Bumper sticker. . .(shudder)

[Tricky]

It is eternal self-exclusion, squirming in the fires of their own hatred, and it isn't dished out. It is chosen by he who wants exclusion.

If a person could choose to live in a place where "God's rules" didn't apply, than that might be true. But since the scenario that Christianity lays out says God makes the rules and God enforces the rules, then it is indeed God who "dishes out" punishment.

Don't like America's laws? Move to another country.
Don't like God's laws? Move to... um...

 

[Ossai]

Huntster

Child, child! Is your hatred of God so complete that you think spin will somehow harm Him as if He were a political candidate?

How do you hate that which doesn’t exist?

He didn't give me a business card or anything, and answers to "God", so I assume He's the same "God" that is referred to as "God" from my religious upbringing. Now He could also be known by another name by other folks who speak other languages. I don't know.

As you worship your golden calf, do you ask it’s blessings?

that God must have two legs, two arms, ten fingers, a long flowing white beard, and straight white teeth?

Gee, and Isaac only got to see god’s backside.

Christ said we must believe like a child, not disbelieve like one.........

You must have been a very boring child. When I was seven, I was literally set down in front of a set of encyclopedias and told to look it up because I ask so many questions.

Ossai

 

[Huntster]

Yep you are religious alright, and have shown that once you have made your mind up, you will stick to the dogma no mater the evidence against your argument.....

What evidence is that?

Please keep it up and never, yes never look at it from the other side, I mean, we all at some time were where you are now but we looked at religious dogma and found it greatly lacking. It in the end explains nothing and only gives a tool to people to believe in anything they want, because if they don’t have to explain god, why would they have to explain anything else they believe in. You know the old saying “When it’s your time to die, you die” so they keep on smoking are whatever, they believe and that’s that. You can, and most likely will try to explain it away as something they shouldn’t do, but my friend, when your foundation for logic is already flawed by not have a solid foundation in knowledge on the working of the universe, well if you didn’t know the rest you never will.

Quite the contrary. Others can believe what they will, including Spaghetti Monsters and Colored Unicorns if they wish. It's fine by me. I won't say they shouldn't.

Has in you name you are only here for sport.

Kinda. I'm having great sport here sometimes.

Have fun with you limited outlook on life.

Thanks! I already am.

 

[Huntster]

If a person could choose to live in a place where "God's rules" didn't apply, than that might be true. But since the scenario that Christianity lays out says God makes the rules and God enforces the rules, then it is indeed God who "dishes out" punishment.

Don't like America's laws? Move to another country.
Don't like God's laws? Move to... um...

Nice try. You've been living in America too long. Gotten spoiled, ya' have. You think you deserve something that doesn't exist, and if somebody doesn't give it to you, the lawyers will make them.

You either want union with God or you don't, and you will get it or not. I want it, Ossai doesn't.

You want the 72 Virgins?

Go talk to your local imam.

 

[Huntster]

Quote:
Child, child! Is your hatred of God so complete that you think spin will somehow harm Him as if He were a political candidate?

How do you hate that which doesn’t exist?

I don't know. You tell me. You seem to be doing it.

Quote:
He didn't give me a business card or anything, and answers to "God", so I assume He's the same "God" that is referred to as "God" from my religious upbringing. Now He could also be known by another name by other folks who speak other languages. I don't know.

As you worship your golden calf, do you ask it’s blessings?

I don't have a golden calf. I don't even have a flesh and blood calf anymore, nor do I have any gold of any kind. Don't need it.

As I love and pray to God, yes, I ask for His blessings. Thankfully, I get them, too, and in more abundance than I deserve.

Quote:
Christ said we must believe like a child, not disbelieve like one.........

You must have been a very boring child.

Oh, my, no! I was way more than anybody could handle!

When I was seven, I was literally set down in front of a set of encyclopedias and told to look it up because I ask so many questions.

Just a couple of years ago, huh?

I was reading before kindergarten. I had a well used encyclopedia set when young, and am thankful as can be that those days are over. This internet stuff is like intellectual Heaven on Earth. No limits.

Near my seventh year I was already exploring the outdoors on a bicycle, and I've never looked back. Reading is a pastime. Exploring is where it's at. By 16, when I got my driver's license, the greatest gift Daddy ever gave my brother and I was our independence. We were into interstate travel, with the double barrel in the trunk, hunting, fishing, hiking, exploring, etc. Two years later (virtually days after my 18th birthday), I was in a real jungle; on the border of Thailand and Vietnam.

Did I say that I hate snakes?

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
Yup. No "doubt" about it. Thomas doubted. And Christ knew his heart:

Then if Christ exists, He knows what is in my heart too. He knows that I am a good and honest person. So I have nothing to fear because I doubt his existence. Doesn’t that make sense to you?

Yup. It makes sense.

I can't say whether or not it makes sense to God.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Oh, I scan Scientific American occasionally when I find a copy on top of the commode, or if I'm specifically looking for information.

Hey, I'm way behind on my reading already. There's no room on my nightstand anymore.

Ah then that business about not being not being interested in “new knowledge” was just a joke.

Yes and no. It's interesting, but I don't have time to seek it out, unless it's something I specifically need. And seeking such out is easy these days.

