NoGodBlog.com

The United States was founded by religious immigrants leaving Britain because they were persecuted for having beliefs considered too reactionary at the time, meaning that they were dangerously conservative, and opposed the Church of England's reforms towards relative liberalism. If an official church were established in the United States it would have been based on these extremist values, and would ultimately be worse for atheists. Its not whether or not there is a state church, its the popular religion of the people themselves that matters. The Church of England is so weak, and wishy-washy that Atheism come easily.

Didn't the golden age of Persia end when they began to push for a more "official" religion?

I agree, our official church has nothing to do with our secular nature. I'd imagine europe's secularism has more to do with our generally more liberal political views.

Although, the Archbishop of Canterbury is enough to turn anyone atheist, so maybe you have a point there.

If in the times of the founding fathers, they had adopted an official religion, I'd imagine America would have gone more the way of Saudi Arabia than Europe, but this is all just speculation...

Happy we-let-you-have-independence day!

An official American Church would be the absolute best thing for atheism here in the "Colonies". The establishment would have been terrible for liberty at first but very quickly the number of people who rejected the mandated religion would swell until atheism was the default position just like in Europe. People don't like to be forced into believing or accepting what the government tells them.

I look forward to the day the USA declares independence from religion!

I've mentioned this before, but it bears repeating. I am an American living in England. That the head of state of this country (the Queen) is also the head of the Church of England may or may not be helpful to atheism. Somehow I doubt it. No one here cares what religion (if any) their politicians belong to, or what any others belong to for that matter. I think this is more an idiosyncrasy of the British people than it is a consequence of there being a state religion.

In the end I am not sure.

I'm afraid Europe is not so fortunate an example. Europeans have seen the devastation that religion brings throughout their history - the 100 year war, the Inquisition, the wars in Britain, the Vatican's alliance with Hitler, the genocidal "missionaries" to the new world, and the list goes on and on. Europeans trace their family histories and find that so many of their own ancestors died fighting to the death over transubstantiation, or the role of the pope, or the paying of bribes for forgiveness, and other magical ideas with no basis in reality. Hundreds of millions of dead Europeans is part of the violent legacy of Christianity, and that is a real eye-opener for Europeans, who are generally well educated about this history. This awareness of history is why they reject religion. It's also part of why they have some of the highest living standards in the world.

Why should we Americans be willing to accept 1,000 years of tyranny and genocide just to prove the point that generations of Europeans were already unfortunate enough to prove? Religion is an enslaving, destructive mind-virus that leads to war and dictatorship (formerly known as monarchy).

Fighting for our freedom has never been easier than it is right now, and yet we bicker over our own internal politics and what to call ourselves. If we continue on this path, our great grandchildren may be killing each other one day over the silly religious idea of the era - maybe whether Jesus ascended into space by floating or if Gawd built an elevator... More stupid things have happened.

I am an American living in England

Im a Briton who is happily now an American citizen. How are things in Orwells surveillance and nanny state these days?

No one here cares what religion (if any) their politicians belong to, or what any others belong to for that matter.

I disagree. The British people care very much if their politicians wear their faith on their sleeves. Remember Tony Blair? he took a lot of criticism for his open Christian faith. An atheist would have an easy time of being elected to office as compared to a church going Christian in GB.

I am compelled to disagree with Alexatheist's ideas regarding an official church in the colonies. People don't like being told many things, but if the vast majority of them believe it it won't necessarily cause them to dissent and become atheists. For example in the 1950s Americans were pretty much told that the only acceptable stance was an anti-communist one, this didn't lead to a massive increase in communist support in the United States just for the sake of dissent, almost everyone went along with it because it corresponded to their views. As Christianity has always been a far more pervasive view in The US when compared to Britain, it is no doubt that an official state religion would have been embraced by almost all. In fact, in places like Tennessee I am confident a state baptist religion would be readily accepted, and would consolidate the craziness down south.

I've received verbal abuse for sitting during God Bless America -- called unpatriotic.

These idiots really need to listen to the words of this prayer.

Comment from: alexatheist [Member]
Im a Briton who is happily now an American citizen. How are things in Orwells surveillance and nanny state these days?

Funny you should ask. I visited Orwell's grave recently. No cameras, no people. Big 'Brover' is alive and well, though.

An atheist would have an easy time of being elected to office as compared to a church going Christian in GB.

That's pretty much what I meant. I just said it the other way.

"How much longer are we going to think it necessary to be 'American' before (or in contradistinction to) being cultivated, being enlightened, being humane, & having the same intellectual discipline as other civilized countries? It is really too easy a disguise for our shortcomings to dress them up as a form of patriotism!"

-Edith Wharton

Edith Wharton...

How appropriate to quote a "French Imperialist" on the American "Independence Day"...

patriotism played a roll in the acceptance of this nation to go to war....

today we have a bankrupted country and a bunch of people dead or displaced....

and the enemy has still not been destroyed....Mission is not Accomplished....and thats because we haven't firgured out that the enemy is an idea....

I found a new blog....its NoPhreedmBlog.com

Jesse Helms is dead. Figures he'd hold out till the wee hours of July 4 to upstage Independence Day.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080704/ap_on_re_us/obit_helms

Awww Charlie...to hot in the kitchen?

I'm curious...what news source to you get your information from...

Code Pink?

You are right on one point...the enemy is an idea. But then again...it usually is...

Charlie

I wish that were the worst of it. We will be suffering from fallout of the BushCo and the evangelical right lunacy for years to come.

Phreeky has spent its whole life battling nonexistent demons so the war on a nonexistent enemy in Iraq is just more of the same for it.

What

dont worry....Bush says were just in an economic down turn.....a little rough patch if you will....

and phreedm....I get my news from:
AP
Fox
CNN
MSNBC
CNBC
Comedy Central
internet

comedy central is my fav....I find The Colbert Report specifically entertaining and refreshing....

then Phreedm I use my own experiences to form an opinion on all I here and read.....be advised that I am not restrained in thought from unverifiable ideas like that of a supernatural being......

Charlie

If you want the straight dope on Iraq read Juan Cole's blog at http://www.juancole.com/.

Phreeky is a sockpuppet. So just poke fun at the Phreeky caricature and have a good laugh.

As I listen to my entire neighborhood exploding dud after dud expensive explosive bought across the state line, with an occasional firework lighting the night, I realize that no matter how much we piss and moan about the high cost of gas and the "economic downturn", we still have money to burn. Literally. Even as a child I was saddened by this odd custom of making loud bangs and little explosion. Ah, there goes another siren and ambulance: probably some idiot who got a little too close to his own little war fantasy.
I love America.. but give me a break! I am not cynical, just very practical. Does anyone else think this is a stupid way to celebrate our independence from the Brits, who obviously have a better handle on many thing ( including the religion thing) than we do...?

