Should the religious enjoy immunity to excoriate non-believers in any way they wish?

No, of course not. No one should send mail like that nor should anyone have to receive it no matter what their beliefs.

No they should not. The religious intrude upon us who do not share their religious beliefs…. we should have the same right to make observations about their beliefs.

There is never an excuse for incivility. You and I have had our disagreements and PM’s, but we managed to do it with adult behavior, no name-calling and ended up creating a better understanding.

Frankly Christians should be held to a HIGHER MORAL STANDARD than the non-religious because we are purporting to be followers of Jesus Christ, who was all about loving our neighbors as ourselves, turning the other cheek, etc… Which is why I will not support any negativity or acting up from Christians here on fluther or elsewhere in my daily life, and is also why I never sported another person’s avatar.

Why is everyone so defensive? Christians are subject to the rules of civility like anyone else, in case any of us have forgotten.

I’ve been nasty on a bad day as have other people, so we can’t continually ask everyone else to chillax if we can’t recognize our own inability to rise above the pettiness. I’d say if you don’t want to participate, quit following and move on, I think it’s a great question and needed asking.

Of course, obviously the correct answer is that nobody should be able to excoriate anybody in any way they wish, if doing so involves name calling, etc.

Lord know there have been times when I have not agreed with @ETpro, but no one ever deserves that kind of message.

I’ll quote M. Scott Peck here -“Religious Freedom is not my right to my religion, it is me standing up for your right to your religion.”

Those who criticize someone else’s rights to a belief system have ceded their own rights.

I’m curious about something. Since you choose to describe yourself as a “gentle soul” why would you then bely that self descriptor with this shit-stirring question ?

Of course the crap that is received by Harris and Dawkins is totally indefensible. What else is new?

Since I would not define myself as either religious or a religionist (merely stated a belief in God) I’m still trying to understand why so many on Fluther insist on everybody being in one camp or the other.

I have many friends and acquaintances in my everyday life (both those who believe in a God and those who eschew any belief) to whom it would never occur to impose this artificial grouping. We are who we are and represent no one except ourselves. Why is it the total opposite here on Fluther? I just don’t get it.

And, for the record, I figure God is perfectly capable of defending himself and is not in need of my puny voice to do it so I feel no necessity to choose a side.

But it baffles me why so many others do, even the peaceful :) atheists.

Now I see where the question about how I’d feel if Fluther ceased to exist came from. We’ll destroy it from within. How do we clear the decks and start over? If this relatively small community can’t keep things civil, how can there be hope for larger communities to get along?
Perhaps we should ban the ‘nasty’ words such as shit. Then only people with larger vocabularies will be able to voice their disapproval.
I support @ETpro wholeheartedly.

I don’t think so. Any and every person should be viewed as having equal rights over their own thoughts and idea processes.

I do not agree however that the hate mail is “Christian”. That is a misunderstanding on Sam Harris’s part. Any true Christian that is sending hate mail really needs to do some studying and then some praying and then ask for a lot of forgiveness and learn to never do it again.

@Buttonstc I don’t understand why this Q is ‘shit stirring’, it’s just a Q like any other.

Please explain why a gentle soul can’t ask a piercing & thought-provoking question?

In all honesty….

I dont feel this is truly a question. Of course no sane flutherer would say that the religious get immunity. (That is… here on fluther we are all sticking to the rules of fluther which clearly don’t grant that immunity.)
I view your question, therefore, as a way to vent a complaint and an invitation to share your point of view on how sometimes it feels unfair. Unfair in a sense that religious persons often show little restraint in referring to the non-religious in a degrading way.

Given my interpretation of your question, I choose to stand with you in expressing that feeling as well and taking this opportunity to ask all on this thread who would answer the opening question with ‘of course not’ to show that in practise; by realizing that a lot of the things we say about ourselves or others can be unworthy of that answer.

I know that it is easy to hurt people by critizing their beliefs or their God(s). When we critize that belief we often touch upon people’s cores and when you truly love a God…
Well we all know how people can hurt you through the ones you truly love.

We should, however, realize that criticising atheists often comes down to critizing the person hirself, due to a lack of deify or belief to critisize. Today, for instance, I read one Jelly claiming that surely without the Christian God people would have no reason for moral/ good behavior. People would all just be rapers and murderers.

Dear @ETpro, may I please read your question as a suggestion for all of us to have no tolerance for intolerance?

” . Today, for instance, I read one Jelly claiming that surely without the Christian God people would have no reason for moral/ good behavior.”

You are talking about me and this enrages me!! Because that IS your conclusion.

I did not get a chance to properly defend myself because I left that question. Because I have been trolled. Regardless of the fact that it is someone else here who said I was the troll and also said my faith was repulsive!! But all along it has been me the bipolar Christian person who has been stepping out of conversations and being silenced, and then you you point your fingers at me.

Flag the question please it is going nowhere but producing one side against another. Here I am again the African voodoo queen. Go ahead crucify me.

Oh and P.S. don’t forget how the attack on my dutch heritage, because how could I be dutch.

Later. Again. Ive got things to do.

Sorry. @KaY_Jelly.

I was trying to show how easy it is to hurt people, even when we don’t intend to. I am sure you didn’t have any bad intentions.

So please…. I am truly sorry if I now hurt you again. It was not aimed at you. (I made no reference!) i was just showing how a jelly with good intentions can still hurt people.

Let’s not blme this question and also please don’t get enraged too easily either.

@KaY_Jelly Who called you repulsive? Was it on a Q or PM? They should be taken to task if this is the case. Was their comment deleted? I believe you, don’t misunderstand, I am not asking because I don’t believe you. I assume they meant to imply your faith repulsed them and not that you repulsed them, but I understand why it would be hurtful either way.

Whatever the case, don’t dwell on one idiot when the majority of jellies are not disrespectful. Don’t overgeneralize. You wouldn’t want us to do that if one stray Christian went on a rant damning everyone to hell and saying everyone who isn’t a Christian should be locked up.

I was on the other Q also questioning what you said about morals. I hope I was not offensive in my answer. I hope you go back to that Q and let us know where we misunderstood your inteiones with what you wrote.

@KaY_Jelly , Okay, take the time to defend yourself. I will refrain from commenting on the quoted statement until you explain yourself.

@LostInParadise Which Q are you talking about please?

@ETpro Your question is not entirely honest, it is not worth responding to directly.
You may flag as you seem necessary, but in the end it was meant only for you to know.

One of the things that I hate most in the world is hypocrisy. I don’t care whom it’s from, I hate hypocrisy. The problem is, it becomes difficult to recognize hypocrisy from “your own people”. I’ve seen lots of vitriol from atheists on this site; I’ve seen discussions where I, as an atheist, was trying to be civil and having a good discussion, and then some other atheist comes in with “deluded” and “fairy tales” and “naive” and all that crap and it embarrasses me and it ruins the discussion I was having because now the person I was debating with ignores me and focuses on the inflammatory comments. Now, all I can do is show that I’m not like that; it’s not up to me to change people’s “debating” styles.

That said, I’m very aware of the hypocrisy from both sides. I’m aware of people taking questioning and criticism as personal attack, but I’m also aware of people thinking that calling someone “deluded” is a form of questioning or criticism, when it’s really just name-calling and flame-baiting.

I also have a different point of view because I’ve spent some time on sites with the opposite demographic or laxer moderation, where posts talking about how atheists are worse than rapists and how atheism is vile, disgusting, and insane are commonplace. So because of that, I tend to be a little desensitized to what I see here, because nothing I see here comes close to that kind of vitriol.

Nonetheless, none of it is okay. It doesn’t matter whom it comes from. Obviously the PM you received was uncalled for, but I don’t think that speaks for all religious Flutherites. I have been a major critic of religion on this site; a lot of my questions are about that, a lot of my comments are about that. I have never once been accused of being hateful or trolling because of my religious criticisms. And I have never received a hateful PM because of it. If I can figure out how to present my opinions in a non-inflammatory way, so can others (and no, I’m not saying you deserve it. I’m saying you should try and figure out why it happened).

^Many people here could learn a thing or two from this fine, young man. I hope you are listening to what he is saying.

I don’t want to bash anyone at all, but reading back through Q’s, you can see that some people seem to be inflammatory on purpose.

None of them that I have PM’d, care to change for whatever reason, so that’s what we’re dealing with when it comes to civility on both sides.

@ETpro Would you care to chime in about this?

@KNOWITALL Every so often I PM an atheist who seems to go too far and a few times I thought to myself after their response to me that they were not inflammatory on purpose, they seemed oblivious to how they were coming across or didn’t think it was a big deal. I don’t think they had malicious intent, but they just have no tolerance for what they perceive as beliefs that hurt others. I am not saying this about all atheists who seem to go too far, just some. Both sides have people on the extremes who have little tolerance for the other.

@JLeslie Yes, I agree, I’ve done the same. If I’m offended, I try to always PM the writer to clarify, and quite often the conversation ends with “Okay, thank you for explaining.” because it’s all subjective.

Although I remember you and I had a few misunderstanding at first because to me your consistant questioning of my beliefs felt like an attack…hahahaha, and once a few people realized I was just talking, not trying to convert people, it got a lot better for me here.

We’re all probably just perceiving things that strangers write in a negative way because in all reality, we don’t know each other, or each other’s intentions, etc…

I don’t see the point on either side of this question.

If any member of the collective were to be cut the blood would be the same color red. No matter which of us takes a shit, it still stinks. Each and every one of us has been wrong about something at one time or another in our lives.

The simple truth is that nobody really knows what happens after you die until, well, you die.

Which, by the way, is another thing we all have in common.

Like I’ve said before and I’ll say it again. Rejecting someones religious beliefs is like rejecting the person themselves. This isn’t the intention of the unbeliever, but in the mind of the believer this is how it feels. Nobody likes rejection

The reason is because all believers have doubt. They reject anything that tries to deepen that doubt. This is why you can’t get through to them and why they always use circular arguments. They are in denial and it all centers around a fear of their own mortality.

No.

@flip86 All believers have doubt? That is a pretty sweeping statement. Maybe some theists feel rejecting their beliefs is like rejecting the person, but I don’t think most atheists are saying they reject the person they disagree with, just their religious beliefs.

I think when it comes to both sides there will be those who shut their eyes and ears and start swinging away with a bat to get their point across and then wonder why they are being pelted with rocks. I’ve seen the flame bait questions and answers on fluther more than I care to remember. I’ve seen it come from both sides. It has lessened but once in awhile it will rear its ugly head. Both sides often claiming that they were justified because the other side does it more.

As individuals, hatred is not justifiable and hatred hidden form of mocking is still recognized as hatred. I did not see the whole video but I could see how he viewed the letters. He didn’t feel sad that this anger was directed at him, he was laughing. He was being condescending. He even looked grateful for the remarks. He was happy that he had proof of non christian like christians. It was fueling his smugness. He also knows that the controversy he creates will only make him richer.

@JLeslie Everyone has doubts. Everyone. The subject doesn’t matter. The religious have doubts about their beliefs weather they want to admit it or not. Some can never overcome the doubt and eventually reject the religion. Others bury the doubt with delusion.

Just listen to religious people describe heaven. They all have their own version. They all imagine what makes them feel warm and fuzzy. It is all delusion.

@flip86 Delusion? Sorry, I wouldn’t use that word. I don’t see any harm in someone wanting to believe there is an afterlife and having a picture of what it is like.

Speaking of those fry pans calling the skillet black. I do not think religious people should try to indoctrinate non-believer, heathens, atheist, agnostics, gays or anyone else; but too many do. I would say it is because they are in religion instead of a relationship. If they were in a relationship which is of a divine nature, instead of a religion which is man-centric, they would not. But it is not non-believers her who get insulted and putdown even if latently or underhanded. By believing what I believe I have been labeled, maligned, character assassinated, called a troll, delusional (basically having my sanity questioned) and then some. No matter which way the crap is flowing it should not be; but this is the world and it is controlled by powers and principalities in the spiritual realm so I am not surprised.

@flip86 The real point is that you can’t paint everyone with the same brush. Do I have doubts, sure. Will those doubts be cleared up with attacks by non-theists, probably not. Am I scared of death, not in the least. Conscious belief in an unseen Deity can’t be called delusion if it’s real to me and not to you, that’s just a difference of opinion isn’t it?!

@Hypocrisy_Central This may not be the appropriate format for converting anyone, but if someone were to PM me asking for help seeking God, I’d sure give it to them.

On a personal note, I still don’t know how to take half of what you post, some sounds angry and ugly (like a gay question or two), some sounds very reasonable. If I’ve misinterpreted some of your statements, I’d really like to have more clarity.

I see this question has received much moderator action already, so I will refrain from typing what I am thinking.

The religious have always expected special privilege and have always maintained a double standard.

Any lie, cheat, using, thieving and mudslinging is allowed the religious, but even intimate a reply to this and you have created an instant martyr!

” Should the religious enjoy immunity to excoriate non-believers in any way they wish? ”

No, they should get as good as they give. I have long thought that the struggle between those that are rational and those that are, shall we say, less than rational, will come to the sword. In their death throes they may try to take the rest of us with them. That is the precursor to the sword you are seeing; the desperation of the religious comes out in invective.

@Neodarwinian How does being civil turn into ‘special privelage’? .

Your post sounds bitter and angry so there must be more going on here than a few conversations on fluther. You can PM me what you’re thinking if you choose, I’m interested (and I won’t preach at you!)

I’ve had people call my Jesus a Unicorn, I’ve been called stupid for believing a fairy tale, I’ve been questioned until I’m blue in the face and completely out of patience. I’ve got nasty PM’s, too, from more than one person.

I thought about this more. My goal is never really to create doubt in the believer. My goal is to either get understanding for myself, or for the believer to not be so rigid in their negative thoughts about peope with different beliefs if they have negative opinions. The tricky part is some believers think if they don’t believe all that is taught to them in their religion, they feel none of it might be true. I don’t agree that has to be the case.

@KNOWITALL If you don’t fear death, why do you believe in a conscious existence after the fact? Why not accept the scientific consensus that death is final and your consciousness ceases to exist?

Delusion is the right word. The scientific community has never corroborated the idea of a soul/spirit/ghosts, etc. Your brain is ultimately what makes you, you. Every other organ can fail and be removed/replaced and you will still be you, because of your brain. Once the brain fails, there is no coming back. There is no longer a you. Sure, your shell remains but it immediately begins to breakdown.

@flip86 I’d argue that delusion isn’t the right word and it’s this kind of thing that I was alluding to earlier. This constant idea that you need to let others know that they’re “deluded”; it’s condescending and I don’t understand why it’s so necessary. It may be your belief just as it may be a theist’s belief that all those who refuse to see God are deluded.

It happens to be atheists moreso on this site. I have seen the exact same thing from theists on other sites. Someone says something like “I’m an atheist” and the other person talks to them about delusion and hating God and stuff like that…on this site, it happens to be the other way around most of the time, but it’s the same deal. Why is it necessary?

@flip86 To me that is two seperate questions.

1)I don’t fear death because there’s nothing to fear, it’s a release from pain and earthly worries.