It is hard to tell when you are being serious.

Yeah, I know.

Always keep 'em guessing, some old boy told me once...............

Originally Posted by Huntster
I agree. My experience cannot be scientifically quantified, and is unlikely to sway you. I'm sorry. That's just the way it goes.

I’m not sure if I agree that your experience cannot be scientifically quantified. Certainly it would be a lot of work, but you could write an autobiography.

My autobiography would be more a book of comedy than science.

And nobody would believe it, anyway.

Heck, you already told me what some of your experiences were, now I know more about you. What could be more scientific than gaining knowledge?

Not much. I have a lot of respect for scientist-discoverers. They have skills and intelligence that I lack in abundance.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Oh, BTW, I'm a pretty good feller. I used to be a real SOB, but that was a long time ago. God, Mrs. Huntster, and John Law fixed that. The struggle I was referring to was purely spiritual, and was a disciplinary gift from God. When I finally relented, and admitted in prayer what God wanted to hear, BANG! It happened. It could actually be felt physically.

I am sure you are a “pretty good feller”, but you do seem to have a mean streak. I’d hate to make you mad while you had a tire iron in your hands. And don’t blame being Alaskan for your confrontational style.

Believe it or not, I did get the quickness here. Not long after arriving here (during the wild pipeline construction days, and just after the war), it was a literal "Wild West" atmosphere, and I was getting tired of getting sucker punched. I finally figured that if it was coming, I may as well get into the game right off the bat like everybody else seemed to like to do.

But lots of us have had life-defining experiences which didn’t involve God. Maybe it was just you who decided to stop being an SOB.

Oh, no. I literally got the Hell whupped out of me by God, Mrs. Huntster, and John Law. I was dragged, kicking and screaming, to "see the light."

Originally Posted by Huntster
Correct. No God isn't an option, because my faith has been rewarded with experiences which strengthened the original faith. The possibility of no God simply isn't realistic. Thomas didn't doubt the existence of God, he doubted the words of his friends.

I’d say that the possibility of no God is the most realistic scenario because it deals with the real world only, not unsubstantiated spiritual realms.

And how do you know exactly what Thomas was thinking?

His words:

Thomas, called Didymus, one of the Twelve, was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples said to him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands and put my finger into the nailmarks and put my hand into his side, I will not believe."

He didn't say he didn't believe in God. He didn't believe that "we have seen the Lord."

Originally Posted by Huntster
Yeah. I was being a smart ass.

You gotta realize that subtle inflections don’t translate well to the written word. Not everybody knows when you’re being sarcastic.

Let them wonder.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Ossai would say I was lying. I'm almost wishing his silly ass would come back with more BS for me to play with.

Well, technically, you were lying, but I try not to use that term. (I sure do seem to restrict my vocabulary, eh? ) The reason is that everybody lies at some time in their life. Calling someone a liar is like calling them a human. Yeah, it’s true, but so what? What matters is what you lie about. All lies are not equal. It is not worth getting all bent out of shape when you catch someone making an intentionally incorrect statement while they are trying to make a point.

Ossai! Ossai, young man! Are you listening?!

(The above is a voice crying out from the tundra.................)

Originally Posted by Huntster
What do you have against circles? Do you deny they exist, too?

I'm of the leaning that circular is the predominant cycle we are tied to.

Gosh. Circular cycles. Heavy, man. You’re so cute when you try to be deep.

I'm usually deep.

Often in deep doo doo.

Originally Posted by Huntster
I am among them. Faith is rewarded with greater faith. As faith strengthens, it becomes similar to knowledge, but it doesn't truly fit the definition of knowledge. I'm coming to the realization that words aren't adequate to describe it.

Faith itself appears to be tied intrinsically to this supernatural phenomenon that physical science has not yet been able to penetrate.

Not yet, but physical science is making inroads into understanding faith. There is some evidence that it may be chemically based. Not overwhelming evidence, mind you.

Agreed. Again, science and the spirit may one day meet.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Middle American/Carribean Catholics are a different breed. So are lots of African Catholics, especially in Ethiopia.

Yeah, in Mexico and Central America, many of the RCs have started following something that could be called “Cult of the Virgin”, in which Mary is the central figure. The Pope ain’t pleased.

I agree about the "Cult of Mary." While I understand where from and why it has come, like everything else, some take it to extremes.

But, like anything international, different flavors are inevitable. But, I must say, it's wonderful being able to understand a Catholic Mass, regardless of the language used to say it (that's coming from a pre-Vatican II altar boy, who used to sing in Latin).

Originally Posted by Huntster
From the same movie (exactly):

"Wake up, Copernicus. The law is still on the side of the lawmakers, and everything revolves around their terra firma."

Yes, the H.L. Menken character. His words were not being portrayed sympathetically though. He was cast as somewhat of an a-hole, but a clever a-hole. But cynical or not, that quote has some truth to it. Fortunately, laws and lawmakers can change and face reality, as the aftermath of the Scopes trial demonstrated.

Yes, and sometimes the identity of the lawmakers change. For Coperincus, the lawmaker's "terra firma" was in the Vatican. For Scopes, the lawmaker's "terra firma" was Rhea County.

Today?

