right-or-wrong-experience-for-the-job/by-nominating-john-brennan-obama-is-ignoring-war-crimes By Nominating John Brennan, Obama is Ignoring War Crimes], Glenn Greenwald, ''NY Times'', January 8, 2013.</ref>

== UN definition ==
The UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment defines torture as:

"...any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions." <ref>http://asiapacific.amnesty.org/apro/aproweb.nsf/pages/knowTortureDefinition</ref>

== Common methods ==
Torture is widely practiced in many countries throughout the world as a means of intimidating the ruling regime's opponents. Amnesty International in Asia & the Pacific states that instances of torture or ill treatment by the police have been reported in over 140 different countries since 1997.<ref>http://asiapacific.amnesty.org/apro/aproweb.nsf/pages/knowTortureContext</ref> By far most commonly reported method of torture is physical beatings - other commonly reported methods include:

* [[Rape]] and [[sexual abuse]] in custody

* [[Mock execution]] or threat of death

* Prolonged [[solitary confinement]]

* [[Electric shock]]s

* [[Suffocation]]<ref>http://asiapacific.amnesty.org/apro/aproweb.nsf/pages/knowTortureMethods</ref>

* [[Waterboarding]],<ref>http://people.howstuffworks.com/water-boarding.htm</ref> also known as 'water torture' or 'water cure'

== Controversy ==
It is a matter of dispute whether it serves any valid purpose to distinguish between degrees or levels of torture. To some opponents, "torture is torture" and should always be prohibited. The US maintains that its [[coercive interrogation]] techniques are not "torture". While this position has met with considerable resistance from legal experts nationwide,<ref>http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/04/06/usdom13130.htm</ref> former President [[George W. Bush]] vetoed the [[McCain Amendment]], which was intended to tighten the definition of torture. Ironically, under the current administration's definition of "torture", the abuse [[Senator McCain]] received while a POW in Vietnam would '''not''' be considered torture.

In addition to disagreement over the nature of what is or is not considered torture, controversy exists as to whether torture generally elicits useful information. A large amount of prisoners tortured will eventually break and give up information or confession just to end the torture. John McCain, who is considered both a patriot and a conservative, had his will broken after weeks of torture and the pain of improperly treated injuries, and subsequently signed a written confession stating "I am a black criminal and I have performed the deeds of an air pirate. I almost died and the Vietnamese people saved my life, thanks to the doctors."<ref>http://www.azcentral.com/news/specials/mccain/articles/0301mccainbio-chapter3.html</ref> Examples like this illustrate that rather than evoking truthful statements or valuable intelligence, torture has the equal potential to elicit misinformation, and is therefore of questionable value.

The signatories to the [[Geneva Convention]] <ref>http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/geneva03.htm</ref> in 1949 defined relative classes of persons who may be considered "prisoners". The Bush administration has classified [[terrorist]]s as [[unlawful combatant]]s not associated with any signatory power and maintain that previous international conventions have not addressed this classification.

==See also==
*[[John Brennan]]

== References ==
<references/>

==External links==
*[http://www.wcl.american.edu/hrbrief/14/2devos.pdf?rd=1 Mind the Gap: Purpose, Pain, and the Difference between Torture and Inhuman Treatment] by Christian M. De Vos

{{Ten Commandments}}

[[Category:Instruments and Methods of Torture]]
[[Category:Barbaric Practices]]
[[Category:War Crime]]
[[Category:Crime]]

God

2019-07-11T02:34:22Z

PiousOne: Self-correction of one letter. While minor, I couldn't let myself err on the page God.

''This article is about the biblical God. For the term as used to refer to any divine being, see [[Other gods]]''
[[Image:Alphaomega.jpg|thumb|200px|God is the Alpha and Omega, the first and last, the beginning and the ending <ref>Revelation 22:13</ref>]]
{{trinity}}
{{cquote|'''Genesis 1:1''' In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.}}
'''God''' is the sovereign creator and eternal ruler of all things and beings that exist, whether in the physical [[universe]] or in the spiritual realm ([[Heaven]]). Not only is God the creator and ruler of the things and beings within those two realms, but He is also the creator of the realms themselves. God created the physical universe, and before He acted in this creation, the universe did not exist. Likewise, God did this with the spiritual realm.

