Members Log In Not Registered? Register Now.
Updated 12:58 pm.EST, Sat November 21, 2009
- RSS|
- E-newsletter - Preview : Daily | Weekly
CP Contents
Hot Topics :
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. (JN 8:32)
wwfsmd's Comments
-
Atheists Sue to Take 'God' Out of Obama Inauguration
wwfsmd »Sun Jan 04, 2009 8:56 pm
Agree: 1 
Disagree: 2
Questions are clearly not tolerated at this end of Christianity. Someone who requires a reason to believe something is equated with Mao and Stalin, who were not at all reasonable people. If I require a reason for believing a fantastic claim, then I am somehow like the KKK?
This proves that not only do Christian posters on this site have no answers, but simple questions are so threatening to their beliefs that they resort to name-calling in lieu of any substantial response. Not only is this childish, it shows their similarity to fundamentalists of other faiths.
It has been a sad showing for the Christian faith, but my expectations get lower with every Christian blog or newsletter I come across. Those I found here are already lost. Beyond reason. Too rigid to be kind, and too afraid to think.
I feel sorry for you.
I will concentrate my efforts on the middle ground from now on: Those who have not yet been convinced to take mythology at face value. Those who still base their morality on human happiness rather than ancient prejudices. Those who can see the beauty of the garden without having to imagine fairies living beneath.
I wish you all well, but I'm too honest to continue to hope for any meaningful dialog here at the religious fringe. I'll take my answer off the air, as they say. I believe I've already seen your response. -
Atheists Sue to Take 'God' Out of Obama Inauguration
wwfsmd »Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:12 pm Agree: 1 Disagree: 1
zabud,
I appreciate your non-argumentative intention. I understand that you mean well. I would stay away from the word "pity" though. I don't think it serves your purpose. I have a pretty thick skin, but many will not take well to the assumption that they need to be pitied.
When speaking to non-Christians, I'd also suggest staying away from the King James English. I know it sounds more poetic to you, but it comes off as preachy and out-of-touch to many. I'd grant an exception for the psalms, which would probably sound pretty lame without the archaic language.
You are not arguing, I'll grant you that. You are insisting, however. I'd actually prefer an argument. An argument implies that there may be some substance to your claims.
There is no reason to believe the bible, and the bible is what all your insisting is based on. If you don't have an argument, you aren't going to change an atheist's mind about your 3-in-1 god. Do you not realize that your scripture sounds the same to an atheist as Hindu scripture, or Islamic scripture?
Atheism in no more a religion than not playing a game is a game itself. Your anger is showing now. April Fool's day? You can look that one up. That is simply an insult, and will not help further your evangelist goals. -
Atheists Sue to Take 'God' Out of Obama Inauguration
wwfsmd »Fri Jan 02, 2009 5:40 pm Agree: 2 Disagree: 2
"Well, then set me straight. You believe the only folks electable to government office should be faithless..." -Delight
No, I don't. You are putting words into my mouth. I voted for Obama, who is Christian, when I could have voted for the Libertarian candidate, who is most likely atheist. This is what I mean by not grasping the concept.
There is only ONE uncloseted atheist in Congress. How dare you blame anything our government has done on "godless ways." That phrase, by the way, sounds really silly to someone who doesn't believe in gods. It's like saying "your evil leprechaunless ways."
Blaming crime on atheism is equally ridiculous. There are more christians in jail than atheists. Yes, there are more christians in the general population, so you'd expect this, but the percentage of atheist criminals is smaller than the percentage of atheists in the general population. Perhaps there's a reason for this.
The devil incarnate world leader? Do you think I have not read Revelation? Atheists in this country are often quite familiar with the bible. The bible is the reason many of us became atheists. How you can justify all the contradictions, ludicrous claims, and divinely justified cruelty in it is beyond me. That is a concept I don't grasp.
I was baptised. I used to carry a bible around, even to school. But after many years I saw the light of reason and the universe opened up. I wouldn't give up the clarity of truth and the awesome wonder of the natural world for the comfort of an imaginary afterlife. I can no longer swallow the lie, and I no longer want to. -
Atheists Sue to Take 'God' Out of Obama Inauguration
wwfsmd »Fri Jan 02, 2009 12:54 am Agree: 0 Disagree: 0
Delight-
You clearly don't grasp the concept.