Now, I will pause and try to get back to this later. I have laundry to do.

Watch where you hang it to dry. You know the old saying...........

 

[Paulhoff]

For every action, there is a reaction. Or,..............

In order for there to be a positive, there must be a negative. Or,.................

In order for heat to exist, there must be cold (or the absence of heat).

So now the devil is on the same level as god, so that make the devil a god, mmmmm, or does that mean that god is not a god.

God is not a god.

Paul



So much for your equal BS.

 

[rwp]

As I love and pray to God, yes, I ask for His blessings. Thankfully, I get them, too, and in more abundance than I deserve.

Could you please define God? When you use that word, who or what are you talking about?

 

[Paulhoff]

They never give a clear answer on which god they are talking about. It is always a loving god that could care less about children and their well being, don’t worry, he will find a way for his so-called god not to get blamed for that. Made everything and isn't responsible for anything that goes wrong, I want a job like that.

Paul

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
For every action, there is a reaction. Or,..............

In order for there to be a positive, there must be a negative. Or,.................

In order for heat to exist, there must be cold (or the absence of heat).

So now the devil is on the same level as god, so that make the devil a god, mmmmm, or does that mean that god is not a god.

God is good, Satan is evil (or, the absence of good).

You get to choose which you prefer. If you find evil on the same level as good, and prefer it, you get what you choose.

The point is that in order for there to be good, there must be it's opposite.

So much for your equal BS.

When did I write anything about "equal"?

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
As I love and pray to God, yes, I ask for His blessings. Thankfully, I get them, too, and in more abundance than I deserve.

Could you please define God? When you use that word, who or what are you talking about?

God:

The infinite divine being, one in being yet three Persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. God has revealed himself as the "One who is," as truth and love, as creator of all that is, as the author of divine revelation, and as the source of salvation

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

Why did Thomas get what I can't have?

 

[Huntster]

Why did Thomas get what I can't have?

I don't know.

Why did Thomas and Peter get what Judas couldn't have?

 

[Paulhoff]

You like science? Try this:

For every action, there is a reaction. Or,..............

Now that you cheery picked this, and you quoted something in science, so do the full quote which is
"For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction."

So you are saying that the devil is equal to god in strength. If you are going to quote science don’t cheery pick like you do the bible. I hope you pray to Allah tonight for forgiveness.

Paul

 

[Tricky]

Yeah, I know you’ve already replied to some of this, but I said I would get back to the other post, so first things first.

Your "beliefs" are dogma if shared by others just like my beliefs (shared by other Christians) are dogma.

It's a two way street, partner.

Is sharing with one other person enough? Somehow, that seems to destroy the meaning of the word. Still, unlike with various churches, there isn’t any official atheist credo. We’re all free agents.

Sorry. It's true. I don't care if people here think I'm a sinner, saint, fool, or SOB. That isn't so in my community, but it sure is here.

Sorry, but overwhelming evidence is against you. You may not care if they like you, but you certainly go to great effort to make sure that your personality is correctly portrayed.

Never did. I'm not man enough. She'd shoot me, cut me to ribbons, or whip my ass. When we first started dating, that was one of the specific rules she layed down, and I had to verbally agree to. I did so, and never even came close. Even if I'd wanted to, I'm not brave enough to try. I've seen her shoot. She's good

And there was my answer. True, accurate, and clear.

But it wasn’t to the question I asked. I didn’t ask IF you beat your wife, I asked you if you were STILL beating your wife. Obviously, it was a loaded question which assumes you beat your wife, just like the question “Still trying to turn my faith against me” assumes that I was ONCE trying to turn your faith against you. I was/am not. I am merely discussing the inconsistencies and internal contradictions in your faith as you describe it. Your question was an implied insult, but don’t worry, I was just pointing it out. I’m very difficult to offend.

I can't believe I just read that!

"Fuzzy?" Need a priest to know whether or not you've sinned?

Where did you get that?

Though it was talking more about Christians who only learn from their priests/ministers about what they’re supposed to be against, it is also true that I have found that your statements about morality aren’t always consistent. No, I don’t feel like digging up examples right now.

Which Christians have vastly different moral codes than I do?

Those that would vote for Jesse Jackson, for example. You want other examples?

No, I'm just not going to eat "fruits" that I know are poisonous. Again, I'm not stupid.
Cute. But go ahead; I at least think you're only funning.

How do you know they are poisonous unless you try them? Knowledge learned from others?

And yes, I’m funning, but obviously you realize that I am also your opponent in these debates, and I won’t always play clean. I’ll try to at least be clever though.

I like that one, too.

Thanks. I can’t claim authorship though. I have a good memory for jokes. So do you.

Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, render unto science that which is science's, and render unto God that which is God's.

And what if folks disagree on what is Caesar’s/Science’s and what is God’s? How do we decide? Faith? Evidence? Apparently a number of Christians don’t believe that discussion of the origin of life belongs to science. I know you’re not among them, but being an advocate of faith, how can you blame fundies for claiming ownership of this issue? Here is another issue where you and many other Christians, both using the same Jesus for guidance, have radically different moral stances.

Fundy. I go 7,500 miles. Strictly by the factory manuals (scripture). My 1985 Audi just turned 233,000 miles. Never had the head off.