== God is Revealed: How we know about God ==

Other than creation itself, God is revealed in several ways, including [[theological correlates]], conscience, and special revelation (the [[Bible]], and prophets). Most importantly though, God is revealed in [[Jesus Christ]], who is the Son of God.

[[File:Mezquita Catedral Cordoba.jpg|frame|center|[[Cathedral]] Cordoba, Spain.]]

== Attributes or Character of God ==
[[File:Rembrandt Ascension.jpg|thumb|[[Rembrandt]], Ascension.]]
The attributes of God are things that describe who He is. Similar to the way one might describe a close friend to another individual, so too do these attributes describe God's character and nature. Attributes of God include but are not limited to [[Wisdom]], [[Infinitude]], [[Sovereignty]], [[Holiness]], [[Trinity]], [[Omniscience]], [[Faithfulness]], [[Love]], [[Omnipotence]], Self-existence, Self-sufficiency, [[Justice]], [[Immutability]], [[Mercy]], [[Eternal]], [[Goodness]], Graciousness, and [[Omnipresence]]. These attributes all work in complete and perfect harmony with one another.

God exercises eternal and righteous judgment of the wicked in [[Hell]], because of an inherent problem in the human heart, namely [[Sin]]. According to the [[Bible]], the sacrifice of [[Jesus Christ]] on the cross of [[Calvary]] and then [[resurrection]] is God's merciful and gracious response to the problem of the human heart.

=== God is Triune ===
{{main|Trinity}}

Although the Bible does not use the term, it is clear that God is a triune God, or three in one.
These are sometimes referred to as ''God the Father'', ''God the Son'' ([[Jesus Christ|Jesus]]), and the ''[[Holy Spirit]]''.

The first hint of the Trinity is in {{Bible ref|Genesis|1|26}} which relates God saying, "Let us make man in our image", indicating that God is a plurality.

The three beings of God are treated as equivalents in these words of Jesus shortly after His resurrection:
{{Bible quote|Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.|book=Matthew|chap=28|verses=19|version=NIV}}

==== Jesus is God ====
[[Image:Pieta.jpg|thumb|270px|[[Pieta]], [[Michelangelo]].]]

The first verse of the [[Gospel of John]], in which Jesus is referred to as the "Word", makes clear that Jesus is synonymous with God:
{{Bible quote|In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.|book=John|chap=1|verses=1|version=NIV}}
This verse not only says that "the Word" (Jesus) is synonymous with God, but also says that the Word was "in the beginning", which means that He existed before all else existed, something that is only true of God.

This is reinforced two verses later, in which Jesus is described as the creator.
[[Genesis]] refers to God as being the Creator.
{{Bible quote|Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.|book=John|chap=1|verses=3|version=NIV}}

==== The Holy Spirit is God ====

In the following passage, the [[Holy Spirit]] is referred to as God:
{{Bible quote|Then Peter said, "Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? Didn't it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn't the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God."|book=Acts|chap=5|verses=3-4|version=NIV}}

=== God is Omniscient ===
{{main|omniscience}}

God knows everything:
{{Bible quote|This then is how we know that we belong to the truth, and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence whenever our hearts condemn us. For God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything.|book=1_John|chap=3|verses=19-20|version=NIV}}

Because God is outside of [[time]], He can see and knows the [[past]] and the [[future]] as well as the present.

== "God" sometimes used to refer to God the Father ==
[[Image:Velasco Padre Eterno.jpg|thumb|left|180px|God the Father by [[Jose Maria Velasco]] (1840-1912).]]
In the Bible, the word "God" (θεός) does not always refer to God's being as a whole, but more specifically refers to the Person of the Father (God the Father). Here are some verses which demonstrate this:
{{cquote|'''John 3:16''' (NASB) For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.}}
{{cquote|'''1 John 4:10''' (NASB) In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.}}
Notice how in each case, "Father" can be substituted for "God." For example, "For the ''Father'' so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son," and "not that we loved the ''Father'', but that He loved us and sent His Son."
{{Clear}}

