# Religion is for stupid people



## ambush80 (Sep 7, 2018)

Fast forward to 51:30.



<iframe width="560" height="315" src="



" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>


----------



## welderguy (Sep 7, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Fast forward to 51:30.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Can a simple person have wisdom?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 7, 2018)

Here's them getting into it more deeply two nights later.  Fast forward to 30:56.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="



" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 7, 2018)

welderguy said:


> Can a simple person have wisdom?




Did you watch it?


----------



## welderguy (Sep 7, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Did you watch it?



From  51.30-54.00
Condense it for me...or not.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 7, 2018)

welderguy said:


> From  51.30-54.00
> Condense it for me...or not.



I can't.  Their conversation is incredibly dense with ideas as it is (go ahead I tee'd that one up). Peterson claims that stupid people are better off believing the things of their ancestors because those ideas survived so long that it must indicate that they're supremely useful.  In the second video Peterson says that most people are stupid and the type of rational analysis that Harris engages in may be unavailable to most people.  Harris disagrees.  He thinks people are capable of separating the good parts of "Traditional Wisdoms" from the bad ones.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 7, 2018)

welderguy said:


> Can a simple person have wisdom?




Yes.  A simple person can have wisdom.  That's what Sam argues.  Wisdom might be something like recognizing the moral of a fable but knowing that it's a fable.  Jordan seems to think that we're incapable of truly comprehending the depth of fables because they're meaning is so deeply rooted in our psyches that we may as well call them "inspired by God".  Strangely, he seems to more fervently apply that idea, religiously, to the Bible but not to a work by Marilyn Manson.


----------



## welderguy (Sep 7, 2018)

I've run across many people in my line of work that are incredibly intelligent (engineers), but seemed to be so lacking in common sense. What I would call working knowledge. They have plenty of book sense but no hands on knowledge.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 7, 2018)

welderguy said:


> I've run across many people in my line of work that are incredibly intelligent (engineers), but seemed to be so lacking in common sense. What I would call working knowledge. They have plenty of book sense but no hands on knowledge.



I love this meme of the "book smart guy without a lick of sense" because it's true a little bit but mostly false.  It's really a way for less intelligent people to feel superior or at least equal.  I've run across blueprints that call for 13 ft. lumber. As a builder it seems like the architect is one of those kinds of people that you mention.  But I went to art school and I understand proportion and aesthetics. I can recognize that the architect simply had a different concern than a builder would.  There's nothing wrong with recognizing that some people are smarter than others.  That's just how the world shakes out and intelligence takes very different forms.  

You could say that someone has allot of "spiritual intelligence or acumen" but maybe lacks in cognitive ability.  They seem very sensitive to or finely tuned to issues of the spiritual realm.  Those people, true contemplatives, seem to be few and far between; as rare as theoretical physicists.  The mediocre majority bumble along with a rudimentary but "good enough" understanding.  Sam and Jordan are a rare breed.  It's easy to see when you recognize the hard work and great thought that they've put into their arguments. It makes what we do here seem bush league.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 7, 2018)

welderguy said:


> From  51.30-54.00
> Condense it for me...or not.



What do you think of Peterson's analysis That stupid people are better served following traditional wisdom?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 7, 2018)

I enclosed my carport and removed the brick veneer to make the room as big as possible. All I accomplished was making the room 12' 6" wide.

What that meant was a 6" strip of sheet rock for the ceiling and buying a piece of 15' wide carpet.

That was a good example of bad common sense.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 7, 2018)

I haven't watched the video parts. Do they ask why some smart people are religious? 
Is it somewhat related to superstitious people and not being very smart? I don't want to say stupid but just not educated. Generations earlier than us were very superstitious. Not so many today. 

I'm thinking of the Gullah and Geechee and all of their superstitions. They weren't stupid, just not educated.

I would think though that even today there are people that are superstitious and educated.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 7, 2018)

Artfuldodger said:


> I enclosed my carport and removed the brick veneer to make the room as big as possible. All I accomplished was making the room 12' 6" wide.
> 
> What that meant was a 6" strip of sheet rock for the ceiling and buying a piece of 15' wide carpet.
> 
> That was a good example of bad common sense.



Honest mistake.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 7, 2018)

Artfuldodger said:


> I haven't watched the video parts. Do they ask why some smart people are religious?
> Is it somewhat related to superstitious people and not being very smart? I don't want to say stupid but just not educated. Generations earlier than us were very superstitious. Not so many today.
> 
> I'm thinking of the Gullah and Geechee and all of their superstitions. They weren't stupid, just not educated.
> ...



They touch some on that subject in the second video at the 20:00 mark.  You should watch the parts that I highlighted.  I found the entirety of both the videos very interesting, same with the Vancouver videos.

When they met in Vancouver Sam talked about the way that he treats a handgun  "superstitiously".  He says that the axiom of treat all guns as loaded is metaphorically true even though it might be actually false.

Jump forward to 15:00.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="



" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 7, 2018)

Artfuldodger said:


> I haven't watched the video parts. Do they ask why some smart people are religious?[/COLOR]
> Is it somewhat related to superstitious people and not being very smart? I don't want to say stupid but just not educated. Generations earlier than us were very superstitious. Not so many today.
> 
> I'm thinking of the Gullah and Geechee and all of their superstitions. They weren't stupid, just not educated.
> ...



Sam observes that for some people are willing to suspend reason when it comes to religious doctrine.  He says they may be fiercely committed to rationality in all other parts of their lives but for some reason they give their religious beliefs a pass.  He also said once that religious people will sometimes defend other religious beliefs to a fault. It's like when you asked if Christians think it's worse to believe in another god or be an atheist.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 7, 2018)

There was once a man that thought of himself to be of superior intellect over most of common man. He's dead now.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 7, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> There was once a man that thought of himself to be of superior intellect over most of common man. He's dead now.




Didn't watch any, did you?  Peterson is on your side.  Listen to his analysis.


----------



## welderguy (Sep 8, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> What do you think of Peterson's analysis That stupid people are better served following traditional wisdom?



First of all, I believe wisdom and knowledge to be two different things. It sorta erks me when people use them interchangeably.
But, aside from that, I really gotta ask you. Has it ever occurred to you that maybe some that you label "religious" actually do know something that you have not been made privy to? (at least not yet)
Do you even think that could be a possibility? Or do you not let your mind even entertain that thought?


----------



## Israel (Sep 8, 2018)

I've enjoyed watching JBP struggle as "an intellect" in matters of the faith. (Though I am sure I have not watched more than maybe 1% of his offerings)

Not as one might enjoy an ant trying to escape the magnifying glass's beam...but as one in whom I see a pressing to reconciliation of the observable and conceivable (even the measurable) into what he also sees undeniable in unknowns.

I've kinda rooted for him in his straddling. The form this rooting takes is for his rest _in place._

His confidence that there _is a_ pragmatism, a sure utility to be discovered remains for him a dire endeavor...seeing a utility in some things that he is not prepared to either dismiss nor accept to himself as immutable truth, yet still seeking their reconciliation.
Like men, he wants this to take place observable...outside of himself. There...they can be handled, quantified...and shown as provable. He's as equally near and equally far from a man like CS Lewis who understood "looking at" and "looking along" are both necessary. 

Truth "out there" is of no utility to the self...even if (one may imagine) all utility in the "out there" is seen. It becomes "I can see why men believe such and such, and even see their ascribing the usefulness of it..." but until it is received into oneself to understand its true utility, the exposing of such surmisings "for others" are not shown as the fiction they are to the embracing of the exalted self. That self which imagines itself sufficient to judging what could be best for others, yet never drinking from the same cup.

He calls the church in one vid the repository of such "useful fictions". (More or less) Which only serves to show he is still laboring in the miasma of religious sight. That which "must be hypocritical" (not his words...but the implication is not unfounded) in its delivery...for to him...no one could _really believe_ what they expound. He cannot yet see, nor will he till a repentance of self is found, a cup waiting. (Till then he can only move among what speaks with a wink wink, nod nod)

I have a hope for him in his seeming undeterred hold to the truth of the utility...of truth. His grasp in some measure of the effects of truth, emanating as it were to effect from the individual into what he has described as the network of communicants, he recognizes can be profound.

He has simply not yet seen settled (to my seeing to this moment, only) that Jesus Christ is that centrality...but that does not disqualify him anymore than the saying so qualifies me. He at least recognizes (and O! what hope is there!) that truth spoken is not such as will garner a popular reception. In fact, he seems to understand by his statements...its work may be very much opposite in result for the speaker. 

I think he just sees this presently as mere consequence in a sea of lying...not yet recognizing the very necessity, and benefit of it, the _real utility_ of it.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 8, 2018)

welderguy said:


> First of all, I believe wisdom and knowledge to be two different things. It sorta erks me when people use them interchangeably.
> But, aside from that, I really gotta ask you. Has it ever occurred to you that maybe some that you label "religious" actually do know something that you have not been made privy to? (at least not yet)
> Do you even think that could be a possibility? Or do you not let your mind even entertain that thought?


If in fact the religious do know something beyond what non religious know, what differentiates all the different religious? There must be so many gods that.......


----------



## welderguy (Sep 8, 2018)

bullethead said:


> If in fact the religious do know something beyond what non religious know, what differentiates all the different religious? There must be so many gods that.......



See, I knew YOU would say something like that, thus the question was not posed to you.
I can't speak for any other of the religious, but I know that I know something, whether any other person does or not. If that makes me "stupid", then....haleluiah!! I'm stupid then.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 8, 2018)

welderguy said:


> First of all, I believe wisdom and knowledge to be two different things. It sorta erks me when people use them interchangeably.
> But, aside from that, I really gotta ask you. Has it ever occurred to you that maybe some that you label "religious" actually do know something that you have not been made privy to? (at least not yet)
> Do you even think that could be a possibility? Or do you not let your mind even entertain that thought?



I think the immensity of things that we don't know about might include God.  I don't make truth claims about things that I don't know about.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 8, 2018)

bullethead said:


> If in fact the religious do know something beyond what non religious know, what differentiates all the different religious? There must be so many gods that.......


Even a wise man such as Solomon followed after them.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 8, 2018)

welderguy said:


> See, I knew YOU would say something like that, thus the question was not posed to you.
> I can't speak for any other of the religious, but I know that I know something, whether any other person does or not. If that makes me "stupid", then....haleluiah!! I'm stupid then.


Im am in no way implying that anyone is stupid , dumb, or less intelligent for believeing in a God or gods.
All I am saying that believing in a higher power is not at all unique.  Hundreds of millions of people all claim the same thing. Nothing stands out that makes a believers experience or a gods involvement more special except personal interpretation.
Nothing at all wrong with that all.

People interpret things differently. Proving what they think is the cause is the biggest hurdle.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 8, 2018)

gemcgrew said:


> Even a wise man such as Solomon followed after them.


And Luke found the Force, or did the Force find Luke?


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 8, 2018)

bullethead said:


> And Luke found the Force, or did the Force find Luke?


Much to learn, you still have.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 8, 2018)

gemcgrew said:


> Much to learn, you still have.


In 5000 years our conversation could be scripture.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 9, 2018)

bullethead said:


> In 5000 years our conversation could be scripture.


It is scripture today. It probably won't survive the 5000 years though.


----------



## hopper (Sep 15, 2018)

Sometimes I think the stupidest sounding people are religious people trying to convince a none believer that there is a God and a none believer trying to convince a believer that there isnt.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 15, 2018)

hopper said:


> Sometimes I think the stupidest sounding people are religious people trying to convince a none believer that there is a God and a none believer trying to convince a believer that there isnt.



Do you think Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson sound stupid in the videos?  I don't.  I think they sound thoughtful, respectful, and sincere.


----------



## hopper (Sep 15, 2018)

I was making a generic comment based on the title of the post. No disrespect to guys in vid. I didn't watch it.


----------



## hopper (Sep 15, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Do you think Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson sound stupid in the videos?  I don't.  I think they sound thoughtful, respectful, and sincere.


Forgot the reply button on that last response above this one


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 15, 2018)

hopper said:


> I was making a generic comment based on the title of the post. No disrespect to guys in vid. I didn't watch it.



You should listen to them discuss.  It will probably change your opinion of people discussing belief.  I think they're impressive as heck.


----------



## hopper (Sep 16, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> You should listen to them discuss.  It will probably change your opinion of people discussing belief.  I think they're impressive as heck.


I may when I get a chance. I dont have a problem at all about people discussing belief, I do it . Nothing wrong with a discussion.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

hopper said:


> I may when I get a chance. I dont have a problem at all about people discussing belief, I do it . Nothing wrong with a discussion.



All 4 events are available on Jordan Peterson's Youtube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/user/JordanPetersonVideos/videos?disable_polymer=1

The third event in England is where Jordan said "Well, maybe not everybody's as smart as you, Sam."  Which is why I made the OP.  I personally think that Sam's arguments are intellectually accessible to almost everyone and that we no longer need "Bad reasons to be good, when good reasons are available".

It's cool to see how they develop their ideas over the course of the four events.  They also repeat much of the stuff they covered previously (I think for the sake of the new audiences).  I loved how they "Steelmanned" each other.  I think the practice would help us in here.