Daniel Paul-
I agree that the oath is only part of the ceremony. But that is indeed the part this lawsuit is about. The devil is in the details, right?
Atheism is a religion? You know better than that. You are just trying to get me excited. I'm not that easy.
mtgburrell-
Your answer to Chip was right on. I've read many of your posts and find them more honest and compassionate than most on this site. -
Atheists Sue to Take 'God' Out of Obama Inauguration
wwfsmd »Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:32 pm Agree: 1 Disagree: 0
The presidential oath is not decided by the president. This is not a free speech issue. The oath is in the constitution (Article II, Section I.) There is no mention of any gods in the oath. Look it up.
Judges doing the swearing-in ceremony have traditionally added the "so help me God" in themselves, just as presidents have traditionally placed their hand on a bible. The lawsuit is about the judge adding words to the constitutionally decided oath. Judges have authority to interpret the law, not add words to it. This is not a case-law situation... yet.
No one wants to restrict Obama's speech. The injection of religion into a constitutional matter is the issue. No judge can make you swear by a deity you don't believe in when you are in court. This is no different. The oath was decided by vote. I'm sure somebody wanted to put God into it, but they lost. The constitutional congress understood that any hint of religion in government would be divisive, and they were right.
Obama will say "so help me God" whether prompted or not. There is too much pressure for him not to. He would'n want to ruin his little kiss-*ss moment with the religious right during this ceremony. He already invited Mr. Purpose-Driven. It is too late for him to have a secular ceremony. In fact, if Newdow win this in court and Obama says "so help me God" where the judge does not, it's going to make him look even better to religious folks.
Future presidents, however, may feel less pressure to inject religion into their ceremonies, especially if our country's trend toward secularity continues. Religious prompting from a judge is not about freedom of speech, it's about a religious group asserting its beliefs over others using an inappropriate government platform. -
Atheists Sue to Take 'God' Out of Obama Inauguration
wwfsmd »Wed Dec 31, 2008 8:23 pm Agree: 3 Disagree: 0
The suit is to remove the judge's prompt for a declaration of belief, which violates the first amendment. Nobody is claiming the president can't say "so help me God." This article, of course, did not mention that. The prompt constitutes a religious test for office, which is illegal.
Government support of religion and personal freedom of religion are two different things. Why can't christians understand this? No atheist cares what you believe or how many times you say "Jesus" in a conversation, but the government represents all of us and must be completely neutral on all religious matters.
Every time someone tells me to take a flying leap I donate money to an atheist legal fund. -
"I see that you did not specifically address the prophecies in Daniel 2 & 7 or the detailed account of the coming messiah, which Jesus fulfilled . . . why?" --Online
Online,
Apparently the concept of writing stories based on older stories is completely incomprehensible to several people here.
Of course I didn't address specific prophecies. The point is that once a prophecy has been written, it is easy to write another story later on that matches the prophecy in the older story. This is not rocket science, here, but apparently many simply can't grasp this simple concept. -
DP,
You accused me of basing my morality on biology and extended that to a complete lack of morals. Nothing could be further from the truth. I believe people should be responsible for their choices: much more than christians generally do, I might add. That's one reason I'm a humanist. Ancient myths do not excuse you from being mean to people.
Homosexuality is not evil. It does not hurt people, except where it crosses the false morality that right-wing christians are so proud of. Murder is a choice that hurts people. Adultery is a choice that hurts people. Homosexuality is only a crime to people like you.
You blame your war against homosexuality on an ancient text which you call God's law. Are you just following orders? Take some responsibility for your position. -
Most Britons Don’t Believe in Nativity Story, Survey Finds
wwfsmd »Tue Dec 23, 2008 2:11 am Agree: 0 Disagree: 0
Aritonang,
What's your point? -
Wilderness,
You want Grace and Truth? How about this:
TRUTH---
Homosexuality is not a wicked way, it is biological. Some people, just like some other animals, are attracted to the same sex. They are born that way. There is more evidence for this than there is for the existence of Jesus.