== Terminology ==

The Bible uses several different words to refer to God.
"God" itself is not a name, but an [[Old English]] word meaning ''supreme being, deity'',<ref>[http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=god God] Online Etymology Dictionary.</ref> which the translators who translated the Bible in to English chose as the appropriate English word for the [[Hebrew]] ''elohim'' and the [[Greek]] ''theos'' used in the [[Old Testament]] and [[New Testament]] respectively.<ref name="DPK">Kruse, Dale P.,[http://www.layevangelism.com/advtxbk/sections/sect-10/sec10-9.htm More on the ''Names'' of God In the Bible], Advanced Training Program of Evangelism.</ref>

The other main term for God is the Hebrew ''adonai'', usually translated ''Lord''.
There are various compound words also used in the Bible, such as ''el shaddai'', which means ''God Almighty'' ("''el''" is a short version of ''elohim'').<ref name="DPK" />

In the original tongues, God the Father is sometimes mistranslated due to the lack of an English equivalence. In such cases, the closest English approximation is "daddy", thus showing humanity's closeness with Him.

''YHWH'' is given in the Bible as God's actual name. In most English Bibles it is translated as ''Lord'', in small capitals. The name has various other English versions, including Yehovah, Jehovah, and Yahweh.<ref>McHyde, Tim, [http://www.escapeallthesethings.com/yahweh.htm God’s Name: LORD, Yahweh, Yahveh, YHWH, YHVH, Jehovah or Yehovah?]</ref>

== Resources on becoming a Christian ==
[[File:Hoffman Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane.jpg|thumbnail|170px||Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane by Heinrich Hofmann.]]

''see also:'' [[Resources on becoming a Christian]]

'''Below are some resources on becoming a [[Christian]]:'''

*[http://www.jesusfilm.org/film-and-media/watch-the-film Jesus film - free access]

*[http://www.thewordfortoday.org/?page=C2000 Free audio Bible and Bible audio streaming]

*[https://www.gotquestions.org/repentance.html Repentance]

*[http://www.allaboutgod.com/ AllAboutGod.com]

*[[Video testimonies of Christians]]

'''Tips on choosing a Christian church:'''

*[http://www.allaboutreligion.org/choosing-a-christian-church-faq.htm Choosing a Christian Church]

'''Spiritual growth as a Christian:'''

*[http://www.navpress.com/product/9781576839324/The-Pursuit-of-Holiness-Jerry-Bridges The Pursuit of Holiness] by Jerry Bridges
*[http://www.navpress.com/product/9780891099413/The-Practice-of-Godliness-Jerry-Bridges The Practice of Godliness] by Jerry Bridges
*[http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/529785.The_Complete_Book_of_Discipleship The Complete Book of Discipleship: On Being and Making Followers of Christ]

== References ==
{{Reflist}}

== See also ==
*[[Other gods]]
*[[Atheism]]
*[[Christianity in Conservapedia]]
*[[Bible Art Gallery]]

== External links ==
*[https://www.gotquestions.org/who-is-God.html Who is God?], at [[GotQuestions]]
*[https://www.gotquestions.org/what-is-God.html What is God?], at [[GotQuestions]]
*[https://www.gotquestions.org/is-there-a-God.html Is there a God?], at [[GotQuestions]]
*[https://answersingenesis.org/jesus-christ/jesus-is-god/10-biblical-reasons-jesus-is-god/ 10 Biblical Reasons Jesus Is God], by Simon Turpin at [[Answers in Genesis]], August 8, 2017
*[http://www.theopedia.com/God Theopedia - God]
*[http://christiananswers.net/dictionary/god.html ChristianAnswers.net - God]
*[http://wikible.org/en/God Wikible.org - God]

{{Conservatism}}

[[Category:Christianity]]
[[Category:Divine Beings]]

God

2019-07-11T02:28:52Z

PiousOne: Grammar clean-up and accuracy revision.