*Approach 1: Steel manning*

_The philosopher Daniel Dennett outlines an effective process for arguing with someone who has opposing views:_

_(1) Attempt to re-express the other person’s position so clearly, vividly, and fairly that they say, “Thanks, I wish I’d thought of putting it that way.”_​_(2) List any points of agreement (especially if they are not matters of general or widespread agreement)._​_(3) Mention anything you have learned from your target._​_(4) Only then are you permitted to say so much as a word of rebuttal or criticism._​
_The first step of Dennett’s approach has been called steel manning. It’s the opposite of straw manning, in which you misrepresent the other person’s position or argument so you can easily defeat it. In contrast to a straw man, a steel man is an improved form of the other person’s views—one that’s harder to defeat._

_https://conversion-rate-experts.com/steel-manning/_

The first two times Jordan and Sam talked was on Sam's podcast #62, #67.  The first one was miserable as they got gridlocked on one particular topic.  Then they seemed to talk passed each other.  It was much like what happens here.

https://samharris.org/search/jordan peterson

I think the whole thing made them friends and allies.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

This is what Sam wrote about their first exchange:

https://samharris.org/speaking-of-truth-with-jordan-b-peterson/


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

Here's a great piece on their debates in Patheos, an online magazine that I'll probably add to my regular reading:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/youngf...s-asks-questions-jordan-peterson-cant-answer/

_"However, with the rise of Jordan Peterson, Judeo-Christian ideas are getting a new lease on life, if not in an orthodox sense, at least in a sense that still makes Sam Harris uncomfortable. It bothers Sam intensely that Peterson could sell out a theater multiple nights in a row for an in-depth lecture series on the book of Genesis. It bothers him that Peterson doesn’t dismiss Christianity as primitive Stone Age thinking. It bothers him, because it shows that for all the Horsemen’s yeomanly efforts, the Bible still hasn’t been relegated to the dustbin of history. And the effects are making themselves felt within his very own fan base, causing one YouTuber to ask in so many words “Is Sam Harris Losing his Audience to Jordan Peterson?”" _

_"For Harris to have emerged as a challenger to Peterson is not something I would have predicted. But their live fencing matches have fascinatingly and tellingly exposed the fault lines in both men’s thinking. They are a must-hear for any Christian who wants to understand our culture’s spiritual zeitgeist, not only for what Harris and Peterson are bringing to the table, but for how the crowd is reacting to them."_


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

And a follow up piece that I'm about to read:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/youngf...ordan-peterson-ill-take-sam-harris-from-here/


----------



## hopper (Sep 16, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> All 4 events are available on Jordan Peterson's Youtube channel:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/user/JordanPetersonVideos/videos?disable_polymer=1
> 
> ...


Sounds cool. I call it objectively speaking, but not to defeat the other point of view, but to move in to my own without being argumentative. This way I can discuss with the possibilities of not putting others on the defensive. To me it helps to learn from others if they have something to offer.
 As for being to Smart it seems like some may be to smart for a spiritual way of life.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

hopper said:


> Sounds cool. I call it objectively speaking, but not to defeat the other point of view, but to move in to my own without being argumentative. This way I can discuss with the possibilities of not putting others on the defensive. To me it helps to learn from others if they have something to offer.
> As for being to Smart it seems like some may be too smart for a spiritual way of life.



That's kind of what Sam's book _Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion_ is about.  He is interested in "spirituality" for secular people.  He understands the value of transcendent experience but doesn't think it has to be tied to mythology in any way.  He and secularists like him wonder what an institution that does all the good things that religion does: community building, rituals (for birth, death, manhood, womanhood), music, architecture, painting...would/could look like. 

He doesn't think you have to be "stupid" to want "spirituality" in your life.  (By the way, I put "spirituality" in quotes because I recognize the same problem that Sam does in that we don't have a word yet that talks about transcendent experience without the supernatural baggage of "spirituality".  It's kind of how Einstein or Hawking used the term "God").


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

hopper said:


> Sounds cool. I call it objectively speaking, but not to defeat the other point of view, but to move in to my own without being argumentative. This way I can discuss with the possibilities of not putting others on the defensive. To me it helps to learn from others if they have something to offer.
> As for being to Smart it seems like some may be to smart for a spiritual way of life.



One of the things Peterson says in his book that I love is "Always assume the person that you're talking to knows something you don't".


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

hopper said:


> Sounds cool. I call it objectively speaking, but not to defeat the other point of view, but to move in to my own without being argumentative. This way I can discuss with the possibilities of not putting others on the defensive. To me it helps to learn from others if they have something to offer.
> As for being to Smart it seems like some may be to smart for a spiritual way of life.



Consider the possibility that our capacity for spiritual experience need not be tied to unprovable things.  Maybe it's only tradition that ties them together.  Some traditions are good and some have been "put up".  Isn't it useful to examine traditions for their usefulness occasionally?


----------



## hopper (Sep 16, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> One of the things Peterson says in his book that I love is "Always assume the person that you're talking to knows something you don't".


Those are definitely good points to practice, it helps to keep the mind open. Now I know alot of very Smart people that live a good life and would say they are spiritual people.
 When I say to "smart" there are always those people that are always trying to figure it out. I know a few that read and study so many things to help them "understand" some end up with so much conflicting and confusing arguments or points they can never step into faith. 
 Personally I dont read alot about the subject. About the only book I pick up once in awhile is serman on the mnt. 
 I do have a feeling that to live a spiritual life one must get out of self, and that probably takes some belief (not necessarily an understanding) in somthing.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/youngf...s-asks-questions-jordan-peterson-cant-answer/

_"But I would like to give Sam Harris his due. Setting aside the fact that no materialist truly practices what he preaches, at least his sermon has a point: We were not made to be split beings. We were not made to stake ourselves on blind faith. Our hearts and minds, our instincts and our knowledge, are meant to be aligned. "_


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

hopper said:


> Those are definitely good points to practice, it helps to keep the mind open. Now I know alot of very Smart people that live a good life and would say they are spiritual people.
> When I say to "smart" there are always those people that are always trying to figure it out. I know a few that read and study so many things to help them "understand" some end up with so much conflicting and confusing arguments or points they can never step into faith.
> Personally I dont read alot about the subject. About the only book I pick up once in awhile is serman on the mnt.
> I do have a feeling that to live a spiritual life one must get out of self, and that probably takes some belief (not necessarily an understanding) in somthing.



That's what meditation does, particularly the kind that the Buddhists developed.  I've tried it myself and it's pretty hard but you can achieve a state (in fleeting glimpses for me as an unpracticed meditator) where you look real hard and can't find "The Self"; the part of you that feels like a driver in a car.  It's an experience available to anyone and it doesn't require any supernatural claims to back it up.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 16, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Here's a great piece on their debates in Patheos, an online magazine that I'll probably add to my regular reading:
> 
> http://www.patheos.com/blogs/youngf...s-asks-questions-jordan-peterson-cant-answer/
> 
> ...


This kind of made me chuckle a little -
*



			It bothers him, because it shows that for all the Horsemen’s yeomanly efforts, the Bible still hasn’t been relegated to the dustbin of history. And the effects are making themselves felt within his very own fan base, causing one YouTuber to ask in so many words “Is Sam Harris Losing his Audience to Jordan Peterson?”"

Click to expand...

*I think its going to be a few life times before the Bible gets relegated to the dustbin of history.


----------



## hopper (Sep 16, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> That's what meditation does, particularly the kind that the Buddhists developed.  I've tried it myself and it's pretty hard but you can achieve a state (in fleeting glimpses for me as an unpracticed meditator) where you look real hard and can't find "The Self"; the part of you that feels like a driver in a car.  It's an experience available to anyone and it doesn't require any supernatural claims to back it up.


I didn't mention anything about super natural. I think the belief to be affective has to be real for that person.


----------



## hopper (Sep 16, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> http://www.patheos.com/blogs/youngf...s-asks-questions-jordan-peterson-cant-answer/
> 
> _"But I would like to give Sam Harris his due. Setting aside the fact that no materialist truly practices what he preaches, at least his sermon has a point: We were not made to be split beings. We were not made to stake ourselves on blind faith. Our hearts and minds, our instincts and our knowledge, are meant to be aligned. "_


It bothers Sam intensely that Peterson could sell out a theater multiple nights in a row for an in-depth lecture series on the book of Genesis. It bothers him that Peterson doesn’t dismiss Christianity as primitive Stone Age thinking. It bothers him, because it shows that for all the Horsemen’s yeomanly efforts, the Bible still hasn’t been relegated to the dustbin of history. And the effects are making themselves felt within his very own fan base, causing one YouTuber to ask in so many words 
He sounds Jealous


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

_"As Christians, we have an opportunity to complete the work Peterson has begun, whether he realizes it or not. We have an opportunity to show how the mind’s understanding might meet the heart’s longing. We have an opportunity to point people to the God who gave us faith and reason, and pronounced them both good.

Jordan Peterson has set the ball. It’s up to the Church to spike it."

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/youngf...s-asks-questions-jordan-peterson-cant-answer/
_
That's a tall order for people who have found other ways to fill "the heart's longing", ways that don't require belief in the supernatural.  While talking to my mom about the practice of "Equity Hiring" (quotas based on race/sex...) she brought up the story of her being hired at a Christian College, even though she wasn't a Christian at the time.  In retrospect she says that God made it happen.  I asked her "Why don't you ask the people who hired you if you were an equity hire?  Maybe some of them are still alive and might answer you."  She kind of shrugged and walked off.  I told her that if she was interested in the truth that she could dig around and ask more questions but if she stopped at "God dun it" that she will never know the truth.  

I've wondered about the claim of a resurrection of Jesus.  I've looked into it.  Here's one source for discussion:

http://www.veritas.org/can-scientist-believe-resurrection-three-hypotheses/

I've asked believers how they think it could have happened.  They answer like my mom.  "God dun it".  Instead of looking any further.  Instead of asking another question.  Instead of coming up with a theory.  Instead of experimenting. That doesn't seem to me like using the "ability to reason that God gave us".


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

hopper said:


> It bothers Sam intensely that Peterson could sell out a theater multiple nights in a row for an in-depth lecture series on the book of Genesis. It bothers him that Peterson doesn’t dismiss Christianity as primitive Stone Age thinking. It bothers him, because it shows that for all the Horsemen’s yeomanly efforts, the Bible still hasn’t been relegated to the dustbin of history. And the effects are making themselves felt within his very own fan base, causing one YouTuber to ask in so many words
> He sounds Jealous



Possibly.  But if you watch them talk you would be less likely to come to that conclusion.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

hopper said:


> I didn't mention anything about super natural. I think the belief to be affective has to be real for that person.



No, you didn't.  I only mentioned it because that's the biggest hurdle for the "too smart" people who I think you're talking about.  Sorry if I'm misunderstanding you. 

Did you mean "affective" or "effective"?  There's a distinction.  Either way your statement is true in the sense that placebos "work" but they work for a different reason than a neuroblocker, even though the effect or affect may be the same.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

hopper said:


> It bothers Sam intensely that Peterson could sell out a theater multiple nights in a row for an in-depth lecture series on the book of Genesis. It bothers him that Peterson doesn’t dismiss Christianity as primitive Stone Age thinking. It bothers him, because it shows that for all the Horsemen’s yeomanly efforts, the Bible still hasn’t been relegated to the dustbin of history. And the effects are making themselves felt within his very own fan base, causing one YouTuber to ask in so many words
> He sounds Jealous



Sam's worried about the cover that Peterson gives to the people that think that God talks directly to them and answers their prayers and he gives voluminous expositions on why he thinks it's dangerous.  Peterson doesn't seem to believe in those things himself but he also goes to great lengths to avoid correcting people who do.  Some people have posited that he's afraid of losing some followers and money if he does. I like to think that he's not that kind of person.


----------



## hopper (Sep 16, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> No, you didn't.  I only mentioned it because that's the biggest hurdle for the "too smart" people who I think you're talking about.  Sorry if I'm misunderstanding you.
> 
> Did you mean "affective" or "effective"?  There's a distinction.  Either way your statement is true in the sense that placebos "work" but they work for a different reason than a neuroblocker even though the effect or affect may be the same.


No problem. I think I mean Effective like it works. Not the most literate here. And for most people I know that Believe it's not a placebo, but a real thing.
 Faith is funny and hard to understand. I think I do better when not trying to figure it all out. And yes it can be difficult if not impossible for some.


----------



## hopper (Sep 16, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Possibly.  But if you watch them talk you would be less likely to come to that conclusion.


So you believe or have faith that if I watch it I would be less likely to come to that conclusion, obviously based on your experience.  Just like your moms" truth" came from her belief. There me be no wrong or right in faith or belief,  who really knows.
Instead I can be happy that that person has something.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

Esther O'Reilly's piece in Patheos linked me to this:

https://www.theopentableblog.com/single-post/2018/06/11/Is-the-Resurrection-Unbelievable

I just scanned it for content and it seems like an argument hoisted by believers in miracles.  If you get a chance maybe you can scan it as well and tell me what you think of it.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

hopper said:


> No problem. I think I mean Effective like it works. Not the most literate here. And for most people I know that Believe it's not a placebo, but a real thing.
> Faith is funny and hard to understand. I think I do better when not trying to figure it all out. And yes it can be difficult if not impossible for some.



I understand that some people have had more exposure to critical thinking than others, but your mind is like a muscle, the more you use it the stronger it gets and the easier it is to "lift" hard ideas.  I think almost all people are capable of deep, critical thought.  The fact that you put sentences together the way you do makes me believe that you are as capable as Sam.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

hopper said:


> So you believe or have faith that if I watch it I would be less likely to come to that conclusion, obviously based on your experience.  Just like your moms" truth" came from her belief. There me be no wrong or right in faith or belief,  who really knows.
> Instead I can be happy that that person has something.



I know that if you watch him talk that you will have more insight into what his thoughts, concerns, motivations, knowledge, and feelings are about the subject.  You will have more information to base your hunch about him being jealous with.  You might still come to that conclusion and I'll concede that it was a more informed opinion, but I think it will be a hard one to maintain.  What harm can come of having more info?

There can be wrong and right beliefs and beliefs based on faith.  My mom could make an extra step and get closer to the truth.  In this case, the place she stopped her inquiry doesn't appear to have bad effects.  I can honestly  say that her unwillingness to dig, or more accurately her contentment to "leave it at the foot of the cross" tarnishes the way that she analyzes real life. The consequences of that wrongness can be dire.


----------



## hopper (Sep 16, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I understand that some people have had more exposure to critical thinking than others, but your mind is like a muscle, the more you use it the stronger it gets and the easier it is to "lift" hard ideas.  I think almost all people are capable of deep, critical thought.  The fact that you put sentences together the way you do makes me believe that you are as capable as Sam.


Maybe even More


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

hopper said:


> Maybe even More



Maybe even more.

I'm gonna go hit tennis balls.  Thanks for the great discussion.  This was better than church.  I hope you get a chance to look at some of the material that I linked and that we can discuss it later.  Enjoy the rest of your Sunday.


