Another One Leaves the Fold: "Diary of a Beleaver"

This new Blog contains "The post-faith musings of a former Christian College professor and writer for Christianity Today. One of the most interesting Blog posts so far is this one:
Though the catalyst of my atheism was manifest as the result of more recent personal revelations—the casuistry of “Christian” ministries, the inane and incessant behavioral and financial manipulation of the Church, and the absolute irrationality of so-called holy books—as I think back on my life, I realize that my present epiphany began long before I decided that god had nothing to do with any of that.

In 1988, my family moved to Topeka, Kansas, home of the deplorable Fred Phelps and his insipid Westboro Baptist Church. Topeka was a small place (about 110,000 at the time) and multiple times each week I would see Fred and his followers out with their signs, announcing to the world who was a fag, who was a dead fag, who was a fag-enabler and who was simply sinful enough to go to hell with all of the aforementioned fags. They would chant, sing and yell, spreading their hate to all that didn’t believe exactly as they did.

As a child I grew up in Christian home, (my father was a pastor, if you must know) and it always pained me to compare myself (and our church) to the incorrigible Phelps’. We claimed to hold the Bible to be the infallible word of god, they did too. We thought that homosexuality was a sinful abomination, they did too. We believed that those who disagreed with us were headed to eternal torment in hell, they did too. We were certain that all who repented of their egregious offenses against god could be saved and offered eternal life, they did too. Though it seemed that we believed the exact same things, I knew I wasn’t like them, that I couldn’t hate and prejudge as they did; yet when I looked at the doctrine I subscribed to, I was simply less vocal.

Though they may not be as outspoken, all people that believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible as the inspired and inerrant word of god are the Phelps’ of this world. Keeping your mouth shut while believing the same things doesn’t make you better, only a coward unwilling to declare a side in the debate over human decency.

I realized this in my youth, distancing myself from the predominant Evangelical stance on homosexuality, not knowing that, though still in my childhood, I was distancing myself from the oppression of hegemonic Bible-believing Christianity. I knew that I was not like them because deep down, I didn’t believe as they did. I didn’t care enough about an old book to joyfully destroy the lives of those around me, and then congratulate myself for my divinely inspired accomplishment.

People are so much more sacred than my hubris.

At the end of the day, you’re a Phelps or you’re not. You believe the Bible or you don’t. Lack of expression is not an acceptable cloak for tolerance, because you either believe everyone differing from you is destined for hell, or you don’t. You either believe that you are making this world a better place for everyone, or that you are making the next world a better place for your friends. Whether you end up picking the altruists or the elitists is up to you.

All this to say, belief necessitates an extreme; it’s either true or it isn’t. Once one sees the full measure of their belief system expressed, one must fully accept or reject the holistic nature of said system.

God either hates gays or he doesn’t, there is no middle ground.

Such is the lesson I learned as a child, and such is the choice that all persons of faith have to make; for there is no limbo in which to stand.~AB

Link

243 comments:

Lvka said...

Their problem is not that they're vocal: their problem is that they hate.


God either hates gays or he doesn’t, there is no middle ground.

God hates homosexuality, but loves all men equally. The reason He hates sin is because He knows its consequences, and the evil that it does to the souls that are trapped in it.

Jim said...

Luka,

Perhaps you can debunk your fellow (loving) Christian at http://www.angelfire.com/on4/calebhamer/

He cautions Christians against your type of reasoning.

The boastful shall not stand in Your sight; You hate all workers of iniquity. (Psalm 5:5)

God doesn't JUST hate sin--at least not according to the Bible. Perhaps you have extrabiblical knowledge.

Or perhaps you are guilty of the very casuistry that was mentioned in the first sentence!

Breckmin said...

This is nothing more than 'poisoning the well' by alluding to Fred Phelps and comparing his aberrations to evangelical Christianity which embraces homosexuals as equally loved by God. All sin is equally forgivable..and evangelical Christians have been at work with groups like Exodus and NARTH, etc and have seen many people delivered from homosexual lifestyle and addiction.

I can personally testify to the fact that you CAN have victory over homosexuality. God is gracious. There IS a correct way to begin the healing process.

Evangelical Christians KNOW that they are no better than anyone else who ccmmits various sins. It could be pride, it could be gluttony, it could be homosexuality.

The Sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross is great enough to forgive you of all sin, and evangelicals are quite different from the poison hate (and sanctimony) of Fred Phelps.

Corvus Imbrifer said...

I would see Fred and his followers out with their signs, announcing to the world who was a fag, who was a dead fag, who was a fag-enabler and who was simply sinful enough to go to hell with all of the aforementioned fags.
There it is, that hurtful word, used to such good effect. That sentence had me laughing out loud.

feeno said...

I hope this guy nothing but the best. But is this story any different from any other "deconversion story"? The only thing different from this guy's story and all the others who have left the fold is at least he didn't list all of his "christian credentials".

But that's where it stops. 'Cause as always he follows the lead set by the heroes of his faith who have left the fold before him. First it's his high morale's, WOW he's against Fred Phelps. That's very noble of you sir. And then of course he's also realized how smart he is (even while he was still a youth) and saw how unreasonable the Bible is.

And how can we argue with such smarts and logic? We need to debunk Christianity or we are Fred Phelps. Really? That's almost as stupid as me saying you all need to debunk atheism or you all are a bunch of Joe Stalin's. (There's no middle ground)

I still respect those Atheists who at least have a bucket of balls left and don't need a Fred Phelps to reject Christ.

Long live DC and long live Mr. Loftus and all 376 of you crazy ass followers.

Peace out girl scouts, feeno

Lvka said...

Jim,


The character of God the Father, as well as the character a Christian ought to have as one who is His son, image, and likeness, can easily be seen in the verses below (among countless others):



Matthew 5:43  ¶Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44  But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; 45  That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. 46  For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47  And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? 48  Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.


Luke 6:27  ¶But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you, 28  Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you. 31  And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise. 32  For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them. 33  And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same. 35  But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil. 36  Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.


Romans 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.


Romans 12:14 Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not.


1 Thessalonians 5:15  See that none render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to all men.


James 3:10 Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be.


1 John 4:20  If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

Jim said...

Luka,

Like I said, you need to debate your fellow Christians--not me. I don't buy any of it . . . sorry.

For what it's worth, all of your examples were commands by God to HUMANS to LOVE other HUMANS.

Except perhaps Romans 5:8, in which all you've done is shown that there are contradictions in the Bible--congratulations!

Lvka said...

Jim,


there's no point entering into a (rational) dialogue with people with suffering psyches.


Read the few examples carefully: we are directed to do that that we may be the children of our Father and that we may be perfect even as He is perfect.

Jim said...

Feeno,

WOW he's against Fred Phelps. That's very noble of you sir.

What if Fred Phelps is right? Would you praise that God?

I don't think you would--and you'd be right not to. You're a good person DESPITE your belief in any sort of God. At least I assume you're a good person. :-)

Jim said...

Luka,

there's no point entering into a (rational) dialogue with people with suffering psyches.

Now there's some irony! :-)

Lvka said...

What irony?

Bronxboy47 said...

@Lvka:


Funny you should ask.

(What irony indeed!)

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

Why don't you respond to Jim's bible quotation? In case you've forgotten it, here it is again:

The boastful shall not stand in Your sight; You hate all workers of iniquity. (Psalm 5:5)

I believe the "you" being referred to here is God. And the object of God's hate is quite clearly the sinner. So which is it? Does God hate the sin or the sinner--or possibly both?

Bronxboy47 said...

On the sin that God hates:

Only God is eternally immune to sin. The moment God created lesser creatures, sin became an inevitability. Christian theologians tell us that without evil (sin) we would be unable to appreciate that which is truly good. So evil (sin) must be a necessary part of God's divine plan.
"O happy fault,
O necessary sin of Adam
which gained for us so great a redeemer."

And yet, sin is a part of a his divine plan that God hates. If he hates it, why did he feel compelled to incorporate it into his divine plan? A creation minus the sin factor certainly seems to have been beyond the scope of his magical powers. Go figure.

Andre said...

The one fact that people like Luka and other Christian Hate Deniers cannot escape from is that the Bible can be used to prop up any type of worldview.

Yes we can find support in it for the vanilla flavour God, but equally, Phelps quotes that same abomination at us in support of his hate-filled spewings. So can the KKK, the apartheid government, etc etc.

And it is in that flexibility, that nebulousness, that the Bible loses any hope it has ever had of being an authoritative source for morals and guidance by which we can live our lives.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

He says Ps 5:5 ~ "God hates" so let's look at Ps. 98:8 "let the floods clap their hands" or Is. 55:12, "let the trees of the field clap their hands". So now, do water and trees have hands??? What do make of these things?

First read and take scripture in the sense in which it was intended. Poetic literature as we see in both Psalms and Isaiah present many allegorical statements to drive home the meaning and intention of what's being communicated.

Secondly as Lvka has correctly stated, God has revealed his nature and that being of love, and, I might add, JUSTICE...Sin damages everyone not just the sinner. So God hates the sin that the sinner does and perpetuates because his nature is also just. The deplorable nature of sin is what God hates, not the person. Homosexuality is a sin and damages not only the persons performing the acts, but also confuses and twists children, and presents a whole host of social inequalities that shouldn't exist.

What I have found is that only critics, literalists, and radicals hold that God ordains hate of his creation.

Gandolf said...

Jim said to Feeno ..."I don't think you would--and you'd be right not to. You're a good person DESPITE your belief in any sort of God. At least I assume you're a good person. :-)"



Feeno is utterly lawless.A lawless "liberal" Christian faith jockey!, who fiercely debates and defends faithfuls "unregulated" rights to their continued "faith freedoms".

A type of liberal faith freedom fighting anarchrist, totally devoid of any real thought for need of faith regulation, who sees absolutely no reason for any faith boundary.The type to even do ole big bad ...BAD Leroy Brown, real damn proud.

Without "liberal" faithful type folk like our Feeno, who over the years have all tirelessly campaigned for continued complete "freedom" and "unregulation" of faith.

The little cult people like fag hating Fred Phelps ,would all just be small town soft co*ks, almost unheard of, who just really didnt even stand half a chance to ever even get going.

The feen says .."WOW he's against Fred Phelps. That's very noble of you sir"

I think this is sort of like some type of "transcendent" verbal liberal anarchrist theist "challenge" .It like he`s saying, big deal ! ...But ! just any of you atheists, dare come and try deal with the big liberal movers and shakers like me ,and then lets see how far you`ll get to change any matters.

zenmite said...

Does god hate only sin?

•Psalm 5:5, "The boastful shall not stand before Thine eyes; Thou dost hate all who do iniquity,"

•Psalm 11:5, "The Lord tests the righteous and the wicked, and the one who loves violence His soul hates."

•Lev. 20:23, "Moreover, you shall not follow the customs of the nation which I shall drive out before you, for they did all these things, and therefore I have abhorred them."

•Prov. 6:16-19, "There are six things which the Lord hates, yes, seven which are an abomination to Him: 17 Haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, 18 A heart that devises wicked plans, feet that run rapidly to evil, 19 A false witness who utters lies, and one who spreads strife among brothers."

•Hosea 9:15, "All their evil is at Gilgal; indeed, I came to hate them there! Because of the wickedness of their deeds I will drive them out of My house! I will love them no more; All their princes are rebels."

Bronxboy47 said...

D.S. Burnett:

It appears you've discovered a key to the bible that allows you to correctly distinguish between biblical fact, poetic license, metaphor, and hyperbole. Your post is so patently absurd it hardly merits a reply. You want us to interpret every biblical utterance in the light of God's supposed overwhelming love, a love that is content to see millions of humans suffer through their earthly lives only to be herded through the gates of hell to suffer for an eternity.

Oh, but you say, God's love must be tempered with justice. But if the potentiality for an offense meriting eternal punishment was that great--inevitable in fact--why create humans in the first place? For God to say (despite knowing the end from the beginning) "Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" doesn't sound very loving to me.

"The deplorable nature of sin is what God hates."

Okay, God hates sin.

Prior to Creation, sin existed only as a totally powerless potentiality (if that can be called an existence).

The moment God created creatures inferior to himself sin became an inescapable eventuality.

Isn't it odd that sin, the very thing God loathes above all, is an inescapable bi-product, woven into the very fabric of creation.

And yet, we are asked to believe that an all-powerful (''with God all things are possible" --mat 19:26), all-knowing God was incapable of creating a world without sin and without the vast majority of his sin infected creation being destined for an eternity in hell. But, of course, the infernal fate of all but a mere handful of humans is acceptable collateral damage to the average Christian as long as he can remain convinced that he and his loved ones have a reservation in heaven.

You've heard of self-hating gays, self-hating Jews, self-hating Blacks, well Christians are obviously self-hating humans.

Lvka said...

Zenmite & Bronxy Boy,


what do all your verses (as well as those used by Phred Phelps & Caleb Hamer) have in common? (besides the idea of 'hatred')

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

Sorry, is there a point to your question somewhere?

Bronxboy47 said...

Your empty drive-by comments are infinitely tiresome. If you can't find a point in your last post, how about addressing some of the points I and others have made?

(Though lord knows why I'm encouraging you.)

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

Btw, I don't know you well enough for you to get cutesy with my user name.

cipher said...

Christians are obviously self-hating humans.

BronxBoy47,

I haven't left a comment here in over four years (for reasons I won't go into), but I take a look every once in a great while. I just wanted to tell you this may be the single greatest one-line definition of conservative evangelical Christianity I've ever come across.

Bronxboy47 said...

Thanks Cipher. I appreciate your comment.

And, btw, I'm still waiting for someone to respond to Zenmite's last post. It's seems he's presented overwhelming evidence of God's non-metaphorical hate.

Lvka said...

Btw, I don't know you well enough for you to get cutesy with my user name.


Meaning?

GearHedEd said...

"...Christians are obviously self-hating humans."

I noticed that about Catholics in particular about 20 years ago.

...the whole "miserable sinner" complex.

cipher said...

And, btw, I'm still waiting for someone to respond to Zenmite's last post. It's seems he's presented overwhelming evidence of God's non-metaphorical hate.

They're too busy doing the requisite mental gymnastics.

GearHedEd said...

My 2nd wife was Catholic.

Bet you can guess how THAT worked out...

Bronxboy47 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bronxboy47 said...

GearHedEd,

My condolences.

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

Lvka,

Meaning? Are you kidding? You can't possibly be operating a brain at such low wattage. (And yet you're certain you understand the mystery of life.)

Quite obviously I meant don't address me as "Bronxy Boy".

Gandolf said...

GearHedEd said... "My 2nd wife was Catholic.

Bet you can guess how THAT worked out..."

The missionary position?.

Jonathan said...

Interesting article about Phelps and homosexuality. My only question would be... Isn't the difference between most Christians and Phelps that, just by simply looking at Phelps, one discovers that Phelps is motivated by hate and self-righteousness and bitterness?

With Phelps, would you not say that he has just found a tool (religion) to express the already existing malice and bitterness in his heart?

It seems to me that Phelps doesn't really "hate fags" per se. It just seems that Phelps hates. Period.

-jonathan
iamrontimus@gmail.com
www.traverse-the-precipice.com

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

Your diminutive use of my user name is pretty creepy, since I don't know you from Adam. It's like the unwanted caress from a Catholic priest.

Chuck O'Connor said...

Any person who denies a US Citizen their 14th Amendment rights based on pre-historic myth is both unethical and ignorant. Phelps at least has the wherewithal to be clear about his aggression whereas Lvka, Feeno, and Harvey dress up their bigotry in religious-fueled drivel and demand we respect them. What two consenting adults decide is their identity does not threaten your superstition guys. Live your lives how you want but don't start stepping on the US Constitution for the sake of ANE myth.

Lvka said...

Sorry... I thought I saw an "y" there. My bad. (I innitially thought you don't like being addressed by your nick-name, or something..)


OK, now that we got that one cleared out, did you make any progress in realising what ALL the verses that you, Zenmite, Phelps, and Caleb Hammer put forward, have in common? (besides being about hatred)

Winston Smith said...

I see no evidence on that blog that the author was a "former Christian College professsor" or write for Christianity today.

