AIM Slogan is Blasphemy

[I'll_buy_that]

I would say that this is the f*ng stupidist thing i have read, but I read this gem this afternoon.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51295

 

[slingblade]

There is a reader poll attached to the article (poor grammar theirs, not mine):

Poll Results:

An example of 'The Marketing of Evil' 24.97% (1082)

It's ridiculous – the words 'I AM' is a commonly used English-language phrase 13.80% (598)

It's a mistake by AOL, and the company will likely correct it 11.63% (504)

It's a deliberate effort to position the company in a God-like state 11.40% (494)

It's a mistake by AOL, but the company will not correct it 11.24% (487)

It's a well-deserved charge, I'm kissing AOL good-bye 10.66% (462)

This is 'spiritual correctness' – and it's as bad as political correctness 8.24% (357)

Other 3.11% (135)

Some people are just hypersensitive 2.68% (116)

It's an innocent oversight by AOL 2.28% (99)

 

[Meadmaker]

[/FONT]One question, of all you ouit there in the forum with the stated experience of Sunday school or Jewish services, who of you knew from that experience that Yahweh = "I AM"?

Me, too. Learned it in CCD class.

(I never learned what CCD stood for, though? I think it is Catholic and Christian Doctrine, but I'm not sure.)

 

[Hawk one]

I would say that this is the f*ng stupidist thing i have read, but I read this gem this afternoon.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51295

Between this, the case in the OP, and the case about those Moslems going nuts over some drawings of Mohammed in Denmark, I'm asking myself: What is this, "make your religion look extra stupid" month? Oh well, in that case, I'm glad it's now February.

 

[rustypouch]

And no mention when Molson did their 'I Am' campaign?

 

[geetarmoore]

There is a reader poll attached to the article (poor grammar theirs, not mine):

That is crazy...

46% of the people replying to that poll are buying in to the idea that it is an evil plot by AOL in one way or another.....

Goddard help us all.......

 

[David Swidler]

Funny thing is, that's not what YHWH means. It can't be said to mean anything specific because no one knows how to pronounce it, which is the key to understanding any Hebrew word.

BTW, "I am what I am" is an inaccurate translation. It's better rendered as "I will be as I will be."

 

[Odin]

God?

 

[Mojo]

yeah, and what about that blasphemous Descartes!

"I think, therefore God!" doesn't quite have the same ring to it.

"I think, therefore God" isn't Descartes, it's Iacchus.

 

[Beerina]

Please tell me this is a hoax. Surely nobody is that stupid or crazy?

These are the same people who don't want their little kids sitting on Santa's lap because "Santa" is an anagram of "Satan".

I'm sure they're positive, just positive, that since God is Dog spelled backwards, that there's something evil going on, but they can't quite put their finger on it.

 

[Stitch]

I suppose the guy in the article never uses the English phrase "I am" or it's contraction "I'm" in conversation or writing, then, as it would be blasphemy.

"Are you hungry?"
"This individual is!"

"I'm Martha Jones."
"Blasphemy!"
"Who are you?!"
"This person is Ian Millar."
"Really? Well, this person is phoning the loony bin."

Just use "One" instead - the Queen of England is safe anyway

 

[brodski]

Just use "One" instead - the Queen of England is safe anyway

And if pressed, the Monarch can always fall back on "we". So much for the divine rights.

 

[TragicMonkey]

And if pressed, the Monarch can always fall back on "we". So much for the divine rights.

But if God is a triune god, as some claim, then "we are" is blasphemy also.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

"I think, therefore God" isn't Descartes, it's Iacchus.

Mmm, not quite. Descartes began with a true statement, and a conclusion. All parts of Iacchus's statements are false.

"I babble, therefore god quiche for everyone!"

 

[brodski]

But if God is a triune god, as some claim, then "we are" is blasphemy also.

Ah, but if you want to take it that far, god is "the first, the last also". So god is infinite, but god is also "the first".
Therefor god is "one", so using "one is" rather than "I am" is also blasphemous.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Ah, but if you want to take it that far, god is "the first, the last also". So god is infinite, but god is also "the first".
Therefor god is "one", so using "one is" rather than "I am" is also blasphemous.

I'd forgotten. God is also two letters of the Greek alphabet. Alpha and omega must be immediately retired from use. This will admittedly make reading and speaking Greek a bit difficult. And some fraternities and sororities will possibly be upset as well.

 

[brodski]

I'd forgotten. God is also two letters of the Greek alphabet. Alpha and omega must be immediately retired from use. This will admittedly make reading and speaking Greek a bit difficult. And some fraternities and sororities will possibly be upset as well.

Also, "god is love" So many working class women in england will have to find a new way of ending virtually every other sentence.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Also, "god is love" So many working class women in england will have to find a new way of ending virtually every other sentence.

Interesting. God's also a father, and shepperd. Ok, now we can't celebrate Father's day, and New Zealand's going to have a lot of aimless sheep.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Didn't God at one point in the Bible declare that he was Jealous? A refreshing burst of honesty on his part, but it's going to put paid to a Natalie Merchant song.

 

[brodski]

Didn't God at one point in the Bible declare that he was Jealous? A refreshing burst of honesty on his part, but it's going to put paid to a Natalie Merchant song.

Nah, he only said that he was a jealous god, not the jealous god. So talking about jealousy you could be talking about any number of the gods, so none of them gets too offended. Gods can be pretty understanding like that at times .