Well, you have me beat. I only have 150,000 on my ’93 Honda Civic. Still, we both give tribute to the shrine of Auto Care.

Hypothetically (that science crap again)?

I wouldn't do a damned thing. It's not my problem.

If you and your beloved wife have vastly different religious stances, it can be a problem. Maybe not an insurmountable one, but it will require that you deal with it.

No litmus test. It's a general thing. Knowledge kills faith, but that's okay with my religion, because my religion's foundation, makeup, exercise, etc is made up completely about faith. As long as I don't demand "evidence" or "proof" (which are "knowledge") of the tenets of my religion, I'm fine. In fact, I'm smart, because there is no evidence or proof. You must have faith, or it doesn't work.

That sounds like doubletalk to me. You can’t tell me that your belief in God doesn’t involve a single thing that is evidenced in the world. Heck, the bible itself is evidence, even if it is very poor evidence. Do you think any of it really happened? Is faith your only reason for believing it?

Somehow, I find that unlikely, but if it is true, then it puts you in the very small class of Christians who don’t think there is any solid evidence for their beliefs being correct.

Yup, at least what some folks call knowledge.

For example, the temptation of legalizing prostitution or some currently controlled drugs. Using "facts", "knowledge", "evidence", etc, folks try to sway opinions and morals to change laws. I think it's BS. It's propaganda. Temptation. Stupid. Mistaken. Gonna hurt later. Etc.

Then surely you must think there is some knowledge or evidence that suggests their “knowledge” and evidence is wrong.

I’m not saying such decisions are wrong, I’m saying that you, like all people, base your morality on observation, not just faith. Evidence is an important tool for you in reaching moral conclusions. I wish you would use it more, but I am not one of those who claim you are a brainwashed zombie who does whatever the church says. Let’s just say you are brain-pre-spotted. (I told you I had to do laundry last night.)

For example, those people (especially those who aren't even in the industry)who try to use the discoveries associated with human evolution against Christianity.

They don't know what the **** they're talking about. They're parroting rather weak theories and speculations as "evidence" and "proof" as weapons against Christian fundamentalists.

They're all fools, on both sides.

I’m guessing then that those you are calling “pseudo-scientists” are those who make statements about science without having a lot of scientific training or knowledge. There are many people who believe in evolution who aren’t educated in the detailed mechanics of it. I have a biology degree, but I don’t claim to be an expert, though I know enough to defend it without serious blunders. So depending on how much science you have, you could call anybody who has less a “pseudo-scientist”.

But let us not confuse those who have the general idea of evolution correct with those who misrepresent it wholly in order to make their religious explanation look better by comparison. One kind of “pseudo-scientist” has a genuine but incomplete understanding. The other is making (usually repeating the words of others) deliberate misstatements.

(When I think of how some fundamentalist "pseudo-scientists" read Darwin, I'm reminded of the quote usually attributed to W.C. Fields when someone, surprised to find him reading the Bible asked him what he was doing. "Looking for loopholes," he said.)

And it is not scientists who started this conflict. It is Christian fundamentalists who wanted science to shut up when it contradicted their religious myths. If scientists are using their theories and evidence as weapons, then they are only weapons of self-defense.

The spiritual world, as the RCC has theorized, is divided into good and evil. God is good, and Satan is evil.

Yet God created Satan. That would mean that evil is part of God’s plan. Sorry, Huntster, but there is simply no way that the RCC or any Christian sect can give a logical answer to the question of theodicy. It always requires an internal contradiction, violating the premise of a completely loving God.

I haven't personally seen it, either. I've read the accounts of others who claim to have, and I believe some of them.

It's not that I'm trying to escape logic. I didn't set this thing up, nor do I understand it. I'm trying to figure it out like many others, and fit into it as described by Christ.

It's not a cop-out. It's a lame explanation of what we don't understand.

Bravely admitted. Yet I still see that whatever explanation you contrive or accept, it must fit within the framework of your already established belief. You have already said as much. You cannot take the even braver step of destroying your temple, then rebuilding it.

If strong evidence were presented tomorrow that God exists, I would accept God. There is no evidence which would cause you to reject God. Can you understand why I don’t find your position on God one of an open-minded person? Yeah, I know you don’t care what I think. Well what do you think of someone who would take a position on an issue (not a religious issue) and refuse to listen to evidence against him? You’d probably call him a Liberal.

But those things get me thinking of death. I'm certainly not afraid of it. I used to be afraid of a long lingering death, but then my Daddy recently died of cancer. Like he was so good at doing all my life, he showed me how to do it well. Now I'm not even afraid of that.

I’m not afraid of death either, even though I believe it will be the absolute end of “me”. No heaven. No hell. No nothing. I believe most religions evolve from a fear of just this. Otherwise, what is the need for heaven?

But I'm not impatient for death to come, either. I just don't care. When it gets here, I'll deal with it. Until then, I've got things to do.

I agree, and like you, I’m not thrilled with the prospect of dying. But being dead (forever) doesn’t bother me. Still, like you, I have things to do. As the poet, Omar Khayyam said:

Oh make the most of what we yet may spend
Before we too into the dust descend.
Dust unto dust, and under dust to lie,
Sans wine, sans song sans singer and sans end

Well, no, that wasn't what I meant, but yeah, I think that's true. What I meant was that other people's religion play a role in your life. You're still playing. You're playing with me and my religion right now.