----------



## hopper (Sep 16, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I know that if you watch him talk that you will have more insight into what his thoughts, concerns, motivations, knowledge, and feelings are about the subject.  You will have more information to base your hunch about him being jealous with.  You might still come to that conclusion and I'll concede that it was a more informed opinion, but I think it will be a hard one to maintain.  What harm can come of having more info?
> 
> There can be wrong and right beliefs and beliefs based on faith.  My mom could make an extra step and get closer to the truth.  In this case, the place she stopped her inquiry doesn't appear to have bad effects.  I can honestly  say that her unwillingness to dig, or more accurately her contentment to "leave it at the foot of the cross" tarnishes the way that she analyzes real life. The consequences of that wrongness can be dire.


Out of curiosity Dire for who, not sure I get it.


----------



## hopper (Sep 16, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Maybe even more.
> 
> I'm gonna go hit tennis balls.  Thanks for the great discussion.  This was better than church.  I hope you get a chance to look at some of the material that I linked and that we can discuss it later.  Enjoy the rest of your Sunday.


Yep, stay dry.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

hopper said:


> Yep, stay dry.



I got a good hit in.  Have you reviewed any of the material I linked?  Whaddaya think?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 16, 2018)

hopper said:


> Out of curiosity Dire for who, not sure I get it.



Dire for people who have been victims of people who acted badly because they thought some truth was revealed to them by a higher power.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 17, 2018)

Artfuldodger said:


> Do they ask why some smart people are religious?.


Doesn’t fit their agenda of belittling the Christian. And they claim they want to discuss religion like gentlemen lol ?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 17, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Im am in no way implying that anyone is stupid , dumb, or less intelligent for believeing in a God or gods.
> All I am saying that believing in a higher power is not at all unique.  Hundreds of millions of people all claim the same thing. Nothing stands out that makes a believers experience or a gods involvement more special except personal interpretation.
> Nothing at all wrong with that all.
> 
> People interpret things differently. Proving what they think is the cause is the biggest hurdle.


We all interpret the law differently but what does that to the law?


----------



## Israel (Sep 18, 2018)

For reasons totally misunderstood I once posted something Einstein had said in an interview. It had absolutely nothing to do with whether Einstein, being generally acknowledged as an intelligent man, held the faith of Jesus Christ.

Of course we know of many many men, whose intelligence (as measured) among men is without question, that have held the faith of Jesus Christ.

The matter is simply one of discernment. Discernment, in particular, of the nature and substance of words. And whether in them can be found, by their substance and weight, (or lack thereof) any indication as to their source. It has everything to do with an intangible matter in which all men constantly swim in judging the truth _of things._

A man may, over the course of his lifetime, say many things. And although his having said a thing may indeed be _factual, _the truth of that thing may, or may not be discerned as coming from a "true place". As believers we understand, though we be often accused (and that, not unusually _in self) _something of the nature of hypocrisy and its workings. That presentation of facade in some vain hope of appearing (among men) as something _more than we are_.


And I do not think I speak too presumptuously to say we discover, easily it seems, a blithe ignorance of our own to it in ourselves, yet finding a curious pleasure in pointing it out in others. The lack of consistency (read integrity) by which we find a place of accusation is more comfortably, and conveniently found in the "out there".

Bringing _home_ a true plumb line to our own little house is never comfortable, nor convenient. It indicates all the false angles and shortcuts we have ourselves taken in construction. It shows where "true" work must be done. And also how, if standing on a sloped floor of our own making, how easily we may misinterpret another's level (or _more level_) floor as being all _a kilter._

I also find we have developed the most clever ways of keeping others from looking through our windows, lest it be shown how slanted a floor we ourselves stand upon.

Religion can be a great help here...adorning as it may, the outside of the house to many distractions. But, so can a myriad of other things; shiny things hung from eaves and around paths, easily attained things when abetted by lusts and cleverness. There seems no end to manufacture.

The person of Jesus Christ has for us the hope in Himself of being both Savior (_forgiver_ of and from faulty construction) but also Master Builder. He does not promise we will be spared excavation and renovation, indeed His promise is other wise. We are saved...in one sense by the Demolition Man. But, not without hope or promise. We come to understand it is _quite enough_ to be saved "as though by fire".

Oh, we may desire a sure and perfectly structured house, but here we may learn of vanity. It may well be envy still has a foothold. A desire to not appear less among men, to appear at least...as much as they _may appear_.

But for God? Who knows whether he waits to hear, in delightful anticipation for _one true word? _One_ true appeal _from a thing _once not given to truth, from _a place where truth is finally found_ as surest and only true plumb. _

"Burn it...tear it down!"

It is far better I have nothing found acceptable to man to present than to continue in a house of plain falsehood. Not being...is far better than being...in any lie. _Being_ in anything less...than truth.

Some will say "no man can go there"...or has.
Such do not know, and ignorance is forgiven.

Oh yeah. Einstein said this in an October 1929 Saturday Evening Post interview that can be found online:



> "To what extent are you influenced by Christianity?"
> 
> "As a child, I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene."
> 
> ...






Obviously I do not know if Einstein brought the plumb line "home". If he indeed opened to _the knock_ he might have heard were he to fully examine the thing he says _out from himself that he states as true _in the last lines.

And "Authentic vitality". That matter of recognition of truth when heard...as coming from a real person...a real place in...that person. True...life. _Authentic_...vitality.

None of us obviously, need Einstein's imprimatur; we have a _far more_ sure testimony of Whom, and in Whom, life is found.

But for those who may imagine they are able to dismiss the faith with a bon mot, a clever turn of phrase, _an empty release of derision..._well, obviously "they ain't no Einstein".

They may be more. But only God knows.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 18, 2018)

Artfuldodger said:


> I haven't watched the video parts. Do they ask why some smart people are religious?
> Is it somewhat related to superstitious people and not being very smart? I don't want to say stupid but just not educated. Generations earlier than us were very superstitious. Not so many today.
> 
> I'm thinking of the Gullah and Geechee and all of their superstitions. They weren't stupid, just not educated.
> ...





Spotlite said:


> Doesn’t fit their agenda of belittling the Christian. And they claim they want to discuss religion like gentlemen lol ?




Here are some things to review:

https://www.google.com/search?q=why...n+god&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1-ab

From what I've gathered there seem to be two ways in which "Smart people" (I'll take that to mean people with high IQ or lot's of education in the sciences) maintain their belief in God.  The first way is that they compartmentalize their belief in God and their belief in the veracity of science.  Being educated, they realize that we know very little about the laws of the natural world.  Quantum Physics remains a mystery.  That alone is a gap in knowledge that could contain what we would consider supernatural phenomena.  So they seem to think that we have rules for the natural world (that anyone can test), and then there is "spooky action" that they believe can be detected by "listening" in a certain way (getting pricked in the heart). They seem to rely on a very human process which they call "revelation".  They say that there's no way to measure or record the experience and that in fact there are no instruments capable.

The second way is that they pursue a philosophical justification for God which is an arbitrary point of resolution to an infinite regression:  "Everything has a cause, what caused God?  Nothing."  Oddly,  they don't realize that they rely on philosophical and scientific principles to justify a position that defies those very principles.  They will say "nothing comes from nothing except God." which is a contradiction that they CHOOSE to live with.  It's not an incontrovertible truth,  it's a preference.  

I guess there's a third way that smart people believe in God. It's the way that Dr. Peterson (the guy in the video in the OP) uses in which he kind of changes the meaning of God to "The Logos" or the idealization of the human consciousness.  He never says that there's a "being" with a personality or consciousness "at the helm".  

In summary, "There are things we don't know about and God is in there and I know it because I feel it", "I like God to be the only thing eternal and without a cause, not matter, not energy or anything else", and "God is an ideal, an idea not a guy".  

I hope that was genteel enough.  I'll add some emojis, just to bring it down to a properly decrepit level


----------



## bullethead (Sep 18, 2018)

Israel said:


> For reasons totally misunderstood I once posted something Einstein had said in an interview. It had absolutely nothing to do with whether Einstein, being generally acknowledged as an intelligent man, held the faith of Jesus Christ.
> 
> Of course we know of many many men, whose intelligence (as measured) among men is without question, that have held the faith of Jesus Christ.
> 
> ...


In a book titled Albert Einstein, the Human Side: New Glimpses from His Archives by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, the authors quoted another letter Einstein wrote in 1954:

… It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 18, 2018)

Israel said:


> For reasons totally misunderstood I once posted something Einstein had said in an interview. It had absolutely nothing to do with whether Einstein, being generally acknowledged as an intelligent man, held the faith of Jesus Christ.
> 
> Of course we know of many many men, whose intelligence (as measured) among men is without question, that have held the faith of Jesus Christ.
> 
> ...



Your expositions beg for response.  They're not really discussion as much as sermons.  The theme often seems to be "Don't you point a crooked finger at believers.  Look at yourself!"  Let's look at what you've written.  
_
"But for those who may imagine they are able to dismiss the faith with a bon mot, a clever turn of phrase, an empty release of derision...well, obviously "they ain't no Einstein""_

But....
_
"The matter is simply one of discernment. Discernment, in particular, of the nature and substance of words. And whether in them can be found, by their substance and weight, (or lack thereof) any indication as to their source. It has everything to do with an intangible matter in which all men constantly swim in judging the truth of things.

A man may, over the course of his lifetime, say many things. And although his having said a thing may indeed be factual, the truth of that thing may, or may not be discerned as coming from a "true place". As believers we understand, though we be often accused (and that, not unusually in self) something of the nature of hypocrisy and its workings. That presentation of facade in some vain hope of appearing (among men) as something more than we are."_

That's pretty clever turn of phrase, all to say "I have seen a thing that you have yet not seen.  The true place. ( I has it)".  It's not real humility.  It never is.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 18, 2018)

Israel said:


> For reasons totally misunderstood I once posted something Einstein had said in an interview. It had absolutely nothing to do with whether Einstein, being generally acknowledged as an intelligent man, held the faith of Jesus Christ.
> 
> Of course we know of many many men, whose intelligence (as measured) among men is without question, that have held the faith of Jesus Christ.
> 
> ...


A quote that the faithful like to point to is from an interview Einstein gave in the bookGlimpses of the Great:



> " I am not an Atheist. I do not know if I can define myself as a Pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds.
> 
> […]
> 
> The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn’t know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God.”



But Einstein’s letter to Gutkind one year before his death seems to put the debate to an eternal rest. Here’s a partial translation.



> The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can [for me] change this. These subtilized interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text. For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are also no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything ‘chosen’ about them.
> 
> In general I find it painful that you claim a privileged position and try to defend it by two walls of pride, an external one as a man and an internal one as a Jew. As a man you claim, so to speak, a dispensation from causality otherwise accepted, as a Jew the privilege of monotheism. But a limited causality is no longer a causality at all, as our wonderful Spinoza recognized with all incision, probably as the first one. And the animistic interpretations of the religions of nature are in principle not annulled by monopolization. With such walls we can only attain a certain self-deception, but our moral efforts are not furthered by them. On the contrary.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 18, 2018)

bullethead said:


> In a book titled Albert Einstein, the Human Side: New Glimpses from His Archives by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, the authors quoted another letter Einstein wrote in 1954:
> 
> … It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.




I like this one:
* “My sense of god is my sense of wonder about the universe.”  *


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Here are some things to review:
> 
> https://www.google.com/search?q=why...n+god&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1-ab
> 
> ...


Lol....... but.......it is hilarious to try to hear a non believer explain to me that which he neither does not experience or fully understand in an attempt to tell me what it is or isn’t


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 18, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Lol....... but.......it is hilarious to try to hear a non believer explain to me that which he neither does not experience or fully understand in an attempt to tell me what it is or isn’t



I'm just telling you what believers have told me in person, in videos, and in discussions right here.  You're not being very civil right now.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 18, 2018)

Oh,  There's a fourth way I've noticed that people say that "smart people" can believe in God.  They change the definition of "smart people".


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 18, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Lol....... but.......it is hilarious to try to hear a non believer explain to me that which he neither does not experience or fully understand in an attempt to tell me what it is or isn’t



Tell you what, let's start fresh.  Take one part of what I said, a sentence or two, and explain to me why it's false.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 18, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I like this one:
> * “My sense of god is my sense of wonder about the universe.”  *


I can relate to that 100%


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 18, 2018)

Artful,

Check this guy out.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="



" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>


----------



## welderguy (Sep 18, 2018)

To the unbelieving in matters spiritual, I ask what the scientifically "smart" explanation is for happenings relating to the worship of satan?
Let's just take ouija boards for an example. What causes the piece to move on the board?
Am I "stupid" because I only have one explanation for this, which does not involve science but rather the spiritual realm?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 18, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> This kind of made me chuckle a little -
> 
> I think its going to be a few life times before the Bible gets relegated to the dustbin of history.




I missed this, Walt.   I agree that the totality of the Bible will never be "relegated to the dustbin of history".  It shouldn't.  By the way, that's a misquote of Sam.  He said that Gods get relegated to the dustbin of history.  The Bible should just be re-shelved to the Mythology Section.  

It's good enough for now that The Bible's stupider parts keep getting ignored or at least re-interpreted to fit a modern secular society.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 18, 2018)

welderguy said:


> To the unbelieving in matters spiritual, I ask what the scientifically "smart" explanation is for happenings relating to the worship of satan?
> Let's just take ouija boards for an example. What causes the piece to move on the board?
> Am I "stupid" because I only have one explanation for this, which does not involve science but rather the spiritual realm?


Make sure no hands are touching the board piece, Ask it a question and see how much it moves.
 Stupid, No. Gullible, Probably.


----------



## ky55 (Sep 18, 2018)

welderguy said:


> To the unbelieving in matters spiritual, I ask what the scientifically "smart" explanation is for happenings relating to the worship of satan?
> Let's just take ouija boards for an example. What causes the piece to move on the board?
> Am I "stupid" because I only have one explanation for this, which does not involve science but rather the spiritual realm?




