I am bored by religious people's claim that there way is only way and they only have ticket for heaven stuff...are you among those who are sick and tired of such sales pitches?
does that still work..heard that till martin luther (not king) people used to ask for money..i thought people now sell it for sake of scoring points which might help them get their own ticket
Do you mean the Pentecostal nutcases like Pastor Terry Jones or the Islamic nutcases like the Mullahs in Iran?
The enemy is the thinking that subjective can metamorphasize into absolute if blessed by authority.
As I walk outside and look at all of nature--the trees, rivers, mountains, wildlife--then look up into the sky and observe a boundless universe of phenomenal objects and eternal activities--supernovas, quasers, blackholes, dark matter, anti-matter, neutrinos, etc, it is shocking that a religious person would think that an ancient book of myths provides all the answers to this perplexing and fantastic riddle.
It is tantamount to talking to a patient in a mental hospital.
And you know how frustrating that can be. They spout the same old tired, worn-out phrases that make no sense, making a discussion with them beyond boring, and a waste of one's consciousness.
ya..religion is limited just to homo sapien species and none can trace back to more than 5k years...nature is so big ,vast and huge ...
If a religious person can peer out into the universe, with its breathtaking majestic vastness and activities, then conclude that an ancient book of folklore provides the answer to all of this, then this person personifies narrow-mindedness and insanity.
ya but one has right to believe what ever he/she wishes too..but none has right to tell who would go to heaven and who wont or make sales pitches of my god is only way thing..if it is only way for them , then let them travel that way...but let others travel path they desire...
Note nobody religious came here and fought w/ you...
I'm sick yes, of the others who attack us
it is good that you too are sick..lets have 'my way for me' and 'your way for you'...that would be more mature way..isn't it?
Won't happen. There are too many people on a 'mission'.
Some are religious and motivated by their particular religious beliefs which advocate that they 'spread the good news'. Others are not religious (or at least don't think of themselves as religious) who 'evangelise' anti-religion because they believe it is their duty as a rational human being to do so. Richard Dawkins is one such evangelist and he has many disciples.
So other than preventing people from expressing religious belief, which is a human right (see the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights) or preventing people expressing their opposition to religious belief, there isn't really much to be done about it other than contributing yourself and trying to influence the debate, or avoiding it as much as humanly possible, which is probably easier said than done.
I'm just sick of religion, period. We treat each other like crap every single day, then go to church on Sunday and expect to get into some mythical place with milk and honey flowing.
Religion is just a way to control masses of people through fear and false promises. Nature is the only thing that controls this earth. The only power is in nature. Everything comes from nature and goes back to nature, the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat...all nature.
The more man meddles with nature, the worse off the world gets, because nature WILL rebel against being abused. Global warming is nature with a fever, trying to burn out the infection within it...which is US!
There is no mythical, invisible god, goddess or demon that will save us. We can only save ourselves. If you live a good life, take less than you give from the earth, and do not ever purposely harm another human being, what difference does it make where you go when you die?
well i am not totally sick of religion..it has had positive contribution too..but i am sick of this my way only way theme...live and let live.god or no god ..how does that matter if people respect others and concentrate of their own life...
I wonder; even then you regularly write in religious threads. Don't you?
I'll agree. The mentality used by those who are religious is completely out of line, because the teachings are completely out of context.
If you read my profile, you will notice that I introduced myself on HP as a person who is totally fed-up with narrow-minded, judgemental, know-it-all, blind-for-their-own-sins religious people. Thanks for raising the issue.
It's entirely possible to believe in God without being religious. Religion is not bad by itself but it often gets twisted by people so that sometimes what gets taught and generally believed is not the entire truth.
I've worked at a restaurant way too many church nights to think that everyone who goes to church actually follows what they are being taught. Many who go out to eat after church are rude, loud and way more messy than even needs to be.
Religions are like penises.
It's okay to have one.
It's okay to be proud of it.
It's not okay to whip it out in public and start waving it around.
And it's not okay to shove it down children's throats (or anyones, for that matter).
I would add that both can be factors in irrational behavior.
I disagree with the last. While I certainly would prefer that children are not fed religion, I can't support preventing it. People have a right to believe any fool thing they want and, unfortunately, to pass their ignorance on to their children.
I would campaign and vote against any attempt to prevent that. Sadly.
There's a difference between educating someone and forcing it down their throats.
I was raised in a "contemporary christian" (protestant?) household, went to church and sunday school, and was educated in the household about The Bible and everything related. But I was also raised being told by my parents "It's up to you what you want to believe, and by all means, look into any other religions that might interest you. You don't have to believe what we believe, but it's all we know so it's all we can teach you."
That most certainly sounds like what you're saying, but I definitely wouldn't consider it being shoved down my throat.
We are the only life forms on this planet that place our individually above natural logic. We will kill for it, poison our earth for it, die for it, and we teach this maddness on to our offsprings. Religion is the only safeguard we have that has stand the test of time. Without it there would be many more people liveing outside of natural logic. which would mean more killing, more raping of the earth, and more death.
technically, to go back to the beginning...."their" way was not theirs to begin with, but what preceded us all. you forget that we are latecomers. even if you don't believe their way, you could actually pick up one of many of "their" books and read. oh wait, they don't claim authorship, but - they are trying to interpret the book after reading it...not throwing the book aside and all that in the name of "science". that is, knowledge...all based on the ever decaying universe... i'd be surprised if all that current science is made up of, if it was all we could ever "know", would 1% of it be true.... religious people are the ones you actually love the most, etymologically speaking... the latin, religare, from which we obtain the word, religion, originally means "to bind together." or, at least we love those who love us - but christ said, love your enemies... tell me, are any of us not our own worst enemy? and are we not asked to love our neighbor as ourselves? in spite of your flaws, my flaws - love - religious or not, but you will always bid yourself to someone, unless of course, your name is zarathustra... but i can bet that tomorrow most of us will bind together at least with those who congratulate us in having our opinions in common with them... but no one whines more than the atheists, and no one is more bashful in an argument after it is exposed that they don't know the bible - they forget that we were practically made to learn the THEORY of evolution...and never supplied and working evidence for that too...in fact, quite the contrary...nature is not using patterns unless it is conscious, amigos! whale spine, dog spine, cat spine, ape spine, human spine, cow, monkey, possum, squirrel - in fact...most every mammal spine is composed of the same mechanical dynamics... or accidents must be redefined...as an artist and an art teacher, i would tell my students about the "ELEMENTS OF DESIGN." common terms in the arts. but where you find the elements of design compositionally, you also find the evidence of...a designer. who i happen to love because in spite of those who spit in my face, i will at least do my best to love these..."ANTI RELIGIOUS" sorts...
What you said about atheists is a lie. Most on here can eat you alive not only with biblical knowledge, but knowledge in general.
You flatter yourself. Not an unusual trait for a religionist.
After all, you do consider that you have the upper hand with having your own fairy to find your car keys and all.
Simple Megalomania. Seek help.