LOL. Yeah, if that’s what you mean, religion does play a role in my life. I have to work my ass off to keep it from being taught as science. In the real world, I have to keep my beliefs fairly silent because atheists are despised by so many people, and unlike you, I don’t deny that I care what people, especially co-workers, think about me. God doesn’t play any role in my life, but only those who believe in Him.

Oh, I respect your beliefs. As long as you admit they're beliefs like I admit my beliefs, we're square.

Well, you’ll never see me, who won’t even use the word “proof”, claim that I am 100% sure of being right. But I do have lots of evidence.

Again, that wasn't what I meant. I meant that sometimes we don't have control over our lives, despite our American political freedoms as well as the free will God has given us.

It sounded like you were saying that God controls my actions whether I like it or not. Apologies for my misunderstanding.

And I’ll try to get back to your other replies when I can. Real life intrudes sometimes.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Tricky, when I went to school I learned about the Law of Gravity and the theory of evolution. I immediatly understood why gravity was considered a law and evolution a theory.
yf
CM

In the True Atheist thread Tricky wrote this in response to you on October 31st.

All of science is theories, and that is how it is taught. Some, like evolution and gravity, have a lot of evidence, so much so that it is not necessary to point out that they are "just theories" all the time.

Then on November 1st I responded to you with this.

You still seem to be clinging to that common usage definition of "theory". When the general public says "theory" they generally mean an unsubstantiated guess. When a scientists says "theory" they invariably mean a widely accepted explanatory idea that is broad in scope and supported by a large body of evidence.

Do you now see that, to a scientist, "theory" does not mean what you think it means?

 

[Foster Zygote]

How about germ theory then? You don’t believe washing your hands helps prevent getting sick do you? How about antibiotics, you wouldn’t use those either, would you? It is just a theory after all.

Or atomic theory. Who cares if Iran gets the bomb, it's only a theory.
Or electrical theory. Frank Grimes couldn't have died, it's only a theory.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Foster Zygote , the two dont contradict each other. Thats something that happens in your head.
The Bible is sooooooooo misrepresented here. I am told that the Bible states that a "day" in Genesis 1 is identical to one of our days. If that is the case qoute it and supply Chapter and Verse.

At this point I'd like to thank Tricky for already having done just that.

Now if you cannot then please stup making stuff up to support your preposterous anti-God arguments.

My arguments are not made up. They are based on physical evidence. There is no evidence for the existence of any god or gods. Based on the evidence I have concluded that the likelihood that any god exists is extremely small. Smaller than the likelihood that Douglas Adams' favorite teapot is orbiting the sun opposite the Earth.

The reason you deny God ( a Higher Power) is because you are afraid and prefer to cling to an earthly idol that you can touch then accept the responsibility for what is in your heart.

I find this statement to be a bit rude and out of bounds. It certainly doesn't fit within the protocols of reasoned debate. I will, however, respond to you politely. You, sir, can make no claim as to the content or motivations of my heart. I fear a number of things, the greatest of these fears revolve around the safety and well being of my wife and 21 month old son. But I do not fear your god any more than you fear Zeus, Hanuman, or Huitzilopochtli. The responsibility for what is in my heart is mine alone and it is not your place to criticize me as I have done you no harm. I am a loving father and husband and a loyal friend who values honor and compassion and I feel no guilt or shame for my views. If you persist in your characterization of me as stated above then that's your straw man and you're welcome to him. The real me will continue to exist as is.

Hey! thats why Christ died , to take the burden from you.

What burden? What makes you think I'm burdened? I'm quite happy, no, delighted with my life.

Open your heart!!!

Open your mind!!!

Huntster loves you!!

Really? He said that? Seriously, Huntster doesn't really love me. Although I am usually in opposition to him on this forum I will state that I believe Huntster when he writes that he loves his wife and children and he strikes me as an honest person, the sort who would stop to help a stranded motorist along the road, but I don't think you can speak for him any more than you can tell me what's in my heart. So how 'bout it Huntster, do ya love me?

As do I!!

Thanks. That's very kind. And in a 'human compassion' sort of way I love you too, in the sense that I wish you no harm and I would help you in a jam if it were in my power. But your concern does not persuade me to adopt your viewpoint.

As does your Creator. Open your heart Feel it.

Would it surprise you to know that I was once a Born Again Christian? I did open my heart. And I found that all of the love and compassion I felt and received were of human origin. I never felt anything distinct that was clearly "God's love". We are responsible for all the love and good, all the hate and pain in the world. We must take responsibility for our destiny.

Its no big deal and its all yours , relate to God anyway you want its nobody elses business.

You act as if it's a big deal. As Tricky pointed out, some of us choose not to relate to god at all.

 

[Huntster]

Now that you cheery picked this, and you quoted something in science, so do the full quote which is
"For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction."

Thanks for that clarification.

I "cheerily" picked it, and the full quote is as you write.

However, I'd like to point out that the "equality" of the reactions of good and evil appear to waver.