What is your explanation?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 18, 2018)

welderguy said:


> To the unbelieving in matters spiritual, I ask what the scientifically "smart" explanation is for happenings relating to the worship of satan?
> Let's just take ouija boards for an example. What causes the piece to move on the board?
> Am I "stupid" because I only have one explanation for this, which does not involve science but rather the spiritual realm?



I don't have much experience with Ouija boards but my mom used to have some friends that said they were psychic.  One time, I guess I was probably 12 or 13 they had a seance. They made a makeshift Ouija board with some letters on pieces of cardstock arranged in a circle and put an shotglass upside down in the middle of them.  My mom remembers she, my dad, my uncle, and the two psychics being present.  They turned off the lights and lit some candles. (I don't know why this is necessary.  Must be left overs from some ancient ritual).  Then they put a finger on the shotglass and it started moving, slowly at first them with great speed.  It hit some of the various lettered pieces of paper, knocking some of them off the table.  My mom said that the shotglass "spelled out" how my dad's uncle died (he was a pilot) but she doesn't remeber any of the details of what it said.   I remember my uncle saying that the shotglass was hot.  

Have you ever seen a Ouija piece move by itself, with no one touching it?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 18, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Make sure no hands are touching the board piece, Ask it a question and see how much it moves.
> Stupid, No. Gullible, Probably.




Let's be a bit more generous.  If someone has seen something that they don't have a good explanation for then any explanation is a start.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Tell you what, let's start fresh.  Take one part of what I said, a sentence or two, and explain to me why it's false.




My only point is when a non believer is trying to explain what a believer thinks, experiences, etc.........it’s nothing but opinion. It’s like krispy creme telling you what they think is wrong with your car.

And no, I’m not being uncivil with my post and not intended to be uncivil.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 18, 2018)

ky55 said:


> What is your explanation?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2018)

welderguy said:


> To the unbelieving in matters spiritual, I ask what the scientifically "smart" explanation is for happenings relating to the worship of satan?
> Let's just take ouija boards for an example. What causes the piece to move on the board?
> Am I "stupid" because I only have one explanation for this, which does not involve science but rather the spiritual realm?


Never fooled with those boards myself but keep in mind when non believers and anti religious are setting the parameters, you can rest assured it’s biased.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 18, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Let's be a bit more generous.  If someone has seen something that they don't have a good explanation for then any explanation is a start.


That is taking the LOOONG way around. But yeah sure, we almost NEED an explanation. 

Personally,
I can't say that I fear a devil that not only needs human fingers on the GAME piece, but needs Milton Bradley to sell the gateway to the spirit world for $19.99 at Walmart.


----------



## ky55 (Sep 18, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Personally,
> I can't say that I fear a devil that not only needs human fingers on the GAME piece, but needs Milton Bradley to sell the gateway to the spirit world for $19.99 at Walmart.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 18, 2018)

welderguy said:


> To the unbelieving in matters spiritual, I ask what the scientifically "smart" explanation is for happenings relating to the worship of satan?
> Let's just take ouija boards for an example. What causes the piece to move on the board?
> Am I "stupid" because I only have one explanation for this, which does not involve science but rather the spiritual realm?


And just because I won't be able to sleep tonight if I didn't ask you...
Do you think every teenage girl that uses at an Ouija board with her friends at a sleep over to find out if "Billy" likes her is actually communicating with Satan?.. Do you think that spirits from the Netherworld are peering into Billys sole and actually answering her??
Do you honestly believe that the results of a Ouija board are truthful/accurate/ reliable?????


----------



## welderguy (Sep 18, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Make sure no hands are touching the board piece, Ask it a question and see how much it moves.
> Stupid, No. Gullible, Probably.



So are you saying the piece doesn't move without someone's hand on it?


----------



## welderguy (Sep 18, 2018)

bullethead said:


> That is taking the LOOONG way around. But yeah sure, we almost NEED an explanation..



That's all I'm asking for is a true explanation. Not speculative, but true.


----------



## welderguy (Sep 18, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I don't have much experience with Ouija boards but my mom used to have some friends that said they were psychic.  One time, I guess I was probably 12 or 13 they had a seance. They made a makeshift Ouija board with some letters on pieces of cardstock arranged in a circle and put an shotglass upside down in the middle of them.  My mom remembers she, my dad, my uncle, and the two psychics being present.  They turned off the lights and lit some candles. (I don't know why this is necessary.  Must be left overs from some ancient ritual).  Then they put a finger on the shotglass and it started moving, slowly at first them with great speed.  It hit some of the various lettered pieces of paper, knocking some of them off the table.  My mom said that the shotglass "spelled out" how my dad's uncle died (he was a pilot) but she doesn't remeber any of the details of what it said.   I remember my uncle saying that the shotglass was hot.
> 
> Have you ever seen a Ouija piece move by itself, with no one touching it?



I've never personally had any dealings with a Ouija board.
I've only heard lots and lots of claims that the piece moves by itself with no apparent  help from a human.


----------



## welderguy (Sep 18, 2018)

ky55 said:


> What is your explanation?



It doesn't take a Ouija board to make me a believer in the spiritual realm. I already know it exists by far greater evidences.


----------



## welderguy (Sep 18, 2018)

bullethead said:


> And just because I won't be able to sleep tonight if I didn't ask you...
> Do you think every teenage girl that uses at an Ouija board with her friends at a sleep over to find out if "Billy" likes her is actually communicating with Satan?.. Do you think that spirits from the Netherworld are peering into Billys sole and actually answering her??
> Do you honestly believe that the results of a Ouija board are truthful/accurate/ reliable?????



All I want to know is IF the piece moves(without any human help), what's the "smart" explanation for it. simple question.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 18, 2018)

welderguy said:


> So are you saying the piece doesn't move without someone's hand on it?


Yes
Are you saying that a $20 board game is the gateway to the spirit world?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 18, 2018)

welderguy said:


> All I want to know is IF the piece moves(without any human help), what's the "smart" explanation for it. simple question.


It does not move without a person or people touching it.
Put one on your table. Surround it by 100 people, have them all sit on their hands, ask the inanimate object all the questions your heart desires and it will sit there just like an ash tray, rock, salt shaker, bottle of ketchup and 1000 other things. But place someones hands on it and OooohWeeeeOoohhh the spirits magically move it.
I seriously cannot believe you are even pursuing this conversation.
You admit to never have using one and yet you say Satan guides them. 

I have a magic tree branch in my yard that will find the ground if tossed into the air. $20 (plus shipping) and you can astound yourself for hours at how it works every time.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 18, 2018)

welderguy said:


> All I want to know is IF the piece moves(without any human help), what's the "smart" explanation for it. simple question.


It doesn't move. That is the simple answer.


----------



## ky55 (Sep 18, 2018)

bullethead said:


> It doesn't move. That is the simple answer.



Too simple. 
This one is better:



welderguy said:


> It doesn't take a Ouija board to make me a believer in the spiritual realm. I already know it exists by far greater evidences.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 18, 2018)

ky55 said:


> Too simple.
> This one is better:


I can believe people make this stink up, I just cannot fathom that they admit to it and say it out loud.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 18, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> My only point is when a non believer is trying to explain what a believer thinks, experiences, etc.........it’s nothing but opinion. It’s like krispy creme telling you what they think is wrong with your car.
> 
> And no, I’m not being uncivil with my post and not intended to be uncivil.



There are people here who have been believers, almost all of them.  Do you think that they don't have any understanding of belief?  I believed that Jesus was the Son of God and that he resurrected from the dead and that the only way to Heaven was through Christ.  Then I didn't. Lot's of believers talk about when they were atheists or walked away from their faith for some time.  I believe them when they say they know what it's like to not have faith.  Why don't you think that street goes both ways?

As for civility, when you use an emoji, try to imagine how it might be taken in the worst possible way. not how you might have intended it.  For example:  "You believe that Jesus rose from the dead?"  Remember how that makes you think of the person that would post something like that.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 18, 2018)

ky55 said:


> Too simple.
> This one is better:





bullethead said:


> I can believe people make this stink up, I just cannot fathom that they admit to it and say it out loud.




C'mon, now.   I wanna hear about Welder's experience.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 18, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> C'mon, now.   I wanna hear about Welder's experience.


He clearly stated that he has Zero experience with an Ouija board, yet, he uses it as an example. He makes claims that it moves by the power of spirits and people talk to Satan through it....
I'm guessing he has seen it in movies... idk?


----------



## welderguy (Sep 18, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> C'mon, now.   I wanna hear about Welder's experience.



I have no experience. And I'm glad. But I've heard many(more than I can count on one hand) that have messed around with the thing. They say it moves on it's own. Some of you have said it does NOT move without human assistance. How do you know it doesn't?


----------



## welderguy (Sep 18, 2018)

bullethead said:


> He makes claims that it moves by the power of spirits and people talk to Satan through it...



Show me where I made these claims.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 18, 2018)

welderguy said:


> To the unbelieving in matters spiritual, I ask what the scientifically "smart" explanation is for happenings relating to the worship of satan?
> Let's just take ouija boards for an example. What causes the piece to move on the board?
> Am I "stupid" because I only have one explanation for this, which does not involve science but rather the spiritual realm?


So explain......
What do you mean by the "happenings relating to the worship of Satan"
What "causes the piece to move on the board"???
What is your " one explanation involving the spiritual realm"???


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 18, 2018)

welderguy said:


> I have no experience. And I'm glad. But I've heard many(more than I can count on one hand) that have messed around with the thing. They say it moves on it's own. Some of you have said it does NOT move without human assistance. How do you know it doesn't?



I used to devour paranormal literature.  I've read accounts of toilets being pulled out of the floor by unseen hands, people levitating and crawling up walls while possessed by demons, and all manner of floating objects.  Should I believe that all of those things happened?  Do you?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 18, 2018)

welderguy said:


> I have no experience. And I'm glad. But I've heard many(more than I can count on one hand) that have messed around with the thing. They say it moves on it's own. Some of you have said it does NOT move without human assistance. How do you know it doesn't?


Welder, buy one.
Set it up
Start recording with your phone.
Hands off. Nobody touch it.
Ask it 1, 10, 100 questions.
Post the video on here.

Try it with Chutes and Ladders while you are at it too. I "heard" the game pieces move themselves.


----------



## ky55 (Sep 18, 2018)

welderguy said:


> I have no experience. And I'm glad. But I've heard many(more than I can count on one hand) that have messed around with the thing. They say it moves on it's own. Some of you have said it does NOT move without human assistance. How do you know it doesn't?



Welder, 
have you asked those people where thunder comes from, or why the crops fail sometimes?
Would those answers be as credible to you as their Ouija board statements?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 18, 2018)

welderguy said:


> I have no experience. And I'm glad. But I've heard many(more than I can count on one hand) that have messed around with the thing. They say it moves on it's own. Some of you have said it does NOT move without human assistance. How do you know it doesn't?




Ask them again.  They will tell you that someone was touching it and that it felt like it was moving on its own.  See if any of them tell you that it moved while no one was touching it.   If it did, then we may have some real explaining to do and I would be willing to investigate it.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> There are people here who have been believers, almost all of them.  Do you think that they don't have any understanding of belief?  I believed that Jesus was the Son of God and that he resurrected from the dead and that the only way to Heaven was through Christ.  Then I didn't. Lot's of believers talk about when they were atheists or walked away from their faith for some time.  I believe them when they say they know what it's like to not have faith.  Why don't you think that street goes both ways?
> 
> As for civility, when you use an emoji, try to imagine how it might be taken in the worst possible way. not how you might have intended it.  For example:  "You believe that Jesus rose from the dead?"  Remember how that makes you think of the person that would post something like that.


Well........have you received since you believed? When you do, then you can relate to what we are saying. And I only responded to your emoji with the same.....yet I’m uncivil


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 18, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Well........have you received since you believed? When you do, then you can relate to what we are saying. And I only responded to your emoji with the same.....yet I’m uncivil




Did you see this part?

_"I'll add some emojis, just to bring it down to a properly decrepit level"_

It's a criticism of the use of emojis or didn't you understand that? 

I can relate to what you're saying completely.  You have felt His presence.  He has revealed Himself to you in His word, in His creation, and in the lives He has changed.  Will you now tell me that I don't know what those words mean?


----------



## Israel (Sep 19, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I like this one:
> * “My sense of god is my sense of wonder about the universe.”  *



.
There seemed a care to assure no proposition was made that Einstein ever confessed to being a believer in a god, much less any confession to Jesus as God's Christ.

Odd that a mention of steel man is made, then straw men pop up.

But, you will find this is a spiritual operation. No man is able to _stand_ by his _own_ word.
He must contravene it.

There's no shame in not being an Einstein anymore than there's glory in it. The glory of Einstein's _being_ was for his discovery, and all will be made plain...the secrets of all hearts to be laid bare. 
Everything is set for the revealing of its nature. Its substance.

It's good that you are able to see my _falling short_ in this thing called humility. It shows...discernment.

Tell me though, of this thing perceived as in _my lacking, _(and though _it be_ a thing immaterial, yet perceivable, weighed and measured, at least by you) is it not a plain working by_ your words _that you _have a better capacity_ to its recognition?

But that puts us both back to the very grounds upon which the observation (accusation?) was made, the substantiation of your contention of lack...as in, "he just claims to have something..."



> ( I has it)". It's not real humility. It never is.



So, you contend there is a _real humility_...and something other? I don't disagree at all in this "intangible" but perceivable thing. Just as I do not disagree there is a _true faith_...and mere religious practice.

I do not make any attempt to shirk your observation of my lack in "true humility". And therefore, I also do not need to lay out for you (as you have _already observed_) any of those things in which I find often find _my pride. _These things_..._as _knower _of_ real humility_ should be plain to you. 

A palate cleansed by _true humility_ should have no issue as to the discerning _of natures _(and _their sources_)_ being tasted._

_So, _if indeed you are _haver_ of this thing discerned to my lack, that is the knowledge of _real humility, _while I blunder about in whatever I have that isn't, I will easily confess I do have a something you do not. I am less than _perfect_ example of _real humility._

I agree wholeheartedly the substance of humility _to be real_ though it be entirely a non material thing.

