An atheist perspective [Archive] - Page 2

bluekazoo

09-09-2008, 09:23 AM

It find it EXTREMELY sad that religion AND politics can and will and has damaged what could be has been was either friendship or coexistence but cannot be any more due to the very same spittle and bravado of the opposing view. I dont find it funny at all. At all.

Maui, I don't see any friendships/coexistence ruined here ... while there are people whose stance on various issues has surprised me over the years, most have not. When we read people's views on things over the years, we get a pretty clear understanding of who they are and what they're about. Some folks can be friendly despite differences in opinions; some cannot. But the religion/political thing doesn't change anything, imo ... it's just another extension of who we are as individuals and provides more detail about us ... whether people opt out of relationships because of the opinions of another is just something each will have to decide for themselves ...

doesnt that kind of all into what you yourself said

I don't understand what you mean at the top of your post ... are you saying that because I post that Christians don't live up to the teachings of their prophet/savior but manage to go on and on and on and on, that somehow that has something to do with this part:

people who defend a position with spittle and bravado to be funny as hell

?

I guess I'm not understanding ... can you explain what was in my post that you found either hypocritical or something else?

I'll be back ... ;)

Hepburn

09-09-2008, 09:36 AM

Not necessarily hypocritical...more like...not being respectful.

For example....the pic of jeus I deleted at yuku. I did not find it offensive myself. It was not a porn/making fun of/ sorta pic. But it DID make me wonder about Jesus younger life. He was a man, with all the parts. Did he have "sinful" thoughts when he saw a pretty woman? Or was He perfect throughout his life even when in puberty when hormones were raging? BUT..and here is where Im struggling to make you understand and anyone else confused as to what Im thinking....it DID offend my best friend. There was no discussion about those questions because when I realized it offnded HER, as MY friend, the discussion was then over. I still wonder and ask myself those questions in silence, but there? Where she reads and posts (well, she doesnt post any more), I cannot disrespect her by continuing the discussion. Key word..disrespect. This goes for political disagreements as well as relgious discussion. Respect.

Mivonas comment that got this whole thing going was not her desire to NOT embrace christianity. It was her comment that it is FUN to mock religions. She has no desire for learning, or even battling for her own freedom to not have it shoved in her face. She wants to laugh at religions and mock it in front of the same people who post here that ARE religious. THATS what got this thread going and Bard and others on a roll. There was no respect. For anyone.

Politics are doing the same damn thing. No respect to the opposite side. No meeting in the middle. Just flat out disrespect.

bluekazoo

09-09-2008, 09:45 AM

What I see Miv having a problem with is that specifically the Christian-right (those most fundamental of Christian denominations) are working their beliefs into the federal government. That is what I believe Miv's issue with Christianity is. I don't care who believes what and I honestly don't think Miv does either.

You want to talk about making fun of religions? What do you think people are doing when they refer to Muslims as ragheads, etc? Is that wrong? Or is it funny to people who don't think Muslims are practicing a valid and acceptable religion?

I don't see Miv making fun of Christians in this thread - I see her voicing her opinions about a) their impact on the government (there should be NO religious impact on the government in this country or any country that holds a separation of church and state to be sacrosanct) and b) the hypocrisy of right-wing Christians who talk about Christianity but don't behave in a Christian manner.

None of that is mocking. It's her opinion, and I gotta tell ya, I agree with her on those points.

Re: the porn/pic thing over at yuku ... I was sorry to see you delete it, after you'd split the topic and put up a warning ... that would have been enough for just about anybody. I agree with you, it was NOT porn. But I respect your decision and ultimately we all make those kinds of judgment calls every day in our lives and that's cool. I believe part of the decision made that day was an over-reaction, but that's just an opinion and doesn't affect how I feel about anything else. Everybody's got opinions about everything.

But your post here does bring up something I had been trying to discuss over there before the brouhahaha started about the pic and all the objections to it ... of COURSE he was a MAN and he had all the same parts and if we are to believe that he lived as a human being, then those parts worked. THAT's why I don't understand people's reaction to the piece of art and calling it blasphemous, etc ... There was no blasphemy there ... it wasn't anything other than an image to make people think ... art is supposed to elicit a reaction - that piece clearly did. It doesn't matter if the reaction is negative, it's still a reaction.

lunch is over, I've gotta hit it again for awhile ... I'll be back later tho ... :)

Hepburn

09-09-2008, 09:54 AM

Im not going to argue or debate it, Kazoo. Calling muslims ragheads falls into the same category I posted above. DISRESPECT. RESPECT. Wash it any way you want to wash it. You either show or express respect, or you dont. Pick it apart, explain yourself away of buts and ifs and how comes...(general you/yourself) and it still comes out you either will show respect while disagreeing, or you wont. Period. People I enjoy being around, people I consider friend, people I dont consider friend but still like reading their posts and CARE how my words affect them...I plan to show respect to and NOT disrespect if I can help it. I am responsible for me. Not anyone else. And in my mind, I plan to make my presence comfortable as much as possible so people know I AM thinking about them and not just myself. Again, thats MY plan and MY opinion and I dont expect anyone else to feel the same way. In MY world, one treats friends with respect. People invited to my home, or me invited to them, deserve respect while I am there in either place. When it gets disrespectful, I leave...or I ask them to leave.

Anwyay....this is going to turn into a drone-fest on my end if I dont stop now. So..Im stopping.

Bard77

09-09-2008, 10:19 AM

Its Ok being invisable in sorta used to it.

Yet, those that deem themselves civil, should reexamine their people skills

Is raised real different.

Some of you folksm judging by your actions
were never taught to respect all folk the same

It used to be termed as just dwonhome being Christian

ie charitable ie hospitable

ie

Friendly?

At least not rude??

i guess its asking for too much these days

after 6 years of this silly haughty new england attitude.

pffft

You guys are so fake and clickish, just like high school for heraven sence

not meaning asll by no means

Most all have given the Bard a fair handshake in my return.

Not that

And note it
deep!
Thagts whsat counts to me, and will focus on them from now on.

mivona

09-09-2008, 03:06 PM

You have to admit, when you think about it, the very basic things that are taken on "faith" in religion are quite amusing.

The zombie thing about Jesus encapsulates the silliness of it. He may have been a great guy, with some fantastic messages for people, but the gory death followed by the resurrection is pretty far out there.

The crazy stuff that Mormons believe...

The vengeful god of the Old Testament. I mean, who would want to really worship someone so frightening, vengeful, capricious and downright mean at times?

Hindus, with their plethora of gods...

Islam, with the crazy rules imposed by a god which may be the same as the Old Testament dude - or a near cousin... consider the ludicrous nature of the diktat the two of them have outlined.

And then we have Jesus, who people get really freaked about thinking of him as a man, with a desire for sex. Does it freak them out because it is Jesus having a hard-on, or is it about their abhorrence for sex generally, so that they can't equate anyone "holy" doing "the dirty"? Perhaps they see part of his holiness as being above sex - but why?

The bottom line for me for religion is - does it make people happy, does it help them lead a better, more fulfilling life for themselves? Who would have a problem with that? They can worship fucking pink rabbits for all I care - as long as they leave others alone while practising their faith. Stay out of other people's bedrooms, stay out of other people's bodies, stay out of other people's lives (unless invited).

toke

09-09-2008, 03:28 PM

This is all such foolishness. As I said...Zeus rules. Really he does. All who deny him are heathen and on the way to Hades/Tartarus. Trust me on this...have faith or be damned. Dare not insult me with disbelief or you will be forever known as disrespectful. And thus...dickheads. Be warned. :mad:

mivona

09-09-2008, 03:36 PM

Can we have little foil condom hats for the dickheads?

toke

09-09-2008, 03:46 PM

Only if they're well-lubed. Zeus requires some serious lubrication for pleasuring of the faithful.

Bard77

09-09-2008, 04:27 PM

You have to admit, when you think about it, the very basic things that are taken on "faith" in religion are quite amusing.

The zombie thing about Jesus encapsulates the silliness of it. He may have been a great guy, with some fantastic messages for people, but the gory death followed by the resurrection is pretty far out there.

Far out is a pretty lame far out antquated term, scary,,it scared me then too. scares me now still.

The crazy stuff that Mormons believe...

The vengeful god of the Old Testament. I mean, who would want to really worship someone so frightening, vengeful, capricious and downright mean at times?

Hence old testament, as in superceded by 'the new, testament' yet,folks like yu insist on quoting and refering to antiquated law

Hindus, with their plethora of gods...

Islam, with the crazy rules imposed by a god which may be the same as the Old Testament dude - or a near cousin... consider the ludicrous nature of the diktat the two of them have outlined.

And then we have Jesus, who people get really freaked about thinking of him as a man, with a desire for sex. Does it freak them out because it is Jesus having a hard-on, or is it about their abhorrence for sex generally, so that they can't equate anyone "holy" doing "the dirty"? Perhaps they see part of his holiness as being above sex - but why?

Keep at it, Miv youll shock someone eventually, with yur cheesy shotgun approach., shameless knows no boudaries, it is why it always escalates.
It has lost its moral compass that sometimes sused to say.... enough is enough.