The mystery of life is this. You are love you are peace you are free NOW BE LOVE NOW BE PEACE NOW BE FREE THIS IS WHO YOU ARE. IF there is any other way to live upon the earth to bring order out of confusion then please let us know about it. There is no other answer so JUST BE IT. This is not religious and does not cost you any money JUST BE IT. Keep your money and JUST BE IT and enjoy this new way of life that JESUS CHRIST ESTABLISHED ON THE EARTH FOR HUMANITY ONLY AND NO OTHER SPECIES THAT LIVES ON THE EARTH. Churches will shut down and people will just walk with GOD like ENOCH did and was not found because GOD took him. Where did GOD take ENOCH? GOD took him to be with him ON HIS THRONE IN THE THIRD HEAVEN WHERE GOD LIVES. Heaven is GOD THRONE AND THE EARTH IS HIS FOOTSTOOL. What would people do if all the churches shuts down? THEY WILL JUST WALK WITH GOD LIKE ENOCH AND MYSELF AND CAN GATHER TOGETHER IN PEOPLES HOME OR CITY PARKS WHICH ARE PAID FOR BY CITY TAXES. MONEY IS A NON ISSUE WITH WALKING WITH GOD MOMENT EVERY MOMENT OF EVERY DAY. KEEP YOUR MONEY AND JUST WALK WITH GOD IF YOU ARE HUNG UP ABOUT THIS ISSUE. JUST BE IT IS FREE AND COST YOU NO MONEY EVER TO WALK WITH GOD MOMENT EVERY MOMENT. THANK YOU.
i would like first to thank you for your comments..secondly if you think jesus christ is all that you think HE is ,please follow him but dont ask me to do that..I am fine without christ ..yes i respect christ as human...but that is it...thank you...
THANK YOU. My emphases is on the principles of how to live life on the earth which is the reason for humanity and purpose why we are here on the earth and not some other place. I respect your decision to be without CHRIST. I just want your life to go smoother by being LOVE PEACE FREE. GO IN PEACE. SMILE. IT IS GREAT TO BE ALIVE ON PLANET EARTH.
AMBASSADOR BUTLER – I share your views. My mottos: Don’t talk, show! Don’t preach, practise and be an example!
I seldom ‘listen’ to people; I follow the examples of those who impressed me – those who love and respect others as they love and respect themselves, who suffer this imperfect life in dignity and grateful for the opportunity to BE.
I am an atheist and have been so for about 16 years, I was a Pentecostal "nut" as someone said here in an earlier post once for about 4 years. As an atheist my life has been so much more fulfilling, I have learned to enjoy the life I have in the here and now. One of the things I find fascinating about life is its mystery and its unpredictability. We are here now and could be gone in the next minute.
I have no time to live for a mythical god, I live my life for me and what is important to me. I am here to please myself and enjoy my loved ones and those people that are in some way important to me. I am like that guy in the bible that was condemned to hell for saying: And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry. Luke 12:19
This man was chastised for being a materialist by Jesus, but I like this man only recognize the real world. Jesus is irrelevant to me and how I live my life. I feel that as long as I live a decent life and harm no one I can die with a clear conscience.
I think the real problem is how Christ stated it Himself:
John 6:43-45 (Amplified Bible)
So Jesus answered them, Stop grumbling and saying things against Me to one another.
No one is able to come to Me unless the Father Who sent Me attracts and draws him and gives him the desire to come to Me, and [then] I will raise him up [from the dead] at the last day.
It is written in [the book of] the Prophets, And they shall all be taught of God [have Him in person for their Teacher]. Everyone who has listened to and learned from the Father comes to Me.
John 12:46-48 (Amplified Bible)
I have come as a Light into the world, so that whoever believes in Me [whoever cleaves to and trusts in and relies on Me] may not continue to live in darkness.
If anyone hears My teachings and fails to observe them [does not keep them, but disregards them], it is not I who judges him. For I have not come to judge and to condemn and to pass sentence and to inflict penalty on the world, but to save the world.
Anyone who rejects Me and persistently sets Me at naught, refusing to accept My teachings, has his judge [however]; for the [very] message that I have spoken will itself judge and convict him at the last day.
John 14:5-7 (Amplified Bible)
Thomas said to Him, Lord, we do not know where You are going, so how can we know the way?
Jesus said to him, I am the Way and the Truth and the Life; no one comes to the Father except by (through) Me.
If you had known Me [had learned to recognize Me], you would also have known My Father. From now on, you know Him and have seen Him.
The very words of Christ create the problem, for having read them every person can only either accept them as truth, or reject them as falsehood.
Once someone has come to faith and accepted those words as truth, it's difficult to not tell other folk that they exist, and need to be weighed and dealt with.
If I saw a blind man walking into a minefield, I would be remiss not to shout a warning, because it may offend him when I point out his perilous situation.
But I agree, if he tells me to mind my own business and shut up, I need do no more to warn him again, but the inclination is not to just stand there awaiting the explosion, or with morbid fascination wait to see if he manages to walk though without triggering a mine, but to try again to explain his peril.
Of course, others standing there shouting "Don't listen, there's no such things as minefields" is also hardly an attitude to persuade one to take a vow of silence in case folk are upset!
Too bad the metaphoric translation you're using is all F**ked up and inaccurate. But, nice try.
I would much apreciate it if you could show us how you would deliver your metaphoric translation of these verses.
Thank you in advance.
Sorry, I've tried that once already and many believers actively choose to be not interested.
But, I reserve the right to call out the original translation, anytime I choose to, since I know things were left out and completely left open to interpretation.
You, yourself claim to have done the research of the bible and it's parable scripture, yet you're questioning me about it.
I guess it goes to show you still need research.
Again- simply- "god" is not an external thing, nor is it an internal "thing"- it means be in control and master of self.
To be clearer- what you imagine "god" to be is what YOU should be in your own life.
There is no god. We control our own life and the sooner people start to understand that, the better off everyone will be.
I have my understanding ,,, Was just curious to hear yours.
I wouldn't tell someone that they were WRONG without some kind of explination as to what I disagreed with.
Seems like the sociable thing to do.
Well, you have part of it. What you do with it is up to you.
No, your way is to tell people that is your opinion and then you spout of what you believe.
You never take into consideration that someone is actually tell you truth, not opinion. Your own ego gets in your way, due to the religious garbage.
It would be sociable thing to do? Very few religious folk, have any idea what it means to be sociable, because their ego is in their way and the teaching has them blinded.
Religious uses humankind's mind against themselves. It's the only way it works.
You are intitled to your opinion.
Maybe if I was superior to everyone else ...I would tell them that my opinion is Fact and theirs is B__S__ like some other people on here.
Amazing, Cagsil knows the truth, but will not share it...
The ONE man in the world who is right!
Wow, 2000 years of bible study by some of the finest minds that have ever lived, and ONLY Cagsil (and probably those who consult HIM) may know the truth.
That's a weighty burden to carry, no wonder you act so superior to all those learned men that have examined scripture for so long.
It helps to properly qualify your statements as "I believe this and that" rather than in a way that means "the bible says this and that so I am right"
because, frankly... we're all interpreting, aren't we?
Thinks like "According to Paul of Tarsis [this aspect] is correct, the way things should be done...so I believe that what Paul means is..."
"According to Genesis [whatever number] the words are such and such and I interpret them to mean [whatever your meaning or interpretation]."
I believe that by properly qualifying what you say, you can be heard and you also do not shut out other peoples' interpretations or give them the feeling that they are wrong, their interpretations are wrong, etc... they may be wrong - but if you shut them down with inconsiderations that are not necessary, you've already put yourself in a place to be fought against, ridiculed, shot down, etc.
People will usually consider your points of view if you state them in a respectful manner and qualify what you say in a reasonable way.
aguasilver - Take a bow! You couldn’t have stressed this better.
You offer this false analogy as justification:
(If I saw a blind man walking into a minefield, I would be remiss not to shout a warning, because it may offend him when I point out his perilous situation.)
Let's take these points one-by-one. First, you see a man walking, and because he does not see what you think he should (what is obvious to you) then HE must be blind, even when he is closer to the threat and any potential sign that might be posted about the threat - but still, you have a magical way of KNOWING MORE THAN HE DOES WHAT IS THE RIGHT ACTION FOR HIM TO TAKE. In other words, He is crazy because He doesn't see the demons in the neighbor's dog and you do?