2) Do I believe in a conscious existance after death, I’m not so sure about that because I have no proof, but the Bible and our religion tells me that there is an afterlife, which is comforting since a lot of my family and friends are Christians as well. In fact, it’s the only way I’ll ever meet my earthly Father, so I’m rather looking forward to it. (Maybe I look forward to Heaven like you look forward to the lottery. More hope than anything?)

Some science has shown a loss of weight after death that would imply the ‘soul’ has weight and substance, and if that leaves the body, where does it go, back into the atmosphere or Heaven or does it just dissipate?

What about the other religions that believe in reincarnation, all delusional?

@KaY_Jelly I would not have known @whitenoise was referring to you if you hadn’t said so.

@Dutchess_III I thought it was me. If anything gets my Irish up, it’s people trying to take away our rights.

Wait…what @KNOWITALL? What rights?

Same hurtful question, different day.
You fool no one ET.
And yes, I’ll stop following this question.

@Dutchess_III Our religious freedoms here in the USA. I don’t persecute anyone and I don’t expect to be persecuted. How many times have I heard that I act like a ‘victim’ here on fluther when it comes to religion.

All I’m saying is ask what you want, say what you want to say, and leave me alone to worship as I see fit. Why is that so freakin difficult?

Who is trying to do that, and how? Are they shutting down churches, or what?

@Dutchess_III Let’s not derail, I’m already irritated right this second. :)

@KNOWITALL Wait, death is a release from pain? According to Christianity that is only true for those who have met all the prerequisites.

@flip86 Is that a question?

From many of the reactions above, we can see that words do actually cause feelings, such as anger, frustration, and pain. Many people try to claim that a word is a word is a word, especially when defending their own desire to use inflamatory/derogatory/vulgar language, but I don’t believe it.

The exercise of freedom of speech carries with it a responsibility that is often disregarded.

@KNOWITALL

” How does being civil turn into ‘special privelage’? .”

That is privilege, and you know what I am talking about. From blue laws to stem cell research you religious expect special privilege in the public square. You know this, so why the question above?

” Your post sounds bitter and angry so there must be more going on here than a few conversations on fluther. You can PM me what you’re thinking if you choose, I’m interested (and I won’t preach at you!) ”

Angry, yes, but I leave the bitterness to you and yours as your sun sets in this, the new age of reason.

Please do not message me again, young lady.

@YARNLADY . . . They only feelings that words cause are the feelings folks are choosing to feel over them. I cannot control any other person’s emotions. I can only control my own. How you react to any kind of stimulation is a choice. To say that another person “made” you feel a certain way is a lazy excuse and giving that person waaay more credit than they probably deserve.

@Blondesjon You may be surprised to know that I happen to believe that. However, most people never learn to recognize that and they are the ones who are influenced by words and actions of others. If one does not know how to recognize and control their reactions, they are trapped.

The other problem, @ETpro, is that you’ve posted a lot of questions/comments that have been seen as inflammatory in the past, so that when you post a question like this, where you claim to be genuine, people just see it as another inflammatory post. Based on some of the things I’ve seen you post before, I think you are being genuine this time (it’s difficult to talk about this kind of thing on Fluther outside of PMs without getting modded, so I understand your desire to “get this out”), but who knows, maybe you’ll chime in with a bunch of “deluded” comments. I sure hope not.

@Neodarwinian Were you one of those non-theists who legislated to get prayer out of public schools? Because they won in case you forgot.

I offered to discuss things with you to promote understanding, that’s all, I’m sorry you don’t feel comfortable with that.

Awwww, poor widdle @ETpro is a victim, and a “gentle soul.” Right. And I’m Cleopatra.

For everyone’s information, I was the one who sent ET a PM, and he’s exaggerating it to get sympathy for his shit-stirring “I’m a hate mail victim” question. If you can really call this a question.

@ETpro It’s your comments and questions like this one here that earned you that rude PM. It’s not my problem if you continually refuse to acknowledge your smugness and arrogance. It’s not my problem if you continually deny that your questions are stirring shit up on purpose, despite the fact that many people are very good at understanding the underlying tone of things. You can claim it’s not a duck all you want, but…. how does that saying go? QUACK.

Now then, to the point of the question itself, no, religious folks shouldn’t have immunity, but neither should anti-theists and that’s the main thing that the anti-theists on Fluther fail to grasp. They can be rude and arrogant all they want, and it’s unlikely they’ll be modded for it, since that’s the way this website leans, and majority rules, but when a believer dishes out the same treatment, it’s considered flame-bait. I’ve called bullshit on this for years now, and I’ll continue to call bullshit on it.

Now if you’d like to go on believing that you’ve never done anything to deserve a PM calling you out, then that’s your choice, but you would be just as delusional as you all believe theists are.

@KNOWITALL I just reread your comment and noticed you mentioned weight loss immediately following death. Can you cite the studies? I can. It was the work of 1 guy in the early 1900’s. His results were far from conclusive and remain unfounded.

@YARNLADY . . . You would be very surprised to know that I agree with you. or maybe not. we’re both pretty self-aware people I think we only differ in that I blame those who claim to be hurt by words for a conscious act of willful ignorance on their part and you blame those that consciously take advantage of that ignorance.

Somehow we are both right and I can’t quite nail down the real answer.

@chyna Same hurtful question, different day.
You fool no one ET.
Some people get richly lurved for rhetoric like that.

@flip86 & Everyone else- I’m over it, I’m done, happy to continue tomorrow, but this is just too much negativity for me. Please PM if you want me to address anything specific tomorrow.

<- richly lurved @chyna ‘s rhetoric

Just to try to put the discussion back on track and actually answer the opening question….

I don’t think the attitude is exclusive to the religious. In-group bias and out-group hostility is one of those unfortunately ubiquitous tendencies in human nature. I do think that the religious are more dogmatic on the whole, and that dogmatism can manifest itself in hostility and defensiveness, and as I suggested in another thread a few days ago—the more successful religions may be the ones that instilled the most dogmatism and zealotry in its adherents.

My view is that the individual is merely the host of the beliefs, and sometimes part of a belief system is the belief that one’s beliefs are some sort of “truth” that needs promoting and defending.

I’ve seen similar vitriol and hostility come from all sorts of people; 9/11 truthers, Libertarians, Trotskyites, Maoists, Objectivists, various other conspiracy theorists, Feminists, Men’s Rights Activists, almost any religious group you can think of, some atheists (especially ones who identify with particular atheist communities).

Sometimes all it takes is to think the person is wrong on some point or to just not accept whatever it is they’re saying.

Just as an aside. I’ve actually no qualms about disrespecting people’s views if I think they’re stupid or wrong. I think discourse would be a lot more productive if people stopped pretending to be polite and censuring themselves lest they upset anyone. Going straight to personal insults doesn’t work and is unpersuasive, but I see nothing wrong with causing someone embarrassment or ridiculing the beliefs themselves. Robust positions should be immune to such things.

I like questions that stir up some action. Thus, as a rule, I like @ETpro‘s questions.

I like this one too.

GQ!

They sure beat “What does it mean when I dream about my History teacher?”

But we all know what happens when we start talking about religion (and/or politics). So we should not be surprised ( and I bet we are not surprised) when we knowingly start a shit storm.

@josie . . . you dream about mr. montgomery too?

Consider for a moment the much maligned jehovas witness, I read somewhere that the constant shit & mortal abuse they suffer on doorsteps is some form of right of passage.
They expect & soak up the insults as part of their penance, I do hope I didn’t just make this up.
Also, my shit doesn’t stink, it exudes a glorious floral bouquet…ish.

@ucme is right. you can’t have shit without ‘ish’

Or ‘hit’

These two buggers are talking crap

”@KaY_Jelly I would not have known @whitenoise was referring to you if you hadn’t said so.”

I didnt say so. :/ @whitenoise apologized, I did not mention any names. I am actually thankful that @whitenoise apologized to me though regardless of the fact if it wasn’t @whitenoise or it was @whitenoise who made the remark, someone apologized and that was nice. :)

@whitenoise thank you for the apology. I understand the point you are trying to make. I also understand the confusion in my answer to the question of morals. I did not defend what I said because almost every time I do I get responses which are in third person from @ETpro basically attacking my beliefs.

So now I am slightly shy of saying what I feel because I have felt the hand of contention. Also as I have said I am bipolar and I try as much as possible to refrain from arguments, otherwise it may result in smashing of my PC. LOL.

Damn it @KaY_Jelly! You DID say that Whitenoise was referring to you in his comment, “Today, for instance, I read one Jelly claiming that surely without the Christian God people would have no reason for moral/ good behavior.””

You immediately said ”You are talking about me and this enrages me!! Because that IS your conclusion.”

Your post

You called yourself out.

Pretty much everyone enjoys immunity to excoriate anyone they want. It’s not special to the religious.

@Dutchess_III Yes I did make a comment about morals that I did not get to defend. I apologize because I thought you meant something else. My bad. I am not going to get into specifics with you, but pretty much you had to be there. That’s all that needs to be said.

And you @Neodarwinian, why are you here?

If you accept Atheism as your religion, and you go door to door declaring its benefits over other belief systems, you should accept to suffer for your zealotry.

I am sorry that you think Non-believers are reacting to you negatively. But you have been a zealot in your philosophy, and you are experiencing the same negative responses any prophet experiences when telling people you know you are right and they are wrong.

@Imadethisupwithnoforethought

So, non stamp collecting is a hobby?

@Neodarwinian Atheism is a religion. Science is a way of approaching the world.

If you believe in science we can have wonderful discussions about Godel’s theorem about the non provability of mathematics on it’s own terms, or the many interpretations of quantum theory that imply god. But I suspect you will allow no heresy in your religion, and will not want to discuss these things.

What immunity? The majority of people on this site are atheist.As I see it theists are constantly bashed and insulted for their beliefs. Are you seeking your exclusive immunity from the larger population here? I can see why fluthers members are leaving one by one because even after insult and their leaving the whining carries on.

If you are referring to my comment about being blind, it was not aimed at you it was taken from a scripture and was a general post. If you are sensitive about your own feelings consider that others have feelings too.

” If you believe in science ”

Along with your other absolutist and incorrect statements

I do not ” believe in ” anything, but I accept the evidence put forth supporting scientific theory.

Your phraseology tell me we will no be discussing anything.

Ultimately science is a method of approaching the world. You should try it sometime, especially my special area, biology.

@Neodarwinian So you don’t know anything about the mathematical or scientific fields I have referenced? Or are you too clever to engage me?

You are clearly not a religious zealot making up crap. You are an atheist who has been empowered by god to declare you are clever. I feel humbled by your intellect.

Sincerely.

@madethisupwithnoforethought

” or the many interpretations of quantum theory that imply god ”

No, I am too bored to engage you and this phrase of yours should tell you why.

Quantum theory, the theory of many small parcels of different types of energy, implies no such thing and it is only the religious that think so. Why? Obviously straw clutching.

Bye now.

@jonsblond

:D

I would happily play second banana to you as well :)

So maybe we have enough to start serving ice cream sundaes :)

@Neodarwinian We are two people, but I already know you don’t care. I know you chuckled just a little bit. Everyone loves Peanuts.

They say that in polite company, religion is one topic we should avoid because it can too easily become an uncivil discourse. We are certainly proving that point. Does someone want to switch over to discussing politics? We’ll all end up with indigestion. Whatever happened to agreeing to disagree?

First, for the record. To all whose posts were removed, I did not have anything to do with that. I have yet to flag anyone on this thread. I may do so as I read through the many replies now, but I’ve been off building websites for the day and not reading this, so those who got their posts deleted did so all on their own.

Second point. I probably can’t get to anywhere near all replies tonight. I will work through this that need a reply as time permits.

Finally, there is a vast difference between telling someone that their argument is flawed, fallacious or even an arrogant assertion and telling them they are flawed, filled with fallacy, or arrogant as human beings.

@marinelife, Thanks.

@Linda_Owl Thanks.

@KNOWITALL Thanks.

@KNOWITALL Based on some of the hate-dripping, insult-laden replies that did not manage to get moderated, I can definitively state that some theists here have no idea what HIGHER MORAL STANDARD means. They are doing a fabulous job of making my point for me.

@jca Thanks. If I have stepped over that line, I want to be called out on it. I wish to reign that sort of rhetoric in. But I reserve equal rights to the public airwaves. Neither this forum, not any other than one they pay for, should be the exclusive dominion of Evangelicals and Dominionists.

@zenvelo Thanks. I may take issues with portions of that sentiment. For instance, I do not think Nazis or Stalinists had an inherent right to their beliefs. I think all who stood in opposition to those beliefs held the higher moral ground. I am completely opposed to moral relativism. I suspect you are too, but the language of multicultural tolerance is a seductive call. We find moral people saying female genital mutilation should be respected because it is culturally accepted in certain religious groups. When it comes to doing that to small children who have no vote in the procedure, and can’t even imagine its implications for their adulthood, I vehemently disagrees. If adult women want it done, let them volunteer as adults. Virtually none do.

@Sunny2 I used to not understand why religion was a topic to be avoided, because when I was younger conversations about religion were usually questions to learn about someone else’s religion. Never about trying to change someone’s mind about their religious beliefs. The conversation was out of curiousity.

@ETpro I believe your argument here is flawed, fallacious and even arrogant. I believe you asked this question with an agenda. Based on your past posts and questions I’ve noticed you like to stir the pot. I don’t think you feel attacked at all. I think you like to argue debate. You are no victim here.

I’ve also noticed that you have welcomed several new users lately, but you always have a but after the welcome, then you go on to tell the person how you disagree with them. How is that a welcome? Would you welcome a new neighbor by telling them they are doing something wrong or that you don’t agree with them? I’m not seeing the gentle soul you claim to be.

Perhaps younger brains are more willing to explore different questions and responses, but I don’t think so. Brains that are hard-set with ideas of faith or lack of it are a problem. A sense of certitude, the idea that I am right and you are wrong and that’s all there is to it, is always likely to cause friction. Being generous enough to make room in ones heart for people of all faiths is the basis for peace and understanding in this world. We may not be able to change the world, but each of us can do something to make peace instead of war on a personal basis. I am not a deist, but I do like and agree with a lot of the teachings of Jesus. What I am reading here lacks a sense of turning the other cheek. It also lacks humility, respect and grace. Christians, live your religion. Atheists, have more respect.

Milo here; If everyone simply worshiped me, life (and whatever may follow) would be very simple.

@Sunny2 I think it partly might be a young brain thing. Also, probably because I lived in such a culturally and ethnically diverse place. Everyone had some sort of back story. Where their family was from, what religion they were, if they spoke another language. Everyone was different, so we were all the same.

[mod says] Please try to remember to disagree without being disagreeable.

This’ll teach me to take a day off. Sheesh.

I vote for a new category, Response moderated (condescending bullshit)
All those in favour raise your left eyebrow, in a fashion rather like that of Roger Moore.

And the circle continues and nothing changes. Another interesting (to me) question that is taken over by hostility and the endless back and forth that gets us nowhere. Sorry, ETPro, it was a good question.

^^ You’re apologizing to a person who has posted question after question and comment after comment that are nothing but thinly veiled slaps in the face to those who dare believe in God? Have you no idea how to read the underlying message of such pretense? Do you seriously believe that this question was not intended to stir the shit-pot yet again?

