Protestantism

» jlthomp - 1 Samuel 15

Reviewing HeadZenCard's reply of the 15th, I had to revisit that sterling passage. Holocaust is an ugly fact of life, and one reason I believe the Bible is it includes all the human ugliness, not censoring it to please modern, PC sensibilities. Just be thankful that all that garbage is in the Bible. Otherwise, what would critics so easily pan?

-- posted by jlthomp

» pink101 - 1 Samuel 15

In response to 1 Samuel 15 posted by jlthomp:
.
THAT is a sterling passage?
.
Wow!
.

-- posted by pink101

» jlthomp - Re: On my soap box this morning...

In response to On my soap box this morning... posted by Migisi:
Migisi, where do you get your soapboxes? Mine wear out too quickly, what with all that Bible-thumping.

I agree that members of narrow interest and advocacy groups(aka, religious types) are often suckers, buying into anything that tickles their ears. Witness the PC advocates.You said, If ~you~ think that lowly of yourself, then yes, you're no different than they are.

Ouch! That smarted. And it would have smarted even worse if you had read what I wrote correctly. Please notice, I wrote better, not different, than they. A difference isn't necessarily better or worse than something else.

Maybe it's the residual liberal lurking within(say that ten-times fast), but I refuse to see an ideology, a moral code, a religion or anything else "put on" over our fundamental humanity, as something that makes me "better" than anyone else. If I'm more civilized, humane, loving or merciful than another, that's a wonderful thing. But a human is just a human, fundamentally no better or worse than any other human.

Please don't think such an egalitarian world view would persuade me to give a criminal the same rights as a law-abiding citizen. A hard-case might have hundreds of circumstances in his background that caused him to flout civilization's standards, but that doesn't exempt him from reaping what he's sown. And remember, new technologies are showing that many criminals who were legally convicted, were wrongly convicted.

I wonder how many accused murderers have died, or spent the bulk of their lives in prison, because of a miscarriage of justice. That's why I refuse to presume judgment over anyone, regardless their alleged crimes. If I were sitting on a jury, that would be my solemn duty, but thank God that doesn't happen often.

By the way, Migisi, thanks for taking the time to respond to my missives. I love the exchange.

-- posted by jlthomp

» Migisi - Re: On my soap box this morning...

In response to Re: On my soap box this morning... posted by jlthomp:

.
Migisi, where do you get your soapboxes?
.
Behind Walmart. They're free. Leave those that have been rained on. They won't support your position - no matter where you stand. (wink)
.
I'll be back later. Real life beckons.

-- posted by Migisi

» HeadZenCards - 1 Samuel 15

In response to 1 Samuel 15 posted by jlthomp:

Yes, it was a part of the LORD GOD's plan, according to the popes and preachers, to keep human beings hot and bothered about Him.

This way, He could desensitized His True Believers into doing His Will, like hacking babies into hundreds of bloody, boney, brainy pieces.

The "PC crowd" would set off His radar so long as they remained repulsed so He could send them all to HELLLLL MMMMMMM HAHAHAH!!!

The third way, the way He fears, is the way that destroys Him.

Once we realize that the Bible was written by ugly human beings, the reality of God goes "poof".

You'll run into real unicorns, ghosts and leprechans before you catch a whiff of a real god. (It IS more fun to pan a whole "God", or a "third" of a "God" to the triunity junkies.)

Unicorns and leprechans populate cute fiction. And everybody knows that ghosts aren't real, especially "Holy" ones.

-- posted by HeadZenCards

» jlthomp - 1 Samuel 15

In response to 1 Samuel 15 posted by pink101:

Guess you couldn't tell my tongue was in my cheek while typing that.

-- posted by jlthomp

» jlthomp - 1 Samuel 15

In response to 1 Samuel 15 posted by HeadZenCards:
Wow! And I thought I was a bitter skeptic when coming out of Catholicism. You're as mad at the "God" concept as you understand it, as denominational "Christians" are at each other. Neither bitterness strongly commends those harboring it, their faith, or their ideological positions. Dispassionate reasoning is by far the more effective discussion technique. Please note that I don't bash atheism. Bashing from either side serves no purpose but to vent.

Of course, that's just my opinion; not surprising, considering my phobic aversion to emotionalistic conflict. Comes from being a middle child, I've heard.

-- posted by jlthomp

» pink101 - Tongue In Cheek

In response to 1 Samuel 15 posted by jlthomp:
.
Big problem with this media is learning to read between the lines.
.
We have to pay attention to each other over a period of time in order to understand where any one participant originates.
.
I've got some of us down pat; but, with others, in particular new ones or those who post infrequently, I'm left at a loss.
.
I had a grand child who told me she could see who she was talking to on the phone if she looked in the little holes in the mouth piece. I tried it and it didn't work for me.
.