Then, you decide it is remisss not to shout a warning - so you yell out to watch out for the demons in the dog, getting the guy to stop, but then he is run over by a bus but that is O.K. because at least the demons didn't get him. Is that about it?
You are simply justifying your own insanity.
Here is a proper analogy: You observe an innocent (one with no guilt) and decide that his innocence cannot be tolerated because your own innocence did not last, so you offer him a piece of fruit from your own personal "tree of knowledge" in order to coerce him into living with the same dichotomy that has you ensnared.
Yours is an act of aggression - and it should be repelled by all thinking men.
Talk about all or nothing!
What is your take on the Good Samaritan parable? Really, I would like to know.
Your take on the man in the minefields was different than anything I had heard before. I was curious as to your take on the good samaritan parable. So I asked.
His take on the man in the minefield is exactly why so many people (including me) are against your religion. Are you beginning to understand why it is an act of aggression to spread it now?
His take on the minefield was drastically different. Did it make me think? Yes. I asked for his input on a parable and he didn't give it. So now I doubt he has any input on it that I would care to hear.
I didn't say his take was right by what I think. The pedulum of thoughts has swung to both extremes.
Did it change my view? Not hardley, but I listened and thought.
Care to give your thoughts?
The critical difference to me is between objective damage (physical injury in the good samaritan story) and subjective beliefs (spreading the word of god). There simply is no comparisons to be made between the two. One is aid for reality - a physical injury; the other is an aggressive attack in order to coerce acceptance of a belief system - like threatening a visit from the KGB if Communism isn't agreed to.
Would a Christian want the Mullahs of Iran to point out minefields? After all, they, too, are simply spreading their version of the "word of god".
Speaking persoanally I welcome anybody telling me of possible danger, whoever they are, and unlike my hypothetical blind man, I will seek to establish their truth for myself.
From the time I came to Christ in faith, I have always stated that if I ever found out that Christ was not who He says He is, I would be off like a shot...
....He has proven true for me these last 17 years, and that's a fact.
I was looking at it differently. Somehow I thought the intent of the one wanting to help was a parallel you could address. That aspect wouldn't matter if one is only looking at wanting to help as an act of aggression.
In real life, my friends of other and no faiths offer help from their perspectives. Not once have I considered it to be any form of aggression.
Starting to think I am one of the few who sees people not as their religion.
Intent is only important in reality. An act of faith may be right or wrong, depending on whether or not the belief is right or wrong, i.e. it is opinion, which means an action based on belief is an act of forcing one's opinion onto another - which equates to aggression.
Control is the word.
It could be argued that a schizophrenic genuinely believed the devil resided in the body of a teenager and that is why he had to cut out the teen's heart with a butcher's knife - and there would only be the intent of wanting to help.
That does not bring the teen back to life, though.
A much better analogy than the minefield is the parable of the prodigal son. The father didn't try to change his son's mind, stop him, or "help him" understand the errors of his ways.
He handed over the boy's inheritance without question, shrugged, and said to himself "Go step on a mine. It's your life."
The principle is called "Live and Let Live" in AA and Alanon.
Ok I am better able to see your point. And I prefer reality
Why use schizophrenia (a mental illness) as a basis? Why not apply something that is a choice within generally accepted parameters?
I still feel there is a huge difference between sounding a warning (as in a mine field) and taking someones life to expel a demon. Don't you? As people we see warnings everywhere from texting while driving to maintaining fidelity to not robbing banks. They are not stopped from harming themselves. How is that oppression?
Speaking for myself, I have spoken warnings when I see folks putting themselves in harms way, physically and spiritually. If they heed - great. If they don't or don't want to hear it - it is their choice. I have not exercized control or oppression right?
What is it called when a nonreligionist sounds a warning about christians? Wouldn't that also be oppression?
(I still feel there is a huge difference between sounding a warning)
Sorry to sound like a broken record, but you seem to continue to miss the point I originally made that the minefield analogy was and still is flawed when used as a comparison to a Christian warning someone that he or she needs to find Christ.
The minefield is a real, genuine threat regardless of opinion.
The need to find Christ is nothing BUT opinion.
(Speaking for myself, I have spoken warnings when I see folks putting themselves in harms way, physically and spiritually)
I do not doubt that your spiritual warning came from a genuine belief that you were only offering help, but do you now better understand that what you truly did was to try to impose your personal belief system onto someone else?
Reality is that trying to coerce someone to change actions is an attempt to control. You can rationalize it as caring concern. Bit don't kid yourself. It's not. It's about misguidedly trying to control another's behavior in order to make their actions conform to your worldview.
It is the antithesis of the actions of the father (god) in the parable of the prodigal son.
The mine field is either real, or it isn't. If there is a mine field - and the warning is that there are mines out there - it is compatible. If the "mine field" is a spiritual indiscretion and the warnng is spiritual in nature, then it seems compatible.
You did not address the basis for comparing with actions of a mentally ill person. I really do want to know.
Offering a warning is an effort to impose forcibly a belief system upon another to gain control? So if my hubby warns me the car has been acting up, to be careful going somewhere...he is trying to gain control over me? Isn't it possible he cares about me and wants me to be aware of a real hazzard?
I could see what your saying to be true in certain situations.
How can a person offer genuine help if they don't have something they believe in to offer help from?
What is it called when a nonreligionist sounds a warning about christians?
I hate to do this to you but there is no other way I know. :-)
(The mine field is either real, or it isn't.)
Correct. If P then not -P.
(If there is a mine field - and the warning is that there are mines out there - it is compatible. If the "mine field" is a spiritual indiscretion and the warnng is spiritual in nature, then it seems compatible.)
100% wrong. Sorry. :-).
A mine field can be shown to exist (meaning it has a physical presence, shape and a location.). It can be shown to be an objective, reality-based warning.
Spirituality can NEVER be more than opinion - it is ALWAYS subjective.
You cannot compare an objective warning - "hey, watch out, that car is about to run you over" with a subjective warning, "hey, watch out, because I believe if you don't repent you will go to hell."
Do you see the distinction now? Car is FACT. Hell IS opinion.
(You did not address the basis for comparing with actions of a mentally ill person. I really do want to know)
I only used the schizophrenic as an example so there would be no difficulty in understanding that it was his BELIEF and not any actual fact that caused him to act. Again, physical properties like a minefield can be shown to be real threats of phsical harm. Hell - or any other spiritual warning - cannot be shown to be reality based and thus must be an attempt to inject opinion - there is no other choice. Fact or opinion. That's all there is.
(Offering a warning is an effort to impose forcibly a belief system upon another to gain control?)
I am sorry but you are missing the argument. Is is NOT the warning - it is the BELIEF that causes the attempt to control. Case #1: for argument, let's say you believed 100% that drinking alcohol was a mortal sin that would lead to hellfire. You see someone take a drink, someone you like, and you feel compelled to tell them not to drink. Case #2: same exact thing exepct you have no belief about the evils of drinking. Do you still warn?
Obviously, not. But why not? Because your belief system changed. In Case #1, you were attempting to get someone else to alter their behavior (classic definition of attempting to control) because of YOUR BELIEFS.
(So if my hubby warns me the car has been acting up, to be careful going somewhere...he is trying to gain control over me?)
I hope you have been listening and you will know this answer. Of course not. Control has nothing to do with the WARNING - unless that warning is based on imposing subjective beliefs. Warning that the car has been acting funny is iobjective data and nformational; warning that hell awaits is subjective and a veiled threat.
(How can a person offer genuine help if they don't have something they believe in to offer help from?)
You should know this. The only help to offer is agape - action. If they have a flat, stop and offer help to fix it. But no one wants to hear your advice on how they should live their life unless they ask specifically for it - and even then they don't really mean it.