Yes indeed, war fantasy with Chinese gunpowder all over my neighborhood too. If Israel goes into Iran, Chinese ordinance will not be fantasy. If Jesse had the sayso I suspect he would have nuked Iran when the Shah fell.
Phreedm, your punctuation is perfect, your spelling is usually superb and you are apparently well read. Should Israel take out the Iranian nuclear energy/weapons project for America?

So you think you can tell Heaven From Hell
The Good God from the Devil.

If There is a God how do you know he is Good? Assuming you believe he is good. What is the apropiate behavoir for a God that is realy good? Would a good God inspire religion in mysterious ways even though he knows that is leading to wars and inquisitions. Would a good God remain silent When the religions he inspires prop up visious Tyrants?? Would a good God open up a two way line of comunication and provide a consistant education to every one. If the good God uses "prophets" to deliver his messages why doesn't he have his "prophets" from two differant cultures get together and iron out their differances instead of fighting one war after another? Would a good God betray those who trust him? would he allow those who delivered moral messages like Jesus, Joan of Arc, Gandi and Martin Luther King Jr. to be killed prematurely and people like Stalin And Castro to live a full long life?
One of the characteristics of the devil is that he makes a deal and when he keeps his side you find out that it comes at to high a cost. When God alledgedly promised Canaan/Isreal/Palistine/Isreal to the jews and perhaps to the Muslims as well It led to thousands of years of wars with no end in sight. Is this a characteristic of God or the Devil? Why didn't he at least try to teach them to share it without fighting. Do you teach truth and morality by arranging for superstitios people to deliver your message for you?

Would a good God Teach people that it is a good idea to find out what is true and check your facts correcting them when they are wrong? If God doesn't do the things that a good God would do and he does the things that a good God wouldn't do is he realy good? If God inspires religous wars that lead to mass murder and torture is he trustworthy enough and qualified to pass judgement over those who commit atrocities in his name. If this is how God acomplishes his goals what goals could he be trying to acomplish??

Does God think rationally? If so do you need to think rationally to understand God? If God is an advanced intelegence does he try to acomplish his goals in the most effective way possible? Would he teach truth and morality by refusing to comunicate if that realy was his goal? Does God keep an organized set of records for all the facts in the world?

ZT, satan is a patsy. Isaiah 45:7 reveals the Biblical god makes it all happen, he's calling the shots and satan is just a subcontractor for evil. That's exemplified in Job 1:6-7. Satan just happens to be in the neighborhood and he and god agree to double team old boy Job. This is one of the most pushed tales by christian hucksters and one of the most insane. More on that story at a later date.

Bottom line is the lunatics who wrote the bad book did not think rationally. They desired material wealth from Genesis 2:11-12 to Revelation 21:18-21. From beginning to end the ignorant men who laid out that game plan ruined the world then and today. Gold (material wealth) was the goal and the land from which it was extracted. The bad book is confusion, it represents hatred.

By the way Phreedm, there are actually 12 layers of jewels that make up the foundation of heaven. I wondered if you would clarify that for us. There are also 12 pearls as gates into heaven. Like Hotel California, some can enter but none will ever leave. Jesse is dead but few will ever grieve. Can you tell a smile from a veil?

DiArtemis

I think we as a nation are living beyond our means.....most municipalities at all levels are running deficits.....the feds are burning 1 billion a day more then what they take in....eventually we are going to have to pay the piper.....this will come to fruition when the global economy loses confidence in the dollar....

DiArtimis

Yep. Fireworks are a stupid waste of money. But yesterday's, I rationalized, were in celebration of being rid of Jesse Helms finally. Now, if Pat Robertson and James Dobson would just follow suit...

Comment from: Charlie

then Phreedm I use my own experiences to form an opinion on all I here and read

Ok...great. So share with us the article or news story telling us the USA is bankrupt...

Phreeky is so desperate for attention that he takes literally things said figuratively.

Here ya go....and its current too

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/01/60minutes/main2528226.shtml

Its only the head of the GAO telling us that our Government is making entitlement promises it cant keep....

Ross Perot and Ron Paul know a little bit about what is going on with our reckless government as well....

over

karen:

But yesterday's, I rationalized, were in celebration of being rid of Jesse Helms finally. Now, if Pat Robertson and James Dobson would just follow suit...

How did you come to possess such an attitude? Is hatred and wishing death upon those you disagree with a “fruit of the atheist ‘spirit’?” Do you wish the same for those who don’t share your contempt for Helms, Robertson and Dobson?

jcc

How did you come to possess such an attitude?

From being subjected to lying, hateful, bigoted, cheating, vicious Christians most of my life is my best guess.

Is hatred and wishing death upon those you disagree with a “fruit of the atheist ‘spirit’?”

Nope. It has nothing to do with atheism. There is no "atheist spirit". Jesse Helms was a mean-spirited bigot who couched himself in Christianity and was embraced by people of the same ilk. Most people I know considered him a stain on the image of North Carolina, though- I don't hang out with many republicans. I was just being honest about my feeling for him. If he'd been an atheist and had had the record he'd had as a senator and said the things he's on record as saying, I'd feel the same.

Pat Robertson is similar, spreading hatred in the name of your god, and people fall at his feet. Dobson thinks he has the right to tell everyone exactly what they should and should not do and wants to make it the law, because he thinks your god is whispering in his ear.

The reference to Robertson and Dobson was a joke, but I wouldn't mourn their loss any more than Jesse's. Would you rather I dishonestly paid some lip-service homage to people I disdain? Or is it just that I didn't follow the rule of "if you don't have anything good to say about someone, don't say anything at all."

Do you wish the same for those who don’t share your contempt for Helms, Robertson and Dobson?

Don't be silly. I dole out my contempt on a case-by case basis. ;-) Are you implying you don't ever feel contempt for anyone, or don't care if someone in particular has died?


Anyway, I thought you were done talking to me.

karen:

From being subjected to lying, hateful, bigoted, cheating, vicious Christians most of my life is my best guess.

Wow. So every Christian you’ve run across (or at least the ones you’ve been “subjected to”) were “liars, haters, bigots, cheats and vicious?” Even if they were all those things, does that automatically mean that Christianity requires them to behave like that in order for them to call themselves Christians?—or could it be that those particular individuals were imperfect witnesses of a higher calling?

Jesse Helms was a mean-spirited bigot who couched himself in Christianity and was embraced by people of the same ilk. Most people I know considered him a stain on the image of North Carolina, though- I don't hang out with many republicans.

Oh, well does that mean Robert Byrd is an icon of Christian virtue and a model of Democrat behavior?

I was just being honest about my feeling for him.

No doubt.

If he'd been an atheist and had had the record he'd had as a senator and said the things he's on record as saying, I'd feel the same.

Which begs the question again about Byrd. And what about Ernest Hollings?—will you celebrate their deaths with equal joyous contempt?

Would you rather I dishonestly paid some lip-service homage to people I disdain?

No, that wasn’t why I asked. Whenever anyone expresses the apparent joy that you did over someone’s—any one’s—demise always catches my attention.