Sometimes good predominates, and sometimes evil does. It's not constant; it wavers back and forth. The equality is a long, long, long term thing.

I hope you pray to Allah tonight for forgiveness.

Well, in a way, I will. Allah is the same God to whom I pray.

I don't "know" Him as those who call Him Allah do. We worship and love Him differently.

But we love Him, anyway.

We just don't love each other well enough.

 

[Huntster]

You Must'a Finished the Laundry

Yeah, I know you’ve already replied to some of this, but I said I would get back to the other post, so first things first.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Your "beliefs" are dogma if shared by others just like my beliefs (shared by other Christians) are dogma.

It's a two way street, partner.

Is sharing with one other person enough?

Nope.

Somehow, that seems to destroy the meaning of the word. Still, unlike with various churches, there isn’t any official atheist credo. We’re all free agents.

Freedom is great. Too much freedom isn't.

That's why we have social limits.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Sorry. It's true. I don't care if people here think I'm a sinner, saint, fool, or SOB. That isn't so in my community, but it sure is here.

Sorry, but overwhelming evidence is against you. You may not care if they like you, but you certainly go to great effort to make sure that your personality is correctly portrayed.

Correct. I want all to know that my personality is correctly portrayed.

And those in my community know me like this.

What you don't understand is that I'm not unusual here. Alaskans are gruff, no BS kind of people.

Don't believe it? Come on up and check it out for yourself. Get some "evidence."

Not that you can't do that now. There are plenty of Alaskan internet sources for you to check us out.

I'm not going to hint that you might be surprised. I know you would.

And if you came here, studied the place and people, and checked us out, you'd find out.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Never did. I'm not man enough. She'd shoot me, cut me to ribbons, or whip my ass. When we first started dating, that was one of the specific rules she layed down, and I had to verbally agree to. I did so, and never even came close. Even if I'd wanted to, I'm not brave enough to try. I've seen her shoot. She's good

Originally Posted by Huntster

And there was my answer. True, accurate, and clear.

But it wasn’t to the question I asked. I didn’t ask IF you beat your wife, I asked you if you were STILL beating your wife.

You wanted a yes or no answer.

A yes or no answer wasn't appropriate. I gave you the appropriate answer.

Sorry. That game doesn't work anymore.

Obviously, it was a loaded question which assumes you beat your wife, just like the question “Still trying to turn my faith against me” assumes that I was ONCE trying to turn your faith against you.

Yes and no.

You had no reason to assume that I beat my wife. Now you should know that I don't.

I have every reason to believe that you are trying to "defeat" my faith.

I was/am not. I am merely discussing the inconsistencies and internal contradictions in your faith as you describe it.

Good luck. You may see these "contradictions" clearly. Others might, too.

But it isn't yours or their faith, is it?

Your question was an implied insult, but don’t worry, I was just pointing it out. I’m very difficult to offend.

Oh, oh. I didn't intend to insult you.

I'm glad you have thick skin. Maybe that's why we can exchange posts like this. I'm damned near invinsible. There isn't a thing you can do to hurt me.

Originally Posted by Huntster
I can't believe I just read that!

"Fuzzy?" Need a priest to know whether or not you've sinned?

Where did you get that?

Though it was talking more about Christians who only learn from their priests/ministers about what they’re supposed to be against, it is also true that I have found that your statements about morality aren’t always consistent. No, I don’t feel like digging up examples right now.

Okay. You don't want to dig up your position, and I don't want to defend mine from a lack of "consistency."

We're square.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Which Christians have vastly different moral codes than I do?

Those that would vote for Jesse Jackson, for example. You want other examples?

You betcha.

The ones who "would vote for Jesse Jackson" aren't likely to be doing so on the basis of their Christianity.

Originally Posted by Huntster
No, I'm just not going to eat "fruits" that I know are poisonous. Again, I'm not stupid.
Cute. But go ahead; I at least think you're only funning.

How do you know they are poisonous unless you try them? Knowledge learned from others?

That's right.

You might call it "the Book of Life."

And yes, I’m funning, but obviously you realize that I am also your opponent in these debates, and I won’t always play clean. I’ll try to at least be clever though.

Opponent?

What's the game? Where are the goalposts?

You won't "play clean"?

When "cleanliness" protects the weak, what does that mean?

Originally Posted by Huntster
I like that one, too.

Thanks. I can’t claim authorship though. I have a good memory for jokes. So do you.

No doubt. I thought I'd heard all the good jokes years ago. When the internet came into full fruit, I learned otherwise.

A cute couple (older than me) from my church send me so many incredible jokes, it boggles my mind. And the inter-Alaskan email network is absolutely incredible. It's like the mass media; if they told you just an eighth of the story up here, you'd be absolutely amazed. I get bear attack stuff regularly during bear season.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, render unto science that which is science's, and render unto God that which is God's.

And what if folks disagree on what is Caesar’s/Science’s and what is God’s?

Didn't you read your Bible?

Then you have.................war.

How do we decide? Faith? Evidence?

Both. And much, much more.

Apparently a number of Christians don’t believe that discussion of the origin of life belongs to science. I know you’re not among them, but being an advocate of faith, how can you blame fundies for claiming ownership of this issue?

I don't blame anybody but mankind. Like I've said repeatedly, it's all "religion."