GRACE---
If there is a god, he made homosexuals the way they are. Accept them. -
Those of you who think Jesus fulfilled a number of prophecies (1500 of them? Wow. My bible doesn't have that many pages!) I have two questions:
Why do so many Jews disagree with you? I found pages of reasons Jesus does NOT fulfill the old prophecies, written by Jewish Old Testament scholars. They love that book as much as you do, quotes and all.
Also, you are still assuming the new testament is a true story. If it were, then the old testament would certainly look more impressive, but you can't use one to prove the other when there's no reason to believe either one. Why should anyone believe the New Testament or the Old Testament are true?
Once again, evidence for people and places is not the same as evidence for magical stories. -
Online4Him,
A quick response to your four reasons for believing the bible to be divinely inspired:
1. Manuscripts: The number of manuscripts has no bearing on their veracity. A large number simply means that the religion had many followers at the time it was written. That's not big news.
2. Archaeology: So they found evidence of miracles, angels, and talking snakes at some archaeological dig, did they? Where? My guess is that you are refering to people and places. Nobody has ever disputed that cities mentioned in the bible exist. People still live there. There is evidence that some people mentioned in the bible lived, and there is no evidence for others. That doesn't make any of the fantastic stories true.
3. Prophecy: This is an OLD one. Of course later stories in the bible fulfull prophecies from earlier stories. They were written by people who knew about these prophecies. You can't expect someone to believe a book is true because it says something will happen and then later says that it did happen. That's ridiculous.
4. Statistics: You just restated #3 here. As I said, making up stories to fulfill prophecies from older stories is not impressive. You are simply assuming everything in the bible is true. Showing something is true is different from simply insisting that it is and expecting someone to believe you. -
Believer,
Thank you for understanding why I can't accept the bible at face value. I'm glad you realize that converting someone requires something else. I'm curious if DP feels the same way. -
Believer,
You could learn something about argument and conversation by studying your friend Daniel Paul's posts. Your last statement to me was entirely based on the bible. No one has ever given me a reason to believe the bible, so nothing you said has any relevance to me.
Apparently it is extremely difficult to come up with a reason for someone to believe in the bible. Quoting the bible to a non-believer is like raising your voice when speaking to a foreigner who doesn't understand you. It doesn't help. -
DP,
I looked up the divisible-by-seven thing. I've seen other versions of this, and there's a reason it isn't making historic headlines. I'll give you an example. Let's take a pertinent sentence from my last post:
-------------
I have a degree in math, so the numerology angle is lost on me.
-------------
Now, there are fourteen words in this sentence, or two 7's. There are 63 characters/bytes in this sentence, which is nine 7's. Sound familiar?
Karl Sabiers published a book of similar "astounding facts" he "found" in the bible in 1948. He didn't count spaces and commas (that I know of), but he did count words that started only with vowels to get his 7's... sometimes. Sometimes he counted "vocabulary" words (ignoring repeated words) to get his sevens, again, only when that worked. Sometimes he counted only non-repeated nouns, yet again, only if it gave him sevens. Whichever method of counting words or letters to yield sevens for that particular part of the bible was the method he used for that particular segment. He also decided what he would consider a segment. This is hardly amazing.
In a book with hundreds of thousands of words, you are very likely to come up with thousands and thousands of such "astounding facts" (that's what he called them), even grouped together in "amazingly intricate ways." He, and others like him, have not found patterns. They've extracted a large number of favorite numbers out of an enormous pot of numbers and patterns, the rest of which are ignored.
Many such claims have been made. They are not being silenced by some anti-Christian elite, and they have been published. Mathematicians, historians, linguists, and theologans have looked at and rejected these for even more reasons than the ones I just mentioned. Even if a mathematician didn't believe in a god, he would certainly make a lot of money if he could publish a legitimate validation of such a claim. There is no conspiracy to stifle christianity here. There is simply nothing to these claims.