He does specialize in either/or fallacies, though.

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

Okay, I'll bite. You tell me. What are all those verses about, other than God's anger management problems?

cipher said...

I see no evidence on that blog that the author was a "former Christian College professsor"

Heh! A new take on "no true Scotsman" - "He was never a real Christian college professor to begin with!"

Chuck O'Connor said...

Winston is the master of the no true scotsman fallacy.

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,
You said:
"The reason He (God) hates sin is because He knows its consequences, and the evil that it does to the souls that are trapped in it."

There were no souls trapped in sin prior to God's decision to go ahead with creation despite knowing what that would mean for countless millions of human beings. How do you interpret that as the act of a compassionate, loving God? That's just way too many disposable people. And we are told God couldn't have achieved his purpose in any other fashion. I'd say that's a somewhat limited assessment of the abilities of a God for whom all things are possible--or is that merely another empty biblical phrase which, far from meaning what it say, means absolutely nothing when you get right down to it.

Lvka said...

Not what they're about, but what they have in common.. (It's easy). Or to put it another way, what do all MY verses have in common? (except being about God's love for sinners)

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

Okay, not what do they mean, but what do they have in common.

I await enlightenment.

Lvka said...

All those countless millions of human beings made a free choice in how to be. Their fate was not unavoidable as far as power to do so is concerned.

Lvka said...

I await enlightenment.


Well, that's a Buddhist term, and according to Buddhist teaching, it cannot come except from within. :-)

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

Interesting you should mention Buddhism. It's my contention that the entire Bible is like an enormous Zen koan. You confront and grapple with its contradictions and patent absurdities (much like life itself) until such time as the brain snaps and you achieve satori and freedom.

One thing I find endlessly fascinating is the tendency of bible believers to side with a supernatural entity against their own race. The lack of compassion and empathy towards the millions of humans God considers expendable in the pursuit of his own desires is hard to fathom. Perhaps it's simply a failure of the imagination.

Lvka said...

B.B.,

do you want to save someone from their own private hells? Be my guest. Go to Hitler (who is being consumed by hatred) and try to convince him to leave his hatred behind so that his heart may be free from its destructive grasp, and that he may enter the Kingdom of the loving God and taste its peace. Do you think he'll listen?

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

Sorry, but for millions of humans their fate became unavoidable the moment sin was imputed to the entire human race. At that point salvation became impossible without God's grace. And for sinful man, the rejection of God's grace was as natural as breathing air. So what is God to do in the face of sin-ridden man's rejection of his grace, other than to force himself on them, as he did with Paul. Sorry, Lvka, sin-ridden man is not free to choose how to be. That much, at least, the Calvinists have right.

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

Your last post proves my point. For Hitler to accept God's grace he would have to behave in a manner contrary to his sinful nature. Not very likely without direct, forceful intervention from God.

Lvka said...

Neither God nor the devil force themselves down people's throats. (the former because He's love, and the later because God didn't give him that power). Man is indeed weak, but not powerless, because God is with us (as Isaiah and the Gospels say), wishing ALL men to be saved.


"I can do ALL things through Christ Who strengthens me", says St Paul in Phillipians.

"Resist the devil and he will flee from you", wrote St James in his letter.

Lvka said...

God didn't force Himself upon St Paul: the Pharisees also knew that He has risen, since the pagan Roman soldiers had no stake in the internal Jewish dispute over Jesus' identity, and as such were reliable witnesses of the event -- yet they still didn't confess Him to be the Son of God.

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

That's exactly the point: sinful man, dead in his sins has no honest desire to resist the devil. That desire must be implanted in him from without. Remember, he is dead in his sins. Dead men do not respond to God's call unless God forces them to.

Bronxboy47 said...

God: Okay, countless millions won't respond to my call. Well that's on them. Tough shit. I'm going ahead with my pet project anyway.


Sounds like a loving father to me, Lvka.

Lvka said...

BB,

Without Christ we cannot do anything (John 15:5)

BUT, at the SAME time,

We can do all things through Christ Who strengthens us. (Philippians 4:13)

AND

Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. (Romans 10:13)

IF

he's willing to take up his cross and follow Jesus. (Matthew 16:24; Mark 8:34, 10:21; Luke 9:23)

Bronxboy47 said...

God: In fact, I'm going ahead with my pet project in spite of the fact that I am completely whole, self-contained, lacking nothing, suspended in blissful peace and love with the other two-thirds of the Trinity, and and under no compulsion to create anything.


Perhaps he was just a teensy-weensy bit bored, and totally unaware of his hidden sadist.

Lvka said...

Yes, BB, it's ON THEM. And it is THEY that lock THEMSELVES up in their own prisons, and in their own evil, DESPITE God's constant and unchanging call of love unto good. And they KEEP themselves locked there for all eternity.

Lvka said...

They torture themselves and refuse to stop.

Bronxboy47 said...

Oh give it a break, Lvka. You keep spouting bible verses as though they answer the points I've just raised. And you keep ignoring the fact that a person dead in his sins hasn't the will to call upon the name of the lord.

Winston Smith said...

cipher/o'connor...I didn't say he wasn't a REAL professor.

What I suggest is that he WASN'T A PROFESSOR AT ALL!

Now, I could be wrong.

Simply show me the proof!

Should be simple enough.

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

"They torture themselves and refuse to stop."

Sound like these folks are pretty sick and in need of healing, not eternal damnation.

Bronxboy47 said...

And who is responsible for the creation of creatures who are susceptible to becoming so deranged that they refuse God's grace? Who is responsible for allowing such a possibility? Who gave the "go ahead" for such a scenario?

Yeah, it's on them alright. I swear, your Christian callousness is mind boggling.

cipher said...

God didn't force Himself upon St Paul: the Pharisees also knew that He has risen, since the pagan Roman soldiers had no stake in the internal Jewish dispute over Jesus' identity, and as such were reliable witnesses of the event -- yet they still didn't confess Him to be the Son of God.

Oh, that is such frakking nonsense. Lvka, I'm a Jew (although not a believing one), and I'm calling you out in public - you are full of bullshit. You have absolutely no idea as to what you're talking about. You're making it up as you go along, either because you're terrified that Bronxboy may be right, or because you're in such a profound state of delusion that you're simply unreachable.

Bronxboy is correct - you aren't arguing, you aren't defending your position and you sure as hell aren't offering anything new. All you're doing is spouting Bible verses to reassure yourself. It's all you can do.

If anyone is interested, here is a transcript of a talk given by a Louis Feldman, a professor of history at Yeshiva University in New York, in which he explains how the Biblical account of Jesus' trial and the charge of blasphemy which supposedly brought it about cannot be historically accurate, as they contradict Jewish law.

The Pharisees did NOT believe that he had risen (it may very well be that no one at the time did, if he even existed at all). You are a liar, or delusional, or both.

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

Not to overwork an analogy, but you would have made a perfect concentration camp guard with your ability to blithely justify that which is patently unjustifiable.

cipher said...

cipher/o'connor...I didn't say he wasn't a REAL professor.

What I suggest is that he WASN'T A PROFESSOR AT ALL!


Winston, you're too pathetically stupid even to understand a wise-ass jibe.

Now, I could be wrong.

Simply show me the proof!

Should be simple enough.


I don't believe Jesus rose from the grave.

Show me the proof! (And I don't mean your changed life, or the two-step of your favorite apologist, or the warm fuzzy-wuzzy feeling you get when you think about how much he loves you.)

Should be simple enough.

Winston Smith said...

In other words...he was never a Professor.

Nice try on John's part, but no cigar!

cipher said...

You're an incoherent fool.

Do yourself and the rest of humanity a favor - don't speak.

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

(I can quote scripture too.)

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that (faith) not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.
--Eph 2:8

Faith in God is impossible for a person dead in sin. It must be imposed from without. Otherwise a man could boast about how willing he was to accept God's grace. Paul is pretty specific in preaching against that idea. Salvation is entirely of God. Man can claim no credit.

So were back where we started, at the dawn of creation with God simply shrugging his shoulders over the fact that the vast majority of his creation will reject him and will end up in hell without his direct intervention. Tough shit. Win some, lose some. Just another day in paradise.

Winston Smith said...

Ah, cipher has no answer and falls back on name calling, insults, and demands that I remain silent.

Q.E.D.

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

God's philosophy appears to be:

Can't make an omelet without...

Well, you know the rest.

cipher said...

Ah, cipher has no answer

To what? You haven't said anything intelligible.

Bronxboy47 said...

Winston,

Let's face it, you are decidedly unanswerable.

Winston Smith said...

Cipher, you have convinced me.

The "Diary of a Beleaver" is not by an ex Professor at all.

As far a intelligble remarks, I am still waiting for one from you. LOL!

cipher said...

Your kind always needs to have the last word, don't you?

What a waste of space you are.

Lvka said...

a person dead in his sins hasn't the will to call upon the name of the Lord.


I was dead and numb in a three months-long unipolar depression... because of my decade-long addictive sin... I cried unto the Lord in prayer from the depth of my being... and after months of Nothingness I was delivered in a matter of a couple of hours.

So, as you can see, your theory doesn't fit the facts. (Thank God!)


Sound like these folks are pretty sick and in need of healing, not eternal damnation

Yes. And the healing comes from God. And they refuse it. (Their suffering is internal & achieved; not externally imposed: that's what I've been trying to tell you all along).


God created beings who chose evil, but He is not the Maker of evil beings: there's a difference there.


And who is responsible for the creation of creatures who are susceptible to becoming so deranged that they refuse God's grace?

Their moms and dads. -- blmae it on their parents too, as if they're the ones responsible! :-)


Cipher,

You may be a Jew, but you weren't a witness or even contemporary of the resurrection (as the members of the Sanhedrin 2,000 years ago).

Nor do I understand why, as a Jew, you take the side of purely-evil men like Hitler [as BronxBoy here seems to do], and despise the one God who made all men in His image, and even prepared a Kingdom of love, peace, and goodness for them from before the world was created..


For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that (faith) not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.

The same God is known for letting the rain pour and the sun shine over the good AS WELL as over the bad: the SAME is with His grace: since He desires ALL men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of Truth, as it's plainly written in Scripture. -- So what's the problem? :-\


Can't make an omelet without [breaking some eggs]

God doesn't break any eggs, nor is is it necessary for any egg to be broken. (That 'eggs' are evil and break themselves is alone their business)

Winston Smith said...

Cipher...

Not always. LOL!

cipher said...

Well, I'm done. I'm unsubscribing from this thread.

John, this is one of the reasons (but by no means the only one) I walked away four years ago. As I told you recently on Ken's bog - I can't understand why on earth you want to waste your time arguing with these imbeciles. The evidence now suggests strongly what I've suspected for decades; they're neurologically impaired and are incapable of change. They are, for all practical considerations, developmentally challenged (fundies, let there be no mistake - yes, I'm calling you mentally retarded), and giving them occasion to view themselves as being on equal footing with you is a fatal error. If you want to continue to waste your time - this is America, knock yourself out. I have better things to do. Even when I have nothing else to do, it's still more worthwhile than this.

Winston Smith said...

Cipher, you said nothing worthwhile, and just spewed the usual insults.

So don't let the door hit you on the way out.

And now, I am going to say the last word.

The last word.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Bronx,

You said:"Prior to Creation, sin existed only as a totally powerless potentiality (if that can be called an existence)."

Sin existed with freewill beings had the potential to exercise their choice against the command of God. That began with angels not men or mankind. it certainly wasn't a "potential" with God either as in him was/is no sin neither can he be tempted with it...so you miss the target of what you're trying to assert here...either way you're wrong.

You said:"The moment God created creatures inferior to himself sin became an inescapable eventuality."

Not true yet again. Sin had and has nothing to do with inferiority, it had to do with choice. In order for God to take away free will from a being created with free will he would in the process do the greatest evil.

The heart of sin is unbelief and that unbelief manifested in many ways, it's simple to understand how man is the progenitor of his own sin and not God. God didn't make you do evil...you as an unbeliever especially should stand up and take full responsibility for YOUR sin...The fact is that the ungodly don't like to be called sinners...a rose by any other name...So it's not about hating humanity it's about taking responsibility for your disposition...

So since God doesn't exist (according to you)...who's fault is it that you sin and do evil? Or is it that you do no evil?

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

Your inability to see what is staring you in the face is almost beyond comprehension. I presented no theory. What I did call your attention to was Paul's pronouncements on the nature of salvation. Go argue with him.

You said:

"So, as you can see, your theory doesn't fit the facts."

A protracted period of depression may seem like death, but it is a far cry from the scope of spiritual death. So you cried out to God from the depth of your being and he delivered you. How does that contradict what I said? According to Paul, with whom you appear to be unfamiliar, you, being dead in your sins, would have been unable and unwilling to cry out to God no matter what you were experiencing unless God first granted you the grace to do so. According to Paul, your anguished cry unto the Lord was made possible only through God's grace. Spiritually dead people don't cry out to God of their own volition. That why they are called spiritually dead. According to Paul, the fact that you cried out to God is a clear indication that God chose you, not visa versa.

Rom 9:18
New International Version (©1984)
Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

New Living Translation (©2007)
So you see, God chooses to show mercy to some, and he chooses to harden the hearts of others so they refuse to listen.

English Standard Version (©2001)
So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.

It follows, therefore, that God has chosen not to save the vast majority of mankind. Got it?

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

See these fundy atheists never read any of these scriptures:

Ezek. 18:21-23~"21-But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. 22-All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live. 23-Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: [and] not that he should return from his ways, and live?"

If they did they sure don't know what they mean...

Ezek. 33:11~"-Say unto them, [As] I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?"

Funny how a fundy atheist with no ability to interpret scriptures that they don't believe to begin with, comment that Christians are mentally challenged...the shoe is certainly on the other foot and the trail of evidence speaks for itself.

And YES, before you formulate opinions on scripture you should study to find out what's being talked about, why and how...it's called contextualizing scripture and comes from an organized and generally accepted interpretive technique called hermeneutics.

Lvka said...

your anguished cry unto the Lord was made possible only through God's grace.


But God gives His grace freely to all people... yet not all embrace it.


That passage speaks about chosing Israelites from among the Nations, not about chosing who will go to Heaven or not. (many Jews perished for their evils or unbelief, while at the same time many Gentiles --like Neheman the Syrian or the people of Niniveh-- were saved) -- and that's what Paul argues: that God has chosen to add the Gentiles also to his chosen people, and who can resist His choice?

Lvka said...

Notice that St Paul says that God ENDURED with MUCH LONG-SUFFERING the vessels of wrath, fitted for destruction (ie, the Gentiles), ... NOT that He destroys them.


Compare this to the other words of Paul, written in the Book of Acts:


Acts 14:15 And saying, Sirs, why do ye these things [worshipping him and Barnabas as gods] ? We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein: 16 Who in times past suffered all nations to walk in their own ways. 17 Nevertheless he left not himself without witness, in that he did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness

GearHedEd said...

@ Lvka and Harvey,

You can't prove the Bible by quoting the Bible.

Circular arguments are null.

Bronxboy47 said...

D.S. Harvey Burnett:

Prior to God's creation of entities other than himself, sin had nothing upon which to gain purchase. Unless you want to argue that God is capable of creating a being equal to himself, you must concede that all created creature are inferior to God. God's "gift" of free will to his creatures was obviously a ticking time bomb. The potential for sin was a built in characteristic of both angels and man. Are you suggesting that God didn't know someone was bound to exercise that option somewhere down the line? And, if not, then you must agree that God chose to set into motion a plan of action which he knows was bound to condemn the vast majority of those not even in their mother's wombs yet to eternal damnation. A creator, immune to sin, creates creatures without immunity, and then condemns them when they succumb to their built-in weakness. You guys amaze me.

shane said...

Lvka.

You were not a witness or even a contemporary of Jesus resurrection either, nor part of the Sanhedrin yourself.

So if you are implying that Cipher has no right to assume his position, then neither do you!

Besides, do you honestly think men who devouted their lives to God such as the Sanhedrin would wilfully try to hush the fact that Christ rose from the dead if they truly believed in Him and knew about it?

What would be the point of that....duh?