Here is another issue where you and many other Christians, both using the same Jesus for guidance, have radically different moral stances.

Sorry. I don't have different moral stances with other Christians, I have a broader understanding of God than them.

And that isn't a problem with me at all. And, since I'm a Catholic in good standing, it isn't a problem with my parish or the Vatican.

In fact, my faith fits perfectly with the Vatican.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Fundy. I go 7,500 miles. Strictly by the factory manuals (scripture). My 1985 Audi just turned 233,000 miles. Never had the head off.

Well, you have me beat. I only have 150,000 on my ’93 Honda Civic. Still, we both give tribute to the shrine of Auto Care.

Actually, I consider you wiser than I (but not by much).

Hondas are the best built automobiles (and everything else they build) on Earth.

But my Audi is a quattro. The 1985 was the 2nd year they built them.

I need a quattro here in Alaska. Honda was late into that game.

But I'll need a new passenger car soon. I don't know if I can get a Honda. I'm looking at another Audi Quattro or a Subaru (because AWD is absolutely critical here).

But I wish I could have a Honda.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Hypothetically (that science crap again)?

I wouldn't do a damned thing. It's not my problem.

If you and your beloved wife have vastly different religious stances, it can be a problem. Maybe not an insurmountable one, but it will require that you deal with it.

"Vastly" different?

I don't think that would be the case. When we met, she was Lutheran and I was Catholic. Neither were active at the time (young, wild, in a land of sin, and no churches of any kind in the area).

I had been more devout as a youth, and my family was vastly more committed to church. Mrs. Huntster, after we started having Baby Huntsters, decided to convert to Catholicism. Just like that. For the sake of our children.

All are happy. All are Catholic.

Look up the word: catholic. It means "universal."

It works.

Originally Posted by Huntster
No litmus test. It's a general thing. Knowledge kills faith, but that's okay with my religion, because my religion's foundation, makeup, exercise, etc is made up completely about faith. As long as I don't demand "evidence" or "proof" (which are "knowledge") of the tenets of my religion, I'm fine. In fact, I'm smart, because there is no evidence or proof. You must have faith, or it doesn't work.

That sounds like doubletalk to me. You can’t tell me that your belief in God doesn’t involve a single thing that is evidenced in the world.

Nor would I. I need evidence, too.

I accept the Bible as a foundation, and other evidence that I've experienced or learned about supports it.

Heck, the bible itself is evidence, even if it is very poor evidence. Do you think any of it really happened?

I'm sure of it.

Is faith your only reason for believing it?

Nope. The faith is what makes me adhere to it.

Somehow, I find that unlikely, but if it is true, then it puts you in the very small class of Christians who don’t think there is any solid evidence for their beliefs being correct.

I think you have a very poor grasp of Christianity.

It's foundation is faith. Believing even with a lack of physical evidence.

Faith. It's what Christ came to find, instill, and nourish.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Yup, at least what some folks call knowledge.

For example, the temptation of legalizing prostitution or some currently controlled drugs. Using "facts", "knowledge", "evidence", etc, folks try to sway opinions and morals to change laws. I think it's BS. It's propaganda. Temptation. Stupid. Mistaken. Gonna hurt later. Etc.

Then surely you must think there is some knowledge or evidence that suggests their “knowledge” and evidence is wrong.

Plenty. Just history alone provides that.

I’m not saying such decisions are wrong, I’m saying that you, like all people, base your morality on observation, not just faith.

No doubt about it.

Evidence is an important tool for you in reaching moral conclusions.

Evidence is critical in reaching all conclusions.

I wish you would use it more, but I am not one of those who claim you are a brainwashed zombie who does whatever the church says. Let’s just say you are brain-pre-spotted. (I told you I had to do laundry last night.)

Not only have I been spot-cleaned, I've been cleaned fully. I've been through a full wash in the blood of The Lamb.

Many times. Daily. Every time I reflect on, appreciate, acknowledge, and thank God for the salvation of Christ, I'm cleaned.

Even me. Steeped in sin. Dripping with evil.

The sacrifice of the Lamb redeems. It's the perfect sacrifice if (and only if) you accept it.

Otherwise, you lose it. It wasn't wasted. It worked for some of us.

You just lose it.

Originally Posted by Huntster
For example, those people (especially those who aren't even in the industry)who try to use the discoveries associated with human evolution against Christianity.

They don't know what the **** they're talking about. They're parroting rather weak theories and speculations as "evidence" and "proof" as weapons against Christian fundamentalists.

They're all fools, on both sides.

I’m guessing then that those you are calling “pseudo-scientists” are those who make statements about science without having a lot of scientific training or knowledge.

Yup.

There are many people who believe in evolution who aren’t educated in the detailed mechanics of it. I have a biology degree, but I don’t claim to be an expert, though I know enough to defend it without serious blunders. So depending on how much science you have, you could call anybody who has less a “pseudo-scientist”.

I'm referring to those who have no qualifications whatsoever, yet will attempt to use "science" to attack religion on the basis of "evolution" (their "religion" of choice, if only to attack the religion they hate).

But let us not confuse those who have the general idea of evolution correct with those who misrepresent it wholly in order to make their religious explanation look better by comparison.