The bottom line for me for religion is - does it make people happy, does it help them lead a better, more fulfilling life for themselves? Who would have a problem with that? They can worship fucking pink rabbits for all I care - as long as they leave others alone while practising their faith. Stay out of other people's bedrooms, stay out of other people's bodies, stay out of other people's lives (unless invited).

bottom line for you appears pedestrian and base,
You aee merely a verbal abuser of others
Christian basher, hate monger & bully alike, you always have been
cheersi

Hepburn

09-09-2008, 04:39 PM

And again, you have to insult. Youre just a mean fucking bitch, mivona. Now ban me for saying it. MEAN FUCKING BITCH.

mivona

09-09-2008, 04:53 PM

What is it that has put a hair up you, Hep?

LittleRedFireAnt

09-09-2008, 04:59 PM

Ditto That
MEAN FUCKING BITCH.

May all that bitterness stick to you. May all that barreness be reflected in your life. May you find yourself cold, hungry, and cast out from your family.
May shame fill your mind, your heart be empty, your neighbors follow you with hate and contempt.

May humble pie be all you can swallow until you acknowledge beauty and light.

mivona

09-09-2008, 05:00 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zy0d1HbItOo

Watch this, and wonder... You have to admit, it is kinda zany...

krisinluck

09-09-2008, 05:04 PM

Oh, lucky me. I have internet and a computer at the new apt just in time for people to get all bent out of shape even more than they were.

Yay.

Here's the the crux of Miv's point (I think) in her last long post: And then we have Jesus, who people get really freaked about thinking of him as a man, with a desire for sex. Does it freak them out because it is Jesus having a hard-on, or is it about their abhorrence for sex generally, so that they can't equate anyone "holy" doing "the dirty"? Perhaps they see part of his holiness as being above sex - but why?

The bottom line for me for religion is - does it make people happy, does it help them lead a better, more fulfilling life for themselves? Who would have a problem with that? They can worship fucking pink rabbits for all I care - as long as they leave others alone while practising their faith. Stay out of other people's bedrooms, stay out of other people's bodies, stay out of other people's lives (unless invited).Guess what? A LOT of people feel that way.

I guess I'm not sure what you want, Hep. Do you want her banned here too? Because you prefer not to participate in the discussion about Jesus being Man and God and what that may entail, no one should? Is it because she mentioned Mormons and not Missouri Synod Lutherans or Seventh Day Adventists? Is it because she left out the various Earth religions like Native American and Wicca? Or are you still stinging from something that happened someplace else?

I don't know! So tell me. I respect you enough to listen. (I'm hit and miss, folks...trying to get my spyware protection loaded on this new thing....)

mivona

09-09-2008, 05:30 PM

Take a deep breath, Hep, and step back, and try to hear what I am saying.

(I'm sorry you are not happy with your painting at the moment, but there is no need to take it out on me.)

ALL religions have some pretty weird stuff in them. Stuff that you just have to take on "faith" if you are going to accept it. ALL OF THEM.

So, the idea that anyone would then try to impose that "faith" on anyone else is repugnant. Individuals are free to decide for themselves what they choose to believe - but the imposition of that faith on others is disgraceful.

krisinluck

09-09-2008, 06:09 PM

lol...sure got quiet in here when I said I was finally online at home.

bluekazoo

09-09-2008, 06:23 PM

I'm glad you're back, Kris.

bluekazoo

09-09-2008, 06:33 PM

And again, you have to insult. Youre just a mean fucking bitch, mivona. Now ban me for saying it. MEAN FUCKING BITCH.

Is this part of that respect/disrespect thing you were talking about earlier, Maui?

I guess I'm not seeing how it works ...

Ditto That
MEAN FUCKING BITCH.

May all that bitterness stick to you. May all that barreness be reflected in your life. May you find yourself cold, hungry, and cast out from your family.
May shame fill your mind, your heart be empty, your neighbors follow you with hate and contempt.

May humble pie be all you can swallow until you acknowledge beauty and light.

Is this a curse? bwahahhaaha ... Miv, I believe you've just been CURSED .....

Good grief ... a couple of hours ago it was all about respect and disrespect and behaving respectfully when invited into someone else's home or when inviting someone into your home (which clearly was meant as an analogy for a board) ... now here you are, at the board where Mivona is a moderator, and you're clearly being disrespectful.

What on earth changed in a few hours to turn you on a dime?

There's gotta be something else going on here, other than just the religion thing ... Maui, are you okay???

I'm bailing on this stupid thread ... not because anything Miv has said has offended me - as I said earlier, I agree with a lot of what she said (wanna curse me too, LRFA????) ...

I'm leaving it cuz of the tedium of it all ... at some point it's all been said. In my opinion, this thread reached that point several pages ago ...

LittleRedFireAnt

09-09-2008, 07:33 PM

[QUOTE=

(wanna curse me too, LRFA????) ...

Two at a time is a little difficult, but I'm happy to oblige you Blue Kazoo.
A great experiment...
Do let us know how things are going for you 'kay?
:butt:

Hepburn

09-09-2008, 07:45 PM

So we are to go back to you putting words in my mouth again, Kris? And kazoo right there with ya with her chuckles and grins? Whassa matter kazoo? Not too too too too busy right now to bother with this due to work work work work?

Was that disrespectful? So sorry.

Mivonas last post was disrespectful AGAIN. Its RIDICULE, NOT discussion. MOCKING, not debate or genuine questioning. Its RUDE. Its insulting. Its MEAN. So if you want to pick apart what I said and how I said it, add in I want her banned from here, toss in a few "just because you say so" when I never said any such fucking thing ...I SAID she was RUDE INSULTING and MEAN. And I added Bitch. Sorry for the bitch part, NOT the rest of it. I havent disrespected anyone in this thread. I SAID what MANY OTHERS have said since this thread started, which YOU kris are just TOO concerned with RL stuff to see or digest that it isnt JUST ME. And your sidekick with her waggling finger just ads to the crap. Im sick of it. Im sick of the insults to beliefs of people who caused no harm to Mivona that she is MOCKING and gleefully RIDICULING and she has your full approval and slaps on the back by Miss Too Busy Kazoo. SIck of it. SICK OF IT.

Open your damn eyes kris. And get a fucking clue.

mivona

09-09-2008, 11:38 PM

Religions, when you look at them outside of faith, are quite silly. The things that you have to believe in order for them to exist are quite silly.

That doesn't mean that their use, as a social cohesion tool, is not beneficial. It doesn't mean that all they do for an individual is worthless.

It just means that some of the stuff they are founded upon is rather silly.

Hepburn

09-10-2008, 12:01 AM

Thats all you had to say from the getgo, mivona. But you had to SAY its fun to ridicule and mock. There are people here with many different faiths, and some with none at all (atheists). Why do you have to deliberately hurt with your words? Yeah yea yeah..I know. Look who is talking. Well..I like to believe I learn as I go. Hav you learned anything, mivona? Have you learned that your words hurt and sometimes richochett? That was something that happened recently, remember? So who has it hurt this time? Do you even care? I think you do..in some deep part of yourself. because if you didnt, you would be truly cold hearted. Believe or dont believe what you want. But allow others to do the same without bitchslapping them every time you open your mouth and laughing at what they hold dear.

Now Im done with this thread because again, words were put in my mouth by Kris that I didnt say. ASSumptions were given that are not true. And finger waggling galore commenced by throwing my words of respect in my face. I didnt say I was perfect. I was trying to make you GET IT. I dont know if it did or not. Doesnt matter any more anyway. It just isnt worth it to my steps forward Im trying desperately to make.

So have your last words, mock me and ridicule me and put more words in my mouth I didnt say. Whatever.

I was invited back here, where I never really left. Only to have happen AGAIN what happened before. Fool me once, fool me twice and all that rot.

mivona

09-10-2008, 02:21 AM

People who are secure in their faith are hardly going to be swayed by someone pointing out the ludicrous nature of some of its beliefs. For fuck's sake, Hep, why are you getting so bent out of shape.

Have I said that adherents of any particular faith group are, collectively, bad people? No.

I have said that some adherents of some faith groups are overbearing in forcing their beliefs onto others, impacting on other people's lives.

And I have said that all religions have some pretty silly underpinnings. That does not negate the good that they do, but it also does not put them beyond ridicule and mocking.

Like, Magic Mormon Underwear (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsXzHLiHTOU) - you have to admit that is pretty funny.

krisinluck

09-10-2008, 03:20 AM

bluekazoo

09-10-2008, 03:41 AM

Maui, please knock it off. Don't throw more friends away simply because you're having a bad streak ...

You really do hate it that I'm busy, don't you?

You bring that up all the time. You even use the 'busy busy' sarcastically sometimes yourself, but it's always obvious what you're getting at.

Look. I work 50+ hours a week. I keep house. I cook (sometimes). I volunteer. I'm sorry, but that makes me busy. I'm not griping about it (and I'm not griping that I'm bored either). But the facts are the facts.

Sometimes - just sometimes - I mention it. When I'm tired, maybe. Or when I'm posting on the run (like I am this morning). But it always irritates you.

Anyway, you've been slamming at me a lot lately - here and there - little digs, big digs, and now it makes sense. You're still upset that you took the pic down at yuku and that not only did I speak up about it, but you didn't really think it was the right thing to do either, and you're uncomfortable with the decision.

And of course then you have the hypocrisy of banning someone and then following them over to another board and bitching at them there.