Bronxboy47 said...

And you would also have us believe a loving, non-sadistic God would condemn an entire creation to death and eternal suffering, based on the behavior of two dewy-eyed innocents who, being sorely handicapped in the knowledge of good and evil, hadn't the slightest apprehension of the enormity of the sin they were tempted (by God's agent) to commit.

It makes for a dramatic tale to scare children with, but it doesn't make a damn bit of sense.

GearHedEd said...

"fundy atheists..."

THERE'S an oxymoron if there ever was one...

Bronxboy47 said...

"...tempted (by God's agent)..."

what the hell, God allowed it; it wouldn't have happened without his permission; he ought to get the credit.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Bronx,

You state:"And, if not, then you must agree that God chose to set into motion a plan of action which he knows was bound to condemn the vast majority of those not even in their mother's wombs yet to eternal damnation."

The potential for sin was in mans ability to chose, the actualization of that was the result of man's choice. God did however make a way and provision for sin from the beginning:

Revelation 13:8~"And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

You said:"A creator, immune to sin, creates creatures without immunity, and then condemns them when they succumb to their built-in weakness."

As I stated the provision for this was made before man arrived so there's no problem as I see it. If man in his ability to be like God couldn't exercise the moral choice that God made and there was no provision for it you'd have a point but from the beginning there was a provision from eternity.

You still haven't answered the question:

So since God doesn't exist (according to you)...who's fault is it that you sin and do evil? Or is it that you do no evil?

I mean since you want to blame God for being some grand condemner (even though you don't believe he exists) since evil yet exists, where does it come from and more specifically where does it come from in your life?

Lvka said...

GearHedEd,

it's not about "proving" the Bible, it's about *understanding* its content in the first place.


Shane,

it's not about denying Cipher his right to assume a position or the other. (I got the impression that he understood my innitial comment about the unbelief of 1st century Pharisees as an afront to all Jews of all times for not believing in Jesus... or something like that).

The Pharisees believed the resurrection to have been a false miracle, or devilish magic trick, much like the Pharaoh who disbelieved the signs that God worked through Moses, and regarded them as magic. ("with the lord of demons does He cast out demons", etc)

Bronxboy47 said...

D.S. Harvey Burnett:

Sorry, but I simply can't join you traitorous Christians in your betrayal of the vast majority of the human race. You see no problem in forming an alliance with an entity who cannot be called to account for any of his actions, no matter how horrific and gratuitously sadistic (was it really necessary to drown men, women, children and animals in a flood like unwanted kittens? They could just as easily been spoken out of existence.) Christianity is clearly a cover for the passive aggression of repressed sadists.

And no, I don't believe in your God, the anger you perceive is over the poisonous absurdity of your myths and your world view, which has ever been a defiant roadblock to progress of mankind.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

BROX,
Get real, get to something substantive instead of equivocating on the issue...I'll repeat the question differently:

Since (according to you)God doesn't exist...yet you do evil (I say sin) who's fault is it that you do evil? Or is it that you are communicating to all of us that you do no evil?

As I said, I want to know this because you and all other God haters ridiculously condemn God for asserting that YOU are responsible for your sin or evil and further condemn him for setting boundaries...Are you man enough to take the blame for your own actions or are you just another piece of primordial cop-out slime that has no culpability for your own actions and resultant evil that comes as a result of your actions?

I mean I simply want to know.

GearHedEd said...

Lvka said:

"...it's not about "proving" the Bible, it's about *understanding* its content in the first place."

Let me clarify, then...

The things written in the Bible cannot authoritatively support the things written in the Bible.

Its as if you're trying to define "antidisestablishmentarianism" by saying,

"antidisestablishmentarianism is the condition of antidisestablishmentarianism".

It says exactly zero.

GearHedEd said...

"...you and all other God haters..."

Harvey.

Atheists don't "hate god".

It's a stupid proposition for someone who doesn't believe in god to hate something that he believes does NOT exist.

And it's even stupider for you to repeat that misconception when you KNOW it's not the case.

Bronxboy47 said...

D.S. Burnett:

If what I just said wasn't real enough for you, then we are obviously speaking past each other. You're demanding that I take your world view seriously and that I use its vocabulary (sin, etc.). You must be joking.

Bronxboy47 said...

I'm checking out. You race traitors have had enough of my time for one day.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Gear,

You said:And it's even stupider for you to repeat that misconception when you KNOW it's not the case."

I guess even "stupider" is a word but that doesn't come close to addressing my question...Since you have som much to offer, and your friends obviously come up short why don't you take a stab:

Since (according to you)God doesn't exist...yet you do evil (I say sin) who's fault is it that you do evil? Or is it that you are communicating to all of us that you do no evil?

GearHedEd said...

define "evil".

GearHedEd said...

Or better yet, why don't you post some statistics showing how atheists and agnostics are in any way less "moral" than a suitably representative cross section of Christians?

Hint: You can't do it.

GearHedEd said...

I mean, you're the one claiming that atheists are a bunch of "God-Haters, hedonists, and all around evil people. Put your money where your mouth is and prove your false allegations.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Gear,

Just man up and answer the question. You mean to tell me you don't know what evil is?

Then how in the world can you or do you attribute it to God or Christianity in any sense?

I mean my goodness, this isn't rocket science...

GearHedEd said...

I don't believe in "evil", at least not as Christians like to define it.

Shitty things happen in life; lots of those shitty things are the result of other people being douchebags to each other for personal gain.

"Evil", as many Christians I've known define it implies some sort of plan or conspiracy. I don't agree with that.

That being said, I didn't attribute evil to Christianity; so I ask again:

How are you defining "evil"? Until you tell me what you're really asking, any answer I give is going to be replied with some variation of "Gotcha!"

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Gear,

You said:"I don't believe in "evil", at least not as Christians like to define it."

So you don't believe that killing a baby for instance is evil? Or that someone murdering your family or a next door neighbor is evil? i mean that's how Christians define it too, we certainly don't have a lock on the definition...So you think a tornado killing families and destroying homes is NOT evil, or is that evil according to you?

Was john Wayne Gacey evil? how about Charles Manson. Was he evil?

Why is your understanding of evil superior to mine?

You said:"Evil", as many Christians I've known define it implies some sort of plan or conspiracy. I don't agree with that."

What sort of plan or conspiracy? Do volcanoes and earthquakes conspire? Do these serial killers that I mention conspire?

What are you talking about?

You said:"That being said, I didn't attribute evil to Christianity;"

So Christianity IS NOT evil according to you? That's a good starting point and you have no argument with me there.

You asked:"How are you defining "evil"? Until you tell me what you're really asking, any answer I give is going to be replied with some variation of "Gotcha!"

Well there are only a limited amount of options and maybe you should look them up...the lord of this blog wrote a book and at least he got that right about the types of evil...moral evil carried out by moral agents, non moral evil as a result of accident or neglect and natural evil as a result of some natural or uncontrollable disaster...

Now the question is plain. Do you attribute any type of evil to yourself or are you simply a "victim"? I mean you're either evil in part, or not. What are you?

GearHedEd said...

I have to work in the morning but I'll respond tomorrow.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Later,
I'm out 4 the night too.

Gandolf said...

District Supt. Harvey Burnett do think lions are evil? ..What about that out of control wild Rottweiler down the road,do you suppose maybe the naughty dog is become possessed by the devil?.

DSHB said to Bronxboy47.."So since God doesn't exist (according to you)...who's fault is it that you sin and do evil? Or is it that you do no evil?"

Humans are really little different from lions and tigers except for having better use of their brain power and matters of self control etc.Lions who are brought up in the wild, act lots differently to lions brought up in captivity having been taught a more socially adaptive way to co-exist with some other species.

Some humans brought up under some rather wild conditions ,are not expected to always act and behave quite the same way as maybe some other more "civilized" humans might do.

And yet both lions and humans who have been brought up under far more socially acceptable and civilized conditions can sometimes still fall back into very unsocial and uncivilized behaviour.Kind of lots like the call of the wild,that given certain situtions and factors, can end up in absolutely any living being doing things totally outside of its usually observed character.

This of course naturally is a bad thing for continued harmony and capability of our continued co-existence and social networking within our human societies.

Unlike some other beings,humans continually try to learn and use their superior brains to even form rules and regulations, to hopefully help aid in our co-existence with all beings around us.


Evil and the way the words often used by some types of people, seems to suggest the presence some supernatural being/force, thats kind of alive having a personality and presence or life of its own or suchlike ...Thats supposedly always at work trying to ensnare us.

Yet if such a being/thing actually ever honestly existed, why wouldnt we then observe it attacking and possessing many new born babies ?.

Because evil as in the form of supposedly being some identity known as the devil/satan by some ....Is just old ideas of ancient humans who still being ancient man were still ignorant of many things, and still had many things they needed "more time" to learn and completely understand.

Harvardo my funny old fossil friend,yes many people sometimes do both good and bad things.But no, we are not ensnared by any supernatural forces, of either naughty evil devils or even sinless angels or/and Gods .

There are many differing situations and factors which we get subjected to in our lives which can take an effect on us, either for better or at times for worse.Combined with the mixing of our genes etc which likely do sometime help shape some of our personalities as well, which when combined together,all work towards helping form who we might become and how we might behave.

If God and angels were actually a honest force ,we surely should observe faiths displaying themselves as postivily being of some supernatural benefit .Just as surely we should also observe supernatural devil attacking the weak and especially the babies .

But no, we dont actually observe any of this type of evidence at all.

Most everything we observe suggest faith and ideas of Gods actually makes little more difference to any human capabilities of all their possibility of actions, than also does the effects of our societies laws regulations and boundarys of culture, society or tribe .Faith/God has little different observable effect on us, than does culture or society.

So if any supernatural forces actually existed ,then where is any of the obvious observable/measurable evidence Harvey ?.For something that you keep on trying to suggest is so ever present in all our lives ,strangely enough,the evidence seems forever missing! and is always unavailable! to even be honestly observed or measured at all?.

shane said...

Lvka.

If the story of the two Roman soldiers is true, then they reported everything they saw.

What did they see?.......
There was an earth quake, and an angel came down from heaven in dazzling white.
The soldiers fainted in fear.

If they reported this to the Pharisees, would that sound like a devilish trick?

Wouldn't the Pharisees investigate this a little more?

Also, the Pharisees would have recieved this report after the alledged earth quake at Jesus crucifixion, the 3 hours of darkness, the tearing of the curtian at the temple, and the dead saints going into the city and seen by many!

Yet they would have thought the report of Jesus resurrection nothing more then a devilish trick and decided to pay the soldiers to keep it hushed up?

Its obvious that if the Pharisees wanted it hushed, then they did not believe it, and therefore non of the other events at Jesus crucifixion happened either!

That....or the Pharisees were extremely stupid.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Gandy,

All that's good, but you still didn't answer the question and I'll lay it out a little differently for you because you at least addressed the issue.

Jim started off saying that God not only hated sin but hated people too. This was followed by a chorus of fellow associates saying that God basically penalized people for being evil or becoming evil even though he knew they would be (if he were God)

In essence, there's anger directed at God (which they don't believe exists) for 1- allowing people to become evil and 2- not stopping it (I suppose) and 3- for telling us and saying and condemning them (us) for being evil which leads to 4-the idea of God (that Christianity espouses)is some sort of evil by itself because it (and God) calls people evil

Now I ask the question, not about supernaturalism or the devil, do YOU (not you in particular-any of the one's primarily making the complaint) believe that they do evil or have any evil? I ask do any of them think that evil exists at all...

The answer I get is, "What is evil?" or "how do you define evil?"

Now, this is amazing to me because evil is being ascribed to God by the critic and the critic doesn't seem to know what evil is outside of invoking the supernatural or defining it within the context of God and biblical belief.

In short Gandy the answer you gave only says that humans are acting in accordance with their evolved, animalistic nature and without saying it you suggest that people aren't or can't be evil....(at least in a biblical sense which makes no sense because the bible does not ascribe evil any differently than you do)

Now this is a real trip because knowing you, I believe that both of us agree that a thug murdering someone in cold blood or a thief stealing your car is an evil character and both of us would do our level best to bring justice to the situation and put a low life crook away...

BUT it is an inconsistency to penalize that low life criminal for acting out his animalistic nature just because there are a greater amount of people who don't like what they do...In other words, evil, under your rubric, is only evil based on numbers not because the actions are wrong.

So the problem I have here with the God haters is that not many of you have even the courage to apply "evil" to yourselves and do not acknowledge that you have any evil...so are you perfect people with no evil in you? Are you saying as you suggest that there is no such thing as evil?

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Also to address my concern doesn't automatically grant the existence of God.

Let's assume that God doesn't exist for a minute and that Christianity is a myth or legend.

Does evil exist and if so do YOU have any of that...Are you evil in any sense?

Ryan Anderson said...

Harvey; I have animalistic instincts that would be at odds with society if they were to surface and be acted upon.

But evil, no.

Bronxboy47 said...

D.S. Harvey Burnett:

You can stick to your fantasy about atheists hating a God they don't believe in, if it gives you comfort, but that doesn't make the idea less absurd.

My anger isn't directed at some mythical God, it's directed at race traitors like yourself whose allegiance to ridiculous, primitive fantasies has placed them in stubborn opposition to human progress for centuries.

I am not ascribing evil to God. I repeat, I don't believe in your God. What I am calling attention to is the absurd reasoning Christians use to justify the atrocious behavior of their fantasy God.

If I point out the absurdities of Christian theology, in your opinion, that makes me a God hater. Don't be ridiculous. What that makes me is someone who is pointing out the absurdity of Christian theology. You can impugn my motives if you like, but you must realize that I can match your ad hominem slander (that's what it amounts to) with reams of psychological analysis of religion-dependent personalities. I can question your motive for embracing and defending patent absurdities with a haughty conviction that matches your own. But where would that leave us? How about dealing with the specific points I've raised in my posts?

Bronxboy47 said...

D.S. Harvey Burnett and Lvka:


Your fantasy God's behavior, and the convoluted, pretzel-twisting logic used to explain and defend the motivation behind that behavior, is simply too absurd and outrageous for rational people to believe.

There is no difference between Christian theologians and the guys who sit around making up fantasy characters (and assigning them magical powers) for computer games. The amount of logic involved is exactly the same.

Bronxboy47 said...

Correction: The gamers may be even slightly more rational.

Gandolf said...

Hi Harvey the way i see it where many of the mix ups happening over this defining this word evil, is put in the biblical sense to many people, and to me anyway, it seems to be suggesting to be refering to some sort of demonic possession of people.Demonic possession meaning some sort of supernatural entity has taken control.

I think this is where you get people asking you to define what you are actually meaning by the word evil.They are asking do you mean evil in this supernatural demonic sense, or evil as in the meaning of humans being very very extremely bad.

Then you might ask me well what then is this bad or evil in the sense of being very very extremely bad.And i would reply this is a human word we designed to discribe very very extremely unsocial bad habits/behaviour which do cause us humans problems as a group when trying to finds ways we can all try to co-exist together in some sort of order which allows for more harmony and happiness etc.

Evil in this sense is not about supposedly being possessed by any supernatural demonic entity , its just extremely bad behaviour which when classed as evil tends to often be used in discribing somebody that might specially seem totally viod of any thought to care about the happiness and well being of others.Which is why often we human will see mass murders as extremely evil people,because they seem to be totally lacking in any thoughts or compassion etc for others.

I cant speak for other here Harvey but speaking for myself i can honestly say i feel absolutely no hate of any God,because first of all, how can i ever feel hate for something i cant even see good reason to think even actually exists?.

I suspect what people might actually hate or better put, tend to greatly dislike!, is human unfounded faiths in these God-/s and suchlike that over the years have often caused us humans many problems.And what people are suggesting is if this christian idea of a God actually did exist,going by the fact he "created us" 1, with an ability to be evil ,and 2, then decided he`s gonna punish us for it if 3, we dont see enough evidence to believe in him etc

Well that idea being a idea of God suggests that if this God was "actually" real, then he would surely be kind of evil in the sense, he created us in a way fully knowing we could/would quite likely make a great balls-up of the whole plan ...and then to top it all off when we do is gonna punish US ? for it.