Oh, I don't. In fact, even though I rail against Darwinism, I admit Darwin was a biological genius, and that his premise was correct.

It's the "Darwinists" who I have trouble with.

One kind of “pseudo-scientist” has a genuine but incomplete understanding. The other is making (usually repeating the words of others) deliberate misstatements.

Correct. Their "religion."

(When I think of how some fundamentalist "pseudo-scientists" read Darwin, I'm reminded of the quote usually attributed to W.C. Fields when someone, surprised to find him reading the Bible asked him what he was doing. "Looking for loopholes," he said.)

And it is not scientists who started this conflict. It is Christian fundamentalists who wanted science to shut up when it contradicted their religious myths.

I agree 100%

There was a resistance from all monotheism against Darwinism from the very start.

Should there be any surprise about that?

If scientists are using their theories and evidence as weapons, then they are only weapons of self-defense.

That was true in the past, but today, the public school system (thanks to Scopes) has brought evolution into full fruit.................as another religion.............a secular one.

And Christian resistance helped it come to this.

Originally Posted by Huntster
The spiritual world, as the RCC has theorized, is divided into good and evil. God is good, and Satan is evil.

Yet God created Satan. That would mean that evil is part of God’s plan.

Satan was Lucifer, one of the Archangels. He resented God's power and glory, and rebelled. He is now the Adversary.

Evil is part of the plan because it's inevitable. Free choice, by definition, makes that so.

In order for there to be good, there must be evil.

Sorry, Huntster, but there is simply no way that the RCC or any Christian sect can give a logical answer to the question of theodicy. It always requires an internal contradiction, violating the premise of a completely loving God.

Sorry, Tricky, but there is.

The "logical" answer is movement. Resistance. Pressure. Stress. Opposition. Competition. The one constant in both physical and spiritual worlds.

Balance. Balance requires "pressure" or "resistance" from at least two sides.

Originally Posted by Huntster
I haven't personally seen it, either. I've read the accounts of others who claim to have, and I believe some of them.

It's not that I'm trying to escape logic. I didn't set this thing up, nor do I understand it. I'm trying to figure it out like many others, and fit into it as described by Christ.

It's not a cop-out. It's a lame explanation of what we don't understand.

Bravely admitted. Yet I still see that whatever explanation you contrive or accept, it must fit within the framework of your already established belief. You have already said as much. You cannot take the even braver step of destroying your temple, then rebuilding it.

I cannot do so. I'm not qualified. Only One was.

I'm just one who recognizes that, and seeks to understand more.

If strong evidence were presented tomorrow that God exists, I would accept God. There is no evidence which would cause you to reject God. Can you understand why I don’t find your position on God one of an open-minded person?

Yup. If I look at it as you describe; from your perspective.

That perspective is one of the physical. You demand evidence. Physical evidence.

If you look at it from my perspective, can you see how I don't need that?

Since I've recognized that God and spirituality are not (and never have been) of the physical realm, I also recognize that physical evidence isn't (and may never) be available?

Yeah, I know you don’t care what I think. Well what do you think of someone who would take a position on an issue (not a religious issue) and refuse to listen to evidence against him? You’d probably call him a Liberal.

Nope. Liberals are of the liberal political/ideologial mindframe (misguided folks..........)

I don't refuse to listen to evidence against my religion. I've heard it all.

I'm here, aren't I?

After consideration, I just reject it.

Originally Posted by Huntster
But those things get me thinking of death. I'm certainly not afraid of it. I used to be afraid of a long lingering death, but then my Daddy recently died of cancer. Like he was so good at doing all my life, he showed me how to do it well. Now I'm not even afraid of that.

I’m not afraid of death either, even though I believe it will be the absolute end of “me”. No heaven. No hell. No nothing. I believe most religions evolve from a fear of just this. Otherwise, what is the need for heaven?

No "need" for Heaven. It's just there.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Well, no, that wasn't what I meant, but yeah, I think that's true. What I meant was that other people's religion play a role in your life. You're still playing. You're playing with me and my religion right now.

LOL. Yeah, if that’s what you mean, religion does play a role in my life. I have to work my ass off to keep it from being taught as science.

It isn't being proposed to be taught "as a science."

Nor should it be taught as a religion in public schools.

I could get ugly here. I can describe how it can be taught in public schools. Legally. It has been done in such a way for much of American history, and is still being done in that manner today. It would withstand legal review, because it has already withstood legal review.

Wanna go there?

In the real world, I have to keep my beliefs fairly silent because atheists are despised by so many people, and unlike you, I don’t deny that I care what people, especially co-workers, think about me.

Oh, make no mistake: I care deeply how the people in my immediate community think of me. Believe it or not, I'm a pillar of my extended community.

JREF isn't "my community."

God doesn’t play any role in my life, but only those who believe in Him.

God surrounds you. You're holed up like a rat. His legions are everywhere.

He doesn't play a role in your life; He controls it.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Oh, I respect your beliefs. As long as you admit they're beliefs like I admit my beliefs, we're square.

Well, you’ll never see me, who won’t even use the word “proof”, claim that I am 100% sure of being right.

Me, neither. I can't guarantee squat.

God can.

But I do have lots of evidence.

Of what?