You are an online friend, Maui. I've known you for years. But once in awhile I just don't understand you, particularly when you start lashing out at people who haven't done anything to you. There are people online who are poking at you, who are causing problems for you, Maui, but it is not me. It is not Miv. It is not Kris. I just wish you'd get ticked off at the guilty ones instead of throwing backlash at other people sometimes ...

Yeah, and I know you hate me to say it, Maui, but I'm off now - to start working for the day. A simple enough statement, but it sure ticks you off for some reason.

LRFA, don't bother throwing the whammy at me ... I'd have to believe in it for it to work ... and I don't ...

tabbinosity

09-10-2008, 07:58 AM

The irony throughout this thread, from the OP on, is positively overwhelming.

Reverend Colin

09-12-2008, 03:46 PM

What I posted up there to Bard goes for T2T and Colin as well, who is no more a reverend than the hate spreading Baptist pig that comes into the restaurant and leaves a damned tract instead of a tip for his server. Jesus is not amused.

Dude, my faith is stronger than you could begin to comprehend. I am called to treat people with care and compassion and understanding, even (maybe especially) when their path is different from my own.

This is my Great Commission:From Matthew 25heh...you do realize that precious few will get that humor, right? I get it...LOL!I did not see a zombie graphic; was that here? If you are talking about the Yuku thing, my being offline more than not means I did not see it; it was gone before I knew anything about the situation. And all this angst over a statue created by an artist looking to make a name for himself...instead of addressing what is really an interesting line of thought about Jesus: he was both man and God. How did that work? Did he have human desires beyond the basic ones of breathing and food/drink? How did he deal with those?

Yeah, I do wonder those things, because as I've said before, I was the kid the Sunday School teachers were scared shitless of; I asked the questions they had never even considered in all their lives. I was born taking the the idea of "Seek and ye shall find" thing seriously. As opposed to many who can quote it from memory but, rather than act it, choose to sit in a pew and let someone tell them what they should believe and how they should act.

Note what I said to Bard when I got here this morning; my comment yesterday was about the pseudo-Christians. Period. I have never, T2T, thought of you as one of them.

Until BigK decided to bring on the comment about Mivona's panties (now there's something Jesus would be pissed off about - if, in fact, He's as hung up on sex as most Christians seem to believe He is), I didn't get pissed off. Now...well, now I am. And I'm less than thrilled to have Colin over here spewing his own version of "christianity".

Can everyone see the quotes and the non-capitaliziation? Good. Because this quote from Bard:is what I see when I encounter people who think that because they've got Jesus in their heart they have to beat it into everyone. Damned Romans taught them that and it has trickled down through the centuries that it's okay to bring people to Christ at the end of a sword (or in this day, sharp words).

Back to Bard...ARGH!!!! Is it so impossible for you to see that what has happened here is other side of that same coin!!!??? She (and anyone else) has a right to believe that Jesus was just some dude who was the biggest of the possible Messiahs in that time. There are those who believe that John the Baptist was the true Messiah, and that Jesus usurped that spot. There are those who believe Jesus never lived at all.

Every single one of those people have a right to believe whatever they want to, and to speak of it without being beaten with words by those who claim to have the One True Faith. That sells God short, people! Again, turn the coin over.

God is so vast you cannot, with authority, say that what He has put on your heart is the exact same thing He is going to put on every. single. heart. on this planet! How arrogant Christianity is - and has been since the days that they burned the Cathars and the books that didn't fit the box the early Catholic church deemed to be the right one!!!!!

Just because Miv (or anyone else) does not believe in God does not mean that the spirit of God (call it whatever works for you; I suspect most of us are aware of a higher power somewhere out there) is not within her (or them). It is NOT up to you to tell her how to live out her own walk.

Thoughtful loving Christians would not be making comments like the one BigK made a page or two back, nor would they be attacking her with such venom because she believes differently than they do and isn't one who feels the need to hide that in a closet.

TOLERANCE, people. Not everyone is the same! It's okay that not everyone believes the same thing....it's even terrific to discuss those differences in order to learn from them. It is not okay to get all defensive and batshit because you think you are "called" to change the basic beliefs of another person.

http://xb3.xanga.com/a62b374bd5308210319480/s84244721.jpg
I'm stepping off now...have appts today.

Walk the walk, folks...talk is cheap.

Dear Shit-for-brains.

I can now see why gRoss put you in charge. You're a hair shy of a half deck, he on the other hand makes you both whole.

Great rant, but it's all bullshit to back your girl friend. She's a douch bag and nothing more.

You did nothing to quill her hateful rethoric. Fro Christ sake you can't even she it.

As far as:
And I'm less than thrilled to have Colin over here spewing his own version of "christianity".

You can look far and wide on the internet and elsewhere and find no such thing.

Nobody said the Mivona didn't have a right to believe or not believe in any thing she wants. Many were upset of her disgusting and uncalled for remarks about anyone that does believe.

I doubt anyone gives a flying fuck about your "Sunday School" memories, what you consider "compassion and understanding" and especially what happened in the Catholic Church 600 years ago.

BigK comment was written in the style of Mivona. But that's a bad thing because......he's on the opposing side?

Fuck off and have a better day tomorrow.

Bard77

09-12-2008, 05:03 PM

Kris

For the record.

Though I think I have made it quite clear prior.

None, have a problem with ANY questioning Chrustianity or thinking its silly.

Most however, do NOT go out of their way
Like minova did, to ridicule, demean, condecend,insult, provoke, and invoke hate rhetoric in order to do so.

Minovas remarks ARE hate rhetoric according to the written law and the spirit it was drafted and crafted in

Minova is a bigot, this thread with her volumous statements prove it to all who are unbiased.

I didlike haters ane de\meanders of men,

No matter who they are.

that includes Christians, I ran Trouble off my board for his twisted version of A JUDGEMENTAL GOD is gona damn you stuff!!

Im sick of people judging God by his stupoid children
you cannot judgde a man by his kids, wake up folks.

try reading the new testament christians

And anti christians, get familiar with the difference between the two

otherwise you appear uneducated in the matter.

I personaslly lost all respect for minova on thios thread

I have nothing to do with bigots.

Bard77

09-12-2008, 05:14 PM

By the way, nodding to the Rev

We have only crossed paths a few times.

For what it's worth Rev, I reserve judgement of folks on how they treat me and others in my site, I do not base my judgement of others based on whast 'Thety' say about rev colin.

Only because I been there, besides its how I was raised, tto aslways give the other guy the benefit if the doubtNeedless to say, I dont even know this sorry world anymore

People ain't what they used to be period.

Sad, some call it progess yeah,whatever, we are a callous and indifferent society, jaded and cold, we border ion amoral imo.

citation, the tousands starving daly in the world

nuff said.

We take our parents legacy and inheritance and lock them away in the name of convenience

NOT to mention the millions of babies murdered since rowe versus wade
The homeless
We prefect still the art of war>? a barbarians form of recreation.

Our treatment or LACK of for our ELDERLY>>???
We are a pitifull society....

Talk about a cursed society

Wake up and mirror up America.

Ill be back in a month or so for the responce to these remarks.

Blind and sad I say.

Bard77

09-12-2008, 06:10 PM

Yes, I know how it works here at the Ros show

If you are one of the elite, chosen, oldtimders, whatever
Folk turn a blind eye.

Yet let another start bashing OTHER faiths, and see ALL hell breal loose

Thats why my respect dimminishes for many who remakin silent duriung these times

Cus it shows bad on you, not me.

Shame on ASNY wgho would condone or endorse such vile filth

demeaning masses in genderal bkigioted huge brushstriokes.

mkinova is literally in violation of hate frhetoric

and since iut happensto be Chrustians and fasghkionable

its tolerated!

Shasme

I would NEVER tolerate the same filth being spoken about any group, buddist lor otherwise.

Yet, Im not an insider am I?

Oh yes, lets pretent that elite spirit does not exist here.

Its been displayed zskince page one with Kris's dendofrsement and defence lof minova, while atempgting gtki ckiye nme for bad condxuct

my lof my

Am I the only ione who can read here?

I may not be able to spell

but at least i can still read.
Some of you are just ti\o afraid to cross grain with the established stus quo here

For awhile there was nothing to deal with but silence here at rosses.

It will be that again if decent folk don't stand up for once, for crying lout loud

Sad-sacks.

I think this is the last chance for this board

If you remakin the same and refuse to grow, hyoull die n my opinion

Maybe already dead.

'May be a case of a dead man walking'
If miv is unleaheed and allowed ti continue unchecked

This board imo remains

"A dead man walkin g'

ta ta

Peace out and all that

tally-ho

krisinluck

09-12-2008, 07:31 PM

Fuck off.Back at you. :)

VocalVixen

09-12-2008, 07:37 PM

I just have to say, Bard, that I have stated quite clearly that I am NOT a Christian. I feel that I have been able to express my views clearly and hopefully without offending anyone who chooses God to lead them.

I feel that I can represent a non-believer in a respectful way. If not, I'm sorry if I have offended anyone.

Miv, I enjoyed reading the original post. It made me think and want to comment. You have taken it, in my opinion, and turned it into an us vs. them conversation - a mocking fight at times. That is rude and disrespectful and it is apparent that you enjoy this type of meanness.

Bard77

09-12-2008, 08:01 PM

Bard77

09-12-2008, 08:05 PM

bluekazoo

09-12-2008, 09:01 PM

Time sure flies!