Or is it just that I didn't follow the rule of "if you don't have anything good to say about someone, don't say anything at all."

You’re certainly free to say what you think, but frankly, I’m a little disturbed by the hatred you apparently possess.

Are you implying you don't ever feel contempt for anyone, or don't care if someone in particular has died?

No, but I am called to re-examine why I’ve developed any such feelings in the first place—and then pursue a path of forgiveness, if possible.

Anyway, I thought you were done talking to me.

I guess I should’ve been clearer about that. I meant that I realized that there is nothing more I can say to you here to get you to understand my positions on things. I didn’t necessarily mean to suggest that I would never respond to you again.

jcc

Wow. So every Christian you’ve run across (or at least the ones you’ve been “subjected to”) were “liars, haters, bigots, cheats and vicious?” Even if they were all those things, does that automatically mean that Christianity requires them to behave like that in order for them to call themselves Christians?—or could it be that those particular individuals were imperfect witnesses of a higher calling?

Where did I use the term "every"?
Naturally, Christianity doesn't require them to behave like that. Rather it calls for them to act the opposite, but then they are always, as you point out(though I disagree with the higher calling point), imperfect. But they are also, as they usually point out, forgiven. (Not that they change their behavior or attitude at all; they just keep relying on their imperfection and forgiveness cycle.)

Oh, well does that mean Robert Byrd is an icon of Christian virtue and a model of Democrat behavior?

Which begs the question again about Byrd. And what about Ernest Hollings?—will you celebrate their deaths with equal joyous contempt?

Byrd recanted his racist ways, but I don't believe that was anything but political expedience. He did a lot of damage early in his segregationist days, but he did fight against the war in Iraq and other issues in the W. presidency that a serious democrat should have done. But I've never been a fan of Robert Byrd and though I won't celebrate his death when it comes, I won't mourn him either.
Ernest Hollings? Doesn't ring a bell. I'll have to look him up.

Whenever anyone expresses the apparent joy that you did over someone’s—any one’s—demise always catches my attention.

Hey, if W kicks the bucket, drinks are on me! And you can bet I'm not alone in that thought. Think how many people might be alive today if that pretzel had done its job back in 2002. Well, maybe not; Darth Cheney would have stepped in. But I don't think Cheney would have been reelected in '04.

But seriously. Everybody dies, and the truth of the matter is, there are some mofos out there who rate cheers more than tears when they die. If that's cold, so be it. It's not as cold as some of the acts they commit.

You’re certainly free to say what you think, but frankly, I’m a little disturbed by the hatred you apparently possess.

I might quibble over the word hatred, but we would just get into a big semantical debate, so I'll leave it. Why does this disturb you? Did you think me incapable of such strong feelings?

No, but I am called to re-examine why I’ve developed any such feelings in the first place—and then pursue a path of forgiveness, if possible.

Do you mean you don't know why you feel contempt for a person and have to search for the reason? Or is this a throw-back to my past again? And to what forgiveness are you referring? Forgiveness from, or for the person you feel contempt towards, or forgiveness from above of from within? Regarding Jesse, he was a public figure; I had no personal relationship with him. My objections were to his racism, homophobia and lack of regard for women's rights, mainly, and his efforts to use his power to manipulate those negative qualities into laws, along with his Christian ideals. I feel no sorrow at his demise; after all, he lived a full life and was rather ill when he kicked. I also feel no need for forgiveness for feeling no sorrow at his passing. These statements of mine I feel are much more forthright and honorable than that of the president when he allegedly "gave up golf" in honor of the dead soldiers in Iraq. What an empty, dishonest and insulting gesture that was.

Karen

Hey, if W kicks the bucket, drinks are on me!

If I see anybody moron that piece of craps death in public I will make them a "project".

karen:

Where did I use the term "every"?

Perhaps you overlooked my qualifying, parenthetical phrase: “or at least the ones you’ve been ‘subjected to.’”

[Christianity] calls for them to act the opposite, but then they are always, as you point out(though I disagree with the higher calling point), imperfect.

This is another example of my inability to reason with you here. You read my words, but apparently their meaning is lost on you.

But they are also, as they usually point out, forgiven. (Not that they change their behavior or attitude at all; they just keep relying on their imperfection and forgiveness cycle.)

And how many times have I had to say, Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven? And how many times have I had to say that understanding and accepting forgiveness is anything but license? And how many times have I had to refer to Paul having to write to first century churches addressing this exact issue?

[Byrd] did a lot of damage early in his segregationist days

Apparently not enough to continue to be ignored by the mainstream, drive-by, media. They treat him with kid gloves compared to evil Republicans…remember Lott? ...double standard anyone?

but he did fight against the war in Iraq and other issues in the W. presidency that a serious democrat should have done.

Yes, and what an enormous price he’s paid for his absolution. The trifling stain on his soul left by his days of recruiting for that innocuous little social group call the Klan has been completely absolved by this noble “act of conscience.”

Ernest Hollings? Doesn't ring a bell. I'll have to look him up.

Try Googling his name along with “Governor, South Carolina, Capitol, Confederate Battle Flag” and see if Google has the guts to include sites that contain his racist quotes and deeds… But, like Byrd, being in the “correct” party is sufficient penitence for any and all past racist sins.

Think how many people might be alive today if that pretzel had done its job back in 2002.

It’s comments like this that contradict your claim that “there is no ‘atheist spirit.’”—hogwash—there is, and it’s irrefutably mean.

Everybody dies, and the truth of the matter is, there are some mofos out there who rate cheers more than tears when they die. If that's cold, so be it. It's not as cold as some of the acts they commit.

Oh, no. No, the warmth radiating from those words is enough to heat a small house for the winter. You’re a well of compassion, mercy and forgiveness that has no bottom karen—and God help any poor sap, including your own kids, who end up on your bad side—God knows they deserve your wrath.

Why does this disturb you? Did you think me incapable of such strong feelings?

No, I’d just hoped that by this point in your life you’d have sought to possess and understand the deeper meanings of mercy and grace for your fellow man (or are you without such needs for yourself?).

I’m truly saddened to see you continuing to cling to such bitterness and rage as you grow older. Do you really want that to be remembered as someone who wouldn’t let that go when you’re gone?

Do you mean you don't know why you feel contempt for a person and have to search for the reason?

Not at all. I know exactly what provokes my ire. But I’m also aware that giving in to and intentionally feeding such emotions is not Christ-like, and it’s therefore, always counterproductive.

I also feel no need for forgiveness for feeling no sorrow at his passing.

And in the end, we all get what we want—and some, what they deserve. If you live by the sword, you die by it, so self-pity won’t be an option when the same is said of you. As I’ve said before, you’re certainly free to think anything you want, or hate anyone of your choosing, including yourself and God, but only a fool believes he doesn’t need forgiveness.

jcc

Perhaps you overlooked my qualifying, parenthetical phrase: “or at least the ones you’ve been ‘subjected to.’”