It truly confuses the hell out of me that you would repeatedly apologize to and defend multiple members who, in their air of superiority, attempt to disguise their disdain for and flat out hatred of believers. Something doesn’t add up, here. “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.”

@WillWorkForChocolate Yep.

@KNOWITALL Open your eyes.

She’s not from Denmark.

Holy crap on a cracker, I missed all the fun.

@Dutchess_III You’re not serious?

Really. I’m serious. She isn’t from Denmark!

NO I’M NOT SERIOUS! I know what you guys were saying. I was just trying to defuse the situation a little. You disagree with her apologizing to @ETpro, and I understand why. However, I see it as her “walking the walk and talking the talk,” as in practicing her idea of how a “real” Christian behaves. I respect and admire that.

I didn’t disagree. I do think @ETpro can be pretty rough on Christians and theists, but I think @KNOWITALL is interested in hearing all opinions, even abrasive ones.

Just so we’re clear, I’ve expressed my concerns in a polite manner to ET and other people who I find abrasive about religion or anything else. I am not a doormat or passive, I openly question and PM if I feel it necessary.

I used to argue with Seek and JLeslie a lot, I found them both to be abrasive and I avoided them, and now I consider both friends that have enriched my life with their personal stories and their knowledge. NO ONE is disallowed to ask a question because someone else doesn’t like it, not him, not me and none of you.

That some of you DO NOT get that about me after all this time except JLeslie (thank you!), is odd, I will always stand up for YOUR rights to speak your mind, whether anyone likes it or not.

We all have the choice to not answer or not follow a question that we find unacceptable and I encourage everyone to do that. Just like media in real life, if there’s no audience there will be no show. Peace.

Amen!

@Dutchess_III Thank you sister, don’t make me come over there…hahaha!

I have to agree with @WillWorkForChocolate there is a manner of asking a question. One that does not stir up (well, shit). It is like taking a site that has 90% black contributors and 10% white contributors and asking ‘Should I make special concessions for a white person who sends me filthy emails?’ That is shit stirring. If the question was asked ‘What do I do about people who don’t agree with me, and send my shitty mails’ then they would get answers based on the issue?

Turning the other cheek is fine, however, I fail to see where this is a good question if anyone can point that out to me.

I am annoyed for a lot of reasons, mostly because we have lost so many good contributors on this site due to this lack of tact.

I’m still bummed that mouse is gone.

WOW, this brouhaha is still going on? Well…..there is no blood in the isle yet but I believe I do see a few Jellies sharpening shanks in the hallway. ding, ding The match is over. No matter what goes on God is still on the throne. Those who don’t like it, don’t. Those who don’t believe it, then don’t. Everyone go have a piece of cake and some hot coco and let it go. Come back in three days and if tempers are still up we will settle it by duel with ivory handled pistols at 30 paces.

She is trying to create peace, @WillWorkForChocolate. That is all.

I am following this train wreck but not sure why.

No, @Dutchess_III there’s a huge difference between creating peace and turning the other cheek, than folding in on yourself and back pedaling because the arrogance run amok can intimidate one into doing so.

@Mama_Cakes I agree! :(

P.S. This is relevant. Since we could technically turn the question around and ask the same thing of atheists because they also give hate mail I purpose that this question may be slightly one sided for a higher purpose.

Immunity?

I’m going to go somewhere else and talk about sharp knives.

@JLeslie I’m not berating her, I just wish she’d take off her rose colored glasses and see people for who they really are. Caving in and refusing to accept what’s right there in the open is one of the biggest reasons that the anti-theistic garbage here just continues to get worse.

@WillWorkForChocolate I don’t perceive her as having on rose colored glasses. I have seen her stand her ground during some pretty tough arguments here. I understand your frustration with some of the atheists on fluther who go way too far and can be down right mean. I don’t like it either. Sometimes I call them out on it, I probably should do it more. I’m not the only one, I have seen dominixc and rarebear and other atheists pushback atheists who just go too far. Sometimes it seems I am perceived as one of the people being abrasive when that is never really my intent. I was just surprised to see someone on her side so to speak criticize her so sharply.

@LornaLove I fail to see where this is a good question if anyone can point that out to me.
Good luck, it is a muddled question with a false rationale. If someone doesn’t know the difference between religion and a relationship with Christ, (or imagined with other gods), they should learn first what they are speaking, of or remain silent, especially if they do not care to learn. This question was trying to get a gourmet meal from a hotdog stand.

@janbb I am following this train wreck but not sure why.
Because IT IS A TRAIN WRECK. No one can look away from a train wreck even when they know what is going to happen.

The cake is untouched and a few more spoons are missing…shank patrol, to the hallways QUICK!

“The cake is untouched and a few more spoons are missing…shank patrol, to the hallways QUICK!”

You’re cracking me up!

@JLeslie The point is that I need no one, atheist or theist or ‘other’, to tell me how to treat people. I have read plenty of nasty posts and PM’s and feel confident in my abilities to communicate for myself. I took the time to talk to ETpro about things, so perhaps I have a different perspective on thing’s than others do.

@Hypocrisy_Central This was about how we treat each other in regards to religious discussions, not religion itself or anyone’s relationship with Christ. And by the 4th post it was no longer a discussion, that is ridiculous.

@WillWorkForChocolate Oh, I’m seeing people for who they really are all right, it’s just unfortunate that you don’t see that you are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Can I be a moderator again for, like, a half hour?

I really want to read this whole thread.

[mod says] Again, folks. Disagree without being disagreeable. Don’t make things personal when they needn’t be.

@augustlan . . . Can you also make sure that if anyone decides to use the word ‘douchebaggery’ they are made aware that it is a copyrighted word that I own? I don’t expect any financial recompense. A simple acknowledgement will suffice.

I agree with @augustlan folks. We can discourse without discourtesy. It’s only religion we’re discussing, not something important like football.

packers rule

::sigh:: still redacted. Guess that’s a no.

” Should the religious enjoy immunity to excoriate non-believers in any way they wish? ”

I see that many of my responses were deleted so I will be succinct here and pare the above question to aid that brevity I am seeking..

Should the religious enjoy immunity? Not to put too fine a point on it….,

No.

Well of course they should @Neodarwinian. It’s free speech. Everyone in America is entitled to that. Being an asshole in exercising it has nothing to do with whether one is an atheist or a theist. it has to do with whether one is an asshole or not.

@Dutchess_III I’ve seen a ton of Christians, even preachers, acting like jerks. That’s the whole reason I always say I love God, but dislike a lot of His followers.

jesus loved us all without condition and only expects us to do the same

R.E.S.P.E.C.T

A pox upon both sides of this issue! There is nothing to talk about. What the heck difference does it make whether or not there is a God? This argument has not about actions or even potential actions. It is all about words, a language game. One person talks one way and another person talks another way and in the end it just does not make a difference one way or the other. Your belief or non-belief plus a subway token will get you a ride on the subway.

Actions are all that matter. If we want to talk about whether or not a person is good, then we have to evaluate what that person does. A good person is someone who does good things. A smart person is someone who does smart things. The existence or non-existence of God is of no consequence.

@Dutchess_III

Missed the entire point.

No one enjoys immunity from criticism, but christains and muslims seem to expect it.

I don’t care what you express or believe, just keep it out of science, politics, medicine, schools and the public square.

@Mama_Cakes You’re cracking me up!
If it is because someone is feeling you up, it is NOT MY HAND. The cake that is suppose to be “untouched” has gooey frosting and some fruit filling….or was it a Red Velvet cake? The spoons are still missing though, and a few forks have joined them…. ;-)

@Neodarwinian You can’t keep it out of politics as I’ve tried to explain a bazillion times, never going to happen so why keep beating your head on a brick wall.

You’d be more effective trying to tell me why something should be voted for or against reasonably, than to expect me to ignore my religious beliefs. There are some things, like abortion, that most opinions cannot be changed on, and others like gun control, that are subject to change based on events and rational argument.

All Americans “expect” it @Neodarwinian. Not just Christians and Muslims!

@KNOWITALL

This country was founded on that principle; keeping religion out of politics. You know again what I mean. Vote your conscience, but don’t expect the rest of us to run our lives based on some bronze age myths. Your day is done and times are changing.

(In general) This country was founded on that principle; keeping religion out of politics.
This nation was founded on Christian foundation. That is why they came here to escape the religious stranglehold of Europe, more fondly known as the Catholic church. That is why they were called Puritans.

I’m all about separation of Church and State.

Yes, and all good modern day Americans should strive to be the god bothered “witch” murderers that were driven out of Denmark in t he 1600s

Or not.

Ga @Hypocrisy_Central!

@Hypocrisy_Central

” This nation was founded on Christian foundation ”

Yes, some are that mistaken, .

The Constitution is the law of this land, not the bible. Keep that in mind so the rest of us do not have to keep bringing it up. Religious freedom, yes. Freedom from religion, also yes.

@Hypocrisy_Central The Puritans were not the only people who came here. And a great number of our Founding Fathers were deists. Some were apparently (based on their private correspondence) atheists, although it was not wise to be openly so at that time.

Yeah, a Puritan might set you on fire.

For tonight’s installment, let me answer a question a number of you have asked. Why do I keep asking these questions and posting challenging answers to the theistic questions others ask. I do so because I am concerned about my country and my planet. Here’s an answer from another thread that explains this concern more fully.

Carrying on with that though, there is a shadowy Christian Dominionism religious group called The Fellowship of The Family that has enormous power in politics. They own an apartment building near the Capitol on Washington’s expensive K Street that they rent super-cheap rooms there to members of Congress so they can have access to their ears. They sponsor the National Prayer Breakfast. These are not people with no influence. And their stated goal is to work with whoever has power in the US or internationally, be they dictators, war lords, kings, elected leaders or the ultra wealthy. It’s raw power they pursue. They want to bend this power toward setting up a world-wide Dominionist government. They pushed Uganda to pass their Kill the Gays laws.

In a nuclear age, people believing that provoking nuclear Armageddon on the Temple Mount will transport them instantly to Paradise are DANGEROUS. And they exist in far too extensive numbers to be ignored. Nonsense; dangerous, murderous nonsense; has to be called what it is. Mincing words or keeping quiet will not do.

Now I recognize that there are a ton of fine people who haven’t a murderous bone in their body and who aren’t Dominionists and don’t even know what that term means are but who are Christians. Unfortunately, the absolutism Christians have to embrace since it is set forth in their holy text is in itself dangerous, because it provides the fuel needed for a critical mass of those who actually want a Christian Jihad to rid the world of apostasy, or a nuclear war in Israel, and they have a loud and growing political voice.

Wowza! The illuminati isn’t real. Christian Jihadist? I’m pretty sure those are mutually exclusive words.

Maybe we should all try to be a little less indignant.

Time and time again I read that fluther is biased towards atheism and I indeed see religious people are occasionally being mobbed. Yet I see a lot of mobbing the other way round as well. Just look at this thread. Count the various stabbing and I would say the majority is stabbing at the ‘unbelievers’.

When Jesus said ‘turn the other cheek’, I feel he didn’t mean that we should ask to be slapped and then run around, curse the whole world and whine about how unfairly we were treated.
I feel what he meant was ‘don’t let them hurt your pride… and don’t let them touch your core, but most of all don’t allow them the joy of seeing you hurt.’ After all when you regress to indignation and revenge, you render control to the party that hurt you.

This is a discussion site and we should all be willing to either discuss or stay out of a thread that we all know the content of.

So…
... when talking (writing), be considerate and don’t be a spark looking for a fuse.
... when reading, listen and don’t be the fuse.

@tinyfaery Sadly, they are not when you have people contemplating death sentences for Old Testament crimes.

@whitenoise If we can believe what we read of Jesus’ teachings, he would throw the Dominionists out of the temple with far more violence than he did the money changers. Talk about a den of vipers. I will not be silent while I see that creeping threat.

I discuss. I sometimes label beliefs absurd or delusional because I think they are. I do not label people. My critics do. And they insist they have the moral high ground to call names and I should just accept it. Not happening.

@ETpro

A bent sign post cast still point in the right direction.

Regardless of whether you believe in the scriptures, these old books do offer a lot of alternative insights into the way people could and possibly should live their lives.

In general I am not taken aback by most things that you write. If, for instance, you write about a delusion based on bronze age, aggressive superstition, then you don’t phase me. Nevertheless, I fully understand other people do get phased. More importantly: I also understand that they feel that your wording was chosen deliberately to phase them.

Surely you must understand that as well… because if your message was that people are mistaken based on a belief that renders from a past in which we knew less about the world than today, then you could find less ‘sparky’ words.

On the other hand… you indeed in general seem to be genuinely concerned about the religious claim on public life and I share a lot of your frustration when people think themselves on a moral high road based on their religion.

What I am saying… you can learn a lot from the teachings credited to Jesus and the religious can learn a lot on ethics from atheists humanists like you. (Calling you a humanist, since I sincerely feel that label fits you better in ethcical / moral debates.) We all can learn a lot more from each other as long as on occasion we just turn the other cheek and look each other in the face again.

@DominicX has been taking me to school on those same issues of diplomatic wording. I fully admit I have much to learn, and I am working on expressing things in ways less likely to spark a confrontation with someone who is persuadable.

I have read the Bible through multiple times in various translations and gone to an evangelical Bible college as well as studying comparative religion at the college level. When I write about what the Bible and Torah say, I’m not just guessing. Amazingly, a good number of my staunchest theistic critics here are apparently ignorant of what their own holy book requires of them. And actions do speak louder than words.

I’m pretty comfortable with the labels I apply to myself, and confident they are accurate. I am a secular humanist and a soft (or agnostic) atheist. I am a very solid 6 on this scale of theism to atheism.

@ETpro I know you’re not in an identity crisis. Nor did I ever doubt you’ve read the books. So have I and I agree it seems so many religious have not and – to me – this adds frustration to the debate.

It is just that a lot of what I perceive as most annoying is when religious people, as you write, claim the moral high road over atheists, since atheism doesn’t offer moral guidelines.

The religious are right… atheism doesn’t offer a source for morals / ethics, however it doesn’t exclude them either. Humanism does offer a moral base and is perfectly compatible with atheism.

As atheism offers no inclusion or exclusion of moral / ethical awareness, I would like to reserve atheism for religious debates and humanism for ethical ones. I find that, in general, only the staunchest religious people would claim that humanists cannot have morals.

This makes sense to me… hope it does to you as well.

@whitenoise I have often said regarding politics and law that ethics can be discussed without religion, and I think it is true in other realms besides politics, so your statement, I would like to reserve atheism for religious debates and humanism for ethical ones kind of spoke to me. I think the difficulty is for those who feel strongly that their ethics and morals come from their religion; the people who consult their religion for what is ethical, they can’t separate the two things. I could be wrong, but that is how it appears to me. I am not saying all religious people are like this, I am only talking about the ones who can’t understand having morals or ethics without reigion.

@JLeslie

Religion comes with moral guidelines, atheism doesn’t. However: saying that this means that atheism excludes morals is a step too far and a hurtful lie at best.

You are so right when you say that ”[you] think [] the people who consult their religion for what is ethical [] can’t separate the two things”.