Now i have no reason to go hating any God because i happen to think these ideas of Gods is just early ideas of man passed down to us through time from the dark ages, from a time back when even every earthquake! and every lightning bolt! and suchlike!, to those people back then with no better way at the time to understand, seemed to them like it also must have very supernatural factors about it too.

And when you think of these early people being able to considder a God who might likely throw linghtning bolts and earthquakes at us as some sort of punishment for not enough worship or whatever,then you can get a glimps into imagining and starting to see how these same folk might easy have thought it actually quite possible, a God might exist who would 1, "create" us as possible failure types ,and then 2, also go and punish us for it if we didnt show worship and faith etc.

You asked..."Does evil exist and if so do YOU have any of that...Are you evil in any sense?"

Ohh yeah look Harvey im a total shocker!....No hopefully not ..just jiven with ya ...I do try to do my best ..Am i perfect? no very far from it...Do i murder or rape or steal from people ?,no thankfully not ..I considder myself lucky to have been given the chance to have been amongst a group of humans who all showed some love and caring attitudes .And taught me how this could best work so we all tended to get along a lot better together in a group.

But sadly not everyone gets that same chance.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

So Ryan, what you are saying is that if you feel inclined to go next door and bash in the neighbors head for whatever reason that's not evil?

Is that right?

What is it then?

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

A Bronx Tale,

Which best describes your commentary...you said this: it's directed at race traitors like yourself whose allegiance to ridiculous, primitive fantasies has placed them in stubborn opposition to human progress for centuries."

Do you even know any history? Modern science and all the inventions we enjoy today were birthed out of religion, by the religious and persons seeking to obtain the truth and eviden trail that GOD left within creation. If that evidence stood against popular thought so be it...In fact if you've ever been sick and been to a hospital or Dr's office for treatment it was because of RELIGIOUS intervention in helping humanity not atheism or agnisticism...in fact all atheism has done is LEACH on Christian ideas and values for ages like a big ole blood sucking tick...Interventions in nation building humanitarian efforts etc...all birthed by the CHURCH...Like I said before get real...

You said:"I am not ascribing evil to God."

That's one of the only few things you said that could be considered to be correct

You said"If I point out the absurdities of Christian theology, in your opinion, that makes me a God hater."

No you ARE a God hater...like I said about a rose...you display all the classic characteristics of a person filled with hate...anger (which you admit) over them that believe in God and accusations which are only based on your sense of subjective morality...what is that? NOTHING.


Then you said:"How about dealing with the specific points I've raised in my posts?"

1- You haven't raised any points and 2- you haven't attempted to answer the question I posed directly to you...

Is there a such thing as evil and if so do you have evil? Then how do you reconcile your overt anger, animalistic impulses as these have described? What are those things?

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

What you need to do is read your god's book (Why i became An Atheist~Loftus)..on about page 228 where he begins to outline the problem of evil...

So far all you guys have done is destroy one of the strongest arguments for atheism by claiming that the evil doesn't exist in any other form but a meta-spiritual form...

You god argues this however:"That is given the quantity of evil in our world, it is improbable that a good, all powerful God exists."[Loftus Is delusional, Why I wanna be an atheist pg. 234]

I've never seen such a crowd so willing and eager to destroy Christianity that in the process they bolster Christianity and destroy their own arguments in one fell swoop...Then nobody seems to have the nerve to call, murder, violence, hatred etc evil in this section of the commentary

WOW!!! This has been enlightening!

Ryan Anderson said...

Harvy; it all comes down to how you define words. When you define evil, there is, I'm guess, a metaphysical component to it.

I would just use it as a synonym for "intentionally harmful"

Gandolf said...

Harvey said..."So far all you guys have done is destroy one of the strongest arguments for atheism by claiming that the evil doesn't exist in any other form but a meta-spiritual form..."

Well get a load o this Harvey,we see absolutely no observable evidence of likelhood of any existence of supernatural demonic forces at work at all .So yes we can only conclude at this stage it doesnt really seem likely that supernatural devilish forces exist ...Hence evil (bad) is only what you class for us as the meta-spiritual form.

You had said to Bronxboy..."Do you even know any history? Modern science and all the inventions we enjoy today were birthed out of religion, by the religious and persons seeking to obtain the truth and eviden trail that GOD left within creation. If that evidence stood against popular thought so be it..."

Huh?? ...You say religious people created science seek for the "truth" etc ,and yet then you go and give us non "faith" believers the nasty priestly dissing, for simply saying we (honestly) dont "observe" any "evidence" of the existence of any supernatural forces at work that might then be thought as possibly being connected to demonic possession .

Would you have been a little happier if we fibbed??.

Make up your mind Harvey what is it you want for, the "truth" like you tried suggesting, or is all more honestly a matter you want to hear only that what matches your faith ?.

You cant have it both ways if the evidence dont actually match the science method.

You said ..."I've never seen such a crowd so willing and eager to destroy Christianity that in the process they bolster Christianity and destroy their own arguments in one fell swoop...Then nobody seems to have the nerve to call, murder, violence, hatred etc evil in this section of the commentary

WOW!!! This has been enlightening!"

Now dont go getting so freaking upset ,you`ll do yourself a hernia.And turn into a funny fossil that will damn near scare the legs off a plurry tiktaalik.

Of course we atheists/agnostics think murder violence, hatred etc is evil as in being very nasty and frightfully bad and all the rest of it .....But we just dont connect that to the existence of evil in the sense of being a matter of some type of supernatural demonic type possession like you might like us too.

Why dont we?

Simply because by use of some very simple scientific type method the outcome suggests, there is actually absolutely no evidence at all available that we can observe, to suggest such a thing is at all even likely.

Faith is just not enough Harvey .If it was why would humans have created science.

Now come on repentttttt for dissing us non believers for simply being honest about that what we observe .And i promise ill put a good word in for ya to the atheist gods so you are forgiven.:)

Bronxboy47 said...

D.S. Harvey Burnett:


Your last reply to my posts was so spectacularly ridiculous this is the only reply it merits.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Gandy,

You said:"we see absolutely no observable evidence of likelhood of any existence of supernatural demonic forces at work at all."

That has nothing to do with the point Gandy. What you fail to recognize is that your standard for evil only exists as it pertains to God. In other words you only recognize evil as it pertains to an objective standard as your standard is only subjective...I mean look at it...what you and I would hail as evil looking at the acts of Charles Manson, Ted Bundy etc...some call action that are only "intentionally harmful"??? What the heck is that???

You mean that a person can cut off another head or kill them indiscriminately and it's only considered by the practicing atheist on this board as an "intentionally harmful" act???

FYI, the devil doesn't make a person do everything they do, he is not omnipresent nor omniscient so come off the strawman argument for a minute, that has nothing to do with the convo...We're talking about humanity and what you call it when you see these things...so far I'm not too impressed. I think you guys may make good defense lawyers though because nothing seems to have value, the downside is that the victim upon which crimes are perpetuated has no value either under these explanations.

You said:"Huh?? ...You say religious people created science"

Obviously you're in a propagandist fog too gandy...it's common knowledge that all of the enlightenment scientists took their lead from the church. They were church folk. Here are a few:

Antiseptic Surgery ~Joseph Lister
Bacteriology ~ Louis Pasteur
Calculus ~Isaac Newton
Celestial Mechanics ~Johannes Kepler
Chemistry ~Robert Boyle
Comparative Anatomy ~Georges Cuvier
Dimensional Analysis ~Lord Rayleigh
Dynamics ~Isaac Newton
Electronics ~John Ambrose Fleming
Electrodynamics ~James Clerk Maxwell
Electromagnetics ~Michael Faraday
Energetics ~Lord Kelvin
Entomology of Living Insects ~Henri Fabre
Field Theory ~James Clerk Maxwell
Fluid Mechanics ~George Stokes
Galactic Astronomy ~Sir William Hershel
Gas Dynamics ~Robert Boyle

This is just a few of the CHRISTIANS who lent their time and attention to the discovery of science and scientific thought. The diversion of science and Christianity has only been about over 150 years...uhhohh...That's about when darwin claimed that you were a glorified ape...

Christianity has both developed and contributed to the well being of mankind whereas atheism hasn't contributed anything.

You said:"Of course we atheists/agnostics think murder violence, hatred etc is evil as in being very nasty and frightfully bad and all the rest of it"

So those things are a normal part of your existence?

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Here's some more of those Christians who've contributed to humanity while the atheists have been debating over something that they don't believe in for over 2400years:

Genetics ~Gregor Mendel
Glacial Geology ~Louis Agassiz
Gynaecology ~James Simpson
Hydrography ~Matthew Maury
Hydrostatics ~Blaise Pascal
Ichthyology ~Louis Agassiz
Isotopic Chemistry ~William Ramsey
Model Analysis ~Lord Rayleigh
Natural History ~John Ray
Non-Euclidean Geometry ~Bernard Riemann
Oceanography ~Matthew Maury
Optical Mineralogy ~David Brewster

Here's additional readily available information on the subject Gandy since I seem to have to bring some of you up to speed...stiop readin' anti-God propaganda so much and look for real truth:

How do these (scientific) presuppositions follow from core Christian beliefs?

1. The scientists of the 17th Century believed the material world to be good because God had made it good. Genesis 1 ends with the comment, “God saw all that he had made and it was very good” (Gen. 1:31). Moreover, the essential goodness of matter is affirmed by the Incarnation.

2. The founders of modern science believed that the universe is regular, orderly, and rational because God is personal, rational, and faithful.

3. They believed that the order of the universe is contingent because the existence and behavior of the created world depends on the will of a sovereign Creator. The importance of this theological perspective, for science, is that one cannot deduce the behavior of the natural world from first principles. God could have made a world that behaved in any way he wished, so if you want to know how the world does behave, you have got to go and look. Hence, the importance of observation and experiment, an approach that distinguished the science of the 17th Century from the deductive approach of the ancient Greeks.4

4. 17th Century scientists believed that the behavior of the material world is intelligible to human reason because God has made us in his image and given us a mind with which to think.

All these beliefs follow from the Christian doctrine of creation.


A lot of points to debate but none intimidating to Christianity or Christians with knowledge...

Gandolf said...

1.
Harvey the tiktaalik scarer said..."That has nothing to do with the point Gandy. What you fail to recognize is that your standard for evil only exists as it pertains to God. In other words you only recognize evil as it pertains to an objective standard as your standard is only subjective...I mean look at it...what you and I would hail as evil looking at the acts of Charles Manson, Ted Bundy etc...some call action that are only "intentionally harmful"??? What the heck is that???"

Harvey my friend lets get this straight right,we both know early man had some old ways that today we modern humans would not feel comfortable with.Even the stoning of people for instance.

But you cannot tell me it was some God that taught humans its better to live together in caves,and learn to live in harmony in groups and try to learn to love each other more,because besides it giving a good feeling it aids us with being better equiped for our combined survival.

Obviously neither was it god that provided the measure for us to not be involved in stoning people.Your very own bible is testimony itself, to the fact these measure were evolving along with humanity.Because otherwise there is no good reason why human should have used stoning ,as Gods are said to be the same yesterday today and tomorrow.Which is what we would expect of morals passed to humans from Gods measure.

Im picking maybe "intentionally" harmful is reffering to meaning with "human intention" ,and not by any method of being supernaturally infected by some sort of demonic forces.

I doubt you will find that many non believers writing to jails, to try to get all the convicted mass murders set free ,Harvey.We sure are naughty blighters for not popping our coins in collection plates on Sundays ,but not that many of us revert to becoming nasty wickerd Charles Mansons.

You said..." I think you guys may make good defense lawyers though because nothing seems to have value, the downside is that the victim upon which crimes are perpetuated has no value either under these explanations. "

Ooh come on pull me other leg its rubber ...Sheeeze ...You trying to tell me cave men never cared less when tribal members were murdered or raped ...They just sat there going ho hum somebodies screaming in my tribe.Of course humans all have value Harvey, just as apes and cows also find some value in others around them also.Its total rubbish to suggest without "bible books" this world would have been a complete void of any feeling and caring and understanding compassionate nature for others.There is just no such evidence that backs this old outdated propagandarish idea of yours up.Its a old warn out faith tale, another fictitious myth.

Hell even animal tribes show they have some value of those others around them ,have you ever walked into a herd of cows and started some trouble and had many of them turn on you Harvey? ....Pllllease dont be suggesting maybe the cows got their sense of value, from reading your Christian bible or the Koran?.

Seems to me you faithful folk are the ones who would may make jolly good defense lawyers ,im sure maybe you would never ever tire of trying to argue the hind leg off a blinking bull.

You said..."Obviously you're in a propagandist fog too gandy...it's common knowledge that all of the enlightenment scientists took their lead from the church. They were church folk."

Harvey Harvey my friend, i tried to warn ya, you funny old fossil you ,you`ll go giving yourself a hunia if you keep getting yourself all worked up for no reason like that.

Gandolf said...

2,

Yes i did say .."Huh?? ...You say religious people created science"

But you forgot? to add the following bit that said .."Huh?? ...You say religious people created science seek for the "truth" etc ,and yet then you go and give us non "faith" believers the nasty priestly dissing, for simply saying we (honestly) dont "observe" any "evidence" of the existence of any supernatural forces at work that might then be thought as possibly being connected to demonic possession .

Would you have been a little happier if we fibbed??."

Meaning you say Christians envented the idea of science ,yet you then go and diss us for using the type of simple "scientific method" of "trial" and "observation" ,with the forthcoming (available evidence) that suggests to us ...absolutely no supernatural devilish forces seem to be at work or are even so likely to exist.

Do you understand my point now?.You create the method get all proud about enventing it ,yet dont like it when we make use of it.While trying to tell us faithful folk are really honestly only interested in the truth.

Whats the rub with that faith charade? ..Whats the story morning glory?.

You said..."So those things are a normal part of your existence?"

Yes Harvey these things do happen dont they,even you god books havent changed matters and made these things disappear.Hense of course they are sadly a natural occurence , natural in the sense humans are just not perfect, and so sometimes these things have tended to happen.

But ooh no dont you going trying on that faith propaganda that that them means non faithful have absolutely no measure to judge by.

Unless you can prove bible morals came to us totally void of absolutely any human input ,then i suggest humans thought have always been the only measure anyway.And this is backed up by the very fact, we see morals like old idea of stoning, evolving also within your book the bible to where human thought decided stoning was no longer so moral.

Just because "murder violence, hatred" is sadly a normal part of our existence doesnt make it ok or even suggest we have reason to need to put up with it .No as always with use of philosophy etc,we try and think of ways to deal with these matters.

Gandolf said...

Harvey you dont need to prove to me that humans who happened to be still human even if faithful humans,still had lots of worth ...I wouldnt be without lots of funny old faith fossils that exist in this world, for anything.My faith fossil ,evil hating ex cult member hating, family included! .

I still love em to bits too...its the faith beliefs that were not always so very wonderful....Not so much the faithful that followed them.

My friend yes of course many Christians also made many very great and wonderful inputs to our society,after all they were still human ...But many of these folk would have also have made many wonderful and great inputs into our societies if the happened to be following the faith of teapotism or the universal unicorn ...Or were simply non believers.

There are some tribes in this world who had no supernatural beliefs ,but they still possessed many very good traits and compassion for each other.

Harvey i dont deny Christians have often helped ....But they didnt absolutely need the faith to make them help.

It is true faith did help bind people together in a group and so made for stronger nations ,but then the "forceful" need of faith for this supposed "heaven or hell" trip, was the demeaning and devisive factor that wasnt really so good.And the ideas of slavery and racism and gay hate or seperation and excommunication etc ,whether it be through wrong translation! or whatever! ...Either way still cant be denied that its honestly caused us very many problems.

So im just saying please dont take that im somebody who see every single thing about religion that happened, as only being a total curse on us.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Gandy,

Now before I even read your commentary in depth, I want to tell you what you and others have admitted in this...

1- That evil doesn't exist...it's merely a type of behavior that is a bad type of behavior (whatever bad might mean) that is "intentionally harmful"

OK, I say fine, if that's your boat, float it...but the real problem I have is this:

2- You and others more than eagerly say that all that "Intentionally harmful" behavior (that I otherwise call evil) is only a product of your evolutionary past...in other words it's in the genes and tamed by societal norms and psychological and emotional evolution.