Sure did. I remember reading it, but I must not have really latched on to it in my mind. Sorry.

This is another example of my inability to reason with you here. You read my words, but apparently their meaning is lost on you.

I guess so, since I thought I understood what you meant.

And how many times have I had to say, Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven? And how many times have I had to say that understanding and accepting forgiveness is anything but license? And how many times have I had to refer to Paul having to write to first century churches addressing this exact issue?

But the overwhelming majority seem to treat the process like license, whether consciously or not. They 'know' they will-or can- be forgiven nearly anything, so they make no effort to change anything about themselves.
The part about Paul, I honestly don't remember. Memory failure.

Apparently not enough to continue to be ignored by the mainstream, drive-by, media. They treat him (Byrd)with kid gloves compared to evil Republicans…remember Lott? ...double standard anyone?

Well, I don't control the media. And I found this on Wiki about Lott:

In the book Free Culture, Lawrence Lessig argues that the resignation of Lott would not have occurred had it not been for the effect of Internet blogs. He says that though the story "disappear[ed] from the mainstream press within forty-eight hours", "bloggers kept researching the story" until, "[f]inally, the story broke back into the mainstream press."[10]

So maybe if Byrd had been more controversial during the internet era, he would have had the same treatment.

Try Googling his name along with “Governor, South Carolina, Capitol, Confederate Battle Flag” and see if Google has the guts to include sites that contain his racist quotes and deeds… But, like Byrd, being in the “correct” party is sufficient penitence for any and all past racist sins.

I know how to Google, thank you. I just didn't think it was all that urgent to look him up right away. But if you want to discuss him, I will. Byrd's racism is well-documented; I don't know why you think Hollings' wouldn't be. The persecution complex is spilling over into the republican part of you from the theistic part of you.

It’s comments like this that contradict your claim that “there is no ‘atheist spirit.’”—hogwash—there is, and it’s irrefutably mean.

HAHA!!!! Too funny! I stole the pretzel line from someone at a cookout a while back. Everyone laughed and agreed with it, and no one there but me was an atheist. LOL.

Oh, no. No, the warmth radiating from those words is enough to heat a small house for the winter. You’re a well of compassion, mercy and forgiveness that has no bottom karen—and God help any poor sap, including your own kids, who end up on your bad side—God knows they deserve your wrath.

Actually, once I even like a person, it's very hard for me to ever dislike them, much less hate them. I usually jump right into loving them too easily. My kids have my unconditional love, and it has certainly been put to the test. But you're right- don't get on the dark side of Karen. I'm mostly all bark and no bite, but you never know when I might get a taste for blood. Dun-dun-dun!

No, I’d just hoped that by this point in your life you’d have sought to possess and understand the deeper meanings of mercy and grace for your fellow man (or are you without such needs for yourself?).

Kindness, understanding, empathy, love. Those things I need. Mercy and grace? Not so much. Mercy, sure, if someone has a gun to my head. Grace, I don't know what that means involving my fellow man.

I’m truly saddened to see you continuing to cling to such bitterness and rage as you grow older. Do you really want that to be remembered as someone who wouldn’t let that go when you’re gone?

I really think you're reading WAY too much into this whole thing. Hey, at my funeral, I'll have my son tell the story of how he came home and I was at the computer and on the cell phone with my best friend at the same time and we were both excited searching for naked pictures of Christopher Meloni to download as our screensavers, because we have a mutual fet!sh for him. That'll distract everyone from remembering I didn't care that Jesse Helms died.
Oh, that reminds me, where were you when we were all aglow about Falwell ? I think we had a whole thread on that. Maybe it was somewhere else, though.

And in the end, we all get what we want—and some, what they deserve. If you live by the sword, you die by it, so self-pity won’t be an option when the same is said of you. As I’ve said before, you’re certainly free to think anything you want, or hate anyone of your choosing, including yourself and God, but only a fool believes he doesn’t need forgiveness.

Ooh. Self-pity, eh? Is that your analysis doctor? Sorry to disappoint, but I haven't felt that in a long time. And I don't hate myself; I think I'm pretty cool. I have a lot to work on, but a lot of people love me and also think I,m pretty cool. Can't hate god, because he isn't real, but do hate the idea of god that's presented in the Abrahamic religions. Loki, I like, And Kokopelli. In fact, I have on a Kokopelli T-shirt right now. And sometimes I do need forgiveness. But not now. I'll ask Jesse to forgive me when he asks all the people he slighted to forgive him. Seems fair.

karen:

But the overwhelming majority seem to treat the process like license, whether consciously or not.

Which makes my point—their doing so proves they either don’t understand what Christianity is all about, or they’re intentionally abusing the integrity of its name.

Byrd's racism is well-documented; I don't know why you think Hollings' wouldn't be. The persecution complex is spilling over into the republican part of you from the theistic part of you.

I was simply pointing out the clear, demonstrable, double standard of the mainstream, liberal media.

I stole the pretzel line from someone at a cookout a while back. Everyone laughed and agreed with it, and no one there but me was an atheist.

Ah! Well, that makes it all better then.

My kids have my unconditional love

Oh, I do hope Krys doesn’t catch wind of your admission to that…

Mercy, sure, if someone has a gun to my head.

No, mercy in the sense of not getting what you deserve (which is not injustice, or being spared from someone else’s malevolence).

Grace, I don't know what that means involving my fellow man.

It’s what’s necessary for you to show mercy.

Sorry to disappoint, but I haven't felt [self-pity] in a long time.

I meant if the tables were turned.

And I don't hate myself;

Didn’t say that you did—just that you’re free to do such a thing.

Can't hate god, because he isn't real, but do hate the idea of god that's presented in the Abrahamic religions.

I find that to be an attempt at making a distinction without a real difference.

And sometimes I do need forgiveness. But not now.

As usual, pride is the last barrier to the entrance of one’s heart.

jcc

Which makes my point—their doing so proves they either don’t understand what Christianity is all about, or they’re intentionally abusing the integrity of its name.

Or they like to say they are Christians because it gives them a cloak of "decent" stature. Or something else entirely. The problem with "they don't understand what Christianity is all about" is that no one is an actual authority on the subject. "They" might think YOU have much of it wrong.

Ah! Well, that makes it all better then.

I was simply pointing out that it wasn't related to any "atheist spirit".

Oh, I do hope Krys doesn’t catch wind of your admission to that…

I thought it was alatham you were having that conversation with. I almost butted in on that to try to help you explain a parent's unconditional love for his/her children, but thought better of it. Besides, Krys and I don't agree on everything, though I love him dearly.

No, mercy in the sense of not getting what you deserve (which is not injustice, or being spared from someone else’s malevolence).

Are you speaking in terms of mercy involving my fellow man here? Or is this a heaven/hell reference?

(Sorry. I'm feeling quite dense today.)

It’s (grace)what’s necessary for you to show mercy.