And that is exactly the reason why those who do believe that these can be discussed separately use the right idiom. They shouldn’t claim to get their morals from atheism,but be proud of the abundant alternative sources available, like Humanism.

@Whitehouse Did you get a chance to read my answer regarding morals

I don’t know how to link right to specific answers so if somebody could tell us how and give up the goods to do that it would make life much easier for many of us because some of us (including me lol) would like to know :-)

@KaY_Jelly

I tried to read your answer, but in all honesty, I couldn’t truly understand. You referred to a whole other question about why people cannot just accept god as a given when answering any religious question.

What I got from you overall, though, is that you seem to support the Moral argument:
(1) A human experience of morality is observed.
(2) God is seen to be the best or only explanation for this moral experience.
3() Therefore, God exists.

Well this is just an opinion even though it seems to be completely logical that 3 follows from 1 and 2. And actually 3 follows from 1 and 2. It is however with the second element of this list that I have a sincere problem. I feel there are very many other and possibly better solutions than God that offer an objective explanation for our moral experience.

I seem to remember that I once tried to ask you, on a different thread, whether you thought things were morally right, because they please God or whether they please God because they are morally right.

I personally like to think the latter; that there is an objective morality, seperate from God. How else could we trust His word?

I speak with many of my devote friends and the ones that though this over tell me that in their mind, God doesn’t define Right or Wrong, Good or Evil, He just has devine and full insignt into what is right versus what is wrong. That to me at least would be very reassuring. It would also allow for other ways to find morality.

1  —  Doing chores on Saturday
2  —  Being a stubborn and rebellious child
3  —  Being a drunk
4  —  Practicing magic
5  —  Commit adultery
6  —  Lying about virginity, which meant not bleeding on the wedding bed
7  —  Being a victim of rape
8  —  Apostasy—It’s not just death for Muslims.
9  —  Having gay sex
10 —  Being a medium or a spiritualist

I could go on and on with the list of things that required the village to stone you to death. There were a few considered serious enough that you had to be burned alive. So those are all things Yahweh considered such odious abominations before His eyes that they required death by torture. Yet even though Jesus himself said that not the smallest part of the Law and the Prophets would pass from effect till the end of time, we all know better than following those ancient beliefs.

Since those laws are biblically still in effect, we obviously don’t learn that those laws are wrong from the Bible. We KNOW they are wrong from something that isn’t given to us by belief in God, Buddha, Brahma or atheism. We know it from the human Zeitgeist. We know it because the law of reciprocity, which predated the Bible’s writing by many centuries, is logically obvious to us, and human culture builds on that logic.

And yet there are fundamentalist Christians such as the followers of Dominionism who feel that the death penalties as described above should to be enforced today. If that isn’t close enough to radical Islam to justify the terms American Taliban, Christian Madrasa and Christian Jihad, what does it take?

@neodarwin Religion and politics will never be seperate, sorry.

@KaY_Jelly Sometime, I think it would be a good idea for you post a question that asks how much people know about being bi-polar and how it affects your dialogues and other parts of your life and brain. People need educating obviously.

@ETpro “Unfortunately, the absolutism Christians have to embrace since it is set forth in their holy text is in itself dangerous, because it provides the fuel needed for a critical mass of those who actually want a Christian Jihad to rid the world of apostasy, or a nuclear war in Israel, and they have a loud and growing political voice.”

In regards to your post, since there is a loud and growing political voice, why don’t you and others try to change minds instead of name-calling? I’m curious because it makes no sense to me to ridicule and belittle those who obviously have a big voice in this country, and frankly, around the world. There are people like me who want to hear what you want to say, but when you do it in a nasty way, we don’t listen, we don’t learn, it just stops communication. Remember, we can all change things, but first you have to communicate and understand thy enemy, which is how it feels you thinnk of us at times.

@ETpro smoking too much marijuana will stone you to death, you know.

@KNOWITALL

” @neodarwin)(sic Religion and politics will never be seperate(sic), sorry.”

Wrong again. Religion will fade to such an extent that you will not see it let alone see it in politics.

What did Tony Blair say about religion in his politics?

PS: That is neodarwinian. Play on the Neo-Darwinian synthesis, or as it is more commonly known, the new synthesis.

@Neodarwinian I disagree on that, if anything it will increase as secularism grows (we’ve already seen huge surges in mass killings, teen suicide/ cutting/ self abuse, etc…), churches may be a thing of the past though.

@Dutchess_III No one has ever been stoned to death. And I know plenty who have tried.

@Seek_Kolinahr For the umpteenth time, calling someone’s claim BS is not name calling. It may be true that the claim is BS, and it may be false. But whichever the case, it is not name calling. I have not engaged in name calling, and had I done so, the moderators are ever ready to delete the posts where I do it. The name calling has been directed at me, because I stepped on apparently fragile egos.

@KNOWITALL

” I disagree on that, if anything it will increase as secularism grows (we’ve already seen huge surges in mass killings, teen suicide/ cutting/ self abuse, etc…), churches may be a thing of the past though. ”

What will increase? Religion? The numbers say you do not know what you are talking about. The rest of your post does not cohere.

“The numbers don’t bear your assertion out,” would be a little nicer than ”...you do not know what you are talking about.” Just sayin’

@Neodarwinian One last time…then you’re on my list of people I can’t talk to rationally. People aren’t turning backs on God, just on conservative politics.

“If current trends persist, religious progressives will soon outnumber religious conservatives, a group that is shrinking with each successive generation, the data show.”

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/07/the-rise-of-the-christian-left-in-america/278086/

I think progressives in general will soon outnumber the conservatives, religious or not.

Religion declining in America

@KNOWITALL Very True! But honestly I don’t ask many questions because when I think of questions I have so many things running through my head at one time that I get lost. It’s actually why the same reason just earlier I was accused of running around in circles and for using my bipolar as a crutch and other various things.

I probably do at times run around in circles but again think of a movie in fast forward, because that is my brain sometimes. Sometimes when I am typing stuff out I type words in multiple times or I even skip words altogether because I am talking in my head faster than I can type and then I go back and I can’t remember what I was talking about, and sometimes I get stuck in my own rant going over and over again being very irrational, and unfortunately I do say it is the bipolar because I want people to realize that I am not trying to use that as a crutch because normally I am not an irrational person but that I do have a very real illness and I am a very real person behind the “crazy” message and I sometimes get lost in it.

And sometimes it takes a bigger person to say, “Hey! You are not making sense. Can you explain that better?” (And maybe I will or maybe I can’t even explain it myself) or a person such as yourself and others that understand that it is my illness, <(thank you for understanding) and instead of attacking my personality or my faith like I have been subjected to so many times out here by very few unbelieving people, but for the most part everyone here has very beautiful souls and smart personalities regardless of their faith or lack of.

I just prefer trying to get along with everyone and keeping my bipolar in check as much as possible, maybe I am just asking for some common courtesy and equality since people can’t visibly see my disability so it starts to sound like I am using bipolar as a crutch, but honestly it is a disability and if I was missing a leg from the war and using a prosthetic one, people might not think I was using the prosthetic as a crutch in the same negative term that I was told, but more of an aid or a helpful device, because the disability is more visible so I would be more likely to defend why I am wearing the prosthetic then why I have to use it. On the internet people cannot see me so I am more inclined to defend my “crutch” or my disability just like a war hero would defend the very reason why he has to wear the prosthetic when he or she is subjected with stares. Being a little irrational sometimes is my crutch, because my disability is mental and is not as much visible as wearing a prosthetic/aid/crutch. Should I still ask the question? LOL :)

@ETpro I just wonder that if everything you read is exactly as you think it was or is. How do we know that the act was literally of “stoning” someone to death as we know it to be. As it was pointed out here smoking marijuana can also “stone you to death”. Also as I have pointed out many times before that Lot’s wife did not actually turn into a pillar of salt, did she? Also Psalm 23 jumping to verse 4 has a different meaning then:

4 Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
I will fear no evil;
For You are with me;
Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me.
If we believe the skeptics and To be a follower of Jesus you must hate your children

spares the rod

Ephesians 6:4

4 And you, fathers, do not provoke your children to wrath, but bring them up in the training and admonition of the Lord.

To me spoiling children with Gods word and praise, that would be the discipline of “His rod and His staff”. That is what I get from it.

@whitenoise Sorry if I confused you when I referred to the question but what I really wanted to do was refer to a specific answer I had given but I have yet to figure out how to do that, until I figure that out I will stop referring to questions and assuming it works or that everyone should just know where to go. I truly apologize. It’s also why I gave a link to the moral argument, thank goodness for that or it would of all been for nothing, LOL. But at least you understood the rest of it after that. I also understand we all have different ideas and beliefs and it is not my place or my intention to try to convert or disrespect yours or anybodies ideas and opinions and I honestly love reading them because I was once on the side of atheism as well, and in fact many of my family members and friends do not believe in God and/or do not hold religious beliefs and the ones who do only do it when it is convenient for them.

I will try to refrain from linking to specific answers in questions until I can figure out how.

When you look at countries around the world I don’t think religiousity or number of people who are religious necessarily correlate to suicide rates. I think cold countries have more suicide rates, and also cultures that have very little room for people who din’t fit into the norm. But, even saying that, I am not sure suicide can really be summed up as related to one specific thing in a country. Not religion, secularism, or even the things I mentioned. We might be able to throw in more working women or the break down of the American family and how disconnected the extended family is in many cases. But, I think that might be unfair also. America is not in the top 20 even for suicide rates in the world.

@Neodarwinian Seek is not of my religion or my politics, but she is a very loving person, with much better interpersonal communication skills than you, sir, which means I take her seriously. We disagree RESPECTFULLY, which is why I’m proud to call her a friend.

@Neodarwinian What are you blathering about? I expressed an opinion when I said, “I think progressives in general will soon outnumber the conservatives, religious or not.” It didn’t have anything to do with religion! What’s wrong with you?

[as a mod] Don’t make me use my big voice.

o_o

Hahaha.

This discussion train wreck (should be) closed

Looking at that chain of moderation, we have some VERY slow learners among us.

Interesting, @KaY_Jelly wants the Bible to be the proof of God’s existence, but we’re supposed to think God saying something like “If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city.” that really means they all go out and smoke dope. Seriously?

@ETpro I didn’t see where @KaY_Jelly wrote that. This Q got too long and windy. But, I will say I never understand people saying the bible is proof. A friend of mine once said that to me. I don’t get it.

Fluther’s link system is not working properly. The link above points to http://www.fluther.com/162905/should-the-religious-enjoy-immunity-to-excoriate-non-believers-in-any-way/#quip2783642 but is instead going to the middle of a bunch of deleted post that I don’t think she had anything to do with. She did write that stoning in the OT might have actually meant getting stoned on MJ. It seems that posting the full URL to that post works.

OY VEY!!! :-\

[mod says] Just a heads up, people. If this thread doesn’t get back to a civil discussion, it will be closed.

@ETpro so I’m asking in all honesty now, since this question is supposed to not “stir poo poo” I really want to know why when I give an answer you continue to talk to me in third person and twist everything I say if in fact this statement is true:

”I am not posting this as flamebait, and I will flag flamers whether they be religious or secular. I’m posting this question in hopes we can give this a moment of honest reflection, and keep our discussions of theism versus atheism civil going forward.”

So now I’m going to ask you, do you really think I was talking about smoking pot?

And did you know that stoning is still a punishment in use today? Not to mention other types of corporal punishment, but being crucified is not which Jesus was.

I think I’m the only one who brought up pot! AND I was joking.

Sorry Mr.[mod says] this thread was never meant for civil discussion.
I think some are just expert at sifting rules.
Within a system of rules these prosper.

It not that I think highly about rules per se, I rather not see them, but the reasoning for this goes way beyond the purpose of the website.
And within that purpose rules will remain the best way.

Not really a joke. Death by stoning still happens.

As my pastor pointed out once, when someone is stoned, they aren’t throwing rocks at them. I mean, some are, but the ones that kill do so by picking up heavy boulders and smashing them down on whomever. Utterly barbaric, and SO similar what the great apes do today.

Since we have gone somewhat off topic, I would like to follow through with the obvious question for theists. What determines which parts of the Bible that you follow? The Old Testament is filled with rules, the most extreme of which even Orthodox Jews don’t follow, like being stoned to death for adultery or for picking up sticks on the Sabbath. The Bible also condemns homosexuality, but no less a religious figure than the current Pope has shown sympathy toward them. If you can cherry pick which parts of the Bible to follow then what is the whole point of it?

@LostInParadise That is up for debate and why there are so many variations and denominations of Christianity. I personally focus on Jesus teachings of love and sacrifice. Rules are for people who need them, and I try to live a clean, wholesome life, so I don’t feel I really need many rules other than the ten commandments.

And the 10 commandments are common sense.

@Dutchess_III ‘xactly sista, preach it. :)

BTW, @LostInParadise This battle, and a few others on theism/atheism has been raging for a month. It has a lot of people upset, and Supermouse quit the site because of it. We’re all tired. We all feel like we’ve been hit by a sledgehammer.

“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours house.”
But what if they have a six garage driveway & the vehicles to back that up?

Well, you can covet their garage and their drive way the the boats and vehicles! Just not the house.

@Dutchess_III , I am not entering any battle. I am just asking for clarification. In that vein, let’s examine the Ten Commandments The last 6 are of a non-religious nature. As to five to nine there is pretty much universal consensus, although there is a whole lot of adultery going on. Both John Kennedy and Martin Luther King come to mind in that regard. As to 10, our economy is largely based on keeping up with the Jonses. So much for not coveting.

The first 4 commandments are rather vague. The first one does not even seem to be a commandment. By ignoring religion, I suppose I could say that I follow 2 and 3. As for the fourth, unless keeping the Sabbath holy includes going shopping, there is not much obedience.

@Dutchess_III Does a crowbar come into the category of covet…err, ness?

Though shalt not covet thy neighbor’s crowbars either, @ucme. Everybody knows that. I you do, you get stoned and you also have to buy the beer.

And my mother says, “the whole world wants to go to hell in a hand basket.”

“unless keeping the Sabbath holy includes going shopping, there is not much obedience.”

That’s true, but its supposed to be all part of a bigger plan to give us a chance to redeem ourselves and have a chance in heaven. Back in biblical times Jesus had to play by the rules just us much as we did and it is why it led to His crucifixion.

I also try to follow the commandments.

Jesus became really popular because he didn’t play by the rules.

I could go on and on with the list of things that required the village to stone you to death.
Since those laws are biblically still in effect, we obviously don’t learn that those laws are wrong from the Bible
<groan> When will people who want to speak on the bible learn we are under GRACE, not the Law?

@KaY_Jelly I tried as best as Fluther allows to link to the post where you actually asked this.

Regarding your question about why I went back to addressing you in the third person, I thought for the last few days we were building a bridge whereby, even though we might disagree on some things, we could agree on others, and on the ones where we differed, we could disagree without being disagreeable. Then, in another thread where I was reaching out to you, and being as sincere as I knew how to be in doing so, you tore into me with a new string of insults and claims about my motives that had no basis in fact. Looking for it now, I can’t find it. But I responded with a statement that if that was how you wanted our correspondence here to be, I’d go back to refuting posts I felt needed to be rejected, but not engaging directly with you in doing so.