-- posted by pink101

» HeadZenCards - 1 Samuel 15

In response to 1 Samuel 15 posted by jlthomp:

I was born third, so I had to struggle to get any dessert away from my two older brothers.

Atheists who cling to the cult of personality by dressing up their wisest like "gods" catch my dispassionate hell as well, so don't feel TOO special today.

When I decide to become effective, I'll let you know first.

In the meantime, I take great comfort in the fact that there is only one True Believer who posts here (and it ain't you).

:-)

-- posted by HeadZenCards

» HeadZenCards - Cognative Dissonance

In response to 1 Samuel 15 posted by HeadZenCards:

From www.biblical nonsense.com

Suppose we wanted to test the power of God and prayer in order to verify or debunk related Christian claims.

To begin the study, we gather a group of fifty atheists and a group of fifty Christians who volunteer to have an extremely lethal dose of bacteria injected intravenously.

Following the injection, we provide the fifty atheists with a regimen of broad-spectrum antibiotics to counteract the infection.

We then isolate the atheists in a secret location and tell no one that they are involved in the experiment. Essentially, they don't exist to the rest of the world.

Likewise, we isolate the Christians in a secret location but refuse them the antibiotic regimen.

News of the fifty Christians injected with the lethal bacteria will then be broadcast over the entire Christian world. The report will ask everyone to pray to God for their facilitated recovery from the infection so that deductive reasoning will force the world to acknowledge the one true religion because of the unquestionable and verifiable power of God and prayer.

Because no one knows about the atheists in isolation, no one is specifically praying for them. All they have are antibiotics, while the Christians have the power of prayer from hundreds of millions of certain volunteers and the omnipotence of God. After two months, we will end the experiment and see which group has the most survivors.

Whether or not the public is willing to admit it, I think everyone knows which group would fare better in this study. No semi-rational Christian would ever sign up for this deadly experiment even with the added promise of a great monetary compensation for the survivors.

They know that God isn't really going to answer the divinely directed requests of hundreds of millions of Christians because God only seems to answer prayers in some mystical and unobservable fashion.

Deep down, these Christians may even realize that they can't consider prayer dependable. Thus, the failure to acquire volunteers who won't receive antibiotics creates friction with what the typical Christian believes is absolute truth. The uneasy feeling felt throughout the body creates a drive within the mind to explain and/or separate from the logical contradiction. We call this internal phenomenon cognitive dissonance.

As a way of irrationally explaining the lack of activity from God, a Christian would quickly assert that the almighty doesn't like us putting him to a test.

In addition, we would also hear that God wants us to believe in him based on faith, not what we determine from our own limited human understanding.

As I mentioned previously, because of this proposed choice, God performs his miracles in superstitious ages or in scenarios disallowing falsifiable tests or independent observation.

In other words, the power of God is there even though there's no logical way to draw such a conclusion.

This irrational explanation is a little too convenient for me. An enlightened person will realize that Christians receive answers for prayers just as often as atheists receive answers for problems.

Sometimes prayers are "answered," and sometimes they're not; sometimes problems will have solutions, and sometimes they won't.

It's because of this suppressed "futileness-of-prayer" realization that I feel there is a subconscious mechanism trying to protect individuals from illogical thinking.

In such a case, this hypothetical defense mechanism has simply been repressed from years of conditioning. Naturally, I don't have the means to prove this hypothesis and wouldn't expect any believer to accept it without the necessary support, but it makes perfect sense when you've been on both sides of the fence.

Matthew 21:22 and a few other biblical verses tell us that we will receive whatever we ask for in prayer. This statement is not taken out of context, and we can easily disprove a literal interpretation of Jesus' proposal through objective testing. 2 Chronicles 16:12 condemns Asa for consulting physicians with his health problem rather than seeking God's help.

As you can see, the Bible is unambiguous on its demand for prayer over medicine, yet common sense and observation tell us how deadly a combination of prayer and medical rejection can be.

This is why no Christian would sign up for the experiment. This is also why it's illegal for parents in America to refuse medical services for their children, regardless of the parents' personal beliefs.

Medicine has proven its effectiveness; prayer has not.

Because the evidence contradicts their deepest convictions, Christians provide nonsensical solutions to the perplexity and ignore valid rebuttals when they can't answer them.

-- posted by HeadZenCards