Now aside from the fact that there is NO empirical evidence to support your statements, I'll be so kind as not to debate that...but that in conjunction with this is the real trip:

3- God says that SIN is in YOU also and that SIN is responsible for your fallen condition...

UuuuHHHHOoooHHHH!!!

What are we to make of this Gandy? You SAY that evolution is the key and we're all just animals with refrained emotional and psychological moldings right??? It's IN us to do what we do, some better and some worse...

Guess what my friend...that EXACTLY what the bible teaches about SIN and man's CHOICE unfettered choice of it...

WHAT'S the argument about???

Just because GOD said that sin and evil is IN you, you have a problem with it??? that has nothing to do with spirits, demons, etc...in fact God didn't say that it did...it has to do with YOU and all of humanity...

What's the argument now Gandy?

You ADMIT along with the others that your actions are you and you have overcome them by evolution but still never separated from that, that is within...God declares the same thing and you don't like it...

I think what you don't like Gandy is the punishment for this...You don't like the fact that God says that all you have to do to overcome this is believe in something you don't see, (which you do everyday) and trust in what he has communicated and you can not just cope with YOU but you can overcome those harmful issues that you, me and we all recognize that exist...

Whether you call it sin or merely an inconvenience, YOU ADMIT that it exists and the best you can do is tame it, lock it up when it comes out in others and do your best to overcome YOU...

God says it and you have a FIT because it's God and age old wisdom that was here thousands of years before you and I ever lived...

That's the case Gandy...dress it up all you like my friend and it's still the same...you whether by your belief of evolution or not, have something in you and that something exists in this world that NONE of you can do anything about...you ADMIT IT! YOU SAID IT!

But when God speaks, you HATE HIM...what did he tell you though? only what it's taking a lifetime for you to figure out!

Then ya get mad at me for bearing the message...the same as it was 2000 years ago huh??? How much really have we evolved?

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Gandy,

You said:"So i'm just saying please dont take that im somebody who see every single thing about religion that happened, as only being a total curse on us."

Gandy you're a fine exception to the rule and I didn't men to make you feel that way if I did I'm sorry...

As always I appreciate your input! Even when it is in opposition to me as it is on occasion.

shane said...

Harvey.

You said- "God said sin is in you and also responsible for your fall".
????????????????????......according to who Harvey?
You said there is no empirical evidence that evil has an evolutionary decendence?

So what empirical evidence is there that evil comes from a disobedient act against God?.....what empirical evidence is there that the bible is true?......what empirical evidence is there that such a thing as sin exists really exists?

I dont expect you to answer these, im simply trying to point out your hypocritical and presupposing arguments?

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Shane,

There's plenty of evidence for the veracity of scripture so don't try to oversimplify things...I haven't seen an atheist win a debate yet over these things WLC takes everyone I know to school and John's lost 2 debates that he was well prepared for...so unless you think you can do better, I believe my assertions are well supported...

Gandolf said...

1,

Harvey said ..."Guess what my friend...that EXACTLY what the bible teaches about SIN and man's CHOICE unfettered choice of it..."

Well naturally of course its maybe some of what the same type of message is also written in the bible ,after all the bible is but a part of some "humans" ideas also, of how there philosophy suggested they thought maybe some problems they experienced in life continued to be seen as a being able to continue as a real problem.

But i say the bible a book written by men, because thats how i see it as only being, and still see absolutely no reason to think its thought connected to any thoughts of Gods.

Yes its within us is human nature, just as its within tamed domesticated lions who can sometimes be seen to suddenly return to their old wild ways and be dangerous and kill sometimes without reason or warning.

But then i see no reason or evidence that then suggest this thing you go on to discribe as being the "fall".That idea to me is just more philosophy of men, who must have also thought maybe humans and animals were once perfect at some stage.For starters at that stage they didnt know we even shared some common genes with other beings.

You said..." think what you don't like Gandy is the punishment for this"

Well thats your choice.But it dont faze me because i know what my honest reasons are.My reason is the brainwashing long used to manipulated and instill fear of gods and hell etc ,has been damaging and very harmful and whats worse! is not even built on any real honest truth.Its built on ancient myth and guess work and greed of men wanting to impose control on people so they come then reap the gains!.

But its fine ...You keep guessing and dreming im afraid of Gods if it pleases your myth believing fossilized mind :)

I`ll still try my best to still try to like and befriend ya .Even if you try to continue to scare me we pitiful old ancient manipulative brainwashing fear tactics :)

Many kid f**king priests prove God has little effect on the nature of men .And many faithful have proved belief of God does little to make anyone any better ...Proving the point is pretty much invalid anyway.

H..."God says it and you have a FIT because it's God and age old wisdom that was here thousands of years before you and I ever lived..."

No Harvey ...i have a fit when faith heads try telling its actually ideas from Gods, so they can then try to also sneak in their other brainwashing tactics to control and evem rule and devide us etc.

Keep it honest Harvey ,its this deceitful manner and cultish type brainwashing manipulation tactics added to this other knowledge that includes fear ...that gets me angry

Gandolf said...

2,

Harvey said.."you whether by your belief of evolution or not, have something in you and that something exists in this world that NONE of you can do anything about...you ADMIT IT! YOU SAID IT!

But when God speaks, you HATE HIM...what did he tell you though? only what it's taking a lifetime for you to figure out!

Then ya get mad at me for bearing the message."

Yes Harvey we do have some ancient natural "instincts" within us which sometimes some of us find it difficult to manage ,but thats only because just because humans have now become more civilized, it still doesnt change us from still being humans who happen to still not be always so completely perfect.

And no i dont agree we cant do anything about it ...There is many ways we can try to learn how to better manage these problems ...Which is exactly what humans have done ...We have kept on trying to learn what to do to best manage these situations.

However it is not such a proven fact that god faiths are really so very helpful in better "managing" these problems ...If anything infact these faiths have often provided a sense of bigotry and pig headed approach, that then maybe has often done us far more damage!! than good, and also provided a false sense of security where the likes of abusive kid f**king priests can find a place to hide, and just keep on with their molesting abusive manner anyway.

Yes we have this wild nature hidden away in our human nature,but hiding within faith and religion aint nessasily any real good answer.If anything its a cop-out, and a way of escaping and excusing and suggesting we can do these things and real easily be asking Jesus to be forgiven.

Gandolf said...

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said... "Shane,

There's plenty of evidence for the veracity of scripture so don't try to oversimplify things...I haven't seen an atheist win a debate yet over these things WLC takes everyone I know to school and John's lost 2 debates that he was well prepared for...so unless you think you can do better, I believe my assertions are well supported..."

Harvey i happen to have experienced a few faithful folks well tutored and well rehersed in the fine art of preaching ...ermmm i mean debating :)

But this is more about learning specialized manipulation and domineering tactics , that also can be observed to keep many people inclosed and ensnared within abusive cults such as those like the Jim Joneses ....Places where many normal folks find it hard to even imagine how these people will be seen to be convinced into losing any debate put forward against following a cult that many folks can plainly see is headed down a road leading to death by suicide.

So my friend just because well trained folks win many arguements doesnt do anything to prove the message is always correct.

Bronxboy47 said...

D.S. Harvey Burnett:

Your arguments directly connecting scientific achievement with Christian theology are facile at best, reminiscent of Glenn Beck's chalkboard demos at worst. You would be hard pressed to prove that those on your list of eminent, nominally Christian scientists were not successful in their fields despite their religious affiliation, rather than because of it.

One thing is perfectly clear: The majority of today's scientists are not bible believing Christians. The mind your 17th century scientists believed God gave us with which to think has eventually led most scientists to abandon religious notions which prove to be incompatible with scientific data.

And, of course, you conveniently make no mention of the church's long history of interference with and opposition to any scientific theories or discoveries that challenge or contradict Christian dogma.

Your wholesale attribution of the benefits of scientific advancement to the influence of Christianity is ludicrous.

Bronxboy47 said...

D.S. Harvey Burnett:

It is also conceivable that the Enlightenment would have occurred much sooner had early scientists not been handicapped by being forced to operate within the restrictive confines of Christian dogma. In the end, the accumulated force of scientific discoveries led to the liberation of the scientific method from the death grip Christianity had on scientific speculation and exploration.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Gandy,

You said:"...,after all the bible is but a part of some "humans" ideas also," and
"But i say the bible a book written by men,"

Thus a lesson in "inspiration" human agency was involved as God did not dictate or work outside of human experience and understanding...this is a simple but complicated subject but one that is clearly communicated throughout scripture. So in short we would not expect the bible to not have human ideas, however what we find is people who you say are less sophisticated delivering these ideas and concepts clearly thousands of years ago before any so called scientific enlightenment.

Now these ideas have a supernatural construct to them because they address the issue much deeper than you do with a purely naturalist worldview. They address the root and the problem you only look at it symptomatically and from a perspective of naturalism. That's the fault, you don't see the whole picture.

To display this, you recognize the realm of immaterial reality, such as math, logic, emotion and I could go on. You acknowledge the existence of that immaterial reality because you are familiar with it and you "think" it's a development of the natural realm, even though there is absolutely no empirical evidence for it other than your experience with those things...i simply say that there is a world of immaterial reality that you do not know, refuse to accept and cannot perceive.

Those are facts that are inescapable and reasoned persons admit it readily.

You said:"Yes its within us is human nature, just as its within tamed domesticated lions who can sometimes be seen to suddenly return to their old wild ways and be dangerous and kill sometimes without reason or warning."

Now that's both silly and ridiculous. Humans don't "revert" to killing like they fade in and out of some kind of flux statement. Animals display a totally different psychology in most instances and in major ways. Humans don't kill (one another) to eat either. Your animalistic nature argument is not supportable by the evidence. It's kind of tired and certainly false.

You said:"But then i see no reason or evidence that then suggest this thing you go on to discribe as being the "fall".That idea to me is just more philosophy of men, who must have also thought maybe humans and animals were once perfect at some stage."

If so you're faced with another dilemma mentioned above. The dilemma that people of antiquity were not and are not as less sophisticated in their understanding of the world and man in particular. The concept of the fall and what resulted from it was complex and as you affirm the tenets of it hold true today.

Unlike you, people of antiquity understood true freewill and choices. You as a materialist only have an illusion of freewill. it's controlled and honed by genes and environmental pressures on a materialistic level. That's the short sighted fault of materialism that makes no sense. You can't have freewill and genetic control over that will at the same time. That's ridiculous double speak. the biblical authors never present things like that, but by your dissonance you're kinda stuck...are you free in your will or not?

I'll get back with the rest

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka said:

God doesn't break any eggs, nor is is it necessary for any egg to be broken. (That 'eggs' are evil and break themselves is alone their business)

But there would be no evil eggs if God hadn't decided to permit them. Therefore my analogy stands: God obviously considered the cracking of countless millions of eggs (all those souls who would end up in hell) to be an unavoidable step in the omelet he was whipping up.

Bronxboy47 said...

Lvka,

Your fantasy God considers the vast majority of humanity to be expendable in the pursuit of his own gratification. This is a fact. It can't be denied. All that remains are the unconvincing attempts to justify such behavior. And in order to justify it becomes necessary to demonize those who can't bring themselves to accept such nonsense.

In any event, I would certainly think twice about allying myself with any powerful entity that clearly demonstrated such a cavalier attitude towards the race to which I belonged.

As far as I'm concerned the "People of the Book" are all race traitors, Jews, Muslims, and Christians.

GearHedEd said...

Harvey's analysis:

In essence, there's anger directed at God (which they don't believe exists) for:

1- allowing people to become evil and
2- not stopping it (I suppose) and
3- for telling us and saying and condemning them (us) for being evil which leads to
4-the idea of God (that Christianity espouses)is some sort of evil by itself because it (and God) calls people evil.

----------------------------------

Point by point rebuttal (realize that to rebut this it is necessary to presume for the sake of the discussion that God, etc. is a reality, which atheists don't believe):

1) Can't be mad at a non-existent God for "allowing people to become evil", if God isn't a reality.

2) See 1) above; but granting again for discussion: it's YOUR story that God set the drama in the Garden of Eden (which atheists don't believe in either) leading to the fall of man (myth). The story as written shows how man had no choice in the matter; "Jesus was always the plan from the creation forward" according to your Christian buddies; paraphrased says "man had no choice, could not avoid or was 'created' in sin".

3) follows on the discussion in 2). God condemned (cursed) man for playing the part God had set.

4) God isn't evil. "Evil" cannot exist in a non-existent being. At the same time, while Christianity may not be 'evil' in and of itself, atheists believe that it's not TRUE.

--------------------------------

What Christians continually fail to see is that when discussing these topics, it necessarily drags the atheist into the Bible to rebut the outrageous and ridiculous claims Christianity makes. This is in NO WAY admitting that any of the mythology is REAL; it is the Christians who make the extraordinary claims that must supply the extraordinary PROOF of those claims.

And referencing the Bible stories to atempt proving what's claimed in the Bible is a circular argument with NO FORCE or VERACITY.

GearHedEd said...

Harvey said,

"Now I ask the question, not about supernaturalism or the devil, do YOU (not you in particular-any of the one's primarily making the complaint) believe that they do evil or have any evil? I ask do any of them think that evil exists at all...

The answer I get is, "What is evil?" or "how do you define evil?"

------------------------------

The reason I asked is because you seem to want to define "evil" as some sort of supernatural force with a will of its own. If you define evil this way, I have to say that I don't believe in evil as defined, and therefore don't believe that I do any "evil".

If you define 'evil' as being something contrary to the "objective morality" you Christians are always going on about, I have to say that I don't believe that any such thing as "objective morality" exists, either. Morals are always defined by the society they are found in.

If you define 'evil' as wrong actions according to secular laws, then 'evil' reduces to criminal acts. I'm not a criminal, so I'm not evil by this definition, either.

If you define 'evil' as "bad things happening to good people (usually defined as 'Christians', who incidentally do NOT have a corner on "good" by any measure), as for example a tornado wrecking a trailer park and killing a bunch of folks, I don't call that evil, either. It's nothing more than a random occurrence of meteorological phenomena, without will or purpose.

-----------------------------------

Can you see now why some of us asked for a definition? It's not because we don't know what evil is; it's because we need to know how YOU want to define it.

GearHedEd said...

Harvey said,

"So the problem I have here with the God haters is that not many of you have even the courage to apply "evil" to yourselves and do not acknowledge that you have any evil...so are you perfect people with no evil in you? Are you saying as you suggest that there is no such thing as evil?"

----------------------------------

First: Hating a god that I don't believe exists would be evidence of a conflicted state of mind, which I assure you is not the case.

Second, I am not evil, but that says nothing about whether I'm "perfect". It is stupid to argue that "not evil = perfect", Harvey.

If you cling to the common Christian notion of evil as some sort of supernatural force, then I say that "Yes, I don't believe in "evil" by that definition, either".

GearHedEd said...

Harvey said,

"...Do you even know any history? Modern science and all the inventions we enjoy today were birthed out of religion, by the religious and persons seeking to obtain the truth and eviden trail that GOD left within creation."

This is so easy to rebut. Until about the mid 1800s or thereabouts, EVERYONE was religious, whether they wanted to be or not. Western societies were founded around Roman Catholicism NOT ecause there is any inherent truth in Roman Catholicism, but because the Roman Catholic Church COMPELLED it with threats of exccommunication, torture, prison, or death. And things didn't get much better when the Protestant Reformation happened, either.

Ever heard of Project Steve?

GearHedEd said...

Harvey said,

"...Modern science and all the inventions we enjoy today were birthed out of religion, by the religious and persons seeking to obtain the truth and eviden trail that GOD left within creation. If that evidence stood against popular thought so be it..."

Right. Tell that to Galileo, or Giordano Bruno...

GearHedEd said...

Harvey said,

"...Interventions in nation building humanitarian efforts etc...all birthed by the CHURCH..."

Sure. Tell THAT to the Native Americans the Christian settlers wiped out... or all the European colonies around the world that were considered 'savages' or at best 'wayward children', simply because they hadn't been properly "evangelized" yet.