I eagerly wait for you to show how real humility appears. It must be a very good thing to know if one _can be judged_ to its lack.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 19, 2018)

Israel said:


> .
> There seemed a care to assure no proposition was made that Einstein ever confessed to being a believer in a god, much less any confession to Jesus as God's Christ.
> 
> Odd that a mention of steel man is made, then straw men pop up.
> ...


Odd mention that one would use one Einstein quote without considering them all first.
Deceptive humility?
What was the point of mentioning Einstein at all?


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 19, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Well........have you received since you believed? When you do, then you can relate to what we are saying. And I only responded to your emoji with the same.....yet I’m uncivil


Now you are just making stuff up.
Its amazing the lengths a believer will go to, to separate themselves from the rest of the pack.
Different denominations, the Elect, when you receive (receive what? a bunt cake via FedEx?) then you will have passed the belief test...….
It all reeks of fear and uncertainty.


----------



## Israel (Sep 19, 2018)

I am sure you will be able to find as many prefixes to humility as necessary.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 19, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Now you are just making stuff up.
> Its amazing the lengths a believer will go to, to separate themselves from the rest of the pack.
> Different denominations, the Elect, when you receive (receive what? a bunt cake via FedEx?) then you will have passed the belief test...….
> It all reeks of fear and uncertainty.


Nope. It’s scripture. In Acts. What’s amazing is the hoops people jump through to deny it. More time spent on trying to disprove it than prove it.

And please don’t try to use this as an “elite” Christian, or separation from a pack. That’s a moot and irrelevant argument to hide behind.


----------



## rosewood (Sep 19, 2018)

Artfuldodger said:


> I enclosed my carport and removed the brick veneer to make the room as big as possible. All I accomplished was making the room 12' 6" wide.
> 
> What that meant was a 6" strip of sheet rock for the ceiling and buying a piece of 15' wide carpet.
> 
> That was a good example of bad common sense.


I designed the entire dimensions of my shop by what length materials come in.  I had to cut very little.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 19, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Did you see this part?
> 
> _"I'll add some emojis, just to bring it down to a properly decrepit level"_
> 
> ...


I’m not really sure why you’re hung up with this emoji stuff. It was just a simple sarcastic reply to your “gentle enough “ sarcasm. Not meant to be uncivil at all and shouldn’t be taken that way. 

The subject at hand is “religion is for stupid people”. The non believer somehow thinks they are on an elevated intelligence level above the Christian. 

The emojis are not criticism, the subject is. Knowing the words, I will give you that. When you receive his spirit, there’s no denying or explaining away of that. You may walk away, but you still know.


----------



## rosewood (Sep 19, 2018)

welderguy said:


> I've run across many people in my line of work that are incredibly intelligent (engineers), but seemed to be so lacking in common sense. What I would call working knowledge. They have plenty of book sense but no hands on knowledge.


Yeah, I went to school with those folks.  Some couldn't turn a screw driver and they were studying to be a mechanical engineer.  They were destined to be desk jockeys for sure.

I have always said there are 3 types of engineers.  Those that were born to be engineers and never went to school, those that were born to be engineers and got a degree, and those that got a degree.  Ultimately, the 1st 2 are the only real engineers the other one is a EIDO (engineer in degree only).

Rosewood


----------



## rosewood (Sep 19, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Nope. It’s scripture. In Acts. What’s amazing is the hoops people jump through to deny it. More time spent on trying to disprove it than prove it.


It is all about proving they are not sinful.  They do not want to adhere to God's law, so they try to prove it doesn't exist erroneously thinking they will not be subject to it.

Rosewood


----------



## Israel (Sep 19, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Its amazing the lengths a believer will go to, to separate themselves from the rest of the pack.


 
You do know you are speaking of a thing easily found among men.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="



" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 19, 2018)

Israel said:


> .
> There seemed a care to assure no proposition was made that Einstein ever confessed to being a believer in a god, much less any confession to Jesus as God's Christ.
> 
> Odd that a mention of steel man is made, then straw men pop up.
> ...



It's not saying you know something that you don't.  My mom is the only Christian I've ever known who says "I might be wrong".  That's humility.

Jesus might be Lord.  I could be wrong.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 19, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I’m not really sure why you’re hung up with this emoji stuff. It was just a simple sarcastic reply to your “gentle enough “ sarcasm. Not meant to be uncivil at all and shouldn’t be taken that way.
> 
> The subject at hand is “religion is for stupid people”. The non believer somehow thinks they are on an elevated intelligence level above the Christian.
> 
> The emojis are not criticism, the subject is. Knowing the words, I will give you that. When you receive his spirit, there’s no denying or explaining away of that. You may walk away, but you still know.



This one statement shows that you didn't watch the small portion of the video in the OP,  the part that this discussion is REALLY about. Peterson is a professed Christian, yet he said, in so many words, that "religion is for stupid people".  I wanted to know what believers thought about what HE said.  Yet, without taking the time to understand the context you came in swinging.  How's that look?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 19, 2018)

rosewood said:


> Yeah, I went to school with those folks.  Some couldn't turn a screw driver and they were studying to be a mechanical engineer.  They were destined to be desk jockeys for sure.
> 
> I have always said there are 3 types of engineers.  Those that were born to be engineers and never went to school, those that were born to be engineers and got a degree, and those that got a degree.  Ultimately, the 1st 2 are the only real engineers the other one is a EIDO (engineer in degree only).
> 
> Rosewood



What if Einstein couldn't turn a screwdriver? People have different talents. My brother is an academic.  I like being around him and his academic friends.  They look at the world a different way that the manual laborers I'm usually around in construction.  They often analyze issues like politics and science with more nuance.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 19, 2018)

rosewood said:


> It is all about proving they are not sinful.  They do not want to adhere to God's law, so they try to prove it doesn't exist erroneously thinking they will not be subject to it.
> 
> Rosewood



For me, it's trying to understand how people work.  The idea of deism and religion become a true curiosity when looked at objectively.  That's why I found the discussion in the OP worth sharing.  Did you watch any of it?  You should.  Those are extremely articulate and thoughtful guys talking about religion.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 19, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Nope. It’s scripture. In Acts. What’s amazing is the hoops people jump through to deny it. More time spent on trying to disprove it than prove it.
> 
> And please don’t try to use this as an “elite” Christian, or separation from a pack. That’s a moot and irrelevant argument to hide behind.


When you believe, you generally attribute any positive "happenings" as having received a gift from God.
This is nonsense -


> Well.....have you received since you believed? When you do, then you can relate to what we are saying.


Because every person who believes will tell you they receive.... whether that be comfort or hope or happiness or whatever.
You are trying to make it sound like its some special personalized gift from God to recieve and because you are special, you now belong to the special "can relate" club.

You are trying to separate out people that "used to believe" from people that "still believe" as not having received something.
You cant possibly know that so are just making it up.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 19, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> This one statement shows that you didn't watch the small portion of the video in the OP,  the part that this discussion is REALLY about. Peterson is a professed Christian, yet he said, in so many words, that "religion is for stupid people".  I wanted to know what believers thought about what HE said.  Yet, without taking the time to understand the context you came in swinging.  How's that look?


Kinda blows this outta the water doesn't it -


> The non believer somehow thinks they are on an elevated intelligence level above the Christian.


Oops it wasnt the nonbeliever who said it


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 19, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Kinda blows this outta the water doesn't it -
> 
> Oops it wasnt the nonbeliever who said it



In regards to this:

_"The non believer somehow thinks they are on an elevated intelligence level above the Christian."_

There were several posts that dealt with scientists, or as Artfuldodger put it, "Smart people" who believe in God.  I went on to relay what I had seen, heard, or read about what very, very smart believers had to say (I include Peterson in their number).  I then added what I've observed are the three ways in which smart people believe.  Those observations could have been discussed.  My understanding could have been analyzed.  I was hoping someone would.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 19, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> When you believe, you generally attribute any positive "happenings" as having received a gift from God.
> This is nonsense -
> 
> Because every person who believes will tell you they receive.... whether that be comfort or hope or happiness or whatever.
> ...



While driving my mom to the airport she said "If we learn that there's no God I'll believe it".  I asked "What if we learn that it's another God, maybe one that we haven't heard of yet?"  She said "Then I'll believe in that one.  But for now, believing in the christian God [works for me]."  That was as honest as it gets.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 19, 2018)

Walt,  

Did you see what Peterson said in the video?  What do you think of his analysis?


----------



## Israel (Sep 19, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> It's not saying you know something that you don't.  My mom is the only Christian I've ever known who says "I might be wrong".  That's humility.
> 
> Jesus might be Lord.  I could be wrong.



Do you equate then, "I could be wrong" and "Jesus _may not be_ Lord"?

This humility you say you see in another...if that equation exists there to a consistency, you have yet to meet a Christian mother.

I have no doubt at all there are many both waiting and willing to meet you.

But, I could be wrong.
I prefer to think you misinterpret _your own _mother. No less than I once did _my own._


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 19, 2018)

rosewood said:


> It is all about proving they are not sinful.  They do not want to adhere to God's law, so they try to prove it doesn't exist erroneously thinking they will not be subject to it.
> 
> Rosewood





WaltL1 said:


> When you believe, you generally attribute any positive "happenings" as having received a gift from God.
> This is nonsense -
> 
> Because every person who believes will tell you they receive.... whether that be comfort or hope or happiness or whatever.
> ...



No Sir. Receiving the spirit is scripture. Remember the conversation several weeks back concerning something that happens and unless you experience it you can’t unders it?  I believe Ambush related it to a phenomenon? Something good happening is not what we are talking about. This is an unexplainable instant change that occurs.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 19, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> This one statement shows that you didn't watch the small portion of the video in the OP,  the part that this discussion is REALLY about. Peterson is a professed Christian, yet he said, in so many words, that "religion is for stupid people".  I wanted to know what believers thought about what HE said.  Yet, without taking the time to understand the context you came in swinging.  How's that look?


Anyone who says religion is for stupid people is considered criticism. The non believer just happens to make a discussion on it.


----------



## Israel (Sep 19, 2018)

The ground work is being laid to equate religion with the faith of the Son of God, Jesus Christ.

It _almost _appears effective.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 19, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> No Sir. Receiving the spirit is scripture. Remember the conversation several weeks back concerning something that happens and unless you experience it you can’t unders it?  I believe Ambush related it to a phenomenon? Something good happening is not what we are talking about. This is an unexplainable instant change that occurs.


That happens in many religions,among many beliefs and at quite a few concerts( especially Greatful Dead ones)....
Are you saying that an overwhelming sense, feelings and extreme emotions overcome you? Or are you actually visited by and talk to Jesus/God?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 19, 2018)

Oh look!!! 

The same conversation that all threads over here devolve to.

What a shocker.

Never mind me boys, I'm just passing through, carry on.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 19, 2018)

Israel said:


> Do you equate then, "I could be wrong" and "Jesus _may not be_ Lord"?
> 
> This humility you say you see in another...if that equation exists there to a consistency, you have yet to meet a Christian mother.
> 
> ...




I can hear her voice "Fine. I don't care if that guy internet guy doesn't think I'm a Christian".


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 19, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Anyone who says religion is for stupid people is considered criticism. The non believer just happens to make a discussion on it.



Did you watch any of the video?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 19, 2018)

bullethead said:


> That happens in many religions,among many beliefs and at quite a few concerts( especially Greatful Dead ones)....
> Are you saying that an overwhelming sense, feelings and extreme emotions overcome you? Or are you actually visited by and talk to Jesus/God?


Nope. Not what I’m saying. See, you don’t have this figured out kind you think you did.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 19, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Did you watch any of the video?


Yes and I still stand by my statement, “anyone” relating stupid to the religious in shape or form or ideology is nothing but a critic.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 19, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Nope. Not what I’m saying. See, you don’t have this figured out kind you think you did.


Ohh right,  it's the same thing only different, because you NEED to make it different so your god stands out from the pack...
I do have it figured out.
Your invisible friend is "better" than their invisible friend. You aren't the first kid on the jungle bars to claim it and you won't be the last.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 19, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Ohh right,  it's the same thing only different, because you NEED to make it different so your god stands out from the pack...
> I do have it figured out.
> Your invisible friend is "better" than their invisible friend. You aren't the first kid on the jungle bars to claim it and you won't be the last.


Lol ok ? I believe someone once said “you’re loster than a ball in high weeds”


----------



## bullethead (Sep 19, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Lol ok ? I believe someone once said “you’re loster than a ball in high weeds”


No, cmon really, I get what you are saying, but you cannot possibly understand where I am coming from because you have not experienced what I have, and if you did, mine was just little better.


----------



## Israel (Sep 19, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I can hear her voice "Fine. I don't care if that guy internet guy doesn't think I'm a Christian".




This explains much. Especially your "foray" in what you imagine to be the faith by which you take a stand as knowing it...and then being fit to its dismissal. For you a christian holds...or is held in some sort of wishful thinking (and testimony) that Jesus _may be the_ Lord. Jesus may be...God's Christ. God's (the God over all things seen and unseen, known and unknown) Word in fullness given to and for the world.

But...whatever, "this _set of beliefs_ is working...for me" 


It (and I) speaks nothing of your mother, for it is _only your testimony_ of what appears to you as _her faith. _But it satisfies (does it satisfy?) in you that appearance and conviction of what "it _must mean_ to be a believer in Jesus Christ." A believer's best hope in regards to right standing before God is based on nothing more than...what? It's not even a conviction that Jesus_ is_ Lord...but that after some form or fashion "that jesus" (at best) _may be right _(and righteous) in both what He says, and says_ of God. _

This _leaving alone_ the thought that_ such a "christian" _(to you) is exemplified in



> "If we learn that there's no God I'll believe it"



Who is the "we" there that learns this _to the persuasion_ of a christian? How does such a "we" prove this, and _in such proving _prevail in this _to the christian's believing?_

Again, it is (only) something _you say_ your mother has said, that _to you _indicates a humility_._

Yes, I believe that is how you see it. Yet, not you alone. It's very persuasive of how much a religious bent is yet found amongst the many calling themselves "former christians". For I am persuaded that is all you have ever known. Some _form _of religion.  