(What is it called when a nonreligionist sounds a warning about christians?)
A Sarah Palin moment?
You disdain for talking down to me is obvious. Not.
Perhaps I failed to smarten up to what all you are trying to say, but I sure tried.
You also failed to understand what I was saying.
Do you have any experience "offering" help for anything other than an emminent physical danger?
Do you think people of faith do nothing but tell people they are going to hell?
When I ask a trusted friend for advice, I do want to hear it. Why should I patronize those I trust most?
Right now I am pretty ok with being the genuine person I really am. I wouldn't trade my lack of your kind of knowledge for empathy.
Thanks for trying.
By the way, there is no correlation between offering help to a person who is physically injured and offering belief as a cure for subjectively imagined spiritual damage.
Boy are you confused.
First, it's my analogy and when I quote that he is a blind man, it's from the observation that he is walking wearing dark glasses and using a stick to try and find his way HE IS BLIND.
For the sake of not straining your convoluted brain further, let's just assume (for the analogy) that I met him on a train earlier and we discussed his blindness.
HE IS BLIND.....OK?
Now, please, where on earth do I mention dogs and demons! - whatever you are smoking I'll order some of it if you tell me where to score!
No magical reasoning, I had also tried to cross the minefield, and seen the large warning sign, unfortunately not in Braile, stating.... WARNING UNEXPLODED MINE FIELD
Do yourself (and us) a favour and check back into the unit, it's unfair that you are left out in the world when you obviously have problems adjusting to society.
Where did you ever conjure up a bus from?
This blind man, having ignored my warning shout, is now walking into the minefield, which is the last place I reckon you'd find a bus..... please, don't take another toke of whatever you are smoking, I think it's adulterated!
I think you are too stoned to continue this conversation...
No Winston, I saw a blind man that I had met and spoken to about his blindness earlier (remember I met him on the train... no of course you will not remember, short term memory loss and all that )anyhow I then saw this blind man entering a minefield, one which I had seen earlier and noticed because it had large signs up (like the one above) and I'd thought "Oh my, that poor man" (but he may have been rich, I use poor as a figure of speech, please do not assume anything else)"He may get injured or killed if I do not warn him"..... so I do warn him, and (just like most of the other blind men I have ever met, he ignores the warning and carries right on, until he steps on a mine.
You still don't get it.
THE PATHWAY AROUND THE MINEFIELD IS ALL IN YOUR HEAD.
Your analogy equates the minefield to hell or life without god - and therefore the acceptance of YOUR god saves one from the mines - Well, that is only your personal belief system - that makes it OPINION.
Can you understand that?
What YOU BELIEVE TO BE REALITY (god can save you from imagined disaster) cannot be compared to ACTUAL REALITY (if you step on a mine you will be torn apart). Comprende?
So even if we all agree that the blindness and the minefield are real, then we should beseech this dear blind man - if we are Muslims - to stop and touch his head to the floor toward Mecca 6 times a day and THAT WILL MAKE THE MINES MAGICALLY DISAPPEAR?
Now do you get it? You are trying to save this person by imposing your personal belief system on him - when that system may be wrong.
How would you feel getting this guy to turn over his life to Jesus and when you got to the Pearly Gates it was Allah on the throne and he was really pissed at Christians?
Maybe we should simply find the Right Christian Belief....
Maybe we encourage him to drink the JONES KOOL AID to make the mines disappear?
Or burn up in the KORESH compound?
Or speak in tongues and handle snakes?.
Or go to confession and kiss the Pope's ring?
(FILL IN THE BLANK)______________?.
In other words, don't confuse belief systems with reality - they are not synonymous.
I would suspect that if following your god is the same thing as walking in a mine field, I would rather not.
Or, are you saying that if I don't follow your god, he will lead me into a mine field?
No, I'm saying that when someone tells you that you are about to enter a minefield, it may be prudent to heed the warning and seek a route around it, or through it with the help of someone who knows the safe route.
God does not create minefields, He puts up the warning signs.
...and Winston, No I do not try to impose MY personal belief system on anybody, any more than you are on me.
To you belief and faith cannot be proven, and are therefore subjective, for me, who has had it proven, they are objective, and as real as gravity.
You really don't grasp the irony of your own comments?
In that case let me help:
(for me, who has had it proven, they [belief and faith] are objective, and as real as gravity.)
O.K. so what YOU BELIEVE is REALITY because....well, because by gosh, because you REALLY, REALLY BELIEVE IT. O.K. Gotcha.
(I do not try to impose MY personal belief system on anybody, )
Of course not - you just said what YOU BELIEVE IS REALITY, so you don't have a BELIEF SYSTEM to impose - you just IMPOSE YOUR REALITY ON EVERYONE ELSE!
(God does not create minefields, He puts up the warning signs.)
There you go - IMPOSING YOUR REALITY.
Imposing personal reality - that is EXACTLY what David Koresh did - imposed his reality on his followers. It is EXACTLY what caused believers to fly planes into buildings and blow themselves up for Allah.
Aside to Audience: psychosis - the inability to distinguish FANTASY from REALITY.
"Aside to Audience: psychosis - the inability to distinguish FANTASY from REALITY."
Problem is, my audience understand what I mean, and your audience understand what you mean, but there is no translation.
I deal with Chinese folk all day long, nice decent and very intelligent Chinese folk, who speak English, and four other languages... problem is, when they speak English, they are thinking in Chinese, and no matter what: we both have to translate our thoughts into words that MAY be understandable to each other, we have a basic misunderstanding because Chinese thoughts do not fit into English words....
Of course if I could learn Chinese it would help, but then I'd be thinking in English and speaking in Mandarin..... same problem.
Like the Sheriff said in 'Cool Hand Luke' (just before they shot Paul Newmans charater "What we have here is a failure to communicate"
("What we have here is a failure to communicate")
I think not - I think you understand perfectly. You just don't like it.
Myself, I think what we have here is failure to admit ownership - of a faulty analogy. For clarification, here is what you originally said:
(Once someone has come to faith and accepted those words as truth, it's difficult to not tell other folk that they exist, and need to be weighed and dealt with.
If I saw a blind man walking into a minefield, I would be remiss not to shout a warning, because it may offend him when I point out his perilous situation.)
Sorry, but even a blind man can see that you are making an analogy that compares stepping into a minefield with the risk of not knowing the word of god (as you understand it).
Once again I point out that your analogy is flawed in that a minefield is an objective threat while religious beliefs are subjective.
You simply seem unwilling to admit that no matter how you slice or dice it, YOUR belief is NOT NECESSARILY REALITY, regardless of how much YOU believe it and want it to be real.
A 3-year-old may believe with all his heart, mind, and body that Santa Claus is real - but belief does not CAUSE reality to change.
It then follows that when you attempt to force YOUR beliefs onto someone else, it is not a warning but an act of aggression.
He puts up warning signs to what? What are we being warned about?
I am not sick of my way is the only way because it is the only way - FOR ME. If Jesus indeed did say as he is reported to have said, "I am the way" he was speaking the truth...for him. Trouble seems to have started when a bunch of people who didn't want to take any responsibility for finding their way decided to follow somebody elses way. What I am rather tired of, considering it has gone on for centuries without end is one dogma trying to convince another dogma that it is the alpha dogma. We have tortured, maimed, condemned, ignored, blasted the living crap out of each other over whose way is the right way. If my way was the right way for everyone then there would be no need for anyone else on the planet but me......n' that would be extremely boring. And the chances are I would get good and sick of it!
We are all I's! And whatever you say I am, you is.
No, I mean what I said, 2000 years of the finest minds that ever walked the earth have given us the bibles we use today, and we current folk, who seek to understand or denigrate, according to our faith, or lack of it, are no match, no matter how many trick cyclist books you have read.