GearHedEd said...

Harvey asked,

"Is there a such thing as evil and if so do you have evil?"

Short answer?

No, and no.

GearHedEd said...

Harvey said,

"...So far all you guys have done is destroy one of the strongest arguments for atheism by claiming that the evil doesn't exist in any other form but a meta-spiritual form..."

Um, no. If there's no god, then the "Problem of Evil" isn't a problem anymore.

If you forgot, the Problem of Evil(TM) was stated most famously by Epicurus:

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"

If there's no god, then there's no "problem of Evil" anymore. It reduces to selfish acts by individuals, random acts of natural destruction, and other assorted phenomena not gerated by supernatural agency.

Bad stuff happens, but that doesn't make the bad stuff "evil".

GearHedEd said...

oops, "generated...

GearHedEd said...

Harvey asked,

"You mean that a person can cut off another head or kill them indiscriminately and it's only considered by the practicing atheist on this board as an "intentionally harmful" act???"

No, it's not ONLY "intentionally harmful", it's ILLEGAL according to secular laws, and can in some places be punished with the death of the offender. But it's still not "evil" in the metaphysical sense.

GearHedEd said...

Harvey said,

"I think you guys may make good defense lawyers though because nothing seems to have value, the downside is that the victim upon which crimes are perpetuated has no value either under these explanations."

That's jumping to unwarranted conclusions. We weren't discussing the victims or their 'value'. Atheists, believe it or not, have morals and values; otherwise we'd be Neanderthals (and incapable of typing).

You insult us, and judge us continually Harvey. Remove the plank from YOUR eye, Pharisee!

GearHedEd said...

Harvey said (and this is one of the dumbest claims yet),

"Obviously you're in a propagandist fog too gandy...it's common knowledge that all of the enlightenment scientists took their lead from the church. They were church folk. Here are a few:

Antiseptic Surgery ~Joseph Lister
Bacteriology ~ Louis Pasteur
Calculus ~Isaac Newton
Celestial Mechanics ~Johannes Kepler
Chemistry ~Robert Boyle
Comparative Anatomy ~Georges Cuvier
Dimensional Analysis ~Lord Rayleigh
Dynamics ~Isaac Newton
Electronics ~John Ambrose Fleming
Electrodynamics ~James Clerk Maxwell
Electromagnetics ~Michael Faraday
Energetics ~Lord Kelvin
Entomology of Living Insects ~Henri Fabre
Field Theory ~James Clerk Maxwell
Fluid Mechanics ~George Stokes
Galactic Astronomy ~Sir William Hershel
Gas Dynamics ~Robert Boyle

This is just a few of the CHRISTIANS who lent their time and attention to the discovery of science and scientific thought. The diversion of science and Christianity has only been about over 150 years...uhhohh...That's about when darwin claimed that you were a glorified ape..."

--------------------------------

All those "scientific discoveries" were made DESPITE Christianity, not because of it. Read YOUR history. Or better yet, read the REAL history, not the propaganda you find in your parish library.

GearHedEd said...

"2. The founders of modern science believed that the universe is regular, orderly, and rational because God is personal, rational, and faithful."

Absolutely wrong! The founders of modern science believed that the universe is regular, orderly, and rational because that's what they OBSERVED in the real world. If you haven't heard, the scientific method rests firmly upon OBSERVATION, not faith.

GearHedEd said...

That those men of science happened to believe in god is incidental to their scienftific pursuits.

GearHedEd said...

Harvey said (with corrected typos and grammar),

"...You SAY that evolution is the key and we're all just animals with [refined] emotional and psychological moldings[?] right??? It's IN us to do what we do, some better and some worse...

Guess what my friend...that EXACTLY what the bible teaches about SIN and man's CHOICE [unfettered choice of it (could have left this part off)]...

WHAT'S the argument about???

Just because GOD said that sin and evil is IN you, you have a problem with it??? that has nothing to do with spirits, demons, etc...in fact God didn't say that it did...it has to do with YOU and all of humanity...

What's the argument now...?

You ADMIT along with the others that your actions are you[rs] and you have overcome them by evolution but still never separated from that, that is within...God declares the same thing and you don't like it..."

---------------------------------

I have a hrd time making sense of this mangled English, but I'll try...

The problem is that Bible thumpers have injected God into this argument, and are now claiming that God came before the argument. It's a FACT that the earth is apx. 4.5 billion (that's NINE zeroes, Harvey, not THREE), and that before men showed up, there were NO GODS.

Man invented god in Man's image, that's why he's such a colossal bastard.

GearHedEd said...

Harvey said,

"I think what you don't like Gandy is the punishment for this...You don't like the fact that God says that all you have to do to overcome this is believe in something you don't see, (which you do everyday) and trust in what he has communicated and you can not just cope with YOU but you can overcome those harmful issues that you, me and we all recognize that exist..."

--------------------------------

And here's the desperate 'threat of eternal punishment' ploy that inevitably comes out when the Christian recognizes that his arguments add up to a huge "FAIL".

GearHedEd said...

And the obligatory,

"...Then ya get mad at me for bearing the message...the same as it was 2000 years ago huh??? How much really have we evolved?"

paraphrased:

"Don't give ME any crap here, *I* didn't say this stuff..."

We'll NEVER evolve past stupidity as long as we keep on clinging to RELIGIONS.

GearHedEd said...

And William Lane Craig is a flippin' eediot if he thinks dinosaurs walked the earth at the same time as men did.

Gandolf said...

Harvey said..."Thus a lesson in "inspiration" human agency was involved as God did not dictate or work outside of human experience and understanding...this is a simple but complicated subject but one that is clearly communicated throughout scripture. So in short we would not expect the bible to not have human ideas, however what we find is people who you say are less sophisticated delivering. "

Yes of course there is much inspiration recorded within the bible Harvey ,but unlike you i see nothing much to suggest any input of the divine nature of Gods in this book the bible.

Harvey you keep hounding me about my suggestion that peope of old lacked some knowledge and sophistication.Would you maybe like to argue that they understood tectonic plate movement? ...Or fully understood what caused tsunami? ...Or understood it was weather patterns that controled weather and drought or floods, and it wasnt gods hand turning a tap for rain or sunshine? ....Do you wish to argue they knew exactly why lightning bolts happened to hit certain people and kill them?.

If you dont wish to argue these things please get off my back ....There is no intended dissing or disrespect intended in admission people of old were still ignorant of mant things ...There will be no disrespect intended in future when we older people also become found ignorant of many things they will also learn in our future.

Its a matter of acepting a simple fact Harvey....And anybody who gets all defensive over acepting the truth of matters ...not only is ignorant but also is in danger of becoming a fool and a idiot as well.

Its a fact Harvey they were ignorant of many important matters! of knowledge about natural elements they did experience, that would then tend to make people far more superstitious inclined.IE: humans that didnt yet understand tectonic plates movement ,naturally were far more inclined to place "the hand of god" involvement earthquakes.

You said .."these ideas and concepts clearly thousands of years ago before any so called scientific enlightenment"

Yes but you forget we didnt need much/any modern science to still be able to study human nature and get some insight and understanding of what sorts of things likely helped shaped their charactor and mannerism .

You try and make it sound like this is something big and extremely surprising , and fail to see that i dont get all worked up and in a big flabber over what i see as nothing out of the ordinary really..Its no biggy that people of old already understood much about the behaviour patterns of humans ...after all they had already been humans living amongst other humans ..studing and observing humans nature and behaviour etc for thousands of years.

Yes of course they already understood much about this subject Harvey.They would have needed to close their eyes and ears and not observe or discuss such matters with their elders and suchlike ...To have been still ignorant of this matter also.

Do you even see many modern day psychologists running around with lots and lots of fancy modern day science equipment Harvey?.

Sure maybe they do have afew extra magical scientific instruments today ...But most learning done in the area of human mannerism is still done by study of many subjects and using the scientific type deduction method etc.

However its very different matter when trying to understand what causes earthquakes,lightning bolts,tsunami,flood/drought etc

And they were IGNORANT in these areas.

And through their IGNORANCE tended to simply ASSERT the likelyhood of involvement of the hand of Gods, in these type issues that they were still far to ignorant to yet understand.

Now lets nail this particular little issue here down a bit Harvey ..So we dont keep fighting about it time after time..Do you or do you not agree with me the ancients were still IGORANT of many of these particular issues?

I will now atempt to reply to the rest of your reply.

Gandolf said...

Harvey said..."Now these ideas have a supernatural construct to them because they address the issue much deeper than you do with a purely naturalist worldview."

Well Harvey thats your opinion.Its only assertion, as its yet to be proved as actually being valid and factual.

We know for a fact ignorance of human minds can create superstitious thoughts, its one of the reasons many children still often fully believe a monster does live under their beds,and will have trouble sleeping without a light.

Now its actually scientific method which pretty much proves its a fact no monsters sleep under childrens bed.Yes maybe that is my worldview, and to be honest at present im actually quite happy sticking to it.

Now you may still dwell on the supernatural thought if you wish Harv ,and maybe even wonder if monsters do sleep under beds.

Thats your choice to make.I cant stop you!, but i can suggest it seems very silly !!.

Now because i know minds of children can believe in monsters under beds ,i get some real understanding of how adults thinking about the unknown and lacking in enough knowledge to understand ,might have had wandering minds that might dwell upon ideas of asserting Gods to try and answer that what they yet couldnt understand.

So its not just a matter of worldview like you try to suggest, because its actually backed up by other phenomenon we do observe.

Harvey said..."To display this, you recognize the realm of immaterial reality, such as math, logic, emotion and I could go on. You acknowledge the existence of that immaterial reality because you are familiar with it and you "think" it's a development of the natural realm, even though there is absolutely no empirical evidence for it other than your experience with those things"

Math ,Logic and emotion have all been clearly displayed and can be easily observed being used every single day of our lives .We can use scientific type method to measure the effects whenever and wherever we wish.

Harvey you get into the realm of trying to use mumbo jumbo and lots of rhetoric when you try comparing these things with the idea of Gods and existence of supernatural forces .You become lots like a witch doctor rattling chicken bones. and then connecting a future healing of some sickness within the tribe, with his witch doctorism and matters of whats unknown.

Dont you see this Harvey? .Dont you see the big difference between the matter of "math ,Logic and emotion" which can be freely used and observed by absolutely everyone , and your God of the gaps whos ever lost in the dream world, never availabe to be publically measured, not obvious to most people etc

Dont you see the very big difference here Harvey? .Please tell me you do see there is actually something very different.If you dont see that there is actually a very big difference,well i guess i must realize the gap between yours and my thoughts, is actually far! much larger than i had previously thought.

You said.." simply say that there is a world of immaterial reality that you do not know, refuse to accept and cannot perceive.

Those are facts that are inescapable and reasoned persons admit it readily."

There may very well be this world you discribe that i cannot yet perceive ,just as there may also be monsters living under beds.But without some real evidence being presented and measured and proved,it would be both wrong and utterly stupid and ignorant for me to simply accept such an idea.It would simply be dangerous .It has! been proved! dangerous as history records and reminds us! with witch killings and matters of people who even thought up ideas of sacrificing humans in hope of better controling future parts their lives.

You dont like that i wont simply follow your faith assertions .Just as i dont like and im even a little disgusted in people like yourself who follow and continue to promote ideas which have caused us human so much harm even suicides and death.

Gandolf said...

Harvey said..."Now that's both silly and ridiculous. Humans don't "revert" to killing like they fade in and out of some kind of flux statement. Animals display a totally different psychology in most instances and in major ways. Humans don't kill (one another) to eat either. Your animalistic nature argument is not supportable by the evidence. It's kind of tired and certainly false."

Harvey sometimes some humans do fade in and out of reverting back to their uncontrolled wild side.In fact humans have murdered and then spent a number of years trying to not murder again , but later reverted back once again ...In which this time they might get nabbed by the police.

Humans have also been known to kill and eat people both in the past history and sometimes a few cases of it still happens now from time to time.That guy Darmer? in the USA for instance.How could you so blindly overlook this fact?

You need to drop your faith Harv, i really do think maybe it tends to confuse your judgment far to often and to much .Just a friendly tip!

Just asserting my opinions as being "tired and certainly false" does nothing to prove it a fact....Specially when what little evidence YOU OFFER is so obviously utterly WRONG

Hell Harvey im not sure if the states is behind in learning ..But over here in the NZ its a well known fact some humans have a very big problem with fading in and out of the problem of re-offending in our society.....Our jails over here have created special devisions that are designed to try to deal with this particular problem thats now a WELL KNOWN fact.

Gandolf said...

Harvey said..."If so you're faced with another dilemma mentioned above. The dilemma that people of antiquity were not and are not as less sophisticated in their understanding of the world and man in particular. The concept of the fall and what resulted from it was complex and as you affirm the tenets of it hold true today."

As ive explained ancient human of old times its a fact were very ignorant of many things they still had yet to learn.Ignorant of things such as properly understanding what actually caused earthquakes,what caused lightning bolts,what cause tsunami,what caused floods and drought etc

This inturn severely hampered their ability to make proper infromed knowledgable calculations and decisions of certain matters. For instance without the modern knowledge that was needed to make informed conclusions ,they simply ASSERTED ideas of gods and supernatural forces being involved in the formation of earthquakes,tsunami,lightning bolts,floods and droughts etc

This was a very grave and foolish mistake to make.This was akin to a child asserting that monsters do live under the bed.

While some of the concept or tenets of the fall may even still hold today,the idea of talking snake and involvement of gods and forces of the supernatural etc ,have now days become rather very much lots like the ideas of a child who is involved in conjuring up ideas of monsters that live under their beds.

We modern humans have been able to do much more study and modern scientific evaluation of all these matters Harvey.We have been able to look far far further into matters of archeology and discovered many more things and will continue to discover much more.

Oh yes Harvey,while ancient people had learned many things.Its still a FACT they WERE still very much ignorant and lacking in their understanding of many things about the world and even the universe.Just as we are likely to be ignorant at present ,of many more things we will very likely still learn in the distant future.

However this is not to say modern man havent actually also become a little ignorant and lacking of understanding some things,that the ancient folk actually understood.For instance very sadly much olden day technology has often been forgotten and lost, things like maybe how to create certain products with the art of blacksmithing ...Or maybe what other things can be used for dyeing cloth .etc etc

Gandolf said...

Harvey said..."Unlike you, people of antiquity understood true freewill and choices. You as a materialist only have an illusion of freewill. it's controlled and honed by genes and environmental pressures on a materialistic level. That's the short sighted fault of materialism that makes no sense. You can't have freewill and genetic control over that will at the same time. That's ridiculous double speak. the biblical authors never present things like that, but by your dissonance you're kinda stuck...are you free in your will or not? "

Harvey please explain how you suggest ancient humans could have honestly understood all matters about freewill and choices etc ,when they actually knew very little at that ancient time, about such important matter as the effect of genes and the actual effects of environmental pressures etc ?.

You really dont make very good sense, when you try suggesting/asserting these ancient people could have been informed more than we are today.

Nobody stated genes will have total control over peoples free will ,however its now a well know fact our genes can have an effect on our mannerism .For instance science suggest its likely schizophrenia is partly genetic ,even if its not actually all about genetics.

Why is it many of you faithful will gladly accept sciences conclusions about genetics which suit you,for instance if it helps put your daughter killer in jail...Yet you will bitch about it and stall as much as possible, if it might worry your faithful worldview?
And yet here you are a faithful accusing me of double speak? .Man you faithful lot show plenty of double standards ! .While you will bitch at scientists if your faith dont like em, should your faith children suddenly get sick, there you are... your running to grip and grab and take from the medicine that the scientists will provide for you.

You said.."You can't have freewill and genetic control over that will at the same time"

Well Harvey please do try explaining schizophrenia for us ,from the magical faith point of view ...Because you said we cant be effected by genes and have free will at the same time ..right?

According to the great "faith science" of Harvado ..."That's ridiculous double speak"

What do you suggest as a cure for schizophrenia ....Ancient intelligence ...Prayer and shoving water down the victims throat to rid the demons?