''This article is about the biblical God. For the term as used to refer to any divine being, see [[Other gods]]''
[[Image:Alphaomega.jpg|thumb|200px|God is the Alpha and Omega, the first and last, the beginning and the ending <ref>Revelation 22:13</ref>]]
{{trinity}}
{{cquote|'''Genesis 1:1''' In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.}}
'''God''' is the sovereign creator and eternal ruler of all things and beings that exist, whether in the physical [[universe]] or in the spiritual realm ([[Heaven]]). Not only is God the creator and ruler of the things and beings within those two realms, but He is also the creator of the realms themselves. God created the physical universe, and before He acted in this creation, the universe did not exist. Likewise, God did this with the spiritual realm.

== God is Revealed: How we know about God ==

Other than creation itself, God is revealed in several ways, including [[theological correlates]], conscience, and special revelation (the [[Bible]], and prophets). Most importantly though, God is revealed in [[Jesus Christ]], who is the Son of God.

[[File:Mezquita Catedral Cordoba.jpg|frame|center|[[Cathedral]] Cordoba, Spain.]]

== Attributes or Character of God ==
[[File:Rembrandt Ascension.jpg|thumb|[[Rembrandt]], Ascension.]]
The attributes of God are things that describe who He is. Similar to the way one might describe a close friend to another individual, so too do these attributes describe God's character and nature. Attributes of God include but are not limited to [[Wisdom]], [[Infinitude]], [[Sovereignty]], [[Holiness]], [[Trinity]], [[Omniscience]], [[Faithfulness]], [[Love]], [[Omnipotence]], Self-existence, Self-sufficiency, [[Justice]], [[Immutability]], [[Mercy]], [[Eternal]], [[Goodness]], Graciousness, and [[Omnipresence]]. These attributes all work in complete and perfect harmony with one another.

God exercises eternal and righteous judgment of the wicked in [[Hell]], because of an inherent problem in the human heart, namely [[Sin]]. According to the [[Bible]], the sacrifice of [[Jesus Christ]] on the cross of [[Calvary]] and then [[resurrection]] is God's merciful and gracious response to the problem of the human heart.

=== God is Triune ===
{{main|Trinity}}

Although the Bible does not use the term, it is clear that God is a triune God, or three in one.
These are sometimes referred to as ''God the Father'', ''God the Son'' ([[Jesus Christ|Jesus]]), and the ''[[Holy Spirit]]''.

The first hint of the Trinity is in {{Bible ref|Genesis|1|26}} which relates God saying, "Let us make man in our image", indicating that God is a plurality.

The three beings of God are treated as equivalents in these words of Jesus shortly after His resurrection:
{{Bible quote|Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.|book=Matthew|chap=28|verses=19|version=NIV}}

==== Jesus is God ====
[[Image:Pieta.jpg|thumb|270px|[[Pieta]], [[Michelangelo]].]]

The first verse of the [[Gospel of John]], in which Jesus is referred to as the "Word", makes clear that Jesus is synonymous with God:
{{Bible quote|In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.|book=John|chap=1|verses=1|version=NIV}}
This verse not only says that "the Word" (Jesus) is synonymous with God, but also says that the Word was "in the beginning", which means that He existed before all else existed, something that is only true of God.

This is reinforced two verses later, in which Jesus is described as the creator.
[[Genesis]] refers to God as being the Creator.
{{Bible quote|Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.|book=John|chap=1|verses=3|version=NIV}}

==== The Holy Spirit is God ====

In the following passage, the [[Holy Spirit]] is referred to as God:
{{Bible quote|Then Peter said, "Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? Didn't it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn't the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God."|book=Acts|chap=5|verses=3-4|version=NIV}}

=== God is Omniscient ===
{{main|omniscience}}

God knows everything:
{{Bible quote|This then is how we know that we belong to the truth, and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence whenever our hearts condemn us. For God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything.|book=1_John|chap=3|verses=19-20|version=NIV}}

Because God is outside of [[time]], He can see and knows the [[past]] and the [[future]] as well as the present.