It seems more like the most evil, power-hungry, manipulative minds, that walked the earth, gave us the bible.
These manipulative minds are no match for moral courage. They are no match for scientist or even common sense.
So all these guys were weak huh!
There are none so blind as those who cannot see.
Quintus Florens Tertullian
Chrysostom (John of Antioch)
DARK AGES OF THE CHURCH
REFORMATION OF THE CHURCH
ENLIGHTMENT OF THE CHURCH
John Knox (1513-1572)
WORD GROWTH IN THE CHURCH
Roger Williams (1603-1684)
John Bunyan (1628-1688)
George Fox (1624-1691)
SANTIFICATION OF THE CHURCH
Susanna Wesley (1659-1742)
TRUTH PREVAILS IN THE CHURCH
John Newton (1725-1807)
Robert Raikes (1736-1811)
Francis Asbury (1745-1816)
Robert Murray McCheyne
Charles Grandison Finney
Charles Haddon Spurgeon
Absalom Backus Earle
Adoniram Judson Gordon
Dwight Lyman Moody
EVANGELISM OF THE CHURCH
Thomas DeWitt Talmage (1832-1902)
James Hudson Taylor (1832-1905)
Samuel Porter Jones (1847-1906)
John Gibson Paton (1824-1907)
William Bradford Booth (1829-1912)
John Hyde (1865-1912)
Benajah Harvey Carroll (1843-1914)
John Wilbur Chapman
Albert Benjamin Simpson
Cyrus Ingersoll Scofield
Amzi Clarence Dixon
Reuben Archer Torrey
Frederick Brotherton Meyer
C. T. Studd
James M. Gray
William Ashley Sunday
William Edward Biederwolf
T. T. Martin
Melvin Ernest Trotter
Henry Clay Morrison
Reuben (Uncle Bud) Robinson
George W. Truett
George Campbell Morgan
Lee Rutland Scarborough
Rodney (Gypsy) Smith
William Bell Riley
Louis S. Bauman
William Leroy Pettingill
Harry A. Ironside (1876-1951)
Lewis Sperry Chafer (1871-1952)
John Franklyn Norris (1877-1952)
Thomas Todhunter Shields (1873-1955)
William Reed Newell
John Edward Brown (1879-1957)
Louis Entzminger (1876-1958)
William Graham Scroggie
Ernest Ira Reveal
Robert Pierce Shuler
Martin R. De Haan
Charles Frederick Weigle
Robert Reynolds Jones
Charles Edward Fuller
Alva J. McClain
Walter Lewis Wilson
Dallas Franklin Billington
Fred Sheldon Donnelson
George Beauchamp Vick
Gaylord Ford Porter
Oliver Boyce Greene
Robert Greene Lee
John Richard Rice
Bascom Ray Lakin
Appeal to authority.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacie … ority.html
Monica Belluci says Mcdonalds has best burgers. Hence Mcdonalds is great.
Now if we were talking about a gaggle of atheists speaking on the veracity of the bible, I'd agree, however we are talking about numerous men who were biblical scholars, having studied the bible for many years, so I dismiss your evasion.
What does that mean? They are able to quote from memory? They understand the passages better than others? What exactly is a biblical scholar?
I would think the key factors are a deep understanding of Greek and Latin, possibly Aramaic also, but most of all a wide experience of life backed by a classical education.
I can quote from memory, however I'm no scholar, I know my bible, but not church history and the early fathers, plus there are still areas of various doctrines that I have not studied... yet!
Here's one who you may have heard of, C.S.Lewis:
1911-1913 Studied at Cherbourg School, Malvern England, following Warren; remained remarkably poor in mathematics, unlike his mother, but evidenced an increasing affection for "Northernness" e.g. Wagner's music and Norse mythology. It was during this time that he abandoned his childhood Christian faith.
1914-1916 In April, Lewis met Arthur Greeves (1895-1966), of whom he said, in 1933, "After my brother, my oldest and most intimate friend." Extensive literary and philosophical studies (Latin, Greek, French, German, and Italian) under the private tuition of W. T. Kirkpatrick ("The Great Knock").
1916 Won scholarship to University College, Oxford.
1917 From April 26 until September, Lewis was a student at University College, Oxford. He enlisted in the British army during World War I and was billeted in Keble College, Oxford, for officer's training. His roomate was Edward Courtnay Francis "Paddy" Moore (1898-1918). Jack was commissioned an officer in the 3rd Battalion, Somerset Light Infantry, on September 25 and reached the front line in the Somme Valley in France on his 19th birthday.
1918 On April 15 Lewis was wounded on Mount Berenchon during the Battle of Arras. He recuperated and was returned to duty in October, being assigned to Ludgerhall, Andover, England. He was discharged in December 1918. His former roommate and friend, Paddy Moore, was killed in battle and buried in the field just south of Peronne, France.
1919 The February issue of Reveille contained "Death in Battle," Lewis' first publication in other than school magazines. From January, 1919 until June, 1924, he resumed his studies at University College, Oxford, where he received a First in Honour Moderations (Greek and Latin Literature) in 1920, a First in Greats (Philosophy and Ancient History) in 1922, and a First in English in 1923.
1920 During the summer, Paddy Moore's mother, Mrs. Janie King Moore (1873-1951) and her daughter, Maureen, moved to Oxford, renting a house in Headington Quarry. Lewis lived with the Moores from June 1921 onward. In August 1930, they moved to "Hillsboro," Western Road, Headington. In October, 1930, Mrs. Moore, Jack, and Major Lewis purchased "The Kilns" jointly, with title to the property being taken solely in the name of Mrs. Moore with the two brothers holding rights of life tenancy. Major Lewis retired from the military and joined them at "The Kilns" in 1932.
1924 From October 1924 until May 1925, Lewis served as philosophy tutor at University College during E.F. Carritt's absence on study leave for the year in America.
1925 On May 20, Lewis was elected a Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford, where he served as tutor in English Language and Literature for 29 years until leaving for Magdalene College, Cambridge, in 1954.
1926 "Dymer," a book-length narrative poem, published under the pseudonym of Clive Hamilton.
1929 Lewis became a theist: "In the Trinity Term of 1929 I gave in, and admitted that God was God, and knelt and prayed..." Albert Lewis died on September 24.
1931 Lewis became a Christian: One evening in September, Lewis had a long talk on Christianity with J.R.R. Tolkien (a devout Roman Catholic) and Hugo Dyson. That evening's discussion was important in bringing about the following day's event that Lewis recorded in Surprised by Joy: "When we [Warnie and Jack] set out [by motorcycle to the Whipsnade Zoo] I did not believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and when we reached the zoo I did."
1933 "The Pilgrim's Regress : An Allegorical Apology for Christianity, Reason, and Romanticism" was published. The fall term marked the beginning of Lewis' convening of a circle of friends dubbed "The Inklings." For the next 16 years, on through 1949, they continued to meet in Jack's rooms at Magdalen College on Thursday evenings and, just before lunch on Mondays or Fridays, in a back room at "The Eagle and Child," a pub known to locals as "The Bird and Baby." Members included J.R.R. Tolkien, Warnie, Hugo Dyson, Charles Williams, Dr. Robert Havard, Owen Barfield, Neville Coghill and others.
1935 At the suggestion of Prof. F.P. Wilson, Lewis agreed to write the volume on 16th Century English Literature for the Oxford History of English Literature series. Published in 1954, it became a classic.
1936 "The Allegory of Love: A Study in Medieval Tradition" was published, for which he receives the Gollancz Memorial Prize for Literature in 1937.
1938 "Out of the Silent Planet," the first novel in the Space Trilogy.