I’d like to be able to engage directly with you. I think you are intelligent, articulate, at times witty, and always sincere. I love to to debate epistemology. I don’t need to win every debate to carry on. But I do not have the time for debates that establish nothing and end in a series of ugly accusations leveled at me simply because I don’t agree with you. And that post ripping me apart for trying to reach out, claiming I was doing so for false motives when I was not, and when you had no way of knowing what my motives were, not being privy to my thoughts; that led me conclude you had no interest in a meaningful exchange, but were interested only in dominating debates, not sharing and occasionally learning.

I don’t give up on people easily, so I’m open to another try. Are you?

@Hypocrisy_Central , What does it mean to be under Grace? How does it work? What does it have to do with belief in God?

@hypo: Jesus disagrees with you, according to the book of Matthew.

it’s the apostles, fallible men, who wrote in the loopholes. the Judeo-Christian Congress, if you will.

@Hypocrisy_Central Jesus was crystal clear on the issue of the Old Testament Law still being in force. He said in Matthew 5:17–20;”

“17 Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil.

“18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished.

“19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

“20 For I say unto you, that except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven.”

The list I gave of 10 Laws above are most definitely not “the least” among transgressions. They are all capital crimes. And every time some Christian tries to claim they no longer count, they do so with much hand waving, but no substance.

@ETpro . . . Those passages are awfully open to both translation and interpretation.

The core of what Jesus the man taught was love, compassion, peace, and helping those who are less fortunate. These are teachings that don’t require any type supernatural backing at all and are completely at odds with the old testament. These are all principles I believe everyone could benefit from by implementing them in to their lives.

It’s like when the children’s show Barney and Friends was popular. Adults hated Barney. All you ever heard was a bunch of bitching and moaning about how cheesy and annoying he was. There was all kinds of hateful rhetoric aimed at the big purple guy because folks felt like he was being shoved down their throats.

What a lot of those pissed off folks failed to notice was that Barney, reviled as he was, wasn’t teaching children to shoot heroin, talk back to their parents, or have promiscuous sex. He was teaching children about love, sharing, tolerance, and peace.

Just because you don’t like the package the message comes in doesn’t mean the message is wrong.

again, for any noobs, i am an atheist. so save your bible arguments for someone else.

@ETpro Of course I am willing to give it another try. I love most of your answers when it comes to atheism and it is why I continue to engage with you. You are definitely not my enemy. I certainly think we have made connections regardless of the fact that our belief/unbelief system is not the same.

I know which comment you are talking of and I am not sure but it may have been removed. I understand that you were and it seemed in the beginning of the message you were reaching out to me, and so when I started reading it I thought OK we have smoothed things over until I read the end of your comment which it just seemed you had add the ad hominem attack of “stop trying to control the world” or something or other and considering just a few posts above I had just basically said I was bipolar, which I have not been very quiet about, so then I went into bipolar mode and I felt attacked. My comment was merely to make a point, and honestly it is my fault and I have been praying to God for forgiveness and help because I should not of responded in that manner. So I want to apologize for hurting your feelings, it was not intentional and I guess in my own mind I just felt like I was pointing out the obvious and all my Christian logic flew out the window. Sometimes and here comes the “crutch” my bipolar does take over especially if I feel stressed or attacked and then I may respond differently dependent upon my mood. Which I can tell you I have been a little on the “hypomania” side of bipolar, which is far better than the previous psychotic depression I was in not long ago, what a trip that was.

FYI: This describes me to a T at the moment thanks to Wikipedia..

The DSM-IV-TR defines a hypomanic episode as including, over the course of at least four days, elevated mood plus three of the following symptoms OR irritable mood plus four of the following symptoms:

pressured speech
inflated self-esteem or grandiosity
decreased need for sleep
state of well-being and overexcited
flight of ideas or the subjective experience that thoughts are racing
easy distractibility and attention-deficit similar to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
increase in psychomotor agitation
involvement in pleasurable activities that may have a high potential for negative psycho-social or physical consequences (e.g., the person engages in unrestrained buying sprees, sexual indiscretions, reckless driving, or foolish business investments).[4]

Possible benefits

Some commentators believe that hypomania actually has an evolutionary advantage.[5] People with hypomania are generally perceived as being energetic, euphoric, visionary, overflowing with new ideas, and sometimes overconfident and very charismatic, yet—unlike those with full-blown mania—are sufficiently capable of coherent thought and action to participate in everyday activities. Like mania, there seems to be a significant correlation between hypomania and creativity. A person in the state of hypomania might be immune to fear and doubt and have negligible social and sexual inhibition. People experiencing hypomania usually have a very strong sex-drive. Hypomanic people are often the “life of the party.” They may talk to strangers easily, offer solutions to problems, and find pleasure in small activities. Such advantages may render them unwilling to submit to treatment, especially when disadvantages are minimal.

I think you are a great person. Every once in awhile I feel llike you are trying to give me the bone of contention instead of just a debate. Maybe that is just my bipolar, I am not sure. If I were not mentally disabled I believe I could just not think about those things but my mind races all the time and I am always over thinking everything and reading into everything.

It’s one topic that we do not agree on out of oodles of other topics that we just may agree on. So we never stopped, there was just some kinks and you’ll find when it come to me I am a little kinky! :) Yes of course we are still on. xo

@LostInParadise _ What does it mean to be under Grace? How does it work? What does it have to do with belief in God?_
THANK YOU for asking, it is the first TRULY INTELLIGENT comment to come from this whole thread. I will give you the basic construct in digest form, because SOME PEOPLE certainly need to know it. If you have any further questions I will PM you with the answer.

Grace works like this:
• You recognize that you miss the mark; basically that is what being a sinner is. That you are not perfect, nor smarter than your creator.
• You recognize that because you miss the mark there is a debt to pay to restore your relationship with God, and you can never pay it (you are not perfect).
• You believe Christ, living a perfect life in a fleshly body, was the only one able to ransom you from the sinful state you were in.
• Once you recognize that and confess it to Christ and CHOOSE, to be a bondservant of Him who paid your ransom, who became your propitiation for sin you no longer have to merely cover up the sin with animal sacrifices_, because Christ being the Lamb of God was the last and perfect sacrifice doing what no animal sacrifice could atone for.
That places you under GRACE (unmerited favor of God), and not the LAW. There is no way any person can be perfect so we will screw up, but instead of having to have a high priest sacrifice an animal in our place, we can confess, and repent of it and Christ grants us a pardon because He desires to, because you trust in the Son and believe upon Him. Under grace Christ requires only TWO COMMANDMENTS, follow those and ALL THE REST will come inline automatically; 35 Then one of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, and saying,36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?”
37 Jesus said to him, “‘You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’40 On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.” (Matthew 22:35–40)

The Law allowed for no mistakes, and if you did, and you always did, some animal had to die for you. Under grace, you don’t have to slaughter an animal because Christ died for you being the perfect human you and I could never be.
If you are to love your neighbor, and see him/her just as yourself, you are not going to stone them to death, even if they murdered someone, had sex with your spouse, had sex with a child, stole from everyone they met, had sex with their Great Dane, was gay, or just a simple liar. Anyone who still comes off thinking that after this is just plain pigheaded, arrogant or brain damaged and can’t comprehend.

One last note, many are so arrogant that they can’t capitulate and admit they are flawed or that they are not the only s*** in the universe. Grace will never come to them, and they will be judge under the law, that is what they quote most anyhow. With grace paradise found, without grace paradise will be lost.

@Seek_Kolinahr @hypo: Jesus disagrees with you, according to the book of Matthew.
it’s the apostles, fallible men, who wrote in the loopholes. the Judeo-Christian Congress, if you will.
That is impossible because I AM AGREEING WITH CHRIST, (see above post), God is not agreeing with me. And it wasn’t the apostles who wrote in loopholes it was the Pharisees, and the Sadducees, of which we have many modern day versions right here on Fluther, who wanted to recognize Christ with their lips but deny Him the honor and glory thereof.

@ETpro Jesus was crystal clear on the issue of the Old Testament Law still being in force. He said in Matthew 5:17–20;”
Wow….I mean, WOW! You do not understand that? Is this a quote of yours?

I have read the Bible through multiple times in various translations and gone to an evangelical Bible college as well as studying comparative religion at the college level. When I write about what the Bible and Torah say, I’m not just guessing.

I don’t know if I should pity you or not. If that is true that you said, and you were in control of your faculties when you typed it, I would have to guess:
• You learned it and know better but decided to reject it.
• You slept through every class and used crib notes to pass the test.
• The Bible college you attended ripped you off, that they only had the name Bible college to hide the Devil running all through them.
You went to Bible college and they didn’t teach you the difference between grace and the law? There is just one more I can say to you:

1 Corinthians 1:20

<em>Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?</em>

Now I see why you are seeing but still in the dark. You go on and be as wise as you want to be, as far as I am concerned you have disqualified yourself, so you never have to worry about me ever talking to you about the Cross again. Feel free to keep commenting and lurveing yourself up, glad to help out. You will at least have a reward of men while you are here, good luck trying to take it with you when the Grim Reaper comes.

@Hypocrisy_Central

”[] it is the first TRULY INTELLIGENT comment to come from this whole thread.”

Really? Now… That’s not nice!

@Blondesjon Those passages are crystal clear. There is no other literary work of antiquity that has had more effort poured into accurate translation. If you want to know what the King James English meant by “Jot and Tittle” both words mean essentially the same thing, a tiny element. It is saying not one tiny element to the Law and the Prophets shall pass away till the end of time. They are all in force. Constantine decided to pick what would and wouldn’t be in the Bible we read today. He did so to consolidate his political power, and he included in the canons myriad things that would appeal to the other religions of that day. That is where all the new dispensation crap came from. It had nothing to do with Jesus, whose ministry was to and for the Jews.

I’m right with you in appreciating the messages of love for your neighbor, and of ministering to the poor, that Jesus taught. Just remember that only Jews were neighbors, and the poor Jews are those he sought to help. Paul, a man who didn’t even know the living Jesus, is the man who realized that to make Christianity a powerful new cult, it had to be preached to the Gentiles. Even today, as they did then, Orthodox Jews still pray each morning,
    “Blessed are you, Hashem, King of the Universe, for not having made me a Gentile.”
    “Blessed are you, Hashem, King of the Universe, for not having made me a slave.”
    Blessed are you, Hashem, King of the Universe, for not having made me a woman.”

I am constantly mystified by the Christian apologists who, on the one hand claim absolute certainty in their beliefs thanks to the fact that God is omniscient and omnipotent, and He made certain that the Holy Text was perfect in its revelation of him. They know because the Bible says so. Then they say that every questionable verse can’t be read as saying what it actually says. You have to understand that it actually means whatever I want it to mean. When people advance ideas as utterly illogical as that, there really is no way to debate them. Words don’t have meanings except when they want them to, and then they have whatever meaning they want them to. I’d call it advanced hypothesis myopia.

@KaY_Jelly I am delighted to hear that. I had really begun to enjoy our exchanges and was stunned and disappointed when the possibility of continuing them suddenly seemed to evaporate. I don’t know who misunderstood whom, but I know that in the answer that provoked your ire, I honestly meant no harm. Let’s chalk it up to a misunderstanding and move on from there.

@Hypocrisy_Central I went to Bible college and they tied themselves in knots just like you do trying to hand wave away all the contradictions. I know what the book says Jesus said. I know what modern apologists try to get away with so that what their own holy book can be ignored. Because if you actually asked Christians today to follow the scripture, they would not do it and they would also know that it’s immoral to do it. It’s all about the money and power of controlling religion.

As Seneca, “Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.

@hypo – and that is why, when I left my church, I didn’t pick another denomination.

My former church read those words and believed them. They didn’t brush them aside because they were unpleasant. Unless there was a later verse specifically forgiving one of the old testament laws, so sad, too bad, you don’t get to wear pants. (Deut. 22:5)

Religious people that tried to live with whiteout Bibles were pansies who were going to hell.

And I was just as right then as you are now.

@ETpro :) absolutely ❤

@ETpro I went to Bible college and they tied themselves in knots just like you do trying to hand wave away all the contradictions.
It’s all about the money and power of controlling religion.
(That is why you bypass RELIGION and workout your RELATIONSHIP with the Father) All I can say is sorry bro, that they stole your money like that while leaving you in the dark. Tip:

Romans 3:3–5
<em>3 For what if some did not believe? Will their unbelief make the faithfulness of God without effect? 4 Certainly not! Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar. As it is written:</em>
<em>“That You may be justified in Your words,</em>
<em>And may overcome when You are judged.”</em>

Because they got over on you, (they are men and not perfect) don’t blame it on God, He is still sovereign, mighty and holy no matter who man messed up speaking His name. Try studying the Word for yourself with the guidance of the Spirit, or go the way you want.

2 Corinthians 4:3
<em>But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing,</em>

(You might get a bar of that also @Seek_Kolinahr)

@Hypocrisy_Central Sorry to disappoint you, but every cult leader couches their BS in just such terms. It isn’t unique to your cult.

Cult? Dare I say that that is a fallacious claim.

Care to explain?

Since I don’t feel like giving an essay in great detail here is an argument that I fully support that Christianity is not a cult.

@ETpro Sorry to disappoint you, but every cult leader couches their BS in just such terms. It isn’t unique to your cult.
The Lord is disappointed in you. As He said in His Word, He did not like the actions of Sadducees in the days He walked the Earth He don’t like them any better now. I will be a cult leader if that is what you want to make me, than a modern day Sadducee. (Lurve yourself up with that, but like money, you ain’t taking it with you)

@KaY_Jelly Good article, thanks for posting.

@KNOWITALL Your welcome :) It’s a long article but it’s worth the read. It is exceptionally relieving, like in this case, when I am not the only one who thinks this stuff up and I find Christian apologists who have made arguments for me.

As you have suggested though, depending on my mood it can be truly why many of my arguments get confusing, because just to create one argument it really is for me an essay of sorts, and I get very distracted on different days…like right now lol. Sometimes I have like 10 windows open lol doing 10 different things at once, I have the TV going so I am watching movies, then I am watching YouTube and TV at the same time, or I am at the gym and posting comments, I can’t work and fluther though or I’ll lose my job. And usually as I have already said before I am in a state of hypo-mania or maybe even mania, idk. I can even hear myself in my own head talking a mile a minute and I am trying to keep up with myself while typing…its difficult at times, and then other times I write like an entire essay read it over and say to myself “you’ve said to much” and I erase it and start all over…like now, I want to erase all of this. O_o

@KaY_Jelly I get you, doll. :)

Just remember, you only explain until you’re tired of explaining. It reminds me of your little brother poking you and poking you, just to get a rise out of you for attention. Ultimately we wear ourselves out and get upset for no benefit whatsoever.

@KNOWITALL . . . i believe the term you’re looking for is, “turn the other cheek”.

@Blondesjon I think that trying to explain our personal beliefs seriously with people who only want to use your words against you, is a complete waste of time for everyone involved. Moving forward, I will only respond if I feel the intent behind it is to truly learn with an open heart.

Okay, Christianity is not a cult. But what is it? The article kept talking about something new without saying what it was. If the something new is the idea that belief in Christ leads to salvation, that may be more Paul’s idea than that of Jesus. Jesus never renounced his Judaism.