Guess I'm not real stocked up on grace then. Because, honestly, there are some people I'd have to turn my back on and walk away.

I meant if the tables were turned.

You mean what if people didn't care if I died, or laughed about it? Big deal.

I find that to be an attempt at making a distinction without a real difference.

OK. We're back to square one. I see no evidence to support the claim that the god in the Abrahamic religions is anything more than an idea.

As usual, pride is the last barrier to the entrance of one’s heart.

Wow, My therapist will be thrilled to hear I've been accused of being proud. But in my case, I think trust is more the issue.

karen:

Or they like to say they are Christians because it gives them a cloak of "decent" stature.

Which is a false representation of Christianity—that is, abuse of the name.

The problem with "they don't understand what Christianity is all about" is that no one is an actual authority on the subject.

And that makes no sense to me because if I can understand it, anyone can.

"They" might think YOU have much of it wrong.

And if “they” took the time to investigate it, “they” would discover that I am far from being alone in that understanding.

I thought it was alatham you were having that conversation with.

For the most part, I was (or am—but he may not have noticed my latest reply), but as usual I had to contend with Krys’ distractingly jejune interruptions.

I almost butted in on that to try to help you explain a parent's unconditional love for his/her children, but thought better of it.

Your comments would’ve been more than welcomed by me (but I can understand your reticence for fear of falling out his “good graces.”) ;-)

Are you speaking in terms of mercy involving my fellow man here? Or is this a heaven/hell reference?

It applies equally to both.

Guess I'm not real stocked up on grace then. Because, honestly, there are some people I'd have to turn my back on and walk away.

Well, for my sake, I’m, really glad Christ didn’t feel that way.

You mean what if people didn't care if I died, or laughed about it? Big deal.

Even if that included those whom you love unconditionally?

I see no evidence to support the claim that the god in the Abrahamic religions is anything more than an idea.

…An idea that isn’t quite intuitive to human nature…

Wow, My therapist will be thrilled to hear I've been accused of being proud.

What? You didn’t really think you were immune to it did you?

But in my case, I think trust is more the issue.

Hey, you’re not alone there either. From what I’ve seen, and without exception, it’s always an issue of trust—trusting God, that is.

jcc

And that makes no sense to me because if I can understand it, anyone can.

What makes you so sure you've got it right?

And if “they” took the time to investigate it, “they” would discover that I am far from being alone in that understanding.

So, how many others actually agree with you and why can't you all convince the rest of the errant interpreters where they went wrong? Perhaps they've investigated as long as you have and just come to different conclusions.

Your comments would’ve been more than welcomed by me (but I can understand your reticence for fear of falling out his “good graces.”) ;-)

Whose? Alatham's or KA's? Alatham seemed to be taking the discussion in stride, just not fully understanding the concept. I actually thought you were doing a good job of explaining the dynamic between parents and children. I think maybe one has to be a parent to really comprehend unconditional love towards someone, but then, there are those parents who don't experience it, also.

Well, for my sake, I’m, really glad Christ didn’t feel that way.

You're not one I'd turn my back on. And if Christ ever shows up and needs a helping hand, I won't turn my back on him either.

Even if that included those whom you love unconditionally?

Um...you do realize I'll be dead, right?
I have to admit, it's very difficult imagining any of my unconditionally loved ones laughing at the fact of my death; they all really hold me in high regard (if I do say so myself). My plan is for there to be much laughing at my funeral, however, if I even have one. That will be up to them to decide whether it would be of any benefit to them.

Just to be on the safe side, how about this. If I die while nogodblog is still around, I'll leave instructions for one of my survivors to post a notice here, and everyone can say, "HAHAHA! Karen's dead! Good riddance! Jeez, what a bitch she was, eh?"

…An idea that isn’t quite intuitive to human nature…

Um...huh? I'm sorry, your signal seems to be blocked by my dense-o-trometer. Please try again.

What? You didn’t really think you were immune to it(pride) did you?

Immune? No. Actually exhibiting it? Not very often. Baby steps.

Hey, you’re not alone there either. From what I’ve seen, and without exception, it’s always an issue of trust—trusting God, that is.

Aw-getouttahere! EVERYBODY trusts god. It says so right on our money! And our money should know. It's almost worth the paper it's printed on.

Karen

Just what are you arguing with JCC about? He's a deluded xian right-wing wacko that "believes" all the nonfactual nonsense that goes along with being one. That's all there is to the guy.

karen:

What makes you so sure you've got it right?

Because it [salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, the sole priesthood of Christ and the authority of Scripture] is clearly explained in the Bible.

So, how many others actually agree with you

Um, millions?

why can't you all convince the rest of the errant interpreters where they went wrong?

Um, free will?—just ask spanders…

Perhaps they've investigated as long as you have and just come to different conclusions.

Maybe… if they choose to only believe parts of the Bible, or twist meanings to suite what they want to believe, or added what they wanted to it.

Whose? Alatham's or KA's?

Why Krys’s of course.

Alatham seemed to be taking the discussion in stride, just not fully understanding the concept.

Yes. He’s actually willing to listen to and consider the merits of the other side of an argument—the mark of a truly open mind.

I actually thought you were doing a good job of explaining the dynamic between parents and children.

Why thank you karen! Your honest opinion means a great deal to me—your fearless honesty is another mark of a truly open(ing) mind. ;-)

I think maybe one has to be a parent to really comprehend unconditional love towards someone

Agreed. There are a couple of single ladies at my office (over 40) who, for whatever reasons, haven’t married and I often feel sad for them (and anyone else in that situation for that matter) for not having the opportunity to watch a child grow into an adult. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying I pity them, but am genuinely sad for them that they haven’t known all the emotions—and especially the joys—of parenthood.

but then, there are those parents who don't experience it, also.

Yes, the fact that there are so many parents who choose not to honor their full parental responsibilities is equally sad.

You're not one I'd turn my back on.

Yes, I know that, but if you’re willing to do that for me because of what little you know about me from here, what would it say about you if you did for it for a complete stranger? And if you’d do it for a stranger, why not to someone who, despite whatever evil he’s done but who’s also truly contrite, might need that same compassion?

Um...you do realize I'll be dead, right?

Sorry, I meant immediately prior to your death.

Um...huh? I'm sorry, your signal seems to be blocked by my dense-o-trometer. Please try again.

What I meant was that the “idea” of the God of Abraham, Moses and Jesus—a God willing to provide salvation by mercy and grace despite our predilection to be prodigals—isn’t an idea we humans are likely to manufacture on our own.

Immune? No. Actually exhibiting it? Not very often. Baby steps.

If it makes you feel any better, that’s pretty much how my eyes were opened.

Why, I'm all a-swoon - someone keeps mentioning me constantly, even though I'm allegedly considered 'jejune'.
I love you too, karen, but I don't think anyone loves anyone 'unconditionally'. Though I'd think you're the closest person I've met who could approach that unapproachable bar.

jcc:

Maybe… if they choose to only believe parts of the Bible, or twist meanings to suit what they want to believe, or added what they wanted to it.