1939 At the outbreak of World War II in September, Charles Williams moved from London to Oxford with the Oxford University Press to escape the threat of German bombardment. He was thereafter a regular member of "The Inklings."
1941 From May 2 until November 28, The Guardian published 31 "Screwtape Letters" in weekly installments. Lewis was paid 2 pounds sterling for each letter and gave the money to charity. In August, he gave four live radio talks over the BBC on Wednesday evenings from 7:45 to 8:00. An additional 15-minute session, answering questions received in the mail, was broadcast on September 6. These talks were known as "Right and Wrong."
1942 The first meeting of the "Socratic Club" was held in Oxford on January 26. In January and February, Lewis gave five live radio talks on Sunday evenings from 4:45 to 5:00, on the subject "What Christians Believe." On eight consecutive Sundays, from September 20 to November 8 at 2:50 to 3:05 p.m., Lewis gave a series of live radio talks known as "Christian Behavior."
1943 "Perelandra," the second novel in the Space Trilogy, was published. In February, at the University of Durham, Lewis delivered the Riddell Memorial Lectures (Fifteenth Series), a series of three lectures subsequently published as The Abolition of Man.
1944 On seven consecutive Tuesdays, from February 22 to April 4 at 10:15 to 10:30 p.m., Lewis gave the pre-recorded talks known as "Beyond Personality." Taken together, all of Lewis' BBC radio broadcast talks were eventually published under the title Mere Christianity. From November 10, 1944 to April 14, 1945, "The Great Divorce" was published in weekly installments in The Guardian.
1945 Charles Williams, one of Lewis' very closest of friends, died on May 15. "That Hideous Strength," the last novel in the Space Trilogy, was published.
1946 Passed over for Merton professorship of English Literature at Oxford, but was awarded honorary Doctor of Divinity by the University of St. Andrews.
1947 "Miracles: A Preliminary Study" was published
1950 "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe," the first of the seven Chronicles of Narnia, was published.
1951 "Prince Caspian," the second of the seven Chronicles of Narnia, was published. Mrs. Moore died on January 12. Since the previous April, she had been confined to a nursing home in Oxford.
1952 "The Voyage of the 'Dawn Treader'," the third of the seven Chronicles of Narnia, was published. In September, he met Joy Davidman Gresham, seventeen years his junior (b. April 18, 1915 - d. July 13, 1960), for the first time.
1953 "The Silver Chair," the fourth of the seven Chronicles of Narnia, was published.
1954 "The Horse and His Boy," the fifth of the seven Chronicles of Narnia, was published. In June, Lewis accepted the Chair of Medieval and Renaissance Literature at Cambridge. He gave his Inaugural Lecture, "De Description Temporum," on his 56th birthday and gave his last tutorial at Oxford on December 3rd.
1955 "The Magician's Nephew," the sixth of the seven Chronicles of Narnia, was published, as was his biography "Surprised by Joy: The Shape of My Early Life."
1956 "The Last Battle," the seventh and final book in the Chronicles of Narnia, was published (he receives the Carnegie Medal in recognition of it), as was "Till We Have Faces: A Myth Retold." On April 23, he entered into a civil marriage with Joy at the Oxford Registry Office for the purpose of conferring upon her the status of British citizenship in order to prevent her threatened deportation by British migration authorities. In December, a bedside marriage was performed in accordance with the rites of the Church of England in Wingfield Hospital. Joy's death was thought to be imminent because of bone cancer. Joy had converted to Christianity from Judaism in 1948 partly under the influence of Lewis's books and divorced in 1953 due to her husband's desertion.
(23 April) Married Joy Davidman Gresham in secret civil ceremony when British Home Office denied continuance of her residency permit. Davidman had converted to Christianity from Judaism in 1948 partly under the influence of Lewis's books, met Lewis in 1952, divorced in 1953 due to her husband's desertion and later developed bone cancer.
(21 March) Married Joy in church ceremony at her hospital bed.
1958 Throughout 1957, Joy had experienced an extraordinary recovery from her near terminal bout with cancer. In July of 1958, Jack and Joy went to Ireland for a 10-day holiday. On August 19 and 20, he made tapes of ten talks on The Four Loves in London. Lewis was elected an Honorary Fellow of University College, Oxford. "Reflections on the Psalms" was published.
1960 Subsequent to learning of the return of Joy's cancer, Jack and Joy, together with Roger Lancelyn Green and his wife, Joy, went to Greece from April 3 to April 14, visiting Athens, Mycenae, Rhodes, Herakleon, and Knossos. There was a one-day stop in Pisa on the return. Joy died on July 13 at the age of 45, not long after their return from Greece. "Studies in Words" and "The Four Loves" were published.
1961 "A Grief Observed," an account of his suffering caused by his wife's death in 1960, published under the pseudonym of N. W. Clerk. "An Experiment in Criticism" was also published.
1962 "They Asked for a Paper: Papers and Addresses" was published.
1963 Lewis died at 5:30 p.m. at The Kilns, one week before his 65th birthday on Friday, November 22, after a variety of illnesses, including a heart attack and kidney problems. He had resigned his position at Cambridge during the summer and was then elected an Honorary Fellow of Magdalene College, Cambridge. His grave is in the yard of Holy Trinity Church in Headington Quarry, Oxford.
This same day, American president John F. Kennedy was assassinated and Aldous Huxley died.
You don't have to BE a biblical scholar, but it would be a good idea to at least READ the writings of real biblical scholars. Here is one who has published a great many books recently: Bart D. Ehrman, Ph.D.
However, don't read him if you wish to hold onto your imaginary concept of the bible as infallible.
Your dismissal doesn't change the truth.
Because whom you call as bible scholars are just another educated people who seed their belief in bible. Keep on deluding innocent people john, what's next ?
So we lost our smarts after 1984 ? Now that is a worry, no wonder you guys can't get along
No, we just had to go out to have a great curry, so I did not have time to add more, but for a start I would say Derek Prince was one of the greats:
http://www.dpmuk.org/Groups/81023/DPM/D … Years.aspx
At the age of nine Derek was sent off to boarding school, leaving his grandparents whom he loved dearly. From that time on all his teachers and associates were masculine. In the school system of that time both class work and sports were highly competitive. He participated enthusiastically and successfully in sports, and academically, he was usually at the top of his class. His early training in diligence and thoroughness enabled him to maintain that position.
When he was thirteen, his headmaster entered his name in the competitive exam for a place at Eton College, and he was one of the fourteen boys of his age to be enrolled as king's scholars in the election of 1929. Like other boys his age, he had begun to study Latin at the age of nine and Greek at ten and was writing and translating verse in both languages by the time he was twelve. As he studied the classics, he became more enthralled with the realm of ideas and was drawn toward philosophy. At the back of his mind was always the tantalizing question: What is the real meaning and purpose of life?
His father, who retired as a colonel and settled in a country home in Somerset, encouraged him in his quest. In 1934, his father gave him an allowance of twenty pounds per month, and Derek set off with a friend to 'see the Continent. 'Derek's aptitude for languages enabled him to find the cheapest rooms and food in a time when few people his age were traveling. He often found the local people and customs more interesting than museums and ruins, even in Rome and Athens where the classics had been written.
Upon his return to England, Derek entered King's College, Cambridge, as the senior scholar of his year. (King's is a sister college of Eton.) There also he distinguished himself academically, and from 1938 to 1940 he was the senior research student of Cambridge University. He specialised in the philosophy of Plato and entitled his dissertation 'The Evolution of Plato's Method of Definition.' In 1940, at the age of twenty-four, he was elected a fellow of King's College, Cambridge.
Derek's academic career, however, was interrupted abruptly by World War II. On the basis of his philosophical convictions, he chose to enter the forces as a non-combatant and began as a private in the Royal Army Medical Corps.