@KNOWITALL . . . All I’m saying is that I’m pretty sure Jesus wasn’t a member of the debate team.

@Blondesjon I’m sure you’re right! :)

“Apparently after one day’s journey back to Jerusalem and a day looking for Jesus, it is on the third day that Joseph and Mary discover him at the temple, listening to and asking questions of the teachers. The exact location of the incident within the temple is unstated, but Jesus’ discussion with the officials leaves those who listen amazed at his understanding and his answers.”

http://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/IVP-NT/Luke/Twelve-Year-Old-Jesus-Goes

My point exactly. The words argument and debate are nowhere to be found.

I’m thinking that if Jesus had the Internet he would have done a facepalm before he even got twenty answers in on this thread. The whole thing has very little to do with self-sacrifice and helping your fellow man or even jesus himself and everything to do with being the one who is “right”.

@Blondesjon Then I must emulate my Maker…lol

@Hypocrisy_Central, @KaY_Jelly and @KNOWITALL I knew I should not have written cult but it was too late to edit it out. I apologize to you and to any other Christian here offended by that. You have every right to be angry about that characterization of your religion.

I don’t believe in the religion you follow, and it did start as a number of cults after the death of Jesus, with this or that apostle or claimant to the revealed knowledge of God as the charismatic leader, but the religion has long since left those roots behind. It is a mainstream if fractious religion today, and certainly not a cult.

@ETpro Thanks for the apology. TBH I wasn’t personally offended, I just knew that if that is really what you thought, then there is some serious miseducation which then you possibly could of been adding to the rumor of Christianity being a cult which seems fallacious to me.

But OK I understand when many a men have actually formed cults using Christianity as their base to do evil things, but do not let them fool you that does not mean they are sincere to God and Christianity.

In fact, in many real cults if we really look hard enough most sane people who are not brainwashed by a cult leader can find many irrational and illogical inconsistencies against God, His word and Christianity within the fallacious convents. Also do not mistake irrational and illogical followers of God as being in a cult, because they themselves choose their actions they could also be logical and a cult leader could also become a preacher for God and a follower of His, but instead chooses to extort God’s children, His word and above all people’s faith in humanity and all of the above. Not very God like.

@ETpro I just hope for respect of our beliefs, as I respect your rights to yours. Apology accepted.

@ETpro I too thank you and accept your apology. I know where you are coming from, you have stated it more than enough times, and I am content to let you enjoy what you enjoy in peace. However, I must again remind you, I do not have a religion, I have a relationship with the Father. I am not Baptist, Presbyterian, Pentecostal, Lutheran, or any such thing. Those are creations of man; there is but _one church, and one Shepherd, which is Christ Jesus. What those other churches of men do, I care little. If they follow the Word, all good for them; if they don’t follow the Word or try to twist it, I will not be found there worshiping.

@Hypocrisy_Central I’m very similar to you in that, HC. Men are fallible, God is not.

I agree with both.^^

@KNOWITALL I agree with both propositions. Men are certainly fallible.

As far as I can determine, look for him as I may, Got is simply not… Not fallible, not infallible. Simply not…

@KNOWITALL @Kay_Jelly and @ETPro

Regarding “Men are fallible”...

True as that may be, may I – at a certain risk – add that women may be fallible too?

Although I would be the first one to retract that statement if anyone would tell my wife.

@ETpro I find Him everywhere from nature to a terminal cancer patients gentle, pain-ridden smile, I wish I could show you what I see for just an hour.

@whitenoise Of course, I was posting via cell, have to keep it short. :)

This is interesting:

“The problem is that we are on a hostile channel. Our minds can be prompted by God, from our own carnal desires, or from unclean spirits. Some ignore this and naively believe that anything they think or feel is from God, without humility or reflection. This may seem a silly error, but it can become serious when such a person thinks God has told them to “go kill someone”. Manson, who still claims to be a Christian, heard from his “god” in this fashion many times.”

“2 Cor 11:3 (NIV) But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ.”

“2 Tim 3:13–17 (NIV) ...evil men and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it… you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

And this:

Who’s Not Listening Now?

Jer 6:10 (NIV) “To whom can I speak and give warning? Who will listen to me? Their ears are closed so they cannot hear. The word of the Lord is offensive to them; they find no pleasure in it.”

Zech 7:11–13 (NIV) “But they refused to pay attention; stubbornly they turned their backs and stopped up their ears. They made their hearts as hard as flint and would not listen… So the Lord Almighty was very angry. “When I called, they did not listen; so when they called, I would not listen,’ says the Lord Almighty.”

Mat 13:12–17 (NIV) “Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. This is why I speak to them in parables: [from Isa 6:9–11] ‘Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.’ In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: ‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people’s heart has become callused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.’ But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. For I tell you the truth, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.”

Read it all here.

And the people bowed and prayed
To the neon god they made
And the sign flashed out its warning
In the words that it was forming
And the sign said the words of the prophets are written on the subway walls
And tenement halls
And whispered in the Sounds of Silence

Paul Simon from The Sounds of Silence

The Quakers also know the value of silence. Sitting quietly in Quaker meeting for worship is a very spiritual experience. You can believe anything you want as long as you keep your mouth shut (most of the time).

God comes in all forms figuring out if He is the real one is the tricky part.

Like the time my husband was in the hospital on life support. I was a basket case driving around asking for some kind of sign. At that time I had no one but my husband who opened my life to God again, and helped me to see the error of my bipolar ways, I guess he was the sanity in my madness. Anyway, the satellite radio was not working or even hooked up in the SUV. I accidentally hit the satellite button on the steering wheel. The satellite radio ironically just coincidentally started working, some kind of preview I guess which never happened before, the satellite started searching for working radio stations and stopped on an all Christian radio station in the middle of a song change. The song the station started playing was the most comforting song to me that I will never forget, that to me is God. These are the lyrics to the song:

It’s just a matter of time a few days ago
I saw you, you were fine
Remembering what you said
About the book you read
The one I got you
The Beginning of the End
Oh how we’d talk
For hours upon end
What I would give
Just to do it again
But you’re lying there
In this hospital bed
Won’t you open your eyes
And let’s talk once again

(CHORUS)
If you fly away tonight
I want to tell you that I love you
I hope that you can hear me
I hope that you can feel me
If you fly away tonight
I want to tell you that I’m sorry
That I never told you
When we were face to face

Well I’ve been here all night
And I’m watching you
Breathe in and breathe out
Is it really you
Or just a machine
That’s giving you life
And it’s making it seem
That there could be hope
I could say to your face
If it weren’t for you
That there would be no grace
That’s covered my life
You took the time
To speak into my mind
And my heart
Words of life

(CHORUS)

So goodbye for now
And I’ll see you again
Some way, somehow
When it’s my time to go
to the other side
I’ll hold you again
And melt at your smile
Now all I have
Are the ones that I’m with
And you taught me not
To take for granted
The time that we have
To show that we care
Speak into their minds
And their hearts
While they’re here
And say I love you

(Chorus)

If you are willing to listen He speaks to you in ways you can understand.

Here on Fluther we have lurve and we can give it to each other and feel it from each other and we can even feel like we are not lurved, so I am going to lurve each and every one of you in a special way, but honestly lurve is different than love and I really only love and trust God completely and if you open your heart to God how can you not feel the love vibrating right through the screen to Him because of Him? ♡†

^^ Sorry. I feel no love vibrating through my screen.

I’m not feeling it either. Those lyrics are awful.

And like a bad aftertaste, the melody lingers on.

@gailcalled @Seek_Kolinahr

“Rooftops” is bad? The message is pretty clear and the people in the video seem to be into the message and seem to be enjoying it. The song that I heard on the radio that I posted the lyrics for is up for personal interpretation, and as you will recall I said in my opening statement how God comes in all forms figuring out if He is the real one is the tricky part. So my interpretation of the lyrics may be different than yours, I was also in the situation and you were not.

I have lost many loved ones and have realized that we can take losing someone like a blessing, that which makes us stronger, teaches us something about life and death, and gives us a reason to go on because like in my case I found things to invest my grief into that honor my loved ones that make me feel like their life on earth was worthwhile and I believe it’s because of God’s grace we hold onto the memory of our loved ones and we are able to have the emotions that we do. It’s also possible that we can go in a different direction and we can take losing someone like it’s the end of our own personal world and we have nothing left to live for diving into our own personal inferno.

It is God now that gives me something to live for, He is also glorified in my suffering. I understand that to anyone who doesn’t want God in their life I sound like I am preaching, but then I seriously wonder why sometimes when Christians get “overtly” faithful on fluther because the topic is about faith that unbelievers and skeptics scoff us for doing so, I don’t get that.

Talk about giving true meaning to the real question of “Should the religious enjoy immunity to excoriate non-believers in any way they wish?” I am sorry I just don’t see it that way after this.

Sometimes we need to find messages we want to hear and sometimes we need to look just a little harder to find a hidden message that we never would of heard to begin with.

I did not say that God Himself sent me the message, but in a moment of crisis when you have no one maybe you have no idea how comforting some things can actually be.

You don’t know unless you walk in my shoes, and this is the type of stuff I am talking about, I feel like you are passing judgment because you haven’t walked in my shoes, and I understand this is a public site, but why would you graffiti over something that I just colorfully spilled my guts over, this is no different than me shouting from a rooftop “I AM GAY,” and then you come along and say, “I’m sorry I don’t believe that you are because being gay is a choice.”

If it was a message from God, the message *for me was received loud and clear.*

So if I was in gay pride would it be OK if straight people were to peacefully protest and hold up signs following the parade the entire way that state how “we aren’t feeling the love”?

I think equality should stand tall here and we should hold ourselves to the same standards, shouldn’t we?

@KNOWITALL and @KaY_Jelly I have no problem with you guys posting your appreciation of your beliefs, and your reasons for holding them. I can feel the poignancy of the moment you describe, @KaY_Jelly. I will do my best not to insult you as a person for what you believe, but I’d ask that you do the same.

@KNOWITALL I wish you could do the same. But in reaction to this question where I asked you and others to do that, what I got back from you was name calling by PM.

The point of this question is that while I will constantly strive to respect your right to your beliefs, I will not hesitate to argue with what seems to me flawed logic. And I most definitely will not just STFU and let those who wish to push whatever brand of theistic message they wish have open season on doing so while insulting those who disagree.

It is not insulting to question the logic someone used to arrive at a conclusion. It is insulting to call someone snarky simply because they dare to disagree with your belief system.

”@KaY_Jelly I have no problem with you guys posting your appreciation of your beliefs, and your reasons for holding them. I can feel the poignancy of the moment you describe, @KaY_Jelly..” @ETpro I actually truly get that from you. You have never once tried to stop me from saying what I wanted to say. I hold the same respect for you.

I hope you believe that I would never try to insult you or your ideas purposefully. Sometimes depending on my mood I find that when I am manic I am more sarcastic than usual and I come off as a different person.

I do not think I have gotten bad enough that I have resulted to insults or name calling. I think that is just wrong. I have said it many times I believe we all have the right to be equal. I think getting there is the hard part.

I completely understand the idea to question when someone is being illogical or irrational…maybe that’s who we are, you and I and people like us, searching for the bigger picture and we are all putting together our own puzzle, but my picture is different from yours and sometimes we have similar pieces. Regardless of the quality of the picture, some pieces of it are profoundly beautiful, we would be senseless not to notice, wouldn’t we?

@KaY_Jelly : you asked if I felt the love in that song. I don’t. I thought the song was poorly written and painful to listen to. I don’t see how it can be insulting to you to not like a song, unless of course you wrote it.

@ETpro Your goal, for whatever reason, seems to be to prove to Christians that God doesn’t exist.

For some reason, you expect me to listen while you bash my religion and expect me to like it. Do I do that to you? Of course not. When you’re respectful that’s cool, but often, even after you apologize, you do it again, so I’m done.

@KNOWITALL When it comes to religions, I’m equally dubious of claims that Wodan, Allah, Yahweh, The Trinity, Brahma, Mbombo, Unkulunkulu, The Great Rabbit Nanabozho or any other creator deity should be believed in and worshipped to the exclusion of all others based on assertion of some ancient belief and no other evidence. I’m an equal opportunity critic, and I will criticize what I see as unsupported and often dangerous claims made by supporters of any and all those religions. I’m not really trying to “prove” any particular deity does not exist, because proving a negative is not possible. I am merely stating that there are very good reasons to doubt that any of the deities on that list, or any of the thousands of other deities that this or that tribe or nation has put forward as the one true god actually exists.

I don’t have a religion to “bash” but you have certainly written your reasons why you think my lack of belief in the Father, Son and Holy Ghost is wrong, and I have read what you posted and listened to tapes of Christian apologists you linked to. I haven’t agreed with their claims, because I can see that they are shot through with logical contradictions, circular reasoning and fallacious arguments. I have said so. I will continue to do so unless evidence comes along that convinces me there is a creator deity who cares a hoot what humans think and do. If you see that as bashing your religion and can’t stand reading it, simply avoid my posts. I wish you well and will miss the interplay. But if that’s your choice, so be it.

@ETpro I’m more upset that I believed you had good intentions and that I defended you to other theists. I have been in contact with you several times, I actually liked you as a person, so I do feel betrayed by your continued disparagement of theists.

If you are equally dubious of other faiths, why not take on Muslims or someone else for awhile. Or is because they aren’t on this site? We theists have opened ourselves to you to be truthful and to promote understanding, so I feel very manipulated.

they’re called ‘life lessons’. learn from them.

@Blondesjon I know, I thought he was my friend though, but friends care when they hurt you and he just doesn’t.

for what it’s worth, I’ve been dying to take on that Hare Krishna spammer. They just don’t actually respond to comments.

@Seek_Kolinahr LOL, love to see it.

@Seek_Kolinahr . . . He’s responded to Rascal Dog me.

@Seek_Kolinahr Actually I’m sorry but that is a cop out, I never once asked you if you felt love in that song! Again if I stated I was gay would you say you aren’t feeling the love or is that different somehow. And FYI I was talking about the reaction of the people to the words of the song and wondering how you could not see that lyrics about “God” moves people.

What?

Never mind. I will definitely think twice before I air out anything close to my heart on here and show any more signs of weakness again. Some of you have no clue what compassion really is. pffffffft.

^^refer again to the life lesson post above

@KNOWITALL I have said again and again that disagreeing with someone’s logic is not disparaging them as a person. It you can only respect those who endorse your every thought, then we’ll never get along, and you should either avoid discussions with me or develop the ability to engage in a debate based on reason and logic, and win it or change your view if it’s clear your ideas don’t hold up. That is what I do here, and I have gained far more from those debates where I was shown a flaw in my thinking than I have from ones where I prevailed.

@KaY_Jelly I do like you, but I don’t like the song either. I can, however, understand how profoundly it must have affected you under the unfortunate and quite abnormal conditions in which you first heard it.

@ETpro my favorite Latin term, “tu quoque”. Of course if we were talking fallacies I’d use that term differently but you are quite rational right now lol.

The fact is that you understand that under duress how the song affected me. I get that maybe people don’t like the words, I never even said that I love the song but it’s the message that I got, thanks for getting that.