You said..."I'll get back with the rest"

Oh dear ..My giddy aunt ...Thanks for the warning ...i shall look forward to being enlightened some more by faith the practices

My all the gods of the universe come and quickly bless your cotton socks

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Gandy,

Your attempt to soft-sell the sophistication of the ancients is the problem and why i, as you say "got on your back". Now you say on one hand these people didn't know things because of their ignorance and I see that they knew and described some quite advanced comcepts that only modern science has been able to reveal.

Now, I understand the argument of scientific advancement, but your objection is that they didn't need God or revelation to know what they knew or what God communicated through scripture...I think the opposite is true. There were and are some advanced concepts communicated that man could not and did not simply make up. The bible certainly doesn't address many concepts in detail, neitehr was it intended to, however what concepts it does address it does so cleaverly and within the age of scientific enlightenment we see it...

Such concepts include a round or circular earth (which atheists fight tooth and nail to say that circular doesn't mean round-ridiculous) An earth with a canopy of water called an atmosphere. In my son's 7th grade science book guess what they said the atmosphere consists of? Water. Atheists fight tooth and nail to make the canopy and God dividing the waters from the waters, something other than what the bible describes...So what I'm saying is that there are many concepts that men did not know, could not investigate and was not aware of communicated within the pages of the bible through various mean as God spoke.

So what I'm saying is that your argument that there is nothing in the bible that man could not have written appears true to a certain extent on some subjects, but in context and in day and time is certainly more than false.

That's why, "I'm on your back" old fossil friend!

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Gear
You said:”1)Can't be mad at a non-existent God for "allowing people to become evil", if God isn't a reality.

Obviously you are though, because you spend a great deal of time and energy trying to convince us that something you don’t believe exists, doesn’t exist.

You said”2) See 1) above; but granting again for discussion: it's YOUR story that God set the drama in the Garden of Eden (which atheists don't believe in either) leading to the fall of man (myth). The story as written shows how man had no choice in the matter; "Jesus was always the plan from the creation forward" according to your Christian buddies; paraphrased says "man had no choice, could not avoid or was 'created' in sin".

Man always had a choice. The choice was outlined, “don’t do and live, do and die” that’s called choice. Now under your materialist rubric NO choice exists. You only have a response to genetic processing and programming (however that programming came to be is another story)

You said:”3) follows on the discussion in 2). God condemned (cursed) man for playing the part God had set.”

God condemned man for unbelief. Man condemned himself because he didn’t chose not to believe.

You said:”4) God isn't evil. "Evil" cannot exist in a non-existent being. At the same time, while Christianity may not be 'evil' in and of itself, atheists believe that it's not TRUE.

So what does that mean. That’s a statement of faith…Atheist “believe”…OK…when it’s me and a “belief” you harp and holla, when it’s you we’re supposed to just say ok? Yea right.

You said:”..WAY admitting that any of the mythology is REAL; it is the Christians who make the extraordinary claims that must supply the extraordinary PROOF of those claims.

Bertrand Russell’s requirement for “extraordinary proof” is no more powerful now than it was then. Proof is proof period. This is really silly. It basically states that something that a person is unfamiliar with requires one to have a more abundance of “proof” than something that a person is familiar with or considers less extraordinary…this is a logical fallacy and unwarranted. Horrible argument either way. Lance walked on the moon, What more evidence did you get regarding that claim than anyone else in the world, yet you believe it don’t you?

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Gear,


Regarding evil you said:”The reason I asked is because you seem to want to define "evil" as some sort of supernatural force with a will of its own.”

False. Christians don’t even believe that of evil. It’s not a metaphysical or meta-spiritual force. So I certainly haven’t suggested that. That’s what you superimpose on my statements. I outline 3 type of evil similar to god Loftus, 1-moral evil, 2- non-moral evil and 3- natural evil. None of those have to do with a force.
I have consistently asked when a murderer murders is that evil? You have no answer and the only other answer you render is “No, that’s just intentionally harmful behavior” Obviously you don’t grasp this area so that’s ok…we’ll leave it alone.
What this proves is that if you don’t know what evil is you certainly can’t say that anything a Christians says or does or that any belief that a Christian might have is evil. That’s the point. Those who don’t know what evil is can’t judge it to begin with. So, toward you, my point is proven by your lack of understanding. FYI; Evil doesn’t have will and does not need purpose to be evil. That’s confusion.

You said:”Morals are always defined by the society they are found in.”

Who’s morals? Only the most domineering? How is that decided? Where is this repository and how does society come to a general consensus? Show me where this statement is in the least bit true.

Concerning whether it’s evil for a person cut off another’s head you said:” No, it's not ONLY "intentionally harmful", it's ILLEGAL according to secular laws, and can in some places be punished with the death of the offender. But it's still not "evil" in the metaphysical sense.”

This is what I mean by ignorance and lack of understanding. Just PLEASE don’t ever run for political office or be a police officer with your jacked up sense of what evil is. In fact you might as well fold your tent and stop complaining about anything. It’s all relative to how you feel and what legislature has in law…that’s sad and STUPID!!! 4-real!

Here’s a little problem that you have. You said:” You insult us, and judge us continually Harvey. Remove the plank from YOUR eye, Pharisee!”

Ooh don’t worry, it’s just “intentionally harmful behavior” and really doesn’t matter does it? In fact where is the code that states that I shouldn’t be more judgmental and insulting? (If I am at all) Where is the standard…Is it yours or you??? What the heck is that? Who exalted you and made you moral king of the world? What does “Pharisee” supposed to mean according to you? Does that mean something bad or negative? Then how could that be, because according to you it’s certainly not evil because evil doesn’t exist…therefore in your sad world and epithet I or anyone throws at you is only an inconvenience and since it’s only based on some societal standard and society hasn’t sent me a letter saying that anything I say is wrong, then I’ve done a good thing and should feel good about doing it even more right???

Yea right! That’s YOUR twisted logic at work and that’s how it ends up…societal relativism or amoralism is STUPID! Oops there’s another insult or is it a compliment???

BTW Gandy, do you see this nuts arguemnts? He wouldn't hold that child molesting priest, that you so eloquently mention, was evil...in fact according to him a killer could kill, rape and molest all the children he could and it would on be only an "intentionally harmful" act...not evil according to him.

Tell me you don't be that garbage too my friend? His arguemnts are worthless!

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Gear,
You said:Man invented god in Man's image, that's why he's such a colossal bastard.”

Now, you just finished telling me that man is not evil neither are the things he does evil, only “intentionally harmful”…I suppose the definition of man’s potential problem increases to “colossal bastard”. What is that and who holds that standard? If man (as you say) invented God, then man is a colossal bastard! Does that apply to you also, or just the rest of us in the world?
So let me get this straight, God said, he loves man to come and deliver him from his sins and you say man is a colossal bastard? Sounds like to me then the concept of deliverance shouldn’t be found in the renderings of the mankind colossal bastard’s that you are referring to.

How did these “colossal bastards” come up with any such idea of deliverance, propitiation, or any of those things? I’m just asking since all humanity according to you is a “colossal bastard”…
Gandy, you “colossal bastard” that doesn’t sound like a person who believes that every relationship should be valued because this life is all we have. It sounds like a “colossal bastard” to me…LOL-LOL-LOL!!!

So far as dinosaurs walking with men, ooh now you don’t believe in science huh? Isn't that convenient?

Bronxboy47 said...

D.S. Burnett:

What could possibly be more immoral than coming up with a creation plan that includes the inevitability of countless millions of creatures ending up in eternal torment--and then going ahead with it when nothing is compelling you to do so? On the one hand, you have God continuing on in his own personal bliss, no one suffering anything, and on the other, you have a hell bursting at the seams with tormented creatures your creation plan has deemed expendable. Which would a truly loving and compassionate God choose?

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Gandy,
You said:”Math ,Logic and emotion have all been clearly displayed and can be easily observed being used every single day of our lives .”

No Gandy you’re wrong. There is no empirical proof for any of these things. They are immaterial realities with no empirical proof and no extension in time and space. In fact so far as logic is concerned you simply have to ‘accept’ out of hand it’s tenets as logic cannot be proven by any method scientific or otherwise.

You said:”We can use scientific type method to measure the effects whenever and wherever we wish.”

Wrong again my friend. SM does not apply to these things in proof, only in measuring the affect of things after the fact.

You said:”Harvey you get into the realm of trying to use mumbo jumbo and lots of rhetoric when you try comparing these things with the idea of Gods and existence of supernatural forces .You become lots like a witch doctor rattling chicken bones. and then connecting a future healing of some sickness within the tribe, with his witch doctorism and matters of what’s unknown.”

No Gandy it’s like this, you demand a standard of such high value and accuracy when it comes to God, why should I demand that you be any less exacting? When we hold to a standard of accuracy, then you say it’s “witchcraft and voodoo”. How come it’s not “witchcraft and voodoo” in your disagreement? I mean I don’t value your worldview. Why and by who’s standards is it better than mine?

You said:You don’t like that i wont simply follow your faith assertions .Just as i don’t like and I’m even a little disgusted in people like yourself who follow and continue to promote ideas which have caused us human so much harm even suicides and death

I can trace YOUR world view as being responsible for depression and suicides. I don’t think what you believe helps society and there’s proof of it.

So if you’re disgusted because I spread a message of accountability, hope, love and exemplify that by my life and lifestyle, then how should we feel about the rest of you “colossal bastards”?-LOL-LOL-LOL!!! Y’u-know I couldn’t pass that one up…Gandy he said since you invented God that you’re a colossal bastard” LOL!!!

That’s one for the ages!

Ryan Anderson said...

Harvey "What is that and who holds that standard?"

We do, collectively.

Ryan Anderson said...

Harvey; "I don’t think what you believe helps society..."

Does that matter?

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Bronx,

Now THAT'S an argument with some teeth. Did God have to create anything at all? Obviously not. then why did he if he knew 1- that men would fail and 2- that any of them would suffer eternally because of it?

Now these are deep and what a real argument should consist of instead of calling human "colossal bastards" and claiming that murder is an "intentionally harmful"...look placing plastic on a toilet seat in the middle of the night is an "intentionally harmful" act to whatever degree...anyway Sheese!

First Bronx, if God hadn't have made provision for failure, I would agree with you. But he did. Secondly, if he hadn't have revealed himself to us and taken the repsponsibility upon himself for our freedom, I would agree with the second part, but God did also.

Unlike any pagan myth, the God of the bible took our weight upon himself and moved and demonstrated his acts in real time...so IF you say he placed "failure" there, he didn't stop and most certainly took it back, and the very creation reveals his glory as a witness of that.

Only when it's viewed through materialism and unbelief you can't see it at all. That's my contention.

So your point is good and more though provoking than much of the other commentary so far...

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Ryan,

Where is this "collective" standard? Is it in America, Russia or Great Britian? Is it in Central America?

Where is this mythical and collective consortium and distributor of truth right and moral standards???

Mattering works both ways now doesn't it? Why does what you 'believe" matter more than what I do??? Who's collective standard is that and who instituted it, I didn't get to vote on that one, when did that "air law" pass?

Bronxboy47 said...

D.S. Burnett:

I presented two choices.

Choice A: God continues on in eternal bliss, under no compulsion to create anything.

Choice B: God develops and acts upon a plan of creation he knows will including the inevitable loss of most of his created beings to an eternity of torment. Mind you, not merely the possibility of such a loss, which would be irresponsibly wicked in itself, but the inevitability of such a loss!



You passed right over the crucial question: Why would he choose plan B knowing full well that even his provision for "failure" (not quite sure what you mean by that. Whose failure, what failure"?) would allow countless millions to slip through the cracks.

Ryan Anderson said...

Harvey said "Where is this "collective" standard? Is it in America, Russia or Great Britian? Is it in Central America?"

Yes.

Harvey also said "Why does what you 'believe" matter more than what I do???"

It doesn't. But what I meant was how helpful a belief system is to the functioning of a society in no way speaks to the validity of that belief system.

Bronxboy47 said...

God, Contemplating Creation

God: I am under no compulsion to do this, and If I do it millions upon millions of my created beings will end up in hell for all eternity. Ah, what the hell, let's do it!


This is the sort of being Christians would have us believe is Good.

Bronxboy47 said...

The movie Forbidden Planet nailed it when they came up with the idea of the monster From the id. I can't think of a more accurate description of the Christian God.

Bronxboy47 said...

What boggles the mind is that not a single detail of the Christian cosmic drama was necessary; not one suffocated infant, not one disemboweled pregnant mother, not one victim of Nazi medical experiments, not one native child devoured by a tiger, not one hospitalized cancer patient buried alive in an earthquake, not a single one of these things was a necessity.

But Christians expect us to call the God who enacts a creation plan that makes these things a reality "Good"!

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Bronx,

You said:"Why would he choose plan B knowing full well that even his provision for "failure" (not quite sure what you mean by that. Whose failure, what failure"?)"

I answered the question. The failure of humans to not comply with his stated plan.

You ask:"would allow countless millions to slip through the cracks."

I mean does god have any fear? this is the fear of failure or outcome. This is a human notion. Don't do something because it may not turn out the way you want it to. Now it's more complex because God knows the full shot from the beginning and as i stated IF he hadn't made provision for it (and we're in a less than perfect state as man is) then he could be at fault...but he made provision from the beginning. He's further not bound by a fear of failure.

Is anything necessary? Only god from whom all existence flows no matter how fantastic or mundane.

Another Question: Why didn't God simply create beings without the ability to fail?

Ans: Then he wouldn't have created freewill beings then now would he? then to strip them of freewill does not serve his purpose, in fact it makes him evil to do so.

You rise and fall on your own.

Granted now that this mixture called sin is in the world, this is a bloody place no matter where you go...not because of God, but because man turned his choice over to an enemy that wants him dead simply because God created him.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Ryan,

Let's take your little unlearned statements out further on just one premise...death.

Now according to you society has the right answer to this conundrum of death right? We should be able to find a clear definition of what it means to die right?

This is what we find just between us:

You believe life purposes ends with this life and that death is ultimate and nonending.

I believe that life's purpose is ultimately beyond this life and death is an enemy to us used as a transition from temporaral to eternal.

You think you're right and I do too. but what does society think? Look at what we find about variopus values around the world:

"Cultures can be death-accepting, death-denying or even death- defying. In the death-defying West, the strategies for salvation have historically included activism and asceticism. In the East, the strategies have often been more contemplative and mystical.

Death may be considered either as the end of existence or as a transition to another state of being or consciousness.
...

The American notion of life being what's objective and concrete while the hereafter has an illusory quality is far from being universal. The Hindus, for example, handle the problem of death by viewing life as the illusion and the realm between reincarnations as that which is objective. Hence, for many in Eastern cultures the primary concern is to avoid rebirth by extinguishing one's self-centeredness, while in much of the West, this concern is to obtain as high a quality of personal existence as is possible in the here-and-now.

That's found at Death Rituals

Now where is the repository of these societal norms? Just on this ONE issue YOU seem to be in the minority so far as world history and current practice...Now there's an infinate amount of categories in just America alone we can go through but yet you say "society" decides moral values and what's evil and not etc...

Evidently you didn't get the memo that atheism and it's be all end all notion in this life isn't "societal's norm"...

Now, do you care to tell me where this standard can be found again that we know what's right by what society says? I seem to find that myth missing.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

New atheists/Old atheists

2 words sum them all up:

Myth Makers!

Bronxboy47 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bronxboy47 said...

D.S. Burnett:

You keep harping on the "provision" that your fantasy God made. But that so-called "provision" permits that vast majority of mankind to make the wrong choice and end up in hell. That's a pretty stingy, slipshod provision. In fact, it insults the value of human life. Quite obviously, most of us are expendable, and we became so the moment God's plan of action was set into motion.

I repeat, this is a choice that God made when nothing compelled him to do so. It is clearly an act of insane recklessness and disregard for the value of human lives he was determined to create.

Bronxboy47 said...

D.S. Burnett:

Fear? Why should God fear? He's not risking spending an eternity in hell, but he's more than willing to put others at risk.

Bronxboy47 said...