No man can make it past the point of the ultimate offense to himself...unless he is carried. And...he will know it.

"If you _continue_ in my word..."

As if Jesus did not know the disciple would find full array of determent to such...offered on every hand and side...but One.

How can you believe, who receive honor one of another, and seek not the honor that comes from God only?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 19, 2018)

Israel said:


> This explains much. Especially your "foray" in what you imagine to be the faith by which you take a stand as knowing it...and then being fit to its dismissal. For you a christian holds...or is held in some sort of wishful thinking (and testimony) that Jesus _may be the_ Lord. Jesus may be...God's Christ. God's (the God over all things seen and unseen, known and unknown) Word in fullness given to and for the world.
> 
> But...whatever, "this _set of beliefs_ is working...for me"
> 
> ...


And that was another installment of "That ^ and a Dollar will get you any sized soft drink at Micky Ds"
Now back to our regularly scheduled conversation that is not chock full of assertions and unprovable claims..


----------



## red neck richie (Sep 19, 2018)

Lets just insult people (Christians) from the start? Ambush You listen to Harris like Manson and you say we are indoctrinated.. Yes you are right believers are stupid. You bailed out after I proved you wrong on color? whats up Brother?


----------



## redwards (Sep 19, 2018)

With regard to the title of this thread,..
*"Religion is for stupid people"*
...the title itself begs the question...
If religion is for stupid people, then what must "smart" (or less stupid) people subscribe to?
Could an answer to that question be held simply in one set of scripture verses from God's word?
Hmmm...
Probably a lot of you are familiar with Psalm 23...
If one does not "believe in the exiatance of God"...then let us just remove any reference to God, or what He is capable of doing, from Psalm 23...
What do we have left?

*Psalm 23*
*A psalm of David.
1* The Lord is* my *shepherd*;
I *have what* I *need.*
2* He lets *me *lie down in green pastures*;*
he leads* me *beside quiet waters*.
3 *He renews* my* life;
he leads* me *along the right paths
for his name’s sake*.
4 Even when I go through the darkest valley,
I* fear no dange*r,*
for you are with *me;*
your rod and your staff—they comfort *me.
5 *You prepare a table before* me*
in the presence of *my *enemies*;*
you anoint *my *head with oil*;
my *cup overflows*.
6 *Only goodness and faithful love will pursue* me*
all the days of* my *life*,*
and *I *will dwell in the house of the Lord
as long as* I *live*.*


*Looks like there is nothing left... except...me, my, and I.*

*Personally...even though I (as a Christian) may be "stupid" in the eyes of the "less stupid" of this world... Jesus IS my SHEPHERD!*


----------



## bullethead (Sep 19, 2018)

red neck richie said:


> Lets just insult people (Christians) from the start? Ambush You listen to Harris like Manson and you say we are indoctrinated.. Yes you are right believers are stupid. You bailed out after I proved you wrong on color? whats up Brother?


Richie, wow, in all these years you taught us about color pigment. And I will say that I did learn something, but ONE time you "won" in all these years in all these conversations....
Well I guess if "victory" came along that infrequently every so many years and regarding a non religious subject, you really should bask in your glory. Take two advil if you get sore from all the self back patting.

And, if you took the time to listen to the videos and read the thread..IT WAS A CHRISTIAN IN THE VIDEO THAT MADE THE "RELIGION IS FOR STUPID PEOPLE" statement,  NOT ambush...
But you got that color thing going for you,so...

63,279-1. 
We didnt get a shutout, darn


----------



## red neck richie (Sep 19, 2018)

You have to be double jointed in this forum. No one else is gonna pat you on the back. But I do appreciate the conformation that you were wrong and learned something. Baby steps.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 19, 2018)

redwards said:


> *Looks like there is nothing left... except...me, my, and I*



That sounds self centered and lonely


----------



## bullethead (Sep 19, 2018)

red neck richie said:


> You have to be double jointed in this forum. No one else is gonna pat you on the back. But I do appreciate the conformation that you were wrong and learned something. Baby steps.


I was under informed.
Hey, black is really Dark Brown..I am gonna rock Jeopardy if they ever call.


----------



## red neck richie (Sep 19, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I was under informed.
> Hey, black is really Dark Brown..I am gonna rock Jeopardy if they ever call.


I'm pretty sure they won't call. You have to apply. Pun intended.


----------



## redwards (Sep 19, 2018)

bullethead said:


> And, if you took the time to listen to the videos and read the thread..IT WAS A CHRISTIAN IN THE VIDEO THAT MADE THE "RELIGION IS FOR STUPID PEOPLE" statement,...



But, there is at least one individual who disagrees...
https://www.quora.com/What-are-Dr-Jordan-Petersons-religious-beliefs



bullethead said:


> That sounds self centered and lonely


Yes, I imagine a life without God is...self centered and lonely.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

red neck richie said:


> Lets just insult people (Christians) from the start? Ambush You listen to Harris like Manson and you say we are indoctrinated.. Yes you are right believers are stupid. You bailed out after I proved you wrong on color? whats up Brother?




Sorry, I thought we were done with that.  Which black is the real black again?  The Ivory Black or the Mars Black?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

red neck richie said:


> Lets just insult people (Christians) from the start? Ambush You listen to Harris like Manson and you say we are indoctrinated.. Yes you are right believers are stupid. You bailed out after I proved you wrong on color? whats up Brother?



Hey,  look at this stuff:

https://www.cnn.com/2014/07/17/business/worlds-darkest-marterial/index.html


----------



## Israel (Sep 20, 2018)

bullethead said:


> And that was another installment of "That ^ and a Dollar will get you any sized soft drink at Micky Ds"
> Now back to our regularly scheduled conversation that is not chock full of assertions and unprovable claims..


Far more clever men have found their cleverness to be their own undoing.



ambush80 said:


> In regards to this:
> 
> _"The non believer somehow thinks they are on an elevated intelligence level above the Christian."_
> 
> There were several posts that dealt with scientists, or as Artfuldodger put it, "Smart people" who believe in God.  I went on to relay what I had seen, heard, or read about what very, very smart believers had to say (I include Peterson in their number).  I then added what I've observed are the three ways in which smart people believe.  Those observations could have been discussed.  My understanding could have been analyzed.  I was hoping someone would.



As to Peterson. 

The last I've seen of him, but only by video, he was still (to me) trying to _figure out _something of the resurrection. He doesn't dismiss it, but he approaches it (again, to me) in much the same way you seem to approach certain matters. That is, that if a seeming miraculous thing were to be seen or given (so to speak), and one is in some way acceptable of that "thing", then a reasonable (by man's reason) explanation of the thing can be made. I think this was a point of your scoffing at his "if one had enough death and life in themselves..." (very much as though Jesus Christ were some sort of Zen Master able to, of his own, master the matters of the material...and death itself)

You've said, more than a few times (though not lately...but years ago) about a burning bush experience...would be enough (and maybe _nothing less than enough_) for you. Many occupy that place...."if I saw one (what is to me) true miracle...then I would throw myself heart and soul into the faith". I can be convinced...BUT...only by the seeing of a thing I can't explain.

Yet, I don't see you much different than I see JBP...in his then trying to explain...what he may be _barely apprehending_ of the resurrection. (Not even touching his devotions to the "mythos" matters, archetypes and heroes, matters)

It's not without significance that Jesus said "if they do not believe Moses and the prophets, neither will they believe even if they see one come back from the dead". Of course he is speaking to a thing about man's thinking that "if I saw a truly remarkable thing...then I would be a very true believer" Oh, one may believe he has seen something remarkable...perhaps even inexplicable...and remain an unbeliever.

How can this be? What is Jesus talking about in regards to "Moses and the prophets" as being of primary necessity? Can Jesus be contradicting the man who says "NO! If I see a great miracle...then, I too will be a believer!"?

I believe so.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 20, 2018)

Israel said:


> Far more clever men have found their cleverness to be their own undoing.


Like who?
How?


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 20, 2018)

redwards said:


> With regard to the title of this thread,..
> *"Religion is for stupid people"*
> ...the title itself begs the question...
> If religion is for stupid people, then what must "smart" (or less stupid) people subscribe to?
> ...





> Could an answer to that question be held simply in one set of scripture verses from God's word?


No.
Your "flip side" scenario is as inaccurate as the blanket statement "religion is for stupid people".


----------



## bullethead (Sep 20, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Hey,  look at this stuff:
> 
> https://www.cnn.com/2014/07/17/business/worlds-darkest-marterial/index.html


Shhh, students be quiet, Mr Richie is holding class.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

red neck richie said:


> Lets just insult people (Christians) from the start? Ambush You listen to Harris like Manson and you say we are indoctrinated.. Yes you are right believers are stupid. You bailed out after I proved you wrong on color? whats up Brother?



I also listen to William Lane Craig, Ravi Zacharias and occasionally Mozart (though I have to admit I like pop music very much).  And as you can tell , if you actually read my posts at all, I'm very impressed with Dr. Peterson.  Is having a wide range of interests "Rolling on the ground laughing" funny to you?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Shhh, students be quiet, Mr Richie is holding class.



Peterson says in his book "Always assume the person you're talking to knows something you don't".  I feel like I've always tried to do that but reading it in Peterson's book has put the axiom forefront in my mind lately.  I'm glad that Ritchie shared his expert knowledge as a printer.  When I come in here and discuss, and when I post a thread, I'm trying to learn about what people think and know.  Must of the stuff we say in here is re-hashed but that's only because these questions have been asked from the beginning of people.  I presented this video because Peterson is the only other Christian (besides my mom) to suggest that "Religion is for stupid people". 

Believers took it merely as an insult. 

I was hoping that someone would have responded to the part where Peterson later said "All people are stupid, Sam".  These are old questions but these new guys are approaching them in new ways.  Sam is clearly as interested in  transcendent experience as Jordan, though they approach it in very different ways.  Why do they disagree on small but significant details about how to get there?  As a person who's moderately interested in transcendence and spirituality myself, I find their exchanges exciting.  Sometimes we get "there" here.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

Israel said:


> Far more clever men have found their cleverness to be their own undoing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Many Christians bring up miracle stories as evidence of their belief.  It's no coincidence that miracles are an important part of their chosen doctrine. 

Yes, I like evidence.  But even so, as Jesus warned, some people won't believe even if they see the scars.  Count me in their number.  Have you seen magic shows lately?  They're truly baffling and amazing.  I only bring up magic to point to the FACT that it's a tendency of people to be easily decieved.  Our minds are pattern detectors and that makes us "see" things that may not be what we think they are.  That's the tendency that magicians exploit.

So if some guy came to me, told me he was Jesus and showed me his scars, I might not believe him.  Levitation might help. Is that too much to ask?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Many Christians bring up miracle stories as evidence of their belief.  It's no coincidence that miracles are an important part of their chosen doctrine.
> 
> Yes, I like evidence.  But even so, as Jesus warned, some people won't believe even if they see the scars.  Count me in their number.  Have you seen magic shows lately?  They're truly baffling and amazing.  I only bring up magic to point to the FACT that it's a tendency of people to be easily decieved.  Our minds are pattern detectors and that makes us "see" things that may not be what we think they are.  That's the tendency that magicians exploit.
> 
> So if some guy came to me, told me he was Jesus and showed me his scars, I might not believe him.  Levitation might help. Is that too much to ask?



P.S.  I wholeheartedly accept that if a guy came up to me (in my mind, even) and said he was Jesus that I might "know his voice".  I reckon that would be compelling evidence.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

It occurred to me that Peterson made an analysis about political conservatism.  So I threw the video into the lions den of the Political Forum.  Check it out.  Maybe something interesting will happen.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 20, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Peterson says in his book "Always assume the person you're talking to knows something you don't".  I feel like I've always tried to do that but reading it in Peterson's book has put the axiom forefront in my mind lately.  I'm glad that Ritchie shared his expert knowledge as a printer.  When I come in here and discuss, and when I post a thread, I'm trying to learn about what people think and know.  Must of the stuff we say in here is re-hashed but that's only because these questions have been asked from the beginning of people.  I presented this video because Peterson is the only other Christian (besides my mom) to suggest that "Religion is for stupid people".
> 
> Believers took it merely as an insult.
> 
> I was hoping that someone would have responded to the part where Peterson later said "All people are stupid, Sam".  These are old questions but these new guys are approaching them in new ways.  Sam is clearly as interested in  transcendent experience as Jordan, though they approach it in very different ways.  Why do they disagree on small but significant details about how to get there?  As a person who's moderately interested in transcendence and spirituality myself, I find their exchanges exciting.  Sometimes we get "there" here.


Ambush, the bias(on both sides at times) is usually so great that in this case had anyone actually taken the time to watch the videos they couldn't possibly say what they are saying in here. Their questions and comments were addressed in the videos. The bias kept them from watching and allowed them to jump to conclusions on what they assume the videos were about.

And, I agree. Any time that I am able to learn something that I am unfamiliar with and not likely to become familiar with in my daily life, I appreciate the info.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Ambush, the bias(on both sides at times) is usually so great that in this case had anyone actually taken the time to watch the videos they couldn't possibly say what they are saying in here. Their questions and comments were addressed in the videos. The bias kept them from watching and allowed them to jump to conclusions on what they assume the videos were about.
> 
> And, I agree. Any time that I am able to learn something that I am unfamiliar with and not likely to become familiar with in my daily life, I appreciate the info.



I don't want to believe that people would make all kinds of commentary on and criticism of some thing that they didn't even read or watch.  These seem like good folks.  They can read and write just as well as anyone else.  I'll continue to give them the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Sep 20, 2018)

2 Cor 4:4 comes to mind


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> 2 Cor 4:4 comes to mind




Is NIV OK?

* 2 Corinthians 4:4 New International Version (NIV)*
_4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God._

Who do you think the "God of this Age" is?  What do you think is the "light of the gospel"?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Sep 20, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Is NIV OK?
> 
> * 2 Corinthians 4:4 New International Version (NIV)*
> _4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God._
> ...