Dear all, maybe I’ve confused you or I am confused. When I said can you feel the love, I was talking about the song “rooftops”, the link to the video I left and how in the moment many people understand and get the song and if you’ve ever been to a Christian concert like that when you are a believer it is a different kind of high, one that no drug can take you, it’s not really about the lyrics to the song I heard, although we can connect them if you really keep insisting because it’s all about emotion in the end.

Sometimes my dad used say when we couldn’t find something after he found it and as kids we would ask him how did he find it :/ “you have to put your eyeballs in your hand and smell your way.”

yeah. the linked song is the one I disliked.

the sad one was trite if I’m honest, but I understand how it could have affected you. kind of like The Christmas Shoes or something.

Yeah I get it I really do. That’s why I was generalizing and making a statement and why I even emphasized “how can you not…”. To me it’s like sampling the best tempeh and then saying “how can you not…”?

It should be no secret that this is my favorite Christian group, so set the lyrics aside, maybe this melody is more up your ally?

Anyway it’s all subjective and it really doesn’t matter anymore.

Driving rock music, but I have no clue what they are saying.

Do we even know what we’re arguing about here any more?

@KaY_Jelly

This isn’t going to make you happy, but I have to do it.

I’m really the wrong person to ask if you want someone to be easily impressed by music.

The vocalist: Has one pitch. One. And it’s off-key.

The lead guitar: Unimpressive. It’s likely his entire knowledge of music goes back no earlier than 1995.

The bassist: Doesn’t appear to be playing anything in particular. This is a problem with a lot of metal, if I’m honest, but still.

I’ve already forgotten about the drummer.

The song is way. too. long. Considering there’s exactly one riff, no hook, and the whole thing never changes, four minutes is killing me. And I’m fond of prog metal concept albums.

But, it’s nothing personal. I hate all of that “numetal” garbage, no matter what they’re singing about.

Oh, and I did look up the lyrics. All I can say is “oi vey.”

If you want some really really good Christian music, try Place of Skulls. Here is a playlist of their With Vision album. The band was formed around 2000 by the former guitarist of the band Pentagram, Victor Griffin. With Vision also has one of my favourite artists (and seriously, one of the coolest dudes you’ll ever meet) Scott “Wino” Weinrich on vocals and leads.

@janbb – Apparently, the finer points of Christian rock music. Which, ew. I hated Christian music when I was a Christian.

there is no mtv in hell stryper

Ha ha! I had Stryper. Sold that album on ebay for over $100 to someone in Japan, I think.

OH NO NO! I do not like that group. If we are going to be picky, this is my next religious bearded best friend. This is the best one of his songs that are my most favorite ever he plays the best guitar ever, learning this cover on the guitar was not simple for me. My husband used to play drums I used to play guitar, I gave it up after he died, we used to have band nights, best nights of my life. BLS was one of the last concerts we went to see before he was gone.

OK I’m done with this thread. bye.

^^^ The message doesn’t move me, but the music does.

So some of you that want to bash my religious beliefs think that once the bashing is done, it is “only business”, I didn’t mean to call in to question your beliefs, but just wanted to call me an idiot for believing, but still would like to be friends with me.
That will not happen.

@chyna Who called you an idiot for believing what you believe?

@ETpro She believes it is a thing. She believes that does not require logic to prove it so. She believes it is above logic. She, and many other believers to this site, are shocked you seem to take daily pleasure in calling believers stupid. I just scrolled up to your last few posts and it was clear to me you think believers are stupid.

The question becomes, why can’t you let this go? Are you daily feeling religious persecution?

Why do I just like these words…“This isnt going to make you happy..”

I for one do believe that Christianity can be and is very logical…just saying, some people just don’t want to think that hard about it, I would also like to see some of the fluther atheists etpro seems to think he has it all down and I quote “and I have read what you posted and listened to tapes of Christian apologists you linked to. I haven’t agreed with their claims, because I can see that they are shot through with logical contradictions, circular reasoning and fallacious arguments.”

So I don’t know about anyone else but for anyone who has balls I personally would love to see such a debate in public between a fluther atheist who says he can back his stuff up like etpro does with a high respected well known christian apologist like William Lane Craig, or other apologist because I’d pay to see that. O:-)

I would never debate Sam Harris so I do not try to even make statements against his arguments. I would never debate in public. I may be vegan and eat no meat but I’m a chicken and have stage fright. :-\ Yikes.

@Imadethisupwithnoforethought I have every bit as much right to proclaim what I believe as any sort of theists has, thank you. I will NOT shut up so they, only, can be heard. I have not called any believers stupid. That, they have done to me. Yes, I am daily feeling religious persecution. I just got a dose of it from you.

@KaY_Jelly My complaint was that when I took the time to listen to the links to Christian Apologists you favor, and then took the time to refute their arguments systematically, you did not show me where I had erred in logic. You did not show me why they were right and I was wrong. Had you done so, I would have listened to you. Instead, you just announced they were right, and therefore any logic refuting them had to be wrong. That’s pretty much how William Lane Craig argues.

I would not debate William Lane Craig because while each assertion he puts forward is easily refuted, he doesn’t give his opposition time. He chains a whole legion of fallacies together and hopes to talk faster than his opponent can take notes. There are plenty of people with the intellectual horsepower to take his arguments apart, peice by peice. I am not one. Sam Harris is. Richard Dawkins is. He’s come up the loser in numerous debates. I’ll be happy to provide links if you’d like to listen to them. But it’s not a rebuttal to just post, “I don’t accept that he lost.” You actually need to show why the logic used to refute his assertions is flawed, not just claim it is because that’s what you already believe.

For what its worth, I’ve been challenged to debate with local ministers in front of their congregations or a selection of their followers. Several times. Each time, the minister backed out the day of.

Maybe not Craig, but their arguments would likely the same. Same source material and all.

@ETpro The quote you gave that I used you were referring to @KNOWITALL, not me. But now I see you are back to referencing me. When I chose to use your name it is because you are one of the most well known flutherites who posts that stuff. I wasn’t picking on you, you’ve already stood on the alter and made a name for yourself. So don’t see it as a personal attack and I’m not sure why you have to go right into attacking me personally.

My logic may be flawed and it may not be but in I’m not here to convince anyone and maybe that is what sets us apart. I don’t actually care whether you are winning or I am or Sam is or Craig is. That to me is stupid, to me, a persons belief is not a game. And on fluther when you are pitting varying intelligences together it becomes more about converting, boasting and pride. A real debate is a learning experience for university students. Also if you want to go that way, then there are many times Craig has won debates, or in instances where names you mention “Dawkins” do not even show up to debate him at all. Here are a few good reasons why:

#1

#2 A letter from an atheist

After I read Dawkins stuff I find it is flawed.

@Seek_Kolinahr I do not think the arguments would be the same, sorry, you are talking about someone who would be arguing against his most likely and probably for their religion and not arguing as a Christian apologist, who gets to the meat of Christianity, and not an argument for why you need to attend Sunday mass each week. Different argument all together.

@KaY_Jelly

I’m having a very hard time not rolling my eyes at that “refuting Dawkins” article.

Trees are pretty, therefore God. Checkmate, atheists!

Oi.

@KaY_Jelly Can I ask why you keep discussing this with Seek and ET?
You aren’t changing them and they aren’t changing you, so what’s the point? Just curious.

@KNOWITALL I wonder that too.

@Imadethisupwithnoforethought Here is why I will not just shut up and let theists do all the evangelizing.

@KaY_Jelly If I have attacked you and not an idea you put forward, just tell me where I did that, and I will issue a public apology. As I have said over and over in this thread and others, critiquing a belief, a claim about what exists, an idea—that is NOT critiquing the person who expressed the idea.

William Lane Craig is a very bright man and is well schooled in Philosophy and in Christian apologetics. His debating style is to spend 10 minutes at a stretch providing a data dump of all known apologetica. Refuting any one appeal, such as the Cosmological Argument, can easily take 10 minutes, and that done his opponents time is up and Craig proceeds to spew out another 50 or 100 claims. Unless there were tight rules established to see that he makes it a fair fight, I wouldn’t debate him and understand perfectly why Richard Dawkins might pass as well.

Further to the eye rolling @Seek_Kolinahr notes about the apologetics site, you should understand that Dawkins did not need to write The Greatest Show on Earth to provide evidence for evolution. There is already and enormous mountain of such evidence, and Dawkins needed to write no book to make that so. The evidence has been built up by thousands of scientists and published in a library full of books and Journal articles going back to Darwin’s publication of The Origin of the Species in 1859. In the 154 years since that book’s publication, the evidence has been gathered by scientists working in paleobiology, geology, and organic chemistry. Ecology, genetics, and molecular biology also demonstrate how living species are currently changing in response to their environments and therefore undergoing evolution. Dawkins was filling a gap in his own publications, but anyone debating him should be aware of the 154 years of work he builds his case upon.

@ETpro “Pychopathic, Infantacidal…” That makes it perfectly okay then. (sarcasm)

@KNOWITALL He’s talking about a man who, if we believe the story, heard a voice in his head telling him to kill his beloved son, and who set about to do that and offer him up as a burnt offering. Those words seem pretty descriptive of the behavior to me.

@ETpro Right and the boy lived did he not?

The Egyptian babies didn’t. you know… if we believe the story. neither did Job’s kids. Or the Midianite boys. Yahweh is a fan of infanticide.

@Seek_Kolinahr Yeah, I know, but that one in particular wasn’t a little child though, he was old enough to question his father about it. The Egyptians were given a choice and told what would happen, they denied God still.

See, you question God and His actions, I never really have. I was raised to study God and the Bible, and to ask questions, but it didn’t occur to me to question these kinds of things. That’s the kind of thing I like discovering when we talk, not pointless arguments. I’ll think about that.

God hardened Pharaoh’s heart against Moses, then killed the first born of all of the Egyptians to punish Pharaoh for having a hardened heart… that was hardened by God in the first place. Logic?

exactly how old does one have to be to say, “Daddy, why am I tied to this rock, and what are you doing with that knife?”

There are and have been scientific apologist as well. They believe what they believe until someone later proves it wrong and then say “oops, we thought it was that way but we are THANKFUL someone else came along to prove we were wrong”, never imagining that those people could be just a less form of wrong.

<— less form of wrong

@Hypocrisy_Central I don’t get why anyone should be an apologist for anything, this is still a free country right? Gay, atheist or whatever, if you harm no one else it shouldn’t matter.

@ETpro I am an agnostic. I think those evangelizing about believing in God seem kinda silly, but I don’t feel the need to argue with them.

I understand there is an atheist population who feel like there is no god and they must prove it. And they evangelize their religion like any other devoted religious person.

I could get it if I thought you lived in Saudi Arabia or Alabama, and you were actively hurting by saying you refuse to believe in God, and it is annoying to pretend. But I think you told me you live in Massachusetts. So you are kinda trolling.

@Imadethisupwithnoforethought

Saudi Arabia ~ Alabama ? :-)

@Imadethisupwithnoforethought You live in the USA where 95% of the population is scientifically illiterate, and where Texas wants to add intelligent design to high school curricula as science. No matter where you live, Texas with its population has a great deal of impact on what school book publishers will include in school texts.

By saying “I understand there is an atheist population who feel like there is no god and they must prove it.” you prove you do not understand the atheist population at all. If one even believes in evidence as the basis for conclusions, and atheists tend to be people who do, then it is ridiculous to say there is no god. Science cannot prove a negative. You cannot use science to prove fairies, or dragons, or pink unicorns don’t exist. You can just say I haven’t detected any, and so for now I am not going to believe in them. And you certainly can’t use science to prove something completely outside the universe science observes doesn’t exist.

Atheist instead say that for a very extraordinary claim like a creator deity who is infinite and eternal, and who resides entirely outside matter, energy, space and time yet regulates all those in an entirely undetectable way; extraordinary proof is required. Without any evidence, an atheist is someone who is unwilling to believe there IS such a being, but not willing to guarantee there is not.

@KNOWITALL I am not trying to change their POV. I just get caught in a loop, I have extreme love for the Christian God that’s all, the same type of feeling that an old gentleman has standing on the corner of Bloor and Dundas in Toronto shouting scriptures from his bible and as I roll by in the car I am the only one to crank the window open amongst all the laughter in that car and shout “Amen brother!” and sincerely mean it and alleviate the pressure he feels for one moment. I am a soldier to God, I do what I feel like He wants me to do. People may not like it.
I pay the price, I suffer. There is nothing that can stop the suffering here.

@KaY_Jelly I understand, I just worry a bit for you. Hair shirts and being walled up in a cell have to be more fun than some of these conversations though – lol

@KNOWITALL Don’t worry. :-)

@ETpro Science cannot prove a negative, as you stated, so when people say they think there is a God, I say maybe. When people say there is probably no God, I say maybe.

Aethiests say, according to you, that for an extraordinary claim there must be extraordinary evidence, and they refuse to believe there is such a being, but you will not guarantee there is not.

So now you say, you really can’t guarantee or prove it? Then why are you trying to make people feel stupid? These people keep telling you you seem intent on making them feel dumb, and you just admitted you can’t prove it.

Seems like a religious conviction to me.

@Imadethisupwithnoforethought Here is why. There are all sorts of things you cannot disprove to 100% certainty, but that would be foolish beliefs to follow. Witness all those who died of easily curable diseases in India because a Swami told them that if they just sent him a large amount of money, he could perform psychic surgery and cure diseases through their TV set. We may live in a universe where proof of a negative eludes us, but it is not a universe where there are no probabilities for what is and is not true. In any part of the world that loses sight of that truth, darkness and superstition replace reason and science; and suffering is greatly increased thanks to that. It’s happening in Russia and the USA today.

@ETpro If I admit I’m a ‘stupid’ Christian because I believe in something you don’t, can we stop? The people in Mass who are suing to take “under God” out of the Pledge will probably win, I mean what will make you happy enough to stop mocking our beliefs?

And you never answered one of my questions, which is why aren’t you harassing Buddhists or Muslims, why just Christians?

I’d rather see the pledge disappear from schools. A child isn’t capable of making an informed decision to engage in that kind of affirmation.

@KNOWITALL Sorry, I thought I had answered the “Equal opportunity critic” question. I am equally dismissive of all untestable claims that are asserted from a position of inerrancy and must be taken entirely on Faith. If there is a God who is my Father and wants my love, I am no more able to believe this deity would hide from me and even erase all geological and archeological records of important events like Noah’s Flood and The Egyptian Captivity and subsequent Exodus; than I would hide myself forever from the sight or contact of my own children yet condemn them to death if they didn’t constantly revere me.

Of all the major religions today, none draws my scorn more than Islam. It is stuck in a stage of 13th century primitivism and authoritarian delusion that Christianity pulled itself out of with the dawning of the Age of Enlightenment. And while there are some enlightened Muslims who disregard the most horrific commandments of the Koran just as most Christians today disregard the barbarism of the Law and the Prophets; the enlightened Muslims seem to be losing the battle for hearts and minds, and the fundamentalist murders are winning. Christianity is under threat from Fundamentalism as well.