I'd like to go on public record: I've never done that. Well, almost never.
The wholly bibble says what it says - it's all that 'allegorical' crap the apologists like to toss in. Gives a helluva lotta squirm room.

willing to provide salvation by mercy and grace despite our predilection to be prodigals—isn’t an idea we humans are likely to manufacture on our own.

It's obviously manufactured - it came about when the paradigm shifted in the Hellenistic world from the communal to the individual.
So how about it, jcc? Can you claim the million $ reward from Randi, prove the supernatural exists?
Oh, that's right, figments of the imagination don't exist. So, I guess not, ey?

KA

I love you too, karen, but I don't think anyone loves anyone 'unconditionally'.

I don't place conditions on my love for my children. Isn't that unconditional love?

Can you not imagine a condition whereby the love for your children would cease?
You could probably do so regarding a spouse; children are a different matter; parental love is different. However, there must be a least one circumstance which would end parental love.
And, didn't the ultimate parent kill almost all his children, except for a drunk and his offspring?

Obeah:

Can you not imagine a condition whereby the love for your children would cease?

No. Can you?

there must be a least one circumstance which would end parental love.

Why do you assume there must be one?

didn't the ultimate parent kill almost all his children, except for a drunk and his offspring?

If God is the creator of all living things (that were not created to live forever in this world) then doesn’t that also entitle Him to the privilege of deciding when each creature will die?

What

Just what are you arguing with JCC about? He's a deluded xian right-wing wacko that "believes" all the nonfactual nonsense that goes along with being one. That's all there is to the guy.

I know this will seem strange to you and others, but I consider jcc a friend. Something he said to me early on not only helped me in my healing, but probably strengthened my atheism, if that was possible. I know he believes the fairy tale, but he's a decent guy, and he's willing to get into the meat of the matter. He and I are not going to change each other's minds about beliefs, but it's interesting to talk to him about things like his objection to my honest reaction to the death of Jesse Helms, or unconditional love, or showing mercy to strangers. I get tired of politics and economics threads and like to discuss people-to-people issues.

KA:I love you too, karen, but I don't think anyone loves anyone 'unconditionally'.

Obeah:Can you not imagine a condition whereby the love for your children would cease?

I've tried to think of a reason and I can't. Suppose my son had turned out to be one of the pilots of one of the planes on 911? I would be horrified, humiliated, guilt-ridden and grieved. But I would still love him. Because I would think that something must have gone horribly wrong with him to have set him on that path, and I didn't see it. I would have the knowledge and memories of all of his wonderful qualities that offset that person unknown to me. I wouldn't understand that new person.

Or what if a child got some brain disease or cancer or was in an accident that affected the brain in such a way that his personality was altered and he didn't recognize me as his mother anymore. In fact, he would lash out at me, or threaten me. I couldn't stop loving him. Because I would still see my son, and love him more and hurt for him for what he was going through.

Obeah, do you have children? I know KA doesn't. I think I even feel this way about other children who aren't mine; ones I've watched grow from early childhood and interacted with, or even other older ones I've had some special bond with.

karen:

Thank you for the kind words you wrote about me to What. I hope you realize your feelings of friendship are mutual.

I apologize for butting in on your remark to Obeah, but this statement really caught my eye:

what if a child got some brain disease or cancer or was in an accident that affected the brain in such a way that his personality was altered and he didn't recognize me as his mother anymore. In fact, he would lash out at me, or threaten me. I couldn't stop loving him. Because I would still see my son, and love him more and hurt for him for what he was going through.

That indicates to me to be a significant change of attitude by you on that subject. The reason I say this is because I believe I remember you being sympathetic to Michael Schiavo’s successful court fight to kill Terri Schiavo by depriving her of food and water. If you were sympathetic to his cause, but now profess to still being able to unconditionally love your child regardless of what mental or physical condition he/she is in, does that mean that you’ve also had a change of heart regarding the treatment of Terri Schiavo?

Karen

and he's willing to get into the meat of the matter.

Meat? Where? I don't see anything on the bones you have been picking. Where's the beef?

I've tried to think of a reason and I can't.

Same here.

JCC

Nobody "killed" Terry Schiavo. You are a pig.

jcc

Because it [salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, the sole priesthood of Christ and the authority of Scripture] is clearly explained in the Bible.

Do you mean salvation by grace through faith alone? Because as it stands it looks like salvation through grace alone, and through faith alone. That's two alones.
What's "sole Priesthood" of Christ?

The authority of scripture-THAT'S where everybody goes really looney tunes. Obviously it is NOT clearly explained at all. The 'authority' part might be, but what's contained within sure isn't. Y'all need to call another council and decide what the rules really say. Throw out some of that stuff that doesn't matter any more and do a rewrite. Ask JC to sit in on the meeting. He could at least do a conference call.

Um, free will?—just ask spanders…

Or Fred Phelps?

Maybe… if they choose to only believe parts of the Bible, or twist meanings to suite what they want to believe, or added what they wanted to it.

How do you know they do this? And your answer to the first question leads me to believe that what you think is "clearly explained" is simply you version of "what [you] want to believe."

Why thank you karen! Your honest opinion means a great deal to me—your fearless honesty is another mark of a truly open(ing) mind. ;-)

So, my honest opinion, when it agrees with you, is fearless and the sign of an opening mind, but when it disagrees with you, is frightening and cold-hearted?

There are a couple of single ladies at my office (over 40) who, for whatever reasons, haven’t married and I often feel sad for them (and anyone else in that situation for that matter) for not having the opportunity to watch a child grow into an adult. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying I pity them, but am genuinely sad for them that they haven’t known all the emotions—and especially the joys—of parenthood.

Have they ever mentioned feeling bad about not marrying or having children? (Remember one is reliant on the other!)Perhaps they have no desire for either. Such women do exist you know. They may even be heterosexual! Imagine, heterosexual women, not pining for marriage and children. Before you go on feeling sad for them, you might want to find out if maybe they are perfectly happy with their situations.

And if you’d do it for a stranger, why not to someone who, despite whatever evil he’s done but who’s also truly contrite, might need that same compassion?

Ah, but that's just it! I DO do it for complete strangers-all the time. In fact, one of my sons worries about me because of this. And someone who's truly contrite does deserve compassion. I was speaking of those who aren't. If you go back and reread what I wrote about the jerk, I think you'll see that.

Sorry, I meant immediately prior to your death.

Oh. Still hard to imagine, considering the relationships I have with my unconditionally loved ones. Something major would have to happen to cause a rift. Even if they wouldn't talk to me, I'd leave them a note telling them I till loved them and saying goodbye.

What I meant was that the “idea” of the God of Abraham, Moses and Jesus—a God willing to provide salvation by mercy and grace despite our predilection to be prodigals—isn’t an idea we humans are likely to manufacture on our own.