At this point he decided to look into another kind of philosophy about which he knew very little. He bought a new black leather-bound Bible for his reading material in the army. He had been christened and confirmed as an Anglican and had attended required chapel services during his five years at Eton. At age eighteen, however, he had concluded that 'religion does not do much for me' and only attended chapel at King's College when it was his turn to read the lesson. For the first nine months in the army he ploughed his way through the Bible, finding it baffling and bewildering, unlike any other book he had ever read. He said, 'I couldn't categorise it. Was it history, philosophy, literature, theology, poetry - or even divinely inspired?'
Then in a billet in Yorkshire in July 1941, he met the Author. Recalling that supernatural experience, he says:
Out of that encounter, I formed two conclusions which I have never had reason to change: first, that Jesus Christ is alive; second, that the Bible is a true, relevant, up-to-date book.
These two conclusions radically and permanently altered the whole course of my life. Immediately the Bible became clear and intelligible to me; prayer and communion with God became as natural as breathing; my main desires, motives and purposes in life were transformed overnight.
I had found what I was searching for! The meaning and purpose of life is a Person!
Of course as he could read and translate both Greek and Latin, plus majored in philosophy at Oxford, he probably does not count as informed in your great opinion, no doubt you could have corrected him if you had met him....
....or maybe you are only good for inane one liners?
And hey - if you skim through this list really fast... like scrolling to beat all...
Your eyes will mess up and tell your brain that
Are on this list lol
(time to leave the forums, been in here too long) lol
Yeah, go ahead and make your case for your absurd beliefs. These names mean nothing to me when your whole belief is based on willful ignorance.
And just because I can't see something that does not exist, does not make me blind. Even when you try your best to make me see it, you still fall way short. I just want solid evidence.
You have provided NOTHING.
Conversely, those who CAN see things that don't exist are INSANE.
Yeah. That's why Bible was written on paper and not released as PDF. Finest minds of those times ya know
Yes I understand your feelings on this and can empathise very well.
We as a society, in my humble opinion, should be more respectful and tolerant of what other people choose to follow and believe, regardless of our opinions. And each to their own, but no denigrating of each other's religions or beliefs; and to agree to disagree, if you need to enter the debate, in a harmonious and courteous manner.
The problem with having to be right is that it blocks one's ability to observe the truth and obtain the pure knowledge. But hey, I could be wrong about that!
After reading these posts I have seen Atheist swearing up and down on this thread that Christians are pushing their religion on them, yet from all the stuff I've been reading from all the threads it seems to me that atheist are the worst ones pushing their belief system on others! Christians will retaliate when backed into a corner becuase they must defend their belief!
Atheist seem to point the finger as though christians are pushing their beliefs... when in fact they push their crap so hard it's insulting and revolting!
They seem to be the ones twisted and need psychological help! They can't see their own wrongs!
You people are blind in one eye and cant see out of the other! Why would you throw stones if you live in glass houses? You have no right to tell Christians that they are pushing their beliefs when you are doing the same thing but in a more agreesive and hateful manner.
Somebody will start a new post on something in the Christian's area and ask their views on something and everyone will start giving their views and here will come a nonbeliever calling them insane or stupid. That is pushing your belief down their throats, but you will turn around and say the christians are pushing them down your throat. What a crock!
Thats why I came to this area to find some real christians because all of the Atheist and non believers are confused and dont know which thread to post under. They lurk and post in the christian threads and push their mumbo jumbo and self sustaining, self righteous garbage on those of us who already know the real truth.
Then they have the gall to ask why are we in the Christian forum posting christian beliefs? They call themselves intelligent by copying and pasting random searches that they stumbled on on the internet yet they paste it to the wrong forum.
I have come to the realization that they are as intelligent as the search engine that they are using. this forum has led me to believe that atheism is nothing more than another religion that is trying to be pushed onto others by means of intimidation and name calling. Its like you are saying that if you dont believe my way then you are a dummy-spit..
Respect me and I'll respect you
You claim to know the "real truth" while everyone else is twisted and wrong and what they say is just "mumbo jumbo and self righteous garbage"
Respect is earned, not demanded.
marty, I have observed the same exact pattern and behavior you have described on the christian forums. I thank God for the unbelievers that do show respect for other's belief.
I came to this site with respect for all and I was degregated for my comments. I never said anything out of the way. All i id was post an answer to a Christian thread in the christian area and i was verbally attacked by Atheist calling me insane for my belief in the One True God. As a child I was raised to never speak unless spoken to. I wasnt talking to Atheist so why did they talk to me?
Mr. marty...try ticking them off. An example, most Atheist have no idea how spiritual values alone gave humanity the notion of the sacredness of human life.
Actually Luvpassion, an Atheist knows all too well how "sacredness" came into being. It's one of the main reasons for Atheists screaming back at those who claim "divine" words or "holy" scripture or "god's will".
They are the ones who know how it came into being. It's today's children of "god", mostly Christians who are blinded by their own faith to see that what the Atheists are saying is truth.
Atheists don't know squat about sacredness. Screaming Atheists is one of the problems, not a solution.
I didn't say anything about Christianity or anything like it so save that. The truth is atheists have a pyscological propensity for self destruction and skewed morals and a need to take everyone down with them.
You can't even see grey. You don't see a dfference between a lie and misunderstanding.
Actually I have a good view...a shinning lake with sailboats. As for you personally are you mad?
Not Mad crazy silly...Mad angry at my comment. You @##$$$ you don't know #@$^ about life, and your @#$^ beliefs
Interesting. Nice piece of tolerance.
You cannot be serious.
Am I ? Why because I think of atheists the way you think of anyone who is spiritual?
I'm comfortable being hated on here by everyone...can atheist say the same?
WOW! Nothing like assuming you understand someone and couldn't be further off base than the Earth is from the Sun. Unbelievable.
But all we have is your word for it...and while I think you are unique in your beliefs, you can't speak for other atheists on hubpages....believe it or not.
Um, sorry no idea who u are but he is not an atheist. Really good post though. Cheers. I'm Kimberly by the way.
I don't speak "for" them. I speak based on representing what they have already said.
I'm confused is it love or passion? Do we love passion? Or do we have to pick one? Can we just do stuff without either?
Said...face to face? Or in an obscure forum in a virtual world.
As intuitive as I've always believed you to be...it's hard for me to understand how you can confuse virtual and real.
Cag's com'on play a bit, she's trying so hard
Cagsil, they're really not that far - think bigger
I best get my ticket now for bottom floor, cause I love going down!
what's wrong with me today? stuff keeps cumming out weird?
I think that , well you know the one, is breaking them cause for you know I got the smoke
They have religious folk looking into them....self claiming "real" truth. But, I thought you already knew that.
Cags, Look on your recent hubtivity, check how many posts you make telling everyone what the truth is, how they are selfish, how much you judge them, and mostly...
How you have all the answers
I don't claim to have answers and had you gotten over yourself, you would realize it's not answer people fail to get, it's the irrational thinking they choose to be ignorant about.
So, you want to try again.
And, people LIE too, even though they do that. So, again you have no valid point. Good going.
Posted 23 minutes ago
Actually Luvpassion, an Atheist knows all too well how "sacredness" came into being. It's one of the main reasons for Atheists screaming back at those who claim "divine" words or "holy" scripture or "god's will".
They are the ones who know how it came into being. It's today's children of "god", mostly Christians who are blinded by their own faith to see that what the Atheists are saying is truth.
Posted 58 minutes ago
Mind your business. I can voice a response, which does not require a further response. If you don't have a clue as to what I am talking about, then apparently your view is skewed. I would think that was obvious. But, in your case, I guess not.