Yes, I saw the computer program version as well. Software that found hidden information in the bible using evenly spaced letters, etc. Using the same software, someone found "Darwin got it right" in the King James bible, just to prove a point. "Bogus Code" was found repeated in the same pattern over and over in Genesis: almost 60 times. This is not about what's there... it's about who's looking and what they want to see. -
DP,
You still haven't answered the question. Is "divisible by 7" all you've got? I have a degree in math, so the numerology angle is lost on me. There is more magic number nonsense out there than you are aware of, I'd wager. Maybe seven syllable words are not uncommon in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Latin... especially the words you'd use over and over again when referring to your deity. I'd have to see the details on that one, but it's interesting in that I haven't heard of it before. My guess is that if this were a real statistical anomaly, it would be well publicized. Even if it were true, the people who wrote these books thought seven was a mystical number too, so it doesn't mean anything when they write it into their texts. Modern Christians aren't the first people to count syllables in holy texts.
Why is it that no Christian can answer this question? This group is not the first I've asked. I usually get something like what believer said: It's true because it says it is. Either that, or some mystical personal experience that does me no good. Plenty of mystical experiences to go around, from plenty of religions.
The argument that no human would come up with the bible is nothing more than insisting, and it assumes that I have not read the bible or have no morals. The bible contains plenty of the horror and depravity that you credit humans with, but it often portrays this as the work of God. If I were to write a bible, God would not murder innocent children.
As no Christian has ever answered this question, I don't really expect you to. I just would like for you to understand that referring to it as factual in an argument with a non-believer does not help any point you are trying to make. That would only make sense if the non-believer has been given some reason to consider the bible as anything other than stories people made up. To date, after more than a thousand years, this reason has still not appeared.
Oh well. Thanks for trying!
Maybe I'll go pester the Hindus or the Muslims. Maybe they have a reason to believe their books. Somehow I think I'll get similar responses...
Happy Solstice. -
"Christians don't define anything. We accept and submit to God's definitions contained in the Bible. " -Daniel Paul
Daniel Paul,
It always returns to the bible with you guys. I don't get it. Can you explain this to me?
People wrote the bible, therefore "God's definitions" therein were defined by people just like you.
I know, I know. The bible was divinely inspired. So were the Upanishads, the Vedas, the Quran, etc. I honestly don't understand why anyone believes one over another, except out of some kind of childhood imprinting.
There are millions of people quoting dozens of other religious texts. They are just as convinced of their book's validity as you are of yours. Why should I believe you over them, or the bible over their books? I have read the bible, and I have read parts of other religious texts. Most of them sound equally unbelievable, and the only thing that really set the bible apart in any way for me was my familiarity with it from childhood.
Why do you think the bible is true? -
artm,
I am being honest. Putting words in other people's mouths, as you are doing, is dishonest. I don't care if you worship Jesus, Zeus, or Wotan. Believe it or not, this is not about you. In fact, it is not even about Christmas. This persecution bit is getting really tiresome.
Nobody cares if you celebrate Christmas or what you worship. The rest of us are simply sick of Christians taking for granted that everyone is celebrating the same thing they are, or that they should. Most of all, we are sick of our government taking the same position. Nobody cares if you put crosses or mangers or donkeys in your yard. We just don't want our government, which is supposed to represent all of us, to do the same. -
homoousia316,
I think you hit the nail on the head. -
artm,
Wow. I found someone as paranoid as myself on the other side! I can assure you that secular folk do not care if you celebrate Christmas. They just don't want religion endorsed by their government.
Holy Bible: Mosaic
On our own we are little more than bits of stone and glass. Together we are the Body of Christ. Holy Bible: Mosaic is an invitation to experience Christ in His Word and in the responses of his people. Each week, as you reflect on guided Scripture readings aligned with the church seasons, you will receive a wealth of insight from historical and contemporary writings.
- Own your Own Christian Business
- Need Health & Travel Insurance? We Provide Best Service For You
- Moving Companies - Receive Multiple Moving Quotes from Movers in your area!
- Liberty University Online - Master of Science in Management MSM : Online
- Christian Gifts from The Jerusalem Gift Shop
- new york web design
- LeTourneau University - Online and On-Campus Degrees with a Christian Perspective, designed for Working Adults
- Prophet CRM - Easy CRM Software for Outlook
- Help with Debt Consolidation Loans and budgeting your way out of debt with medical bills and credit cards
- Shop for: Special Occasion Gifts, Wedding Accessories, Kid's Personalized Music CDs & DVDs & Adoration Jewelry
- Financing for your Church Construction Needs - Darra Consulting
HOME
CP SPECIAL
CP NETWORKS
WAYS TO GET CP