That's pretty much where I thought you were going with that other statement, which is why I asked for clarification. Because I think that's exactly the kind of idea we would come up with on our own. Look at all the other ideas that are so strikingly similar. This one was just tweaked a bit to appeal to more people and satisfy more needs. I think it's obvious.

jcc

If you were sympathetic to his cause, but now profess to still being able to unconditionally love your child regardless of what mental or physical condition he/she is in, does that mean that you’ve also had a change of heart regarding the treatment of Terri Schiavo?

If Terry Schiavo had been my daughter, I would have done the same thing her husband did. Loving my child unconditionally does not mean letting his or her body continue existing in a vegetative state when his/her mind is no longer functional. When the brain is functionally "dead", the person is no longer there.

Gotta run. I have an appt.

Can you not imagine a condition whereby the love for your children would cease?
No. Can you?

Yes, why can't you?

Why do you assume there must be one?

Do you even know what an assumption is? You continually make this sort of statement where your own particular brand of emphasis clouds your judgment. It's not all your fault though; blogs tend to breed misunderstandings?

If God is the creator of all living things (that were not created to live forever in this world) then doesn’t that also entitle Him to the privilege of deciding when each creature will die?

You have no idea how stupid this sounds to me, do you?

Obeah
Under what condition(s) would your love for your children cease?

You have no idea how stupid this sounds to me, do you?

I doubt he does. That's why it's okey-dokey for god to kill fetuses, but abortion is murder. Smile; God kills you because he loves you!

Karen, m'love, you're not only a credit to your species, but a credit to atheists.
I can possibly think of instances (hypothetical - best qualify that!) where a father or mother would lose that familial love. But most of them would be extreme.
I can even come up w/instances where a mom might not even be aware of her offspring's living - ergo, my extrapolation of proximity being a requirement for that ephemeral critter we call love.

I'm guessing that jcc is conjuring up the shade of Schiavo for 1 of his patented lectures on hemispherectomies. This is 1 of his wild speculations that borders on blatant mendacity - but he always manages to leave out the details.

KA
I can think of such examples for A father or A mother also. I just can't think of any for myself. In a scenario in which a mother never gets to bond with her child, I can see it. Or if the parent becomes...AHA! It was right there in front of me the whole time and I was too stupid to see it! In fact, it nearly did happen to me. If the parent becomes too mentally unbalanced, he/she may not feel that love anymore. Okay, I concede the point. But I can't think of anything my kids could do to make me stop loving them. Because we're not talking hypothetical people here. I'm basing it on who they are and what they're like, our established relationships, etc. They'd really have to go out of character to do something horrible. And as I said, that would just make me more concerned for them.

Re:Schiavo. I figured jcc was going after the soul angle. But I was in a rush to leave and didn't go into it.

I think some of you simply have a different definition of unconditional love. To me it is simply the understanding that I have placed no prior conditions on my love for my children. Might a situation arise that would cause me to withhold love for my children? Maybe. I just don't know what that might be and would not spend much time thinking about such hypotheticals.

karen:

Do you mean salvation by grace through faith alone? Because as it stands it looks like salvation through grace alone, and through faith alone. That's two alones.

Let me try again: salvation is only possible by the grace of God—that is, it can’t be achieved on our own or through any agent other than God, and only then by His grace—His unmerited favor. How we appropriate that grace is through our faith and faith alone. We can’t appease God or buy His favor (i.e. His grace) by our actions. It is only through a trusting, faithful heart that we can secure our salvation. I hope that helped.

What's "sole Priesthood" of Christ?

Christ, and Christ alone is the only intermediary necessary for us to be able to come to God; no priests, vicars or Popes; our individual, personal, communion with Christ is sufficient.

The authority of scripture-THAT'S where everybody goes really looney tunes. Obviously it is NOT clearly explained at all.

It was pretty clear to me when I read it.

Or Fred Phelps?

Are you saying that he doesn’t have the freedom to hate?

How do you know they do this?

spanders has said as much many times here—to him, the Bible is merely a guide, a collection of well intentioned allegories that we should try to model our lives on—not the Word of God. And the Mormons added an entirely new book that is utterly unsubstantiated, and in many cases contradicted by, both history and archeology, to it.

And your answer to the first question leads me to believe that what you think is "clearly explained" is simply you version of "what [you] want to believe."

karen, I neither made those four points up, nor do I merely “want to believe” them; they’re the Four Great Statements that Luther, and Calvin (among others) concluded about Christianity during the Reformation in the 16th century.

So, my honest opinion, when it agrees with you, is fearless and the sign of an opening mind, but when it disagrees with you, is frightening and cold-hearted?

Um, yeah.

Have they ever mentioned feeling bad about not marrying or having children? (Remember one is reliant on the other!)Perhaps they have no desire for either. Such women do exist you know.

Not explicitly, but it doesn’t take a Ph.D. in psychology to pick up on subtle hints during conversations.

They may even be heterosexual! Imagine, heterosexual women, not pining for marriage and children.

Holy mackerel!—what did I possibly say that gave even the slightest hint at what their sexuality was?—talk about profiling, presuming, and stereotyping! I sure hope you don’t accuse me or any other conservative of doing such a thing in the future—‘cause you just gave me all the evidence I need that liberals can be as prejudiced as what they accuse conservatives of being.

Before you go on feeling sad for them, you might want to find out if maybe they are perfectly happy with their situations.

karen, they live alone (no partners of any kind—only pets), and have so all their adult lives.

I was speaking of those who aren't [contrite]. If you go back and reread what I wrote about the jerk, I think you'll see that.

My point was, everyone needs compassion.

Because I think that's exactly the kind of idea we would come up with on our own. Look at all the other ideas that are so strikingly similar. This one was just tweaked a bit to appeal to more people and satisfy more needs. I think it's obvious.

And for you to conclude that baffles me because Christianity stands alone on it’s foundation that God is the one reaching out to humanity—not the other way around; and that it’s our minds that need changing about Him—not His about us—for our salvation. No other religion offers that because those concepts aren’t intuitive to us.

If Terry Schiavo had been my daughter, I would have done the same thing her husband did. Loving my child unconditionally does not mean letting his or her body continue existing in a vegetative state when his/her mind is no longer functional. When the brain is functionally "dead", the person is no longer there.

But that wasn’t the case; Terri was anything but “brain dead”—she was clearly responsive to others (I saw the videos). Yes, she was severely brain damaged, but she wasn’t brain dead. Her death was an intentional act. Could you accept a court that orders you to stop feeding your child?—a child who could still squeeze your hand when you squeezed theirs?

jcc

It (authority of scriptures)was pretty clear to me when I read it.

So does Levitical Law still apply or not? Remember, 10 Commandments! And yes I know, specific laws for the bad boys and girls of the Jewish tribes of the times. But this is definitely one area you folks can't agree on, so even if it was clear to you, apparently it's not clear en masse.