Most Christians believe abortion to be immoral. Abortion? You've got to be kidding! Abortion pales by comparrison to what a loving God has "provided" for the vast majority of his expendable creation who make the wrong choice while dead in their sins. Yes, this is deep. But only because it's a fantasy that has accessed the deepest reserves of the human imagination to keep itself alive.

The fascination of Christianity is reflective of man's perverse pleasure in having the shit scared out of him, hence horror movies, roller coasters, etc.

Ryan Anderson said...

Harvey; you are aware that until the modern era, societies developed relativly isolated from other societies, right? For example, American Indians developed different death rituals from the Romans because neither group interacted.

But how does showing different groups hold different values support your position in the least?

I'm saying "collective" from the family, to the city, to the state to the region, etc... etc...

PS: we seem to be having two different conversations, or you are dense...

Gandolf said...

Bronxboy said.."Abortion pales by comparrison to what a loving God has "provided" for the vast majority of his expendable creation who make the wrong choice while dead in their sins. "

Oooh i reckon Bronxboy.Man atleast abortion is short and over before you even realize whats happening.

The endless torture and spiritual highjumps and headaches, the Gods thoughtfully provided us, through continually slapping us around the face, with a world full of faithful folks like our friend Harvey, is enough to give almost anyone EVIL nightmares and P.T.S.D, and make us beg to have had the luck to never ever have been born.

Of course if we ask Harvey why Gods might have bothered creating us humans if they already knew we would have to endure such EVIL church designed torments and forever more be suffering from the continued fallout of their nuclear faith bombs.

Harvey would simply reply ..Look son, think of all what you`d be missing! , if the kind caring Gods never created and you`d never have had the blissful wonderful good feeling of being faced with a Eddie Murphy style C.O.G.I.C mindbending brainwashing Pastor like me.hmmmm

Whereeeeee would you beee? ..hmmmm?? ..Ooooh Lordy!! just whereeee would you beeee?? hmmm

Folks... please do pray for me!.I shall now go and make an attempt to approach and reply to Pastor Harveys spiritual hyjinks.

--------------------------------
Atheists prayer.

Dear dear Gods .. if you exist ..Please please do help me through these very troubling and disturbing times, as i now go and pass through this horrific church designed mental warfare.Cradle me in thy loving care! and save me from feeling the pain of to much extreme faith abuse.Amen

Gandolf said...

Eddie Murphy Harvey Burnett said..."Such concepts include a round or circular earth (which atheists fight tooth and nail to say that circular doesn't mean round-ridiculous) An earth with a canopy of water called an atmosphere. In my son's 7th grade science book guess what they said the atmosphere consists of? Water. Atheists fight tooth and nail to make the canopy and God dividing the waters from the waters, something other than what the bible describes..."

Harvey my dear mindbending faithful friend ...The fact is humans were able to discover the world was round by one person climbing a high tree or mountain and discoving ...Holy guacamole! ..Well stone me crows! i can still see the sun going down from up here,while ole Joe blogs down there is suggesting to me,its already disappeared ..Well blow me down George ...This suggests to me this blinking damn planet must be round not flat after all.

Lets be honest..did man really need God for discovering this very simple matter Harv?.

There is many ways early man could work out it wasnt a flat world,Even watching the sun disappear in the distance by a landmark rock or something,and then going there and finding the horison had move on etc.

Logic and common sense scientic method of trial and deduction etc.I said ancient men were ignorant through not possessing methods needed to work many things out such as how earthquakes were formed through tectonic plate movement....I never said they were completely stupid or dumb Harv.

And the matter of the atmosphere consisting of some water ..Well stone me crows that really takes a real godly Albert Einstein type to figure out hmmm ? ...After all i guess rain never ever fell DOWN from up ABOVE, back in the ancient times did it Harvey.

Rain back in ancient times always shot upwards from the ground or always blew in sideways from the sea or just appeared out of no where.

But anyway ancient folks never ever happen to OBSERVE it FALLING DOWN from UP ABOVE now did they.

So yeah of course they needed input of the BRAIN OF GODS to make these magical scientific discoverys ...I mean in them days they were not only just a little ignorant through (lacking ways) to be able to understand what caused earthquake or tsunami or floods and drought etc ...They were also always walking around with all their eyes closed, and were completely stupid and had absolutely no logic, and were all utterly dumb morons as well.

Dont you agree?.

Gandolf said...

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said... "Gandy,
You said:”Math ,Logic and emotion have all been clearly displayed and can be easily observed being used every single day of our lives .”

No Gandy you’re wrong. There is no empirical proof for any of these things. They are immaterial realities with no empirical proof and no extension in time and space. In fact so far as logic is concerned you simply have to ‘accept’ out of hand it’s tenets as logic cannot be proven by any method scientific or otherwise. "
-----------------------------

Harvey if i said to you ..Harvey i bet if i slap you around the face a few times with this here fresh smelling old fish we just caught ..I suggest its "logical" it wont only just be a bit smelly, its likely it also will actually start stinging! a little bit too.

Would you really still like to try claim, my logic maybe is non existent and has absolutely no possibility of any empirical proof by use of the scientific method of "obsevation" and "experience" and cant be "measured" ?.

And if i said Harv,oh Cowabunga Dude!, i see you have $50 in lovely looking gold coins there,let me just kindly releave you of a mere $49 coins, there is no such thing as math!, so i promise you you`ll still have $50 in coins left.

Would still wish to trying claiming your idea that math cannot be measured and cannot have any empirical proof Harv?.

If you do ..Well get your coins out quick ...Cowabunga Dude! im coming over! ..i think i could get used to being around people of that type of intelligence.

And you say emotion cannot be measured ...So whats all this shit about your God supposedly being grieved by our sins etc ? .And when your wife gets upset at you for not spending enough time with the kids, do you just stare off into space with a blank look on your face ? ..Emotion dont exist right ...There is no empirical proof of existence of emotion, as we cannot ever "experience" and "observe" emotion in the process of happening.Right?

No Harvey the "effects" of math logic and emotion can be freely "experienced" by (ALL) of us ,and so do have at least some "empirical" type proof dont they.Lets get a lil honest here.

Now some faithful folks do (claim) to "experience" God ,the very huge difference is this God "experience" is not freely available for everyone to experience the effects when and where ever we want....Like we can do with all the matters of logic ,math,emotion.

The difference is logic,math,emotion is honestly not only a "claim" they are well proven.

Experience of God-/s is still really stuck in the claim stage .Its has`nt yet really gone past the "idea" stage ,we cannot ALL freely make use of it everyday whenever and wherever we wish.

Now i suggest if you cannot see there is a big difference here ..Well its come down to a matter rhetoric and word games .And you are in danger of becoming rather like the witch doctor rattling chicken bones, and pointing to something with little connection, and trying to simply use rhetoric and word games to argue it connects.

If you say but how do we know the words logic,math,emotion has any meaning? , i can just say good point, so how do we know the word God means anything either?.

See how we can quickly get into such utter intellectual bullshit! with miles of rhetoric and these circular word games?.

Are you a pastor who is simply interested in finding out and knowing the simple truth , or are you a pastor who`s become a master at useing miles and miles of rhetoric and intellectual bullshit, to try and "look like" your maybe still managing to prop up a feeble faith, that needs miles and miles of intellectual bullshit and rhetorical word games to try and stay afloat?.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Bronx,

Spare me the bleeding heart jive! You're probably the same one that will cuss somebody out and do all kinds of sign language for cutting you off in traffic. You don't give a spit about the plight of humanity, it's just a tool to bolster a sense of rebellion, an excuse for unbelief.

The fact is that the plan of God was laid out and when he said don't sin, he meant it. Why, because sin was not the condition suited for man to thrive or live in. It's just that simple.

So God doing something more than he's done isn't a question. The miracle is that even with the weight of sin god still is yet able to save and it won't be a piddly number as you claim...the bible names and untold number even though it is a straight gate...

So your bleeding heart is nothing more than that. man somehow thinks his morality is superior that's that's why he can't be saves...too self exalted...Why did he make what he made? I don't know, but we'll both have the chance an opportunity to ask him. 4-Sure!

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Ryan,

Just get back on that turnip truck and head due west OK. Don't interfere in grown folks conversations please. You'll only get more confused...I don't see how that's possible but I know it is...I can see the degeneration...

Later!

Gandolf said...

Harvey said .."Wrong again my friend. SM does not apply to these things in proof, only in measuring the affect of things after the fact. "

--------------------------

Oh well ok ..But still the simple fact still stands..With the matter of logic,emotion,and math, we can stll "EXTREMELY FREELY" measure the (effect after the fact) right.We can do a completely public test and ALL experience it when and wherever we wish right?

Can we do the same with the idea of God-/s Harvey ? ..No we cant.There is no commparison.

Harvey said.."No Gandy it’s like this, you demand a standard of such high value and accuracy when it comes to God, why should I demand that you be any less exacting? When we hold to a standard of accuracy, then you say it’s “witchcraft and voodoo”. How come it’s not “witchcraft and voodoo” in your disagreement? I mean I don’t value your worldview. Why and by who’s standards is it better than mine?"

No Harvey you got it all faithfully mixed up.Im fully prepared for the standard of "high value and accuracy" , the difference is the matters of logic,emotion and math meets the standard.

While the ideas of Gods still are stuck back at the starting gates of still stay only being only "ideas" ...Hense the idea of god dont even come near the standard that all the matters of emotion,logic and math actually happen to DO!.

Now how about a little more honesty!

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Gandy,

You said:"Harvey, is enough to give almost anyone EVIL nightmares and P.T.S.D, and make us beg to have had the luck to never ever have been born."

Is that all you guys ever do is moan and complain??? My goodness!

You said:"Of course if we ask Harvey why Gods might have bothered creating us humans if they already knew we would have to endure such EVIL church designed torments and forever more be suffering from the continued fallout of their nuclear faith bombs."

Did you eat a heart health diet today Gandy? Why? Because every 33 seconds a person dies from cardiovascular disease, and every 34 seconds a person dies of heart disease. Did that stop you from eating or did that make you modify your diet today? Shame on you. Why didn't you tell this to your wife or best friend, maybe stop them from eating something that wasn't "heart healthy"...In fact, since you're so concerned, make a sign and stand at Burger King all day tomorrow and tell the people "don't eat these burgers, people are dying every 30 seconds because of what these burgers do."

How many people died today in an auto accident Gandy? Ooh, I know...(Arnold D. Horshack) about 3,000 to 4,000... That's about 125 to 166people per hour...

Did that stop you from driving today? How about tomorrow? What on earth are you and Bronx gonna do about all those people who'll die tomorrow while driving??? Oooohhh, I know! (Arnold D. Horshack again) God to the car dealership and strap yourself to the door...stop all those good people from buying all those shiny new cars...tell the dealer he needs to close down and stop selling those death machines to the people...

Then when you get out of the funny farm come back here and actually present an argument instead of some bogus and ridiculous complaint based on your own irrational emotional babbling...That's ALL it is...it's not even an argument...

It's an appeal to YOU as a supreme moral being but YET NONE of you will try to save ANYONE tomorrow...

You bunch of sniveling moral hypocrites!

Now that was funny!!!-LOL!!!

Ryan Anderson said...

Harvey; too close to home? That's cool. Enjoy your delusion.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Gandy,

You said;"the difference is the matters of logic,emotion and math meets the standard."

No they don't Gandy, you have no idea...their premises are taken by FAITH because they can't be proven...Get it Gandy...you accept what is not empirical proven...there is no proof for them or validity of them. the foundation of things you "think" are empirically provable are nothing more than faith propositions...

Now do ya get the picture Gandy. that's not voodoo or hocus pocus, those are facts! Only you don't like those facts so you reinterpret them to suit...that's a shame and that's a materialist everyday of the week!

Bronxboy47 said...

D.S. Harvey Burnett:

When you can't come to grips with any of the points I've raised, I guess the next best option is to start calling me names. Fine, I've got a very thick skin.

Nevertheless, your refusal to address the points I've made is here for everyone to see. I am content with that.

Back in 1965, at the age of 17, I took L.S.D. for the first time. About an hour into that first session someone asked me what I thought of the human condition. I immediately burst into tears and began sobbing uncontrollably, body wracked with convulsions for two solid hours. The depth of my sorrow was a revelation even to me.

I don't expect you to accept this as proof of my genuine concern for humanity's plight, but your cavalier dismissal of the possibility only strengthen my sense of revulsion at Christian callousness.

Gandolf said...

Harvey said.."I can trace YOUR world view as being responsible for depression and suicides. I don’t think what you believe helps society and there’s proof of it. "


I went to his first link and bothered to read the first line it said.."A recent recent study has shown that having a greater purpose in life can stave off alzheimers disease."

Really ? ...So being positive helps? ...nooo ...Really? .It cant ..surely not ..No folks meditating on yoga dont benefit either ..no never ...No Cancer patients getting out there and doing stuff dont have a better chance of survival ..nooo .i cant believe it

What the f**k does that do to prove we have and need of religion Harvey.Sheeze what a meat head

I went to the second link over all it basically said ...'If you can't live up to the expectations of well-educated parents,'' said Rasmussen, ''it could make you more vulnerable.''

Yeah well it proves if people cant "live up to lifes expectations" they find life tough ...hmmm well i guess that helps explain why many in the cult i was once in ...ended up comitting suicide ...They found life tough ..society allows abusive faiths that ruin some folks lives ...and so they feel they cant live up to the "expectations of society" ..which "expects them" to try and live and like faith abuse thats been allowed.

So what Harvey ? ...What the hell have either of your links got to do with atheism?.

Bronxboy47 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gandolf said...

Harvey said.."How many people died today in an auto accident Gandy? Ooh, I know...(Arnold D. Horshack) about 3,000 to 4,000... That's about 125 to 166people per hour..."

Also had said..."Did you eat a heart health diet today Gandy? Why? Because every 33 seconds a person dies from cardiovascular disease, and every 34 seconds a person dies of heart disease. Did that stop you from eating or did that make you modify your diet today? Shame on you. Why didn't you tell this to your wife or best friend, maybe stop them from eating something that wasn't "heart healthy"...In fact, since you're so concerned, make a sign and stand at Burger King all day tomorrow and tell the people "don't eat these burgers, people are dying every 30 seconds because of what these burgers do."

This is christianity displaying its "moral best".... l.o.l .

If Christians can some how point to other bad shit in life ...Bingo ..That then makes christianity and faith abuse acceptable too and simply A-Ok

They is lots like lil children in a school yard, arguing with the teacher ..Booo hoo but but i hit him because he hit me ...Whaaa Boo hoo so because he hit me then that must mean i should hit him too whaaaaa ..Runs off stamping the wee tootsys, and doing the whaaa tootsy ...im going to tell my sky daddy on you ..not fair not fair

Such a sad arse feeble argument Harvey ...Its akin to suggesting look folks die in car accidents too ...so then why have any need to worry about trying to protect folks from getting Cancer either

Dont you see how truely childish your type of argument was Harvey.

Man you do not do faith much favor, when you blatantly disply this childish type of moral thought, that supposedly finding other problems, somehow suffices to make something else ok.

Lets get real Harvey.

Bronxboy47 said...

D.S. Harvey Burnett:


It obvious you cannot embrace or defend the tenets of your religion without demonizing non-believers. You must strip all non-believers of any sense of morality, honesty, compassion in order to justify your faith in a God who commits horrific crimes while demanding that you bless him for doing so.

That being the case, we have nothing further to say to each other. But mind you, your incoherent replies and your refusal to defend you beliefs rationally will remain on view for anyone who stumbles upon this site to see. Feel free to foam at the mouth to your heart's content.

One final thought:

You said: You don't give a spit about the plight of humanity, it's just a tool to bolster a sense of rebellion, an excuse for unbelief.

Harvey, when I examine the contents of your mind and your heart on display here, YOU become the superfluous excuse for unbelief. You're doing the Lord's work. Keep it up, my friend.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Yea, blame your condition on everyone else...it's that way for both of you I see...One caught in a cult and the other on LSD...now wonder!

Blame away! everyone else's fault and your own choices gone by the wayside...That's OK.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Gandy,

I guess that's those "animalistic tendancies" huh?

LOL!!!