:1rotflmao

Bard77

09-12-2008, 09:44 PM

:1rotflmao

mivona

09-13-2008, 04:46 AM

Miv, I enjoyed reading the original post. It made me think and want to comment. You have taken it, in my opinion, and turned it into an us vs. them conversation - a mocking fight at times. That is rude and disrespectful and it is apparent that you enjoy this type of meanness.

I don't think it was me who initiated the slide in the thread. I think it went south when Bard went off about the Zombie.

Interesting thing is this.
You seldom see folk take cheap shots at OTHER religions

Just Christians.

Because it is utter crap that other religions and "faiths" are constantly the subject of cheap shots. I take issue with the idea that it is not okay to take the piss out of religious beliefs, but it is perfectly okay to do the same to other belief systems (including those without and God in them).

Religions are funny. The beliefs underpinning them are really unbelievable. That doesn't mean that religions are without any value. They clearly are of benefit to some, but act as a carte blanche to act like an asshole to others.

krisinluck

09-13-2008, 09:09 AM

There has been disrespect on both sides in this thread.

I was hoping for a solid discussion between the differing beliefs, and it just turns into a clusterfuck that will. not. die. I guess that's just the nature of this board, but damn.

I have been asked to clarify some things from this thread by a poster via PM. As I replied to them, I realized it needs a place publicly, so expect that perhaps on Tuesday. That's the when I have uninterrupted time not overwhelmed with life tasks and work.

In the meantime, take comfort in whatever your faith is - or comfort in knowing that you are right and everyone else is wrong wrong wrong (tip of the hat to Ross there).

Peace.

VocalVixen

09-13-2008, 09:49 AM

Bard,

if you would read the whole post, you would see that I was talking to miv, not YOU.

Geez.

krisinluck

09-13-2008, 02:03 PM

Thanks for clarifying that for him, VV. I was going to say something, but figured it wouldn't go well.

mivona

09-13-2008, 02:32 PM

thebigkahooouna

09-13-2008, 04:05 PM

I just got back and wanted to do a "furthermore". It isn't easy posting from my phone.

why dont you post from your computer then? :1meds2:

krisinluck

09-13-2008, 04:05 PM

I would like to admit to being purposefully provocative at times, and in the instance of this thread, that is absolutely the case. I find it hard to resist when it is so easy to have Bard in raptures of outrage, particularly when he has clearly not understood what has been posted or the line of argument, and especially when Trouble, et al join in the spittle fest.I do understand that, Miv. It's not easy to hold back when people are freaking out over perceived threats to their faith.

One thing I'd like people to consider is this: Christians speak of being persecuted for their beliefs today, but I'd like an example of incidents where someone who is an atheist has beaten or murdered a Christian simply for the sake of their faith.

I'm not saying it never happened, but I thought about this a lot today and couldn't come up with one.

Bard77

09-13-2008, 07:41 PM

I just got back and wanted to do a "furthermore". It isn't easy posting from my phone.

I would like to admit to being purposefully provocative at times, and in the instance of this thread, that is absolutely the case. I find it hard to resist when it is so easy to have Bard in raptures of outrage, particularly when he has clearly not understood what has been posted or the line of argument, and especially when Trouble, et al join in the spittle fest.

We both know full well we aint seen no raprures of outrage from the Bard''''LOl

Nice line though.

Yet, it aint for a lack a you trying to get my goat!

Theres an old term eh miv?

Iove thise old crony lines

i wouldnt use them for years cus they were so dopey.

i thought cool masttered when young

Now I love using them, even if i DO look dopey lol

Its fun getting older in that regard miv, you get freerer hiuh?

I think you do know what I mean

Once you would have had me frothing and spelling worser, but no

Today I just barely got eniogh stem to pasrtcipate, let alone get exciterd or worked up, or riled, aint hasppened in years actually,Thank God,

Lifes easier...lol more boreing too yes.

and I enjoyed it, thanks to all, it is an outstanding thread thanks t miv toy, there have been sone grand posts, lots of honest stuff laid out, said, stated

Clean, and honest and out there

I feel honored to have been a part

I than miv for fueling & Bard for milking it like a pro, we got some more good goat milk squeezed out imho, goat milk is real rich, Ross knows.

Bard77

09-13-2008, 07:51 PM

By the way to ANYONE who knows jack shit about boardowning stats or anything related

Just for the record, this here thread proves the Ross show still has readership
so take that gainsayers...lol:1clap4:

Period.

Some posters too, quite a few actually
I say kudos

And like i used to say as a kid

'Fuck-em if they can't take a joke":1rotfl2:

I like seeing my history stay in place (like this board)

Bible says not to rejoice in another mans calamity

I would have hope alll would have learned from that experience

So masny lost boards just by association

Not fair at all

The Bards and many lost 2 years of history

oh well.

Some never learn'

'Im glad Ross still has the tent up

and the circus is still hrere

It still intriques the kid in me

All you fucvktards...lol

krisinluck

09-13-2008, 08:43 PM

Bard, I'll have some of whatever you are having tonight, please. lol

On a more serious note, thanks for that last post especially. Made my day. :)

Bard77

09-13-2008, 11:32 PM

Bard, I'll have some of whatever you are having tonight, please. lol

On a more serious note, thanks for that last post especially. Made my day. :)

Well, without going into a long verbose list of drugs accompaning the words:1rotflmao

Let me simply say that you just made my day too then Kris

So were 'even-Stevan'...another antiquated term smothered in nostalgia to me.:D

Hoping the move was sufferable, your hooked up again PC wise, that's always assuring' or comforting to me anyway, im real restless without my PC hookup

I'm just after getting set up
am HITTING the riasd AGAIN...lol

Starbucks PC access from now on

'Thank God' (rib-miv:1rotflmao) for the Laptop.

Simply a must, Meaning hitting the road again, as in another move

Business to conduct

No other option.

Soooooo, pack again, sigh, etc etc

I'm putting some stuff in storage

I'm traveling light , exception with Baron, my 13 year old GS 125 pound traveling companion, bad hips though.

He actually prefers being with me, even if it means tiny places versus the spacious spreads of the past.

Silly dog.

Sorry bout the tome

Merely wanted to say yu made my day too

And it happened on a day I could use it too (HONEST)....lol

So thanks kiddo.

krisinluck

09-14-2008, 04:28 AM

Bard77

09-14-2008, 12:00 PM

Yes, we are in and the computer is here and working. Daughter is thrilled beyond words at the place, as am I. I didn't realize how un-peaceful things were until we were here and we both just relaxed, you know? It's good, and we're figuring things out as we go along.

Good luck with your move as well, Bard. Moving sucks. lol

Yes I do know.

And yes, the rest all gets figured out, it kinda brings back that adventuresome sdpirit we toted as kids, somehow we often lose it in adulthood, funny it seemes wed become more bold, yet for me the opposite took place

Im glad to be back to living the adventureers life

Even if thaty means Hitcyhiking across the USA as I did often as a kid

Well, I gotta truck now at least...lol
Thanks for the good wishes, YES MOVING sucks worse than the Ross show!!

LOL

Maybe Ill draw out the old broken down hasbeen ringmaster yet:sm1125:

Bard77

09-14-2008, 12:02 PM

Bard77

09-17-2008, 12:49 PM

I believe in remaning 'open'
To a wisdom beyond ourselves

Knowing mankind,
I find that no stretch.

I percieve him as God Jehova Eternal
Jesus Christ his son.

I do encourage folk to be truth seekers

Searchers of spritual truth.

We are spirit beings clothed in flesh

So, I for one find the spiritual condition of man pertnant, essential, and certainly viable enough to consider.

If one can be led by 'the spirit'

I believe yes, its 'our conscience'

I believe many roads lead tio one truth one God.

Being open is a reasonable notion to me, posture of a student naturally.

Most agree as touching other topics anyway.

mivona

09-17-2008, 03:06 PM

I see many followers of religion as not "seekers" but "fearful", who need the company of others who fear to help make the world seem a safer place. Death is a great uniter of the fearful. Those who are different provide a focus of fear.

Having a big guy in the sky helps absolve them of the difficulty of thinking things through for themselves, and it is just so much easier to follow "the rules", even though they were drafted in very different times and sometimes have little relevance for life today.

Maybe when those with such "faith" are able to transcend their tiresome and divisive view of the world, I'll have more regard for religion.

krisinluck

09-17-2008, 03:18 PM

My sig line elsewhere: Religion is for people who fear hell. Spirituality is for those who have been there. I stand by that.

I failed miserably at getting that new topic started. I had an offer from a customer to go for a motorcycle ride today, and I jammed through my chores and stuff yesterday to be able to take today "off". Mea culpa.

mivona

09-17-2008, 03:32 PM

Show us the light, Jesus (http://www.techdigest.tv/jesus-light-switch-thumb.jpg)

thebigkahooouna

09-17-2008, 03:57 PM

Mivona, you're some piece of work,you could piss the Pope off......

krisinluck

09-17-2008, 05:37 PM

Hell, *I* would piss the pope off. That's no big thang.

Miv, you are poking at them. :0608: LOL!

Bard77

09-17-2008, 05:57 PM

Mivona, you're some piece of work,you could piss the Pope off......

Past tense.

Bard77

09-17-2008, 05:59 PM

Amd miv would bow & curtsy.

mivona

09-18-2008, 01:11 AM

Did I create the light switch? I simply reported it... Someone, somewhere thought it was a good idea, and I laughed. I bet some others did too.