What about transubstantiation? Certainly the Protestants and Catholics disagree here. Is that even in the Bible. I can't remember from my confirmation days.

No one agrees about what hell is either.

And so on. You may consider those questions rhetorical if you like.

Are you saying that he(Fred Phelps) doesn’t have the freedom to hate?

Of course not. And in some ways, I can see how he interprets the god of the Bible as hating everyone. The question was, if the scripture is so clear, how can it be interpreted in so dissimilar fashions?

spanders has said as much many times here—to him, the Bible is merely a guide, a collection of well intentioned allegories that we should try to model our lives on—not the Word of God. And the Mormons added an entirely new book that is utterly unsubstantiated, and in many cases contradicted by, both history and archeology, to it.

And the Christians deleted how many books that didn't quite fit the mold or might have been controversial? Plus you have absolutely no idea of who actually wrote it or how they got the information. It contains nothing but what was known at the time. Pretty lame for an omniscient divination. And like I said, it's as if they made a crude Venn Diagram of existing gods, took the overlap and added features for an upgrade. All they had was their imaginations back then. It really doesn't stretch mine a bit to think men came up with this idea. Not at all.

Not explicitly,(talking about marriage, children) but it doesn’t take a Ph.D. in psychology to pick up on subtle hints during conversations.

Well, Dr. Phil, I defer to your vast psychological experience.

Holy mackerel!—what did I possibly say that gave even the slightest hint at what their sexuality was?—talk about profiling, presuming, and stereotyping!

I didn't say you did say that. I was just heading that implication off at the pass before

jcc

It (authority of scriptures)was pretty clear to me when I read it.

So does Levitical Law still apply or not? Remember, 10 Commandments! And yes I know, specific laws for the bad boys and girls of the Jewish tribes of the times. But this is definitely one area you folks can't agree on, so even if it was clear to you, apparently it's not clear en masse.

What about transubstantiation? Certainly the Protestants and Catholics disagree here. Is that even in the Bible. I can't remember from my confirmation days.

No one agrees about what hell is either.

And so on. You may consider those questions rhetorical if you like.

Are you saying that he(Fred Phelps) doesn’t have the freedom to hate?

Of course not. And in some ways, I can see how he interprets the god of the Bible as hating everyone. The question was, if the scripture is so clear, how can it be interpreted in so dissimilar fashions?

spanders has said as much many times here—to him, the Bible is merely a guide, a collection of well intentioned allegories that we should try to model our lives on—not the Word of God. And the Mormons added an entirely new book that is utterly unsubstantiated, and in many cases contradicted by, both history and archeology, to it.

And the Christians deleted how many books that didn't quite fit the mold or might have been controversial? Plus you have absolutely no idea of who actually wrote it or how they got the information. It contains nothing but what was known at the time. Pretty lame for an omniscient divination. And like I said, it's as if they made a crude Venn Diagram of existing gods, took the overlap and added features for an upgrade. All they had was their imaginations back then. It really doesn't stretch mine a bit to think men came up with this idea. Not at all.

Not explicitly,(talking about marriage, children) but it doesn’t take a Ph.D. in psychology to pick up on subtle hints during conversations.

Well, Dr. Phil, I defer to your vast psychological experience.

Holy mackerel!—what did I possibly say that gave even the slightest hint at what their sexuality was?—talk about profiling, presuming, and stereotyping!

I didn't say you did say that. I was just heading that implication off at the pass before

Damn
Sorry about the multiple postings, folks. I know you guys are frustrated with me for talking to jcc in the first place and now I've done this. Gremlins in my server or something.
Let's try this one more time:

Holy mackerel!—what did I possibly say that gave even the slightest hint at what their sexuality was?—talk about profiling, presuming, and stereotyping!

I didn't say you did say that. I was just heading that implication off at the pass before

I don't agree with you in regards to your assumption that Christianity would take over the government or any of that. Christianity does not seek to harm anyone not Christians not atheists not anyone. Christian simply seek to inform you and save you from everlasting torture and pain.

-God Bless,
Christian with questions and comments

I personally want God's blessings on America. You don't?

christianwithq's

I personally want God's blessings on America. You don't?

I assume you mean Jeebus, as you are a christian with qs? Jeebus is tied up in Crackergate, right now.

Wouldn't you prefer the blessings of Cthulhu? His vengeance would be so much more horrible!

No I mean God the Father the one and true God, no other God but him.

No I mean God the Father the one and true God, no other God but him.

Can you describe him for our sketch artist? How do you know he's the *one true* god? Has he got some kind of validation papers? Who validated him?

He was before there was an Earth He created man and He should not have to be explained and the reason I cannot answer your "extremely hard questions" about my faith is simply because He is far to complex for the human mind to comprehend all I can do is trust him. You do believe in trust don't you?

Who validated that their is no God?

This is not to be insulting, only to get you to inquire within yourself.....

Do you believe that you have a brain?
Well most likely you do. Have you actually ever seen your brain? Probably not or you would be dead. You know that you have a brain though because you have studied about brains maybe and you see the evidence of your brain at work in your own body. This can be somewhat of a comparision to God. God is much more complex and multifacited than that however.

The Bible says that the fool has said in his heart that there is no god. I have heard it said and 'tis true....."When there is a design there is a designer, when there is a plan there is a planner." You are a magnificent creation created by a CREATOR. There is a plan for you, a maganificent plan for you! God bless you on your journey of discovering that plan, the Creator, and the Savior of your soul.

christianw/q's

Who validated that their is no God?

You are the one making the positive claim that a god exists. It is up to you to provide evidence to support your claim. I see no evidence of such as yet. You are not the first to come here with these arguments. Sadly, you will not be the last.

Do you believe that you have a brain?

No. I KNOW I have a brain. And you?

Have you actually ever seen your brain?

I have seen MRIs of my brain. I have had EEGs and ECTs. This is not analogous to a god, since the brain can be measured, quantified and studied, even altered.

What the Bible says about anything has no weight in this arena. You are relying on a book written by bronze age sheepherders who were barely literate. There is nothing divinely inspired about the book; it evinces nothing except what would be known at the time. In addition, it has been vastly edited and translated. Perhaps you should be following the god of the OT, before he got edited out, who required human sacrifices and had a wife?

Believe as you will. But try taking a closer look at what it is you really believe, and where it came from. Question whether it's really necessary, or are you just afraid of death and the probability that there are no fairy-tale endings?

Are you?

Am I what? Afraid of death? No.
Afraid that there are no fairy tale endings? No. Am I the least bit afraid that I'll come out on the wrong end of Pascal's wager? No.

Now, I asked you first. Time to own up. Do you need to believe in god and an afterlife because you fear your own mortality?

quitian'
You said

He is far to complex for the human mind to comprehend

Assuming that you are indeed human, then even you are incapable of "comprehending".

Sounds like you are left to making up shit as you go along.

Suck it jesus