I found out a long time ago, it really doesn't matter what I think.  What matters is what the truth is.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 20, 2018)

welderguy said:


> All I want to know is IF the piece moves(without any human help), what's the "smart" explanation for it. simple question.


The acid is kicking in...….


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I found out a long time ago, it really doesn't matter what I think.  What matters is what the truth is.



Hmm...

Don't you strive to live by the truth?  How do you do that if you don't know what it is?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I found out a long time ago, it really doesn't matter what I think.  What matters is what the truth is.



Hmm...

Don't you strive to live by the truth?  How do you do that if you don't know what it is?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

welderguy said:


> All I want to know is IF the piece moves(without any human help), what's the "smart" explanation for it. simple question.



The first thing a smart person does is the same thing a stupid person does.  Their limbic system kicks in and they jump back, run, or fight.  The very next thing a smart person does is look for a natural explanation.  A Stupid person's first response would be to assume that it's evil spirits.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 20, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> The acid is kicking in...….


I don't think that the experiment I suggested to him is going quite the way he wanted or else he would have video after video of the game piece moving on it's own.


----------



## red neck richie (Sep 20, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Shhh, students be quiet, Mr Richie is holding class.


Lesson #2 class sarcasm- The use of Irony to mock or convey contempt. I dont blame you for taking this thread to the political forum Ambush. Btw I do read your threads and it seems to me that a lot of your posts have to do with what Sam Harris thinks. Just an observation on my part. But I haven't seen anything you posted about Mozart. Maybe I didn't go back far enough.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 20, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I don't want to believe that people would make all kinds of commentary on and criticism of some thing that they didn't even read or watch.  These seem like good folks.  They can read and write just as well as anyone else.  I'll continue to give them the benefit of the doubt.


I am not questioning their goodness or their reading and writing skills.
But I cannot fathom that they watched the videos based off of the replies that they have given and questions they have asked.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 20, 2018)

red neck richie said:


> Lesson #2 class sarcasm- The use of Irony to mock or convey contempt. I dont blame you for taking this thread to the political forum Ambush. Btw I do read your threads and it seems to me that a lot of your posts have to do with what Sam Harris thinks. Just an observation on my part. But I haven't seen anything you posted about Mozart. Maybe I didn't go back far enough.


You are not implying that something is wrong with someone who uses quotes from mostly one source are you??

Btw..ambush definitely uses many sources. Harris makes compelling arguments in ways that "we" have a hard time conveying.
Run it till they stop it


----------



## red neck richie (Sep 20, 2018)

bullethead said:


> You are not implying that something is wrong with someone who uses quotes from mostly one source are you??
> 
> Btw..ambush definitely uses many sources. Harris makes compelling arguments in ways that "we" have a hard time conveying.
> Run it till they stop it


Nothing wrong just an observation. You are not implying that Sam Harris is GOD are you? More innuendo?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 20, 2018)

red neck richie said:


> Nothing wrong just an observation. You are not implying that Sam Harris is GOD are you? More innuendo?


Only you could connect those dots


----------



## Israel (Sep 20, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Many Christians bring up miracle stories as evidence of their belief.  It's no coincidence that miracles are an important part of their chosen doctrine.
> 
> Yes, I like evidence.  But even so, as Jesus warned, some people won't believe even if they see the scars.  Count me in their number.  Have you seen magic shows lately?  They're truly baffling and amazing.  I only bring up magic to point to the FACT that it's a tendency of people to be easily decieved.  Our minds are pattern detectors and that makes us "see" things that may not be what we think they are.  That's the tendency that magicians exploit.
> 
> So if some guy came to me, told me he was Jesus and showed me his scars, I might not believe him.  Levitation might help. Is that too much to ask?



Right...scars are a dime a dozen.
But Jesus is saying a bit more than that though, isn't He?
He's not asserting someone who "says they were dead"...but that, to the hearer, if someone YOU KNEW was dead, and came back...

I know it's a difficult place. I can't speak for these you mention



> Many Christians bring up miracle stories as evidence of their belief.  It's no coincidence that miracles are an important part of their chosen doctrine.



And there is a thing that could appear subtle...but I am confident it's not really.

Moses didn't find the burning bush...when he was looking for, or even hoping for...so far as I know, finding
a "burning bush".

I don't want to weary you with many Bible accounts, or what Jesus says in some of them. Not that they are not of importance, but if, in the matter of the christians you mention, if you found some inclination...you might ask them what they knew/know of their estate at the time. Were they "looking for a miracle?" were they in that place of saying..."I don't believe in God...but I'll believe 'IF I see a miracle' "?

Or were they, as of the myriad testimonies I have heard (in belief)...basically going about their "day to day", maybe with God not on their mind at all in any relevant seeming...and suddenly! Boom...
Or even as the some I have heard (not unlike Saul of Tarsus) so fully devoted in being as anti as they could suppose to a certain thing...and suddenly!

It's probably as needless to say this as anything I so often say, but of course any "hearer" is going to weigh "is this guy remembering correctly?...is what I hear him telling me...a true thing...or do I sense distortion?" Was he really the guy who rode down the road shaking his fist out the window at the God he swore, and swore at, "was not there?"  The same guy who the night before had heaved the Bible out into his yard as far as he could, coloring the air blue as he did. That guy had such a remarkably funny testimony! But...powerful...and joyous.

And of course...despite all seeming enticement otherwise...we can't "work our way into their place".  As in "if I hate christians enough, curse their God enough, can I make Him 'show up' "? Maybe like Saul? Or..."can I say enough nice things about Him...that will get Him to "work for me?"

Does it sound funny? Certainly if one can accept, or does, that the God (regardless of_ known relationship_ to Him) one is appealing to is convinced..."He's sure gonna already know about any ruse I might try to force His hand". Please don't be naive enough to think this never crosses the believer's mind...perhaps even as he prays. So...what's God after? If I "work up tears" (I've done it!)...maybe He'll have pity!
If I get angry "enough"...maybe I can provoke Him! If I adopt a desperate demeanor?

and

So...what's a man to do? What can a man "do" if the God he may even barely concede (and conceive) is held in his consciousness as already _knowing all? _(who would _make room_ for a lesser?) This in itself puts man...if he can concede it...already in the most desperate of places. I simply cannot...leverage Him! In fact, in truth...I can't "do" anything apart from His _already knowing. _(Will I "choose" at the last moment to say blue...asparagus...or 575, or no, or yes? to show _my autonomy?_) Will I do a sleight of hand? Can I master "magic" before Him?

Oh, yes, I can turn back to what can be fooled...what will fall for sleight of hand...what can indeed be leveraged with either nice words...or the most angry of them. I can work a cleverness in one place...that is simply the most vain endeavor...in another. And perhaps a man might learn...in these pulls, in these tensions, perhaps even through many fallings to some..."I am a man who adores vanity"...and falls to it...always. It becomes too painfully obvious, I am fit for only one place...where deception is rule...unless something...somehow, in some way...someone has made a way for even liars.

For my true desperate situation is now "not worked up"...but made O! so plain in my sight! I am what is_ all of lost_ in lie. And the _only_ truth I know is...I cannot find my own way out of it!

No man can "elect" himself to go there. No man...would. But...he may be led there.

Jesus said "It is an evil and adulterous generation that seeks after a sign"

Oh! But how I want a sign! I don't even know how "to _not want _one"!

One last "Biblical" story of the many that could easily be presented.

A woman came to Jesus for a thing. He told her it was not right to take the children's food and feed it to the dogs. (WOW!...so much for the "nice" Jesus!)

"But even the dogs may eat of the crumbs that fall from the table"
(Do any think she really _beat_ Jesus at _some game?_)

"Nevertheless He said 'for this saying'...I'll do it."

I've seen beggars ride when kings walk.

And only One has sufficient grace to show He is not at all ashamed of beggars, if they are not ashamed to agree with Him.

"It is an evil and adulterous generation that seeks after a sign"

Yes, Jesus. That's sure enough true. 

Is there anything you can do for evil adulterers?


----------



## red neck richie (Sep 20, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I am not questioning their goodness or their reading and writing skills.
> But I cannot fathom that they watched the videos based off of the replies that they have given and questions they have asked.


The op says to fast forward to 51:30? Even Ambush couldn't stand that much boredom.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

Israel said:


> Right...scars are a dime a dozen.
> But Jesus is saying a bit more than that though, isn't He?
> He's not asserting someone who "says they were dead"...but that, to the hearer, if someone YOU KNEW was dead, and came back...
> 
> ...



In all the talk I've ever heard from The Elect they seem pretty content with where they feel they belong.  I got a new neighbor who's Elect.  I don't think he loses a wink of sleep thinking that I might be a Vessel of Wrath.  It's lip service.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 20, 2018)

red neck richie said:


> The op says to fast forward to 51:30? Even Ambush couldn't stand that much boredom.


It's ok to be a follower Richie


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

red neck richie said:


> The op says to fast forward to 51:30? Even Ambush couldn't stand that much boredom.




I've listened to all 4 events, Ritchie.  I really wonder what you're angle is sometimes.


----------



## red neck richie (Sep 20, 2018)

bullethead said:


> It's ok to be a follower Richie


I know that's why I follow Jesus.


----------



## red neck richie (Sep 20, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I've listened to all 4 events, Ritchie.  I really wonder what you're angle is sometimes.


Really no angle just observation. That's what you wrote? I have been accused of being too literal.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

red neck richie said:


> Really no angle just observation. That's what you wrote? I have been accused of being too literal.



You also erroneously stated that you thought I was bored by the discussions.  I wonder why you said that?  It seems like you're playing some rudimentary game with statements like that.  Did you see where I suggested that people watch all four events in their entirety?


----------



## red neck richie (Sep 20, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> You also erroneously stated that you thought I was bored by the discussions.  I wonder why you said that?  It seems like you're playing some rudimentary game with statements like that.  Did you see where I suggested that people watch all four events in their entirety?


Sorry I take people at their word. Maybe a fault on my part or maybe I surround myself with people I trust.


ambush80 said:


> You also erroneously stated that you thought I was bored by the discussions.  I wonder why you said that?  It seems like you're playing some rudimentary game with statements like that.  Did you see where I suggested that people watch all four events in their entirety?


Frankly Ambush I would not waste that much precious time that I have left on this planet with that gibberish. Yes you are correct on my rudimentary angle. KISS keep it simple stupid. I also enjoy simplifying fractions as well as LCD. but I digress.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

red neck richie said:


> Sorry I take people at their word. Maybe a fault on my part or maybe I surround myself with people I trust.
> 
> Frankly Ambush I would not waste that much precious time that I have left on this planet with that gibberish. Yes you are correct on my rudimentary angle. KISS keep it simple stupid. I also enjoy simplifying fractions as well as LCD. but I digress.



You did not just "take me at my word".  You ascribed a motive to me, that I was bored, and that's why I asked people to fast forward.  I'm bringing it up so that you might recognize what you're doing.  It's not honest conversation.  It's something else.


----------



## red neck richie (Sep 20, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> You did not just "take me at my word".  You ascribed a motive to me, that I was bored, and that's why I asked people to fast forward.  I'm bringing it up so that you might recognize what you're doing.  It's not honest conversation.  It's something else.


What?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

If it's gibberish then why even bother commenting on it. Are you trying to convince others that it's gibberish, like I try to do with religion?  If you are, then you have to build a case, and to build a case you have to know the material.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

red neck richie said:


> What?



the most gracious interpretation that I can ascribe to what you're doing is "honest mistake".


----------



## red neck richie (Sep 20, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> the most gracious interpretation that I can ascribe to what you're doing is "honest mistake".


Perhaps. Maybe Just my literal interpretation? Its hard to figure out a man when you cant talk face to face.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

red neck richie said:


> Perhaps. Maybe Just my literal interpretation? Its hard to figure out a man when you cant talk face to face.



Here's a trick that I've been trying to implement: Try reading what people say in the best possible way.  Imagine the words coming out of your good friend's mouth.  You can still disagree with your good friend and things might get heated but assume that their intentions are good.  It really helps me to "hear" what they're trying to say.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 20, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I don't want to believe that people would make all kinds of commentary on and criticism of some thing that they didn't even read or watch.  These seem like good folks.  They can read and write just as well as anyone else.  I'll continue to give them the benefit of the doubt.



The video is the same rhetoric that’s spewed daily here. The religious have to be conservative and continue in what they’ve been told rather than thinking for themselves. Y’all act like we were just told a story about something and we said “hey it must be true”

It just further demonstrated how far out of the playing field you are with understanding what religion is.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 20, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> The video is the same rhetoric that’s spewed daily here. The religious have to be conservative and continue in what they’ve been told rather than thinking for themselves. Y’all act like we were just told a story about something and we said “hey it must be true”
> 
> It just further demonstrated how far out of the playing field you are with understanding what religion is.



It really isn't but you won't know that unless you watch it.  Why are you so reluctant to listen to what they have to say?  I'm not sure where you got the idea that anyone thinks that the religious have to be conservative.  It must have come from your own head because that's not what the video or any of the other discussion in this thread is about.  Peterson has put forth the notion that people who don't have terribly good cognitive ability might be better served, indeed society in general might be better served, if they follow conservative, traditional values like the one's described by religious texts.  It's better for society if you can get certain people to just believe "It's true because it says so".  

This is what I think religion is.  I won't look up the definition.  This will be in my own words.  Religion is a belief system about God(s) that codifies the doctrine of that/those particular God(s) and sets proscriptions and prescriptions for rituals and behaviors. Is that a good understanding of religion?  What's yours?  Can you demonstrate to me that you have a better understanding of what religion is? If you can, I'll listen intently.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 20, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> It really isn't but you won't know that unless you watch it.  Why are you so reluctant to listen to what they have to say?  I'm not sure where you got the idea that anyone thinks that the religious have to be conservative.  It must have come from your own head because that's not what the video or any of the other discussion in this thread is about.  Peterson has put forth the notion that people who don't have terribly good cognitive ability might be better served, indeed society in general might be better served, if they follow conservative, traditional values like the one's described by religious texts.  It's better for society if you can get certain people to just believe "It's true because it says so".
> 
> This is what I think religion is.  I won't look up the definition.  This will be in my own words.  Religion is a belief system about God(s) that codifies the doctrine of that/those particular God(s) and sets proscriptions and prescriptions for rituals and behaviors. Is that a good definition of religion?  What's yours?  Can you demonstrate to me that you have a better understanding of what religion is? If you can, I'll listen intently.