As for the rest... oh, the piety...

VocalVixen

09-18-2008, 06:16 AM

I see many followers of religion as not "seekers" but "fearful", who need the company of others who fear to help make the world seem a safer place

Miv, I have disagreed with you throughout this thread, but this quote is spot on.

I think it says exactly what some of us non-Christians have been trying to express, and quite nicely.

toys-to-treasures

09-18-2008, 07:01 AM

I see many followers of religion as not "seekers" but "fearful", who need the company of others who fear to help make the world seem a safer place. Death is a great uniter of the fearful. Those who are different provide a focus of fear.

I am sure that there are some people like this, I know a few, very few. This would not at all describe the vast majority of people I know. You continue to define the religion by those on the fringes. Something you refuse to do with Islam and decry those who do.

Perhaps if you can define "many" that would help. What percentage of Christians do you think your statement applies to?

kim

09-18-2008, 07:05 AM

the thing that bothers me is that all the religions i know of except for wicca (and other earth religions) seek to go away from the world to some place different...

seems to me sorta like an excuse for not create a heaven (wonderful haven) right here right now on earth...

like the grass is always greener somewhere else and here is just filled with frustration and longing for something ELSE (greedy too one might tend to think)...

- it could also imply a lack of love for the earth and perhaps also a lack of love for oneself and for ones fellow planetoids (how's that for pc heh)...

kim

09-18-2008, 07:06 AM

edit: typo up there...

kim

09-18-2008, 07:10 AM

p.s. um another word...

- suicidal...

kim

09-18-2008, 07:24 AM

http://htuttle.dyndns.org:8080/kimsstuff/jesus.yodel.mp3

mivona

09-18-2008, 12:00 PM

I am sure that there are some people like this, I know a few, very few. This would not at all describe the vast majority of people I know. You continue to define the religion by those on the fringes. Something you refuse to do with Islam and decry those who do.

Perhaps if you can define "many" that would help. What percentage of Christians do you think your statement applies to?

I think that 100% of those who are seeking to impose their religious views on others are part of the fearful host. Those that see the world in religious divisions are probably part of that body too. They like to have "people like us" around them and get a bit anxious about divergence from what they see as "normal".

I think that those who oppose gay relationships on religious grounds are part of the fearful host too. They can't quite cope with that natural diversity, and fear that homosexuals are somehow going to destroy society as they know it.

I don't rage against the stupidity of fundamentalist Islamacists because their insanity does not impact on my life the way in which fundamentalist Christians do. If I lived in Muslim society, I imagine I would find them as a target of oppression.

I don't think I have ever seen you take issue with anything from fundamentalist Christians. Why is that?

toys-to-treasures

09-18-2008, 03:13 PM

I think that 100% of those who are seeking to impose their religious views on others are part of the fearful host. Those that see the world in religious divisions are probably part of that body too. They like to have "people like us" around them and get a bit anxious about divergence from what they see as "normal".

I think that those who oppose gay relationships on religious grounds are part of the fearful host too. They can't quite cope with that natural diversity, and fear that homosexuals are somehow going to destroy society as they know it.

I don't rage against the stupidity of fundamentalist Islamacists because their insanity does not impact on my life the way in which fundamentalist Christians do. If I lived in Muslim society, I imagine I would find them as a target of oppression.

I don't think I have ever seen you take issue with anything from fundamentalist Christians. Why is that?

To address the last first. You have been around me long enough to know I have taken exception with things Christians are doing and have done in the past.

Just in this thread:

I agree that Christians are often deserving of ridicule and our own worst enemies.

and

Mivona: "We can look back through Christian history to see just how fucked-up some of those widely held and fundamentalist beliefs have both screwed over others in other times and other countries"

Me: I agree with that. It is a shame.

and

I do not think that Christians in general have handled the issue and relationships with gays very well at all. If we had I don't think the current environment would now exist."

As loosely as you define "seeking to impose their religious views on others" you couldn't be more screwed up in your assesment that "100% are part of the fearful host". I would guess maybe 20-30% at the most. When I converted from unbelief to belief it was not at all out of fear of anything.

Painting with as broad a brush as you do just shows a willful ignorance and malice that I can't at all understand in someone as smart as you are.

toke

09-18-2008, 03:55 PM

I'm sorry I became aggravated enough to post to this thread, not being into self-flagellation.

It's pointless, Mivona. People will believe whatever they need to...to achieve comfort, or peace or meaning or whatever it is they're seeking. Nothing anyone can say will change that...nor should it.

If they mess with our rights and freedoms, the place to deal is in the courts. In all else, I wish them happiness.

thebigkahooouna

09-18-2008, 06:05 PM

how could someone thats religious mess with your rights or freedoms?

nobs

09-18-2008, 06:11 PM

toke-sis
:1hug3: I wrote out a post a couple times and didn't post to the thread. I find that religion causes more people to judge you (especially if you are spiritual but do NOT believe in any book or any religion).
Look at all the blood that's been shed in the name of a "God" or a religion. Or a book that preaches beliefs that has been translated for thousands of years.

It just isn't good enough for some folks if you're a good person who knows right from wrong and practices good deeds with a kind heart - you absolutely HAVE to have a label and "claim" your "God".

I refuse and if that is a reason for someone not to like me, then I don't care ... they aren't someone I want to like me anyhow.
The funniest is the strict bible believers who have been taught "judge not lest ye be judged"
Steer clear of 'em, toke-sis, they are the most judgmental of them all.

Bard77

09-18-2008, 06:29 PM

nobs

09-19-2008, 09:51 AM

duh, BK, ever hear of Roe vs. Wade?

Religion and politics don't mix. It is not all inclusive. And it totally leaves out large groups of people. It takes one group of people and makes their beliefs determine the status quo.

But, maybe you're kidding - right?

thebigkahooouna

09-19-2008, 11:00 AM

My wife who's a Democrat,goes to church every Sunday,but she believes in
pro-choice. Just because a person is religious doesnt necessarily mean they're pro-life.I do agree of seperation of church and state,but ya might wanna tell
the good Rev's Wright,Jackson and Sharpton that.

toys-to-treasures

09-19-2008, 12:22 PM

duh, BK, ever hear of Roe vs. Wade?

A lot of people who are not religious at all are opposed to RvW. There are reasons to oppose it outside of religious ones.

Besides the seperation of church and state has nothing to do with disallowing religious people a voice in the democratic process.

toys-to-treasures

09-19-2008, 12:24 PM

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

"You can't be a rational person six days of the week and put on a suit and make rational decisions and go to work and, on one day of the week, go to a building and think you're drinking the blood of a 2,000-year-old space god," comedian and atheist Bill Maher said earlier this year on "Late Night With Conan O'Brien."

On the "Saturday Night Live" season debut last week, homeschooling families were portrayed as fundamentalists with bad haircuts who fear biology. Actor Matt Damon recently disparaged Sarah Palin by referring to a transparently fake email that claimed she believed that dinosaurs were Satan's lizards. And according to prominent atheists like Richard Dawkins, traditional religious belief is "dangerously irrational." From Hollywood to the academy, nonbelievers are convinced that a decline in traditional religious belief would lead to a smarter, more scientifically literate and even more civilized populace.

The reality is that the New Atheist campaign, by discouraging religion, won't create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass superstition. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith -- it's what the empirical data tell us.

"What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience than evangelical Christians.

CorbisThe Gallup Organization, under contract to Baylor's Institute for Studies of Religion, asked American adults a series of questions to gauge credulity. Do dreams foretell the future? Did ancient advanced civilizations such as Atlantis exist? Can places be haunted? Is it possible to communicate with the dead? Will creatures like Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster someday be discovered by science?

The answers were added up to create an index of belief in occult and the paranormal. While 31% of people who never worship expressed strong belief in these things, only 8% of people who attend a house of worship more than once a week did.

Even among Christians, there were disparities. While 36% of those belonging to the United Church of Christ, Sen. Barack Obama's former denomination, expressed strong beliefs in the paranormal, only 14% of those belonging to the Assemblies of God, Sarah Palin's former denomination, did. In fact, the more traditional and evangelical the respondent, the less likely he was to believe in, for instance, the possibility of communicating with people who are dead.

This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book "The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener," skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in pseudoscience, cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine Skeptical Inquirer that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.

Surprisingly, while increased church attendance and membership in a conservative denomination has a powerful negative effect on paranormal beliefs, higher education doesn't. Two years ago two professors published another study in Skeptical Inquirer showing that, while less than one-quarter of college freshmen surveyed expressed a general belief in such superstitions as ghosts, psychic healing, haunted houses, demonic possession, clairvoyance and witches, the figure jumped to 31% of college seniors and 34% of graduate students.

We can't even count on self-described atheists to be strict rationalists. According to the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life's monumental "U.S. Religious Landscape Survey" that was issued in June, 21% of self-proclaimed atheists believe in either a personal God or an impersonal force. Ten percent of atheists pray at least weekly and 12% believe in heaven.

On Oct. 3, Mr. Maher debuts "Religulous," his documentary that attacks religious belief. He talks to Hasidic scholars, Jews for Jesus, Muslims, polygamists, Satanists, creationists, and even Rael -- prophet of the Raelians -- before telling viewers: "The plain fact is religion must die for man to live."