While Buddhist and Hindu religious texts don’t contain the calls to violence and genocide that the Abrahamic Religions holy books do, that hasn’t stopped religious violence from seething throughout India and Asia. Salman Rushdie wrote in “Religion, as ever, is the poison in India’s blood” in The Guardian, Friday 8 March 2002:

“What is there to respect in any of this, or in any the crimes now being committed almost daily around the world in religion’s dreaded name? How well, with what fatal results, religion erects totems, and how willing we are to kill for them! And when we’ve done it often enough, the deadening of affect that results makes it easier to do it again.”

“So India’s problem turns out to be the world’s problem. What happened in India has happened in God’s name.

“The problem’s name is God.”

In a world where we humans now possess the weaponry to end all human life on Earth, I’m a critic of anyone who thinks killing others because their religion is the only right path. And because all these religions rely for their foundation on the inerrancy of ancient religious texts, the ugly head of authoritarianism and fundamentalism can easily arise in any of them, and has done so. Whether its tribal, ethnic, religious, cultic or conspiracist, I will oppose all belief systems with pretentions to certitude.

@Seek_Kolinahr Exactly, and those who opt to leave out the words “under God” which were inserted into the pledge by Congress in 1954 thanks to pressure from Christian Fundamentalists, often face bullying and hate from their classmates for being odd man out.

@ETpro No, thank you for answering, it does clarify things for me in regards to your pov.

@Seek_Kolinahr And that’s your right as an American and a parent. If the pledge said ‘under Satan’ I’d have a problem with it, too.

If the pledge said “I promise to always pay my taxes and follow the law” and nothing more, I would still be against making kids recite it. A child cannot enter into a verbal contract, and should not be encouraged to make promises it does not understand.

It was only after several years of saying the pledge that I knew what indivisible meant. I wonder how many second and third graders know the meaning. I took it to mean invisible as a reference to God.

@ETpro Is your goal to replace darkness with light? Admirable.

I am trying to do the same thing. I am working on humility and kindness when I am tempted to be proud and resentful. What is your strategy?

@Imadethisupwithnoforethought I’m concerned with claims to absolute knowledge which are not founded on ANY evidence whatsoever, but are asserted as requirements all must live by. I’m working on replacing that sort of archaic thinking with appeals to reason and evidence. With the weapons we have today and the religious hatreds carried by large groups of people convinced they are the sole possessors of perfect, revealed truth and all others on Earth are in error and need to be converted or eliminated; I don’t think we stand a very good chance of making it to the 22nd century if that thinking is allowed to continue to grow.

I agree that humility and kindness are desirable attributes. It’s admirable to practice them. But with what I hear from fundamentalist Muslims, Christians and Jews; I don’t think those admirable traits will stem the tide of religious hatred and murderous ingroup/outgroup thinking. I think if you went to a Mosque steeped in Islamic fundamentalism and tried to use humility and kindness to assert your right to not accept their religious requirements, you would not get humility and kindness in return.

Well that’s up for intereptation. You can’t group an entire nation of Christianity, muslims, and jews based on your ideas and because maybe you heard it on the internet or you watched the news :/ I’m not sure, but it’s more than likely you are coming across the activist types who are outspoken but that does not mean that the entire religion and it’s people are out to cause terror. Most people I know do not even practice a certain religion.

“I think if you went to a Mosque.. ”

That’s not a very strong statement, you can’t think, you either know or you don’t, so what have you gotten in return when visiting a mosque or perhaps the right church suited to your needs lately?

Just wondering.

@Key_Jelly

Actually, one can think, but not know, how things will be walking into a mosque.

I feel @ETpro isn’t far off…

The right church suited to my needs?

I need evidence based philosophy, no tithes, no sin talk, no one butting in to my personal choices.

I get all this by not attending church.

I’d rather see the pledge disappear from schools. A child isn’t capable of making an informed decision to engage in that kind of affirmation.
They seem to be thought of as informed enough to know what to do with the condoms people would rather the schools give them that they are not suppose to use unless you want to admit they will have sex, which means the masses must believe they know what they are doing when they are doing it~.

That’s neither here nor there.

Besides, better to hand out condoms than force an abstinence pledge.

@ETpro

People convinced they are the sole possessors of perfect, revealed truth and all others on Earth are in error and need to be converted or eliminated

Who are you then when any objective person looks? Is it that impossible for you to take a step back, and see the irony of your statements?

I prefer to look at it with a grain of salt and a smile.

@Imadethisupwithnoforethought I have never killed anyone for not believing what I believe. Nor would I ever think of doing so for that alone. My problem is with those who have. Which side do you support?

@Seek_Kolinahr That’s my point, if you are getting all the things that you mentioned by attending church, then it’s probably not the right church. I do not attend church but I still have faith in God. God is good but not every religion is good and not every “Christian” or “faithful” person teaching that religion is good.

@whitenoise What does that even mean? :/ Yes someone can “think”, but that isn’t statistical evidence, it’s merely no different than imagination. So basically you are saying that people out here too can say something like “we think there are unicorns” or “we think that God exists” and we should be alright here and this conversation should of been over a long time ago then, right? Because according to you “Actually, one can think, but not know, how things will be walking into a mosque.”

So I’m just wondering what the logic behind that is, like the unbelievers and skeptics have to wonder all too often what the logic is for someone to believe that God exists, or even unicorns and since there has been no evidence to dispute either, does personal logic actually really matter, because according to you, it does not, so there shouldn’t be double standards here :/.

Maybe unicorns do or have lived on a far away planet that we have not discovered yet, and maybe God does exist and maybe if you walk into a mosque they won’t terrorize you. :)

@KaY_Jelly, you wrote:

“I think if you went to a Mosque.. ”
That’s not a very strong statement, you can’t think, you either know or you don’t [...]

I responded to that statement of yours. What you wrote made no sense to me. You can’t realy know what a future unpredictable event like that will bring. You can merely make a reliable estimate. Hence you can think,but not know about what is going to happen.

Interestingly enough, to be sure about any future or past events (that is to know anything), the world needs to be deterministic, that is…. the ‘now’ should be a unique, direct consequence of the ‘before’ and the next a direct consequnce of the now.

In other words… To ‘know’, the future should be an unevitable consequence of the past. In such a universe, God would not be possible. Implying that if God is, then the universe isn’t deterministic. So… believing in God excludes all ‘knowing’ anyway.

@whitenoise OK. So now you tell me it means exactly what I thought it meant!

So really, what you believe and you say it almost with conviction is that ”… believing in God excludes all ‘knowing’ anyway.”

Not only does this contradict the logic in the statement that you and @ETpro provided that you have to “think” before you “know”, because we all know that *”thinking” it is going to rain is very different from ”knowing.” The statement “to ‘know’ the future is inevitable” is ignorant. I wasn’t talking about knowing the future. I was talking about that you can’t think and know at the same time.

Next, it still isn’t logical to say ”believing in God excludes all ‘knowing’ anyway.”. That is the conviction I’m talking about because on the opposite spectrum where one has no belief they do not believe in God, therefore they do not think He exists so then you must be saying a person in that position has no hope in science because they have found mountains of evidence. I guess they just don’t find the right evidence to please people who do not believe, so maybe the world really isn’t round then. =-O

There is no hope for science apparently.

I just have to add here because someone might say well then the skeptics must be right because they question things. That’s not entirely true. Because we still don’t know whether God exists or not, if he does, well then the skeptics are wrong. If He doesn’t then the skeptics have every right to question. Although following Gods words the skeptics have every right to question anyway because we were given choice.

“You may choose a ready guide in some celestial voice”

“If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.”

“You can choose from phantom fears. And kindness that can kill.”

“I will choose a path that’s clear. I will choose free will.”
~Rush

@KaY_Jelly you lost me a bit. But I’ll try to read it again. Anyways: :-)

the ultimate truth of the prog rock lyricist…

Are we there yet?

@Espiritus_Corvus Not bloody likely but can I join you for the sunset on your boat?

I think its cloudy outside so therefore I know I am the weather girl but I haven’t looked outside and I don’t intend to. ;)

@ETpro I told you I am working on humility, and kindness. You ask me what side I am on.

You are clearly not a religious fanatic.

@Imadethisupwithnoforethought Those that kill in the name of their particular conception of God often say the value humility and kindness as well. To me, they have a strange way of showing it. But they do make the claim.

@janbb: Anytime, sweetheart. We can watch the sunset from the stern while everyone else can hang at the bow. The louder, more fervent ones can aptly go even further to the pulpit. Watch the anchor chain you guys. And no alcohol or weed forward of the mainmast —until everybody quiets down and becomes friends again.

@Espiritus_Corvus Deal. Wonder if we can turn this into a sailing thread?

That’s because it is a strange way of showing it. AFAIK, when the Christian God does something He does it right and with purpose the first time and that first time once you wrap your head around it it usually makes you stand back in awe.

Humans were perfect once now we have knowledge and with that we have grown with flaws and that’s because we are and we always have been sinners. But the Christian God has given us the book to follow so that our sins may be forgiven. Many a men have tried to be God, but only one man descended from the heavens and went back where He came to be a man and to teach us His word and how to benefit from it, and He distributed the word at that time.

I am going to post what I think is a seriously relevant link to this question that everyone should read and deals with the fact that atheists also bully believers on the internet.

So this is a two sided street, and is quite the norm. The question is how do we fix it?? Well I did give you a very real possible answer above! But again it is you’re choice to choose whatever you like. :)

@janbb: It would be a nice finish. I’m hoisting the mainsail now to leave Tucari Bay. The weather from the East promises a very nice sunset tonight. We should be rounding the north end of the island at about that time. Last night was very beautiful with golden crowned cumulus, great rays of yellow light shooting through the billowing tops, the purpling Dominican mountains in the foreground. It is awesome in the truest sense of the word. Temp is in the low 80’sF, moderate humidity. Nice refreshing onshore breeze coming off the mountains. Very comfortable. We’ll have another witch’s moon tonight, a nice silver sliver with bright Venus just a few inches away. And the Milky Way is fabulous down here. Shall we sail north to Guadeloupe tonight? It’s only about 40 miles. In the darkness of this stingy moonlight we should leave a bright electric blue florescent wake all the way. Conch chowder for breakfast?

@KaY_Jelly That whole exchange is not in situ, but is claimed to be legitimate. It’s a pretty moronic bunch of patter, and why would Norm Macdonald sic be intimidated by a minority on Twitter? Forgive me if I have my doubts about this one. Seems just another chunk of junk packaged for the credulous to consume. The source is a network founded by Glenn Beck, and we all know he is truth incarnate. Ha!

@Espiritus_Corvus You had me at “nice refreshing onshore breeze.”

@ETpro Ahh, tu quoque my old ironic fallacious friend, tu quoque.

What makes you think that the religious don’t think this here in all it’s wondrous ironic glory is any better of a thread than the link I provided or perhaps written under the same motivational pretense?

@janbb…and rather than argue whether these beautiful things are of a God or nature itself, we will simply enjoy them for what they are, as it was meant to be, and do what is important which is share that joy. I can see no other purpose for all of this. Once you are surrounded by it, the last thing a sane person wants to do is argue about it.

@Espiritus and @janbb:

I get to see Venus and the sliver moon (although mine was gold due to air quality) from my deck, my living room and, nicest of all, from my bed. Here…skylights in living room don’t show in this pic.

@Espiritus_Corvus Sounding better and better!

Ha! At least I am consistent. I am as suspicious of Joseph Smith’s good fortune at finding the lost golden book and translating it before it was conveniently lost as I am Glenn Beck finding a bunch of Norm MacDonald Twitter posts that are conveniently lost but fortunately preserved on his Conspiracy Theory Central network. But believe whatever you wish. Credulity? What’s that mean?

I found this interesting and typical. A day in the life of an American atheist.

Priceless.. @ETpro

@janbb, @gailcalled & Milo: Welcome aboard. I’m heading back south to Martinique after Guadeloupe. There is captain’s work on that island and I miss the food. To get there, We’ll sail along the jagged cliffs along the east coast of Dominica and we can expect some weather along the way. Tropical storms generated by Saharan heat roll off the African coast into our part of the Atlantic this time of year. For landlubbers I keep a store of Meclazine available. Very effective against seasickness.

So, I was thinking we could have a Noir Night below decks: Film Noir, Pinot Noir, cheeses and fruits. You can choose from Dark Passage, Sunset Boulevard, Double Indemnity, The House on Telegraph Hill, A Touch of Evil, or a few old Hitchcock works, like Strangers on a Train, Foreign Correspondent, or all the Bogart greats like Key Largo, The Petrified Forest, Passage to Marsielle, The Maltese Falcon, Casablanca, High Sierra, or The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. I never get tired of watching Police Inspector Renault express his shock at finding gambling going on at Rick’s as the croupier hands him his winnings. Or old man Huston doing his gold dance.

We can play poker with a Tarot deck someone left on board. (Wands are clubs, swords are spades, pentacles are diamonds, and cups are hearts.) Bring your money; this boat doesn’t pay for itself. There are books as well, and cozy corners. There is smoked fish spread and grouper roe for Lord Milo. For those who wish, they can learn the basics of sailing—which is the very best prevention of seasickness.

@Espiritus_Corvus Sign me up! And I know one trick – take the wheel and look at the horizon. (And cool – we’ll have a ship’s cat.)

MIlo here; I have already taken and passed the Ma. Power Squadron course on boating safety; I can box the compass; I play a mean hornpipe. Let’s leave Gail on shore; she has motion sickness so severe she can’t even go below deck to use the head. We’d have to hang her over the leeward side every time she had to pee, which is a lot.

Plus if you’re going to Guadeloupe and Martinique, I speak much better French than she. “Jouez-le, Sam.”

Milo here; I am admiring the same waxing crescent moon (still golden) that you are; Venus is much further away tonight but still visible above my horizon for a few more minutes.

@gailcalled & @janbb Aye, lass. If ye kin take yar station at binnacle aside Jan at the wheel and blow The Lads of Alnwick far us, I kin do an Irish soord dance (taught me by the good sistars o’ marcy yars ago) to it fard on the bow. An’ we’ve a fiddle abard somweers… Aye, we be a shipload of ‘appy pye-raits. Yar speakin’ the Frog’ll come in ‘andy, lass. The Frenchies arrr kinda parr-ticular ‘bout thar mother tongue, azz yeknow. But thar mess makes up far it.

Yesterday afternoon, I saw a magnificent white tallship, a three-masted frigate bound south off Marie Galante Island between Guadeloupe and Dominica. She had to be well over 200ft long and a quarter of that in beam. She was immaculate from her sky sails to waterline. And she moved over the water, dipping to her port gunwales by a freshening wind under full sail, with the grace of a danseuse. She looked like the old Soviet training ship Mir, but she was too far away to read her transom. I could swear it was the Mir. I’d seen her on the Baltic in the ‘80s and again on the quay at Leningrad in 1990. Always Majestic. If I were her captain, I’d round up every person on this string and put them on her deck and spend the next year whipping them into a crew on one of the proudest vessels afloat. We’d go through the canal and head for the South Seas. We would learn to work together for our greater good—the ship. And we would have fine adventures. I guarantee you that these really big questions that our friends fight about now would soon become academic and not points of argument. Things like that are private and what becomes important is whether or not you can rely on the person next to you in time of need whether they be Christian, Jew, Muslim, or atheist. These are arguments for bored old dilettantes. Not Flutherites.