== "God" sometimes used to refer to God the Father ==
[[Image:Velasco Padre Eterno.jpg|thumb|left|180px|God the Father by [[Jose Maria Velasco]] (1840-1912).]]
In the Bible, the word "God" (θεός) does not always refer to God's being as a whole, but more specifically refers to the Person of the Father (God the Father). Here are some verses which demonstrate this:
{{cquote|'''John 3:16''' (NASB) For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.}}
{{cquote|'''1 John 4:10''' (NASB) In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.}}
Notice how in each case, "Father" can be substituted for "God." For example, "For the ''Father'' so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son," and "not that we loved the ''Father'', but that He loved us and sent His Son."
{{Clear}}

== Terminology ==

The Bible uses several different words to refer to God.
"God" itself is not a name, but an [[Old English]] word meaning ''supreme being, deity'',<ref>[http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=god God] Online Etymology Dictionary.</ref> which the translators who translated the Bible in to English chose as the appropriate English word for the [[Hebrew]] ''elohim'' and the [[Greek]] ''theos'' used in the [[Old Testament]] and [[New Testament]] respectively.<ref name="DPK">Kruse, Dale P.,[http://www.layevangelism.com/advtxbk/sections/sect-10/sec10-9.htm More on the ''Names'' of God In the Bible], Advanced Training Program of Evangelism.</ref>

The other main term for God is the Hebrew ''adonai'', usually translated ''Lord''.
There are various compound words also used in the Bible, such as ''el shaddai'', which means ''God Almighty'' ("''el''" is a short version of ''elohim'').<ref name="DPK" />

In the original tongues, God the father is sometimes mistranslated due to the lack of an English equivalence. In such cases, the closest English approximation is "daddy", thus showing humanity's closeness with Him.

''YHWH'' is given in the Bible as God's actual name. In most English Bibles it is translated as ''Lord'', in small capitals. The name has various other English versions, including Yehovah, Jehovah, and Yahweh.<ref>McHyde, Tim, [http://www.escapeallthesethings.com/yahweh.htm God’s Name: LORD, Yahweh, Yahveh, YHWH, YHVH, Jehovah or Yehovah?]</ref>

== Resources on becoming a Christian ==
[[File:Hoffman Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane.jpg|thumbnail|170px||Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane by Heinrich Hofmann.]]

''see also:'' [[Resources on becoming a Christian]]

'''Below are some resources on becoming a [[Christian]]:'''

*[http://www.jesusfilm.org/film-and-media/watch-the-film Jesus film - free access]

*[http://www.thewordfortoday.org/?page=C2000 Free audio Bible and Bible audio streaming]

*[https://www.gotquestions.org/repentance.html Repentance]

*[http://www.allaboutgod.com/ AllAboutGod.com]

*[[Video testimonies of Christians]]

'''Tips on choosing a Christian church:'''

*[http://www.allaboutreligion.org/choosing-a-christian-church-faq.htm Choosing a Christian Church]

'''Spiritual growth as a Christian:'''

*[http://www.navpress.com/product/9781576839324/The-Pursuit-of-Holiness-Jerry-Bridges The Pursuit of Holiness] by Jerry Bridges
*[http://www.navpress.com/product/9780891099413/The-Practice-of-Godliness-Jerry-Bridges The Practice of Godliness] by Jerry Bridges
*[http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/529785.The_Complete_Book_of_Discipleship The Complete Book of Discipleship: On Being and Making Followers of Christ]

== References ==
{{Reflist}}

== See also ==
*[[Other gods]]
*[[Atheism]]
*[[Christianity in Conservapedia]]
*[[Bible Art Gallery]]

== External links ==
*[https://www.gotquestions.org/who-is-God.html Who is God?], at [[GotQuestions]]
*[https://www.gotquestions.org/what-is-God.html What is God?], at [[GotQuestions]]
*[https://www.gotquestions.org/is-there-a-God.html Is there a God?], at [[GotQuestions]]
*[https://answersingenesis.org/jesus-christ/jesus-is-god/10-biblical-reasons-jesus-is-god/ 10 Biblical Reasons Jesus Is God], by Simon Turpin at [[Answers in Genesis]], August 8, 2017
*[http://www.theopedia.com/God Theopedia - God]
*[http://christiananswers.net/dictionary/god.html ChristianAnswers.net - God]
*[http://wikible.org/en/God Wikible.org - God]

{{Conservatism}}

[[Category:Christianity]]
[[Category:Divine Beings]]