But it turns out that the late-night comic is no icon of rationality himself. In fact, he is a fervent advocate of pseudoscience. The night before his performance on Conan O'Brien, Mr. Maher told David Letterman -- a quintuple bypass survivor -- to stop taking the pills that his doctor had prescribed for him. He proudly stated that he didn't accept Western medicine. On his HBO show in 2005, Mr. Maher said: "I don't believe in vaccination. . . . Another theory that I think is flawed, that we go by the Louis Pasteur [germ] theory." He has told CNN's Larry King that he won't take aspirin because he believes it is lethal and that he doesn't even believe the Salk vaccine eradicated polio.

Anti-religionists such as Mr. Maher bring to mind the assertion of G.K. Chesterton's Father Brown character that all atheists, secularists, humanists and rationalists are susceptible to superstition: "It's the first effect of not believing in God that you lose your common sense, and can't see things as they are."

Ms. Hemingway is a writer in Washington.

bluekazoo

09-19-2008, 01:18 PM

Typical attempt at the justification of/for religious belief ...

But this is just rich ...

"It's the first effect of not believing in God that you lose your common sense, and can't see things as they are."

:1rotfl2:

The article is summed up with a quote from a fictional character!

It's pointless, Mivona. People will believe whatever they need to...to achieve comfort, or peace or meaning or whatever it is they're seeking. Nothing anyone can say will change that...nor should it.

If they mess with our rights and freedoms, the place to deal is in the courts. In all else, I wish them happiness.

Toke speaks the truth.

toys-to-treasures

09-19-2008, 02:02 PM

So you dispute the actual data as well?

It is pretty convenient to latch onto one thing and ignore the rest.

A lot of people just believe what they want to out of preference and predispostion, it has nothing to do with logic, evidence or lack of evidence. Both religious and non religious.

nobs

09-19-2008, 03:36 PM

Kazoo
Indeed, toke speaks the truth and I am not saying that because she's my Toke-sis (if I disagreed, I would say so).

TtT
I was responding to Big K who asked how could someone who's religious mess with your rights and freedoms when I made that statement - just an example.
I am aware that there ARE religious people who support RvW but I don't understand that. If your religion teaches it is wrong then by you believing otherwise you are going against your religion.
There is a HUGE difference between being spiritual and being religious.

nobs

09-19-2008, 03:54 PM

oops, no edit and I hit "submit" before I finished.

I think of spiritual people that have a belief system (whatever it may be, Christian - bible based - Jewish - Torah based - Muslim - Holy Koran based - Buddhist, Hindu, Khrisna, Scientology, Church of LDS, Mormon and the many, many other religions and variations of religions) that they practice as being religious (they practice their faith with others and a middle man so to speak).
I think of spiritual people who have no specific belief system, other than the rules they live by, to be decent, worthy human beings whom (for whatever reason) choose not to claim a "faith". I guess the term society labels them is agnostic. Even though many agnostics believe in a higher power and "pray" to one - without "religion".

I also feel that those who do not believe in any higher power (athiest) can be just as good and decent as the most religious person on Earth.

For thousands of years too many have died and killed in the name of a God or religion.

I totally agree with toke.

toke

09-19-2008, 04:06 PM

Dearest Nobs-sis...

Have I ever told you how happy I am to know you? If not...let me tell you now. I sure am. :1hug3:

nobs

09-19-2008, 05:20 PM

Right back at you, my dear toke-sis. :1hug3:

It makes me happy that we share this crazy world together.

Bard77

09-19-2008, 08:06 PM

"It's the first effect of not believing in God that you lose your common sense, and can't see things as they are."

I agree, this line is weak, at best.

Not good writing. Nor coherant reason surfacing either.

Yeah, blundering 'palooka' line.

I'll give ya that Blue..lol

mivona

09-20-2008, 01:30 AM

So you dispute the actual data as well?

It is the interpretation of that data that I dispute.

We know that fundamentalists see the world in a very restricted way, with little room for grey, while those who have thought about religion are much more likely to believe in a range of possibilities rather than the one answer.

I suggest that there would be more willingness among those not aligned to a faith to accept paranormal existence because they are more willing to believe in a range of possibilities.

Accepting that such things may exist is not the same as having a firm belief in them.

krisinluck

09-20-2008, 05:16 AM

It is the interpretation of that data that I dispute.

We know that fundamentalists see the world in a very restricted way, with little room for grey, while those who have thought about religion are much more likely to believe in a range of possibilities rather than the one answer.

I suggest that there would be more willingness among those not aligned to a faith to accept paranormal existence because they are more willing to believe in a range of possibilities.

Accepting that such things may exist is not the same as having a firm belief in them.I agree.

Just as there are radical Muslims, there are radical Christians and there are radical atheists. At least part of the reason those aligned to the more fundamentalist Christian faiths don't believe in anything supernatural is because they have been taught that anything other that strictly belief in the words of the Bible is evil.

kim

09-20-2008, 07:00 AM

not me...

i'm more like scully than molder:

- i do NOT want to believe...

toys-to-treasures

09-20-2008, 02:04 PM

It is the interpretation of that data that I dispute.

We know that fundamentalists see the world in a very restricted way, with little room for grey, while those who have thought about religion are much more likely to believe in a range of possibilities rather than the one answer.

I suggest that there would be more willingness among those not aligned to a faith to accept paranormal existence because they are more willing to believe in a range of possibilities.

Accepting that such things may exist is not the same as having a firm belief in them.

Those are fair and good points Mivona. Still assuming the irrationality of all of the things decribed including faith of any kind (I don't but let's pretend). It still shows that people, religious or not have some of the same tendencies just manifested in different ways. That atheism by itself is not a sign of or guarantee of rationality.

mivona

09-20-2008, 02:13 PM

Who ever said that a belief in atheism was a guarantee of rationality?

I am certain that atheism is based on a logical and rational view of the world, rooted in evidence or lack thereof. What people who adopt atheism do with it reflects on them, as individuals, rather than the philosophical underpinnings of atheism itself.

toke

09-20-2008, 03:54 PM

It still shows that people, religious or not have some of the same tendencies just manifested in different ways. That atheism by itself is not a sign of or guarantee of rationality.

Nor is religiosity a sign or guarantee of righteousness.

mivona

09-20-2008, 06:35 PM

Can you see Jesus? (http://www.nypress.com/images/can%20you%20see%20jesus.jpg)

Zilvy

09-21-2008, 08:46 AM

Looking for God in all the wrong places. (Obtuse)

This must be Mivona's personal DOGMA!:1jester:

mivona

09-21-2008, 09:22 AM

Brilliant, Zilvy!

Well done!

:1clap8:

krisinluck

09-21-2008, 01:54 PM

I'm curious about something.

Those of you who are Christian - what can you tell me about the history of the Church? What events took place to make it what it is today?

The Church we know today is Peter's church. It's known that not all of the disciples stayed together after Jesus' death, so where did they go to spread the Good News, and exactly how did they teach it? What did they teach? And how did Peter's "arm" of the Church become the one and only?

Please please please don't tell me because it was supposed to. Because unless God and Jesus had it in mind that Peter above all was to lead the "True Church", why would Jesus have wasted time instructing all of them in His ways and telling them all to spread the Good News?

(Looking to take this off the atheist line for a bit to give those who feel as if they are being picked at a chance to consider some things that maybe they have not considered before.)

toys-to-treasures

09-21-2008, 11:59 PM

Nor is religiosity a sign or guarantee of righteousness.

Correct. I don't know anyone that would argue with you on that.

toys-to-treasures

09-22-2008, 12:49 AM

I'm curious about something.

Those of you who are Christian - what can you tell me about the history of the Church? What events took place to make it what it is today?
[/I]

It's pretty hard to give you a thumbnail version of 2000 years.

The book of Acts and Paul's writings show that the doctrines of the early church were very fragmented although in some ways not any more than today.

Gnosticism was among the most prevelant of the early church heresies. Most of the "Lost" books of the Bible were Gnostic texts written in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, much later than the books in the Biblical cannon.

The early center of the Church was Jerusalem until about AD 70 when the Romans ransacked the city and destroyed the temple (in response to a Jewish uprising). This caused the faith to become much more dispersed and not suprisingly more confused at the same time it increased it's growth greatly.

As those contempory to Christ were dying off people like Polycarp and Ignatius were the earliest defenders of Christian orthodoxy against things like Docetism that only stressed the divinity of Jesus, disregarding totally His humanity and suffering.

As the church spread out a main issue became the conficting diversity of teachings and beliefs. Christians lived throughout the Roman Empire and different contextual variations of Christianity developed. Controversies within the Christian community about which teachings and which written materials were accepted became more and more pressing. This resulted in doctrinal statements being developed developed and affirmed as orthodox. The process of canonization and more formal heirarchys also began. Not to hide anything but to preserve.

In 313 Christianity became the "official" religion of Rome and the blending of Roman pagan holidays with Christian tradition began. In the between times countless Christians were martyred.

The mixing of politics with the Church began in earnest at this point.

The Council of Nicea (Nicean Creed) was in 325 which was one of the first general councils of the Church.

Should I go on or isn't this what you mean?

krisinluck

09-22-2008, 12:45 PM

That's kind of what I mean.

The thing is, T2T, most Christians haven't any idea of how the Church became what it is today. While is is "Christ's Church" as Peter (and/or Paul) believed it should be, the Church today is not the Church that Jesus Himself would have necessarily selected. And once the Romans got "saved" and felt the need to spread the Good News in their own way, well, it just went all sideways from there.