Posted 93 minutes ago
You're one of those people who like to twist the argument to an "innocent" person getting executed.
Nice try. Only a fool would think that an innocent person would be executed. Especially, considering the method in place to prevent it from happening.
And, it's not a murder campaign. Get it straight...we do not live in a civilized society, which apparently you think we do.
Posted 100 minutes ago
Really, I would have never guessed, but since the world we live in isn't actually filled with civilized and responsible people, then the "system" is required.
Apparently actions speak louder than words. The fact that you went through the trouble to RE-post my posts, shows quite a bit.
Arrogance? You're funny.
Edit: You know it would nice if you actually had a rational thought go through that brain you seem to think you use.
How is that for arrogance>?
My hub solves most of your dilemma.
Posted 2 hours agoreplypermalinkreport
The fact that people go out of their way to try and make their life not change just goes to show how ignorant they choose to be.
Posted 3 hours ago
If you can't see your arrogance, maybe you are in denial about your posts? Need glasses? a dictionary?
wow! I thought I was the only one seeing that! I was just accused of having no sense of humor by cags, because I posted that I thought it was fine for men to be like their mothers
I think he thinks we all need to be brought up correctly, and although I doubt that he has any kids of his own, he is the one to set us straight! hee hee hee! now why do I find that so humourous?
Answers? That is exactly the problem: religions ridiculous answers!
Remind me again, which one worships and obeys invisible friends?
No, you come here proclaiming this:
That is not respectful.
No I came here to proclaim the real truth. You dont want to know the truth cause you cant handle the trutth. If you dont believe what im saying let me pull a trick out of your bag and go copy and paste some of the atheists comments.
I'm not going to say all the atheist do this, but there are some who do! I agree a person shouldnt't throw stones if he or she lives in a glass house and we do see a lot of stones being thrown! I say respect other's beliefs and stop with the insults!
If people don't agree with your post, then debate it, but be civilized and respectful of each other! Everyone seems to get in on out-shouting each other! I'm as guilty as anybody! We take it personal when someone insults our beiefs!
I agree with you Marty. Some do jump in, at times, when it is a dicussion that has nothing to do with them. However, this is an open forum so we have to deal with it. Some should learn to respect the other person. They don't have to respect the belief, but the person who is believing!
Everyone should show some respect in their posts be it Christian, atheist or whatever!
I agree with Elizabeth; however a world of fluffy puppies, kittens and cotton candy aren't the real world.
Shades of gray you know. One can turn the other cheek and expect in this day and age to get knocked on their a@$.
You don't believe it?
Good luck with that.
I agree Elizabeth. Respect is a sign of maturity.
Awesome thread whoever started it, too lazy to check, but feel better now that I'll be going down for eternal death
It has come to my conclusion that there is no respect at all on this site. Thank you very much!!!!
There is nothing to respect with regard to religion.
There's no respect on the internet at all.
Cool why should there be...I mean unless you care if some unknown person, in some unknown place, with unknown values and only written ideas is worth worring about gaining respect from.
Hello world respect me even if you don't know who I am.
Hey I'm not saying there should or shouldn't be.
I was just informing marty1968, who felt it necessary to point out "it has come to my conclusion that there is no respect at all on this site"
If he thinks it's just this site, he's in for a world of disappointment as he travels the interweb.
Sounds like an early onset of "sick-of-it-itis" has struck once more....
Am I showing symptoms?
What happens if I develop full on "sick-of-it-itis"?
People have no concept of the digital wall that separates the real world from the fantasy world. The truth is in here a person can say anything they wouldn't normaly say in the real world...and it helps having internet ninja's to back you up.
So have fun and don't believe everything you read.
Haha I'm 23 years old and I work on the internet.
You need not tell me all that.
Are you I wouldn't know, maybe your 53 and you drive a garbage truck.
I'm 23 and the princess of Albania.
I could be, but I would imagine a 53 year old garbage truck driver would not have the time to maintain such a web presence as I do, all with the same (or similar) pictures and information.
Because he is 53 and a garbage truck driver, he DOES have the time to do that.
But then who would this strapping young lad be in all of his pictures?
You miss the point, and have one as well.
The strapping young lad could be anyone how many pictures of people do you want? A picture is only worth a thousand words to someone who knows the person personally, otherwise it's just another "Could Be"
Want to see some more ghost pictures?
I believe that's you Mr. Garrett.
P.S. I have several pictures of me wearing my tierra.
Come ring my doorbell. Tell me about your religion. I will tell you exactly the same things I would tell you here, but with more venom.
Symptoms of full on sick-of-it-itis
* rolling eyes
* head-shaking, usually just very short side-to-side, might be combined with either sighing or rolling of the eyes
If these symptoms appear, especially when they appear all together, yes, you have a case of full blown sick-of-it-itis.
To ease symptoms, try:
* walking it off... leave your computer and pace down the hallway 5 or more times
* try walking outside - 3 laps around your house
* if walking it off doesn't seem to work, you might try meditating, 5-4-3-2-1 technique (count 5 things you see, feel, hear then 4 things you see, feel, hear, then 3 things... down to 1)
* if none of the above alleviates the symptoms of sick-of-it-itis, call your local emergency number and tell them mythbuster told you to call... They'll know what to do
* sit quietly and wait for assistance! DO NOT - repeat - DO NOT keep walking around. Sick-of-it-itis symptoms have been known to distract people to the point of disorientation... (surely you don't also want to end up with "Help-I've-fallen-and-I-Can't-get-up-itus").
Just wait for help - someone will come to your aid...
Or you'll fall asleep eventually and forget what was bothering you in the first place
Why should I respect you if what you write is nonsense?
To respect you after you have written nonsense means that I have to believe you did not know you were writing nonsense and thus you must simply be stupid.
If I point out that your writing is nonsense, it means that I respect you enough to believe you are not stupid and knew what you were writing made no sense.
So why are you pissed at me for pointing out your nonsense?
You have to respect (and be polite to) your fellow hubbers anyway...It's in the rules.
I am sick of the religious posts. People just get upset at each other and you solve absolutely nothing! Waste of time!
Who are you to say its nonsense what we are writing. Just because you have your skewed version of the truth doesnt make it real.
Why, Marty, I am surprised. It says who I am right beside my post - I am your worst nightmare - a rational human.
Here is some rationality for you:
Truth is opinion.
Truth is not reality
I never try to reify opinion into reality; that is the province of the religious.. You take an opinion (I believe in god) and try to make it real (god exists).
Here are the correct answers in order: 1) Fine, good for you. 2) Uh, no. Not unless you count the Tooth Fairy and Santa as real, too.
Most people need something to believe in. It is a crutch. Unfortunately they can be manipulated by others. Human nature I suppose.
by Tim Mitchell 13 months ago
What is the difference between a religious person and spiritual person?Where that question leads to is can a spiritual person be a Christian? In other words, does a Christian have to be religious?
by fierycj 9 years ago
Its just like the topic says. I'm kind of a rookie in this whole Hub thing. So far, I like the Religion forum, but there's a lot of people you just wanna smack in the head. If you're non-religious, then what in the hell are you doing in a religion forum, for heaven's sake? Can someone pls answer...
by Khawaja Iqbal 3 years ago
What are the benefits of being religious?
by marinealways24 8 years ago
-How does a religious person contradict having a mind? How does a religious person or person of grouped belief contradict having a mind?
by Castlepaloma 6 years ago
Don't laugh Christians, I think I’m in love with Christian women who wants to be a Minister of Yahweh. These Web Pages, did help me with a better understanding of my Pastor Lutheran Brother , Maybe some of you can help me out again to see if am barking up the wrong tree and should move on?Been...
by marinealways24 8 years ago
You don't know what happens or where you go after death.
|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|