It's hard for me to believe that Jesus would have been just fine with the religion that bore His name being spread at the end of a bloody Roman sword. Jesus - the man who stopped the stoning of an adultress - would not have been behind the tortures and misery that have been dealt out "in His name" since His death. The Cathars are a good example. Whoever risked it all to hide the books now known as the Nag Hammadi Library is another.

Have you investigated any of the Nag Hammadi books? Thomas in particular is interesting, because it covers many of the familiar stories we know from the Big Four Gospels in the approved Canon...but it also covers more mystical events that were deemed "improper" for the political climate the Church was attempting to create. The Gospel of Mary Magdalene is another that to this day freaks people out because it shows her NOT as the prostitute the Church has painted her as for centuries, but as a disciple in her own right, and one which understood that which Jesus was teaching better than the men. Definitely improper! lol

As a result, the Bible as we know it is edited and watered down based upon what they decided was acceptable for people to know about Jesus and His message.

Just because "they" deemed it improper does not mean it is not true, or that the Church and it's followers are not missing very important information.

I don't understand how it is that so many can be so strong in their faith without knowing how the specifics guidelines/doctrine/dogma of that faith came to pass.

(I am not targeting you with that comment, T2T; it's just that I see it online and off and it makes no sense to me at all.)

kim

09-22-2008, 08:47 PM

because it's FAITH / BELIEF...

NOT based on evidence...

NOT based on rationality...

- that's what it is and it makes no sense to me either but that's definitely what it is...

kim

09-22-2008, 08:50 PM

p.s. people are born curious and seeking answers and if they can't figure out the truth they often make stuff up...

toys-to-treasures

09-22-2008, 09:44 PM

because it's FAITH / BELIEF...

NOT based on evidence...

NOT based on rationality...

- that's what it is and it makes no sense to me either but that's definitely what it is...

Faith:

1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
3. belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.

Faith in the Christian sense is about 1 and 3. Paul talked about being prepared to give a defense for your faith. If it was really about "belief that is not based on proof" there would be no defense possible. The Christian tradition is not one where evidence and rationality were meant to be disgarded and unnecessary. There are required for it to be vibrant.

Reasonable people might disagree with the conclusions, might think the evidence and logic is faulty. You might even think the whole lot of Christians are numbskulls (which is probably pretty close) but Christianity stands on evidence and reason. On historical events.

If it was established and relied on "belief that is not based on proof" it would have never survived in my opinion. It would have faded away like thousands of other religions and guru's.

Now a lot of Christians don't understand why they believe what they do (as Kris pointed out) and their personal faith resemble "belief that is not based on proof". but they only have what they have today because of the foundation that was laid for them. We're midgets standing on the shoulders of giants.

toys-to-treasures

09-22-2008, 09:49 PM

I wanted to add that there is a point in any belief system, theistic or athiestic, that it becomes an article of faith. Any system of belief reaches a point where we are confronted with the unknown and perhaps the unknowable. At that point we make a conclusion based on our personal inclinations and what each individual thinks best fits reality. There is a lot that can come into play in this process besides cold hard facts. That applies to everybody imo.

kim

09-22-2008, 10:28 PM

IF you believe in an omnipotent "god" and the IF you attempt to define that so called god then you a GUILTY and FULL OF PRESUMPTION...

- how fucking dare you...

kim

09-22-2008, 10:31 PM

edit: the[n] if...

- again how dare you...

kim

09-22-2008, 10:33 PM

fuck - edit again: you ARE...

kim

09-22-2008, 11:04 PM

kim

09-22-2008, 11:09 PM

p.s. you know about banshees...?

- imo you have no idea what you've unleashed upon yourselves repent you mother fuckers before it's too late...

toys-to-treasures

09-22-2008, 11:17 PM

The thing is, T2T, most Christians haven't any idea of how the Church became what it is today. While is is "Christ's Church" as Peter (and/or Paul) believed it should be, the Church today is not the Church that Jesus Himself would have necessarily selected. And once the Romans got "saved" and felt the need to spread the Good News in their own way, well, it just went all sideways from there.

We kinda, sorta, not really, mostly, partially agree on most of this.

Most Christians don't know much about Church history and what they do is very superficial. I think they would be richer for it but still it isn't necessary to be Christian. Being Christian, being reconciled to Christ is not like taking a test on the dogma and needing 80% or better to join the club. It is relational, to a person, not just a set of ideas which is one of the reasons so many are so defensive and easy to offend about it. People defend those they care about.

I don't think that the church at any point behaved ideally (at least for very long) but that doesn't particularly do anything to invalidate the core tenants faith itself. It doesn't excuse specific behaviors but the way people both in and out of the Church behave is perfectly consistent with the Christian worldview of what man is. Fallen, corrupt and sinful. Being in the Church doesn't mean those problems fall away.

It's hard for me to believe that Jesus would have been just fine with the religion that bore His name being spread at the end of a bloody Roman sword. Jesus - the man who stopped the stoning of an adultress - would not have been behind the tortures and misery that have been dealt out "in His name" since His death. The Cathars are a good example. Whoever risked it all to hide the books now known as the Nag Hammadi Library is another.

It’s easy and fair to get upset at the moral and intellectual failings of the church, but God is not really implicated in those failings, people are.

So I don't think Jesus is eve just fine with anything wrong ever done in His name either. I am familiar with but don't share your higher opinion of the Nag Hammadi books although I think they have some value, especially historically. (see below)

Have you investigated any of the Nag Hammadi books? Thomas in particular is interesting, because it covers many of the familiar stories we know from the Big Four Gospels in the approved Canon...but it also covers more mystical events that were deemed "improper" for the political climate the Church was attempting to create. The Gospel of Mary Magdalene is another that to this day freaks people out because it shows her NOT as the prostitute the Church has painted her as for centuries, but as a disciple in her own right, and one which understood that which Jesus was teaching better than the men. Definitely improper! lol

I think you've been what I called "Dan Browned". :)

It is a matter of perspective to be sure but what you think is a grand conspiracy to reject and suppress subversive books was in my opinion the well justified discarding of texts with numerous problems. For instance it is still debated but the Gospel of Thomas (not the infancy of Jesus Gospel which was a second book) was originally thought to pre-date the 4 Gospels and even be a source for them. Serious scholars (not just Christian ones with a vested interest) have pretty much come to the conclusion that Thomas came much later.

One of the major problems besides dating with the Nag Hammadi books is that they were translated from Greek into Coptic and much was apparently lost in the translations from generation to generation. As I am sure you know most of the ancient texts are only available in fragments from over a period of time.

One of the main ways scholars judge the accuracy of texts of antiquity is how consistent translations from various fragment over a period of time are with each other. For the most part the Nag Hammadi books fail that test where the New Testament books are remarkably consistent. The liberal theologians from the "Jesus Seminar" from a couple of decades ago really valued and trumpeted these texts but time has made them look like victims of wishful thinking for doing so.

Regarding Mary Dan Brown likes to make much of the passage "Peter as complaining about Mary’s closeness to Christ"

The Church has always been divided on Mary M. but the prostitute tradition has been largely rejected by most of the church due to numerous historical references and was always called into question. Jesus from all we can tell treated each person according to their need, male or female. Jesus was close to women but personally I think there is zero chance of the Mary and Jesus were married and had kids. It just doesn't stand up on close examination and is a cultural projection backed by extremely flimsy evidence and wishful thinking, not a historical reality. Imo of course.

I think the fact that the western Christian church today pretty much sucks makes the idea that there were important truths that were suppressed more believable and attractive in some ways but no less wrong.

As a result, the Bible as we know it is edited and watered down based upon what they decided was acceptable for people to know about Jesus and His message.

Just because "they" deemed it improper does not mean it is not true, or that the Church and it's followers are not missing very important information.

We've kind of already covered this above but I can't stress enough that while the extra-biblical books have some real value as historical documents they are not on a par (with maybe a few exceptions) with the canonical scriptures. They fail upon critical examination because they were written much later than the books in the NT canon and contain internal textual inconsistencies.

Many of them were widely circulated in various regions in the second and third century though when there was an explosion of new Gospels.

I don't understand how it is that so many can be so strong in their faith without knowing how the specifics guidelines/doctrine/dogma of that faith came to pass.

(I am not targeting you with that comment, T2T; it's just that I see it online and off and it makes no sense to me at all.)

I think that's pretty complex and varies person to person. Some people just are shallow and don't care. What is different about Christianity is the promise of the indwelling presence of God in believers. I think for many that is where a lot of the certainty comes from although I understand why people that are not Christian reject that idea.

When I converted (after looking at evidence for the faith and looking at many others) it was like turning on a light switch in a totally dark room. Not everything was instant but many things were. I saw things I never saw before and my perspective and thinking instantly changed on many things. It was a powerful transformative experience, which I think was totally valid. I felt like and to this day think it made me a totally new person. Even if a person doesn't accept the validity of the power of God working in someone heart and mind it is hard to argue with people's experience.

What people experience personally they believe strongly. You don't need to understand how it works for it to work. Just like you can benefit from electricity without understanding how it works or where it comes from.

(stepping down from my soap-box now)

kim

09-22-2008, 11:30 PM

(when you [toys] ) converted from what...?

kim

09-22-2008, 11:32 PM

p.s. did you used to be a bushist...?

:1jester:

toys-to-treasures

09-22-2008, 11:33 PM

THAT is the meaning of TAKING (again how fucking dare you) god's name in VAIN...

- ANYONE who professes to believe in that so called god and attempts to define what that god is is guilty of SELF VANITY to think that one who is NOT ominipotent could EVER define or EVER be WORTHY of defining that so called god is the ULTIMATE VANITY...

p.s. AGAIN HOW FUCKING DARE YOU...!!!

That has nothing to do with taking Gods name in vain.

I do agree that it is easy to make God in our image; everybody does it to one degree or another. That said I would suggest you are doing the same thing with your non-descript indefinable version so how dare you right back at you. By doing what you are you're suggesting that nothing can truly be known about God. How presumptuous and venal of you.

Besides I am banking on 2000 years of defined orthodoxy. It's not like I am making this all up myself.

Because we can't define God totally or completely does not mean we can't understand aspects of God truly. It becomes idolatry when we think we can confine God to our little box and know Him completely. I don't presume that for an instance. At best I think I grasp the equivalent of a drop in the ocean of who God fully is.

Your attitude also assumes that God has done nothing to reveal Himself. I also reject that strongly.

kim

09-22-2008, 11:35 PM

omygoodness typo there...

freudian er whatever

i meant to say / ask: did you used to be a budhist...?

p.s. i'm kidding...

toys-to-treasures

09-22-2008, 11:35 PM

(when you [toys] ) converted from what...?

I was raised going to a Lutheran Church occassionally but I never really believed it. By my early-mid 20's I thought it was all a bunch of hokum and snake oil so functionally and in my thinking I was an open minded atheist.

kim

09-22-2008, 11:37 PM

please tell me then what you think taking "god's name in vain" means...

- IF you dare (hahaha)...

toys-to-treasures

09-22-2008, 11:38 PM

p.s. did you used to be a bushist...?

:1jester:

Bushist, Yes. Just ask fountainhouse, I'll never get to forget it. ;)

Buddist. Nope although I studied it casually.

toys-to-treasures

09-22-2008, 11:43 PM

please tell me then what you think taking "god's name in vain" means...

- IF you dare (hahaha)...

That's a hard one. Since I have to get to bed I would say it is any misuse or misrepresentation of God's name. I know that leaves a lot undefined. I am not sure that's a bad thing.

kim

09-22-2008, 11:44 PM

ah well i'm sleepy now / gotta get up early...

- g'night...

mivona

09-23-2008, 12:26 AM

I had a transformative experience that changed my way of looking at the world, but it had nothing to do with becoming born again.

thebigkahooouna

09-23-2008, 03:21 AM

born again?? Take my word for it,one of you is enough :0020.gif:

krisinluck

09-23-2008, 04:26 AM

We kinda, sorta, not really, mostly, partially agree on most of this.LOL! I think that's true with most people; no one believes exactly the same. That's kind of my point.It’s easy and fair to get upset at the moral and intellectual failings of the church, but God is not really implicated in those failings, people are.Also my point - those who blindly follow, rather than seek as Jesus instructed, are failing the God they claim to adore. IMOI think you've been what I called "Dan Browned". :)LOL...I can see why you would think that, but in this case, Dan Brown just served as validation. I started studying those books long before he even came up with the idea to write the book that started this surge in mainstream interest. Regarding Mary Dan Brown likes to make much of the passage "Peter as complaining about Mary’s closeness to Christ"

The Church has always been divided on Mary M. but the prostitute tradition has been largely rejected by most of the church due to numerous historical references and was always called into question. Jesus from all we can tell treated each person according to their need, male or female. Jesus was close to women but personally I think there is zero chance of the Mary and Jesus were married and had kids. It just doesn't stand up on close examination and is a cultural projection backed by extremely flimsy evidence and wishful thinking, not a historical reality. Imo of course.I'm not going into the married or not debate, simply because I have not yet decided exactly which I believe.

But there is, in the Gospel of Mary, evidence that she was more than just some chick who followed the apostles around. Peter, (who was a bit of an ass) was terribly offended that Jesus would discuss such things with a woman.

Whether or not the Gospel of Mary is true....If she was not very important to Jesus personally and/or in terms of His ministry, WHY did he appear first to her when He was free from the tomb?

That question is one that no one has ever ever ever been able to answer for me to my satisfaction, and I've been asking it since I was about eight years old. The Church wants to say that Mary was just one of the women who cared for Jesus and the disciples, but that one bit about her seeing Him first that morning does not jive with that. We're talking about God here - He could have first appeared to *anyone*. Mary was chosen for a reason.What people experience personally they believe strongly. You don't need to understand how it works for it to work. Just like you can benefit from electricity without understanding how it works or where it comes from.And on this, we are in 100% agreement. Just in the past two months I've seen impossible things happen on a personal level...things that fell into place despite ALL odds being against it.

I'm not an atheist, obviously, but I do understand why their view is what it is. I see both sides of the argument. I just wish it didn't have to become so angry and bitter when people explore the two sides.

You can't show someone where you are coming from if you are beating them about the head with angry words.

I enjoyed this, T2T. I'm in and out today (laundromat, bring some stuff from the house, cleaning day) so that I can be out most of tomorrow, but I do enjoy discussing this. Thank you. :)

toys-to-treasures

09-23-2008, 06:46 AM

I had a transformative experience that changed my way of looking at the world, but it had nothing to do with becoming born again.

I think a lot of people do, most maybe. Did it overall make you bitter and cynical or more optimistic?

kim

09-23-2008, 06:51 AM

i think it's important to understand all about electricity cuz real soon we're going to have to figure out some new ways to make it...

- i watched that history of poop the other day a guy ran a radio off a poopy battery...

p.s. lol i also waatched eddie izzard (he said that he watches t.v. and learns stuff too hahahaha it was hilarious ya hadda see it never mind i can't explain so well)...

toys-to-treasures

09-23-2008, 07:23 AM

LOL! I think that's true with most people; no one believes exactly the same. That's kind of my point.Also my point - those who blindly follow, rather than seek as Jesus instructed, are failing the God they claim to adore. IMOLOL...I can see why you would think that, but in this case, Dan Brown just served as validation. I started studying those books long before he even came up with the idea to write the book that started this surge in mainstream interest. I'm not going into the married or not debate, simply because I have not yet decided exactly which I believe.

But there is, in the Gospel of Mary, evidence that she was more than just some chick who followed the apostles around. Peter, (who was a bit of an ass) was terribly offended that Jesus would discuss such things with a woman.

Whether or not the Gospel of Mary is true....If she was not very important to Jesus personally and/or in terms of His ministry, WHY did he appear first to her when He was free from the tomb?

That question is one that no one has ever ever ever been able to answer for me to my satisfaction, and I've been asking it since I was about eight years old. The Church wants to say that Mary was just one of the women who cared for Jesus and the disciples, but that one bit about her seeing Him first that morning does not jive with that. We're talking about God here - He could have first appeared to *anyone*. Mary was chosen for a reason.And on this, we are in 100% agreement. Just in the past two months I've seen impossible things happen on a personal level...things that fell into place despite ALL odds being against it.

I'm not an atheist, obviously, but I do understand why their view is what it is. I see both sides of the argument. I just wish it didn't have to become so angry and bitter when people explore the two sides.

You can't show someone where you are coming from if you are beating them about the head with angry words.

I enjoyed this, T2T. I'm in and out today (laundromat, bring some stuff from the house, cleaning day) so that I can be out most of tomorrow, but I do enjoy discussing this. Thank you. :)

Dan brown is an interesting guy but I think he has an agenda other than just selling books. The books are fiction of course but I don't think the way he manipulates "facts" is very ethical or accurate. I also think he had a conclusion in search of evidence instead of having evidence lead him to a conclusion which always tends to give us the results we want.

We tend to see everything through the lens of our time. As far as women were concerned Jesus was a real subversive in his time (he was subversive in lots of ways and in His treatment of lots of people). I don't know if I would call Peter an ass but from everything we can tell he did have an unfortunate tendency to speak before thinking. Something I can relate to. I think his heart was in the right place though.

Something that I don't think most people understand, again because we see it though our time and more "enlightened" eyes, is that Jesus and Christianity actually advanced the cause and position of women in that time. Yes I know that it ha also been misused in subsequent time to repress but that doesn't take away from how revolutionary it was and at times is.

As to why Jesus appeared first to Mary we can only guess but I think it was for multiple reasons. First she was close to Jesus and the disciples. Second the disciples scattered and were basically in disarray and hiding wanting to avoid the same fate when Jesus was taken and crucified. Third because of the haste with which Jesus had to be entombed (due to the Sabbath) there were practical issues of proper burial to attend to that typically women attended to at the time.

I don't think it has special significance that he appeared first to a women because I think for Jesus he didn't make distinctions based on sex or position or standing. I think all people had equal value and importance to Him.

I agree, it's much easier to have a conversation when people aren't taking juvenile pot shots at each other.

I think it fair to dispute my conclusions but it is a position arrived at with much thought, study and reason. It is not for me a belief without proof, but a trust that transcends everything else.

I am going to be busy this week too, I shouldn't even be posting. We have our biggest show of the year this weekend and I have a ton of stuff to do and I have to make a single day trip back and forth to Indianapolis tomorrow.