Somewhere around the minute mark you said fast forward to. It was stated (not a quote) that Christians have to remain conservative......basically err on the side of caution and continue to believe what they e been told rather making a rational decision for themselves. An example given was super heroes to his daughter. I may have misunderstood but it seems that’s what was discussed. Not really reluctant to listen but it’s ovef an hour long. Just saying.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 21, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Somewhere around the minute mark you said fast forward to. It was stated (not a quote) that Christians have to remain conservative......basically err on the side of caution and continue to believe what they e been told rather making a rational decision for themselves. An example given was super heroes to his daughter. I may have misunderstood but it seems that’s what was discussed. Not really reluctant to listen but it’s ovef an hour long. Just saying.



I recommended fast forwarding to the 53' and change mark because that's around where Peterson says "Well, maybe not everybody is as smart as you, Sam".  It struck me like it did some of the audience (judging by their gasps) as controversial. Peterson believes that ancient stories are the distillation of wisdom that go back to our caveman ancestors.  He thinks they're extremely important and valuable and that they tell us how to live our lives well.  Sam thinks that we can learn from those stories also but he wants us to ground our morality in reason.  You can hear all of this when they "steel man" each other in the beginning. 

Believing in the wisdom of ancient stories can be a rational decision as in the case of Peterson himself, but he also thinks that people who can't think well will benefit even more from following the ancient wisdom.  I don't think he's wrong.  I just think that applies to fewer people than he does.  Sam agrees with me.  Stuff that "yer grand pappy, and the grand pappy before him....." believed gets passed down because it was useful.  Some of what they knew isn't as useful anymore and that's just a fact.  Sam wants to carefully separate the "baby from the bathwater". 

Sam's analogy to Batgirl was something like this: "If I told my daughter that Batgirl was real she would continue to believe it given how much she loves Batgirl, even more so if I told her that she would burn in He11 if she quit believing in Batgirl".  It's not quite right because Batgirl doesn't have the history that the Biblical stories do, but Zeus does.

They are long but I find them engaging.  I listen to them in chunks or while driving or cooking or doing some chores.


----------



## Israel (Sep 21, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> In all the talk I've ever heard from The Elect they seem pretty content with where they feel they belong.  I got a new neighbor who's Elect.  I don't think he loses a wink of sleep thinking that I might be a Vessel of Wrath.  It's lip service.



I don't know him. Or his sleep patterns...what wakes him or stirs him.
Or what sits on his eyes.

Besides.

_Should_ he?
Lose a wink of sleep thinking about what "_might be_"?
Tell me who would then ever have right to sleep? Let alone ability.

What amount of troubling...or sacrifice to/for your estate, is acceptable?
Is sufficient?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 21, 2018)

red neck richie said:


> I know that's why I follow Jesus.


Yep


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 21, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I recommended fast forwarding to the 53' and change mark because that's around where Peterson says "Well, maybe not everybody is as smart as you, Sam".  It struck me like it did some of the audience (judging by their gasps) as controversial. Peterson believes that ancient stories are the distillation of wisdom that go back to our caveman ancestors.  He thinks they're extremely important and valuable and that they tell us how to live our lives well.  Sam thinks that we can learn from those stories also but he wants us to ground our morality in reason.  You can hear all of this when they "steel man" each other in the beginning.
> 
> Believing in the wisdom of ancient stories can be a rational decision as in the case of Peterson himself, but he also thinks that people who can't think well will benefit even more from following the ancient wisdom.  I don't think he's wrong.  I just think that applies to fewer people than he does.  Sam agrees with me.  Stuff that "yer grand pappy, and the grand pappy before him....." believed gets passed down because it was useful.  Some of what they knew isn't as useful anymore and that's just a fact.  Sam wants to carefully separate the "baby from the bathwater".
> 
> ...


I know Im probably dragging this conversation backwards but.......
Im having trouble with all the undefined generalizations -
"Cant think well". What exactly is the definition of "cant think well"?
"Religion is for stupid people". What are we calling "stupid"? Who is defining "stupid"?
"Smart". On all subjects? If a genius at one subject but stupid at another.....
I can agree/disagree with individual points but Im having trouble coming up with an overall view
Might seem like Im nitpicking (and maybe I am) but for example -


> people who can't think well will benefit even more from following the ancient wisdom.


1. Right off the bat we are separating out those who cant "think well" from those who do.
2. Then we are basically saying "well they cant think too good so they are better off just going with the flow".
Who is making these decisions as to what is thinking well and better off etc....
I get the overall concept but the lack of details is stopping my brain from thinking it through completely.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I recommended fast forwarding to the 53' and change mark because that's around where Peterson says "Well, maybe not everybody is as smart as you, Sam".  It struck me like it did some of the audience (judging by their gasps) as controversial. Peterson believes that ancient stories are the distillation of wisdom that go back to our caveman ancestors.  He thinks they're extremely important and valuable and that they tell us how to live our lives well.  Sam thinks that we can learn from those stories also but he wants us to ground our morality in reason.  You can hear all of this when they "steel man" each other in the beginning.
> 
> Believing in the wisdom of ancient stories can be a rational decision as in the case of Peterson himself, but he also thinks that people who can't think well will benefit even more from following the ancient wisdom.  I don't think he's wrong.  I just think that applies to fewer people than he does.  Sam agrees with me.  Stuff that "yer grand pappy, and the grand pappy before him....." believed gets passed down because it was useful.  Some of what they knew isn't as useful anymore and that's just a fact.  Sam wants to carefully separate the "baby from the bathwater".
> 
> ...


I guess if I had more time to listen to the entire taping.......it just seems that one statement concerning the religious will be conservative and err on the side of caution and continue in their path rather than make a rational decision meant just that. Sort of like “I’m going to be believe in Batgirl because my Momma did”.......just in case........or........”it has to be true because my Momma did”


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 21, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I guess if I had more time to listen to the entire taping.......it just seems that one statement concerning the religious will be conservative and err on the side of caution and continue in their path rather than make a rational decision meant just that. Sort of like “I’m going to be believe in Batgirl because my Momma did”.......just in case........or........”it has to be true because my Momma did”



Yes.  I think that's Peterson's perspective.  But he goes on to say that all the Mommas (it's actually mostly Papas) through time have their wisdom sublimely collected in the ancient stories.  Everything they know about what it means to live a good life is compiled in books like the Bible.  Peterson likes to point to the fact that "most new ideas are wrong".  So people that might not have the mental acumen to process ideas well might mistake a new bad idea for a good one.  They are better off sticking to what's tried and true. That's what Peterson thinks.

I don't think he puts enough consideration into what our ancestors got wrong about many things. I don't understand why he thinks that all of their ideas are durable and applicable to modern people.  And I don't think he gives people enough credit for their intelligence.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 21, 2018)

bullethead said:


> You aren't the first kid on the jungle bars to claim it and *you won't be the last*.


Why do you think that is?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 21, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> I know Im probably dragging this conversation backwards but.......
> Im having trouble with all the undefined generalizations -
> "Cant think well". What exactly is the definition of "cant think well"?
> "Religion is for stupid people". What are we calling "stupid"? Who is defining "stupid"?
> ...




Your question sounds like you didn't watch the video.  You should watch from the time I suggested to 2-3 minutes forward.  That will probably answer your questions.  Here's some of what Peterson said:

Peterson:  "If you're not exceptionally cognitively astute you should be traditional and conservative. Because if you can't think well then you're going to think badly and if you think badly you'll fall into trouble....If you're not very smart it's better to be conservative, because then you do what everyone else does. And generally, doing what everyone else does is the path of least error moving forward."

Have you ever taken an IQ test?  They show you patterns of things in a series and leave out a piece and ask you to complete the series.  They do the same thing with words and numbers.  They ask you to compare things and to rotate shapes or fit shapes together.  Sometimes they ask you to read something to see if you understand it (they've gone away from that a bit).  These tests supposedly measure cognitive ability, IQ.  High IQ will allow someone to recognize what will happen if they stand on the branch that they're cutting off.  Hi IQ will allow someone to understand a complicated set of directions.  Peterson likes to point out that the best indicators for success are high Conscientiousness and high IQ. 

The old George Carlin joke comes to mind "Think of someone with average intelligence.  That means half the people are dumber than that person.  That's a lot of dumb people".  See what I said to Spotlite about new ideas.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 21, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Yes.  I think that's Peterson's perspective.  But he goes on to say that all the Mommas (it's actually mostly Papas) through time have their wisdom sublimely collected in the ancient stories.  Everything they know about what it means to live a good life is compiled in books like the Bible.  Peterson likes to point to the fact that "most new ideas are wrong".  So for people that might not have the mental acumen to process ideas well,they might mistake a new bad idea for a good one.  They are better off sticking to what's tried and true. That's what Peterson thinks.
> 
> I don't think he puts enough consideration into what our ancestors got wrong about many things. I don't understand why he thinks t all of their ideas are durable and applicable to modern people.  And I don't think he gives people enough credit for their intelligence.





> So for people that might not have the mental acumen to process ideas well,they might mistake a new bad idea for a good one.  They are better off sticking to what's tried and true.


I have to wonder how many inventors, scientists etc would have technically fit into that category, possibly for their entire careers, riiiiight up until that one day...…. EUREKA!


----------



## bullethead (Sep 21, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Why do you think that is?


You'll have to refresh my memory and give me the post#


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 21, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Your question sounds like you didn't watch the video.  You should watch from the time I suggested to 2-3 minutes forward.  That will probably answer your questions.  Here's some of what Peterson said:
> 
> Peterson:  "If you're not exceptionally cognitively astute you should be traditional and conservative. Because if you can't think well then you're going to think badly and if you think badly you'll fall into trouble....If you're not very smart it's better to be conservative, because then you do what everyone else does. And generally, doing what everyone else does is the path of least error moving forward."
> 
> ...


I did watch it back in the beginning but am also mixing in whats being said (typed) on here.
To my point -


> Peterson:  "If you're not exceptionally cognitively astute you should be traditional and conservative. Because if you can't think well then you're going to think badly and if you think badly you'll fall into trouble....If you're not very smart it's better to be conservative, because then you do what everyone else does. And generally, doing what everyone else does is the path of least error moving forward."


I get his overall concept.
But before I can go any further with it all those "not exceptionally cognitive", "if you cant think well", "think badly", "fall into trouble" "least error".....
are all subjective things.

I think I see some validity in Perterson's argument but not how he's getting there.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 21, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Why do you think that is?


Many things that have taken place in human and pre-human history that have paved the way.
These examples below all touch on how and why gods, err invisible buddies, got their start and transformations. They are quick examples, not necessarily all or THE examples that cause me to think as I do.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/god_devel.htm

https://www.quora.com/Why-did-people-start-worshipping-Gods

http://www.bu.edu/arion/archive/volume-18/colin_wells_how_did_god_get-started/


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 21, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Many things that have taken place in human and pre-human history that have paved the way.
> These examples below all touch on how and why gods, err invisible buddies, got their start and transformations. They are quick examples, not necessarily all or THE examples that cause me to think as I do.
> 
> http://www.religioustolerance.org/god_devel.htm
> ...


You were specifically addressing one group and one God. Now, address my question in that context.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 21, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> You were specifically addressing one group and one God. Now, address my question in that context.


Again, you are going to have to give me the post# as I have a vague recollection of what exactly I made that reply to.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 21, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Again, you are going to have to give me the post# as I have a vague recollection of what exactly I made that reply to.


#141


----------



## bullethead (Sep 21, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Ohh right,  it's the same thing only different, because you NEED to make it different so your god stands out from the pack...
> I do have it figured out.
> Your invisible friend is "better" than their invisible friend. You aren't the first kid on the jungle bars to claim it and you won't be the last.


Miguel, even and especially among believers of the same faith, people always seem to feel the need to "one up" the next person. No different than the kids on the playground.

The links that I provided earlier show how beliefs started and turned into religious beliefs. Within those religious beliefs there are personal beliefs that seperate the believers. Whatever some use to convince themselves that an experience they have had came from a god(Christian god mostly in here), there never seems to be a limit to which some believers will go in order to make their experience somehow better than the last or next.
When pressed on other having a similar experience but it not deemed as god inspired, the reply is "well you didn't do it right", "you are not as worthy" "you are not of the chosen that is allowed to get the results that I did" "you/they are not REAL Christians" "those believers of other faiths that claim to have these experiences are wrong" "their experiences do not concern me" and on and on and on.
Christianity has formed, conformed and has adapted from what it started out to be to what is is today and it differs by exactly as many believers who call themselves Christians. It is whatever personal thoughts make it to be so it works for that particular individual.
It is not Monotheistic anymore despite what is claimed. Jesus never said to worship him. He worshipped God, his Father and what he claimed was the Father of everyone as told to him by the generation before. And Jesus' ideas that came from the generations before him came from other cultures before them, which came from others before them all tweaked and made to suit along the way.
Now, Christians worship God, Jesus, a Spirit or Ghost, some pray to Mary and Saints literally asking them to perform god like tasks....BUT..when pressed about it...Oh No, we only believe in One god.
Just like the kid on the Jungle Gym who has a cousin that lives far away or a friend in Alaska(who we always just miss when they came in to visit) that is bigger, stronger, faster (who no one else on the playground will ever meet in their lifetime to confirm) and who makes claims about these "other friends" that are soley based off of Jungle Gym Jim's words....many in here sound no different. When pressed, they cannot produce anything tangible and instead say that the problem is not with them, it is a problem with us others who God purposely made blind.
It is human nature based off of hundreds of thousands of years of examples.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 21, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> I have to wonder how many inventors, scientists etc would have technically fit into that category, possibly for their entire careers, riiiiight up until that one day...…. EUREKA!



Many geniuses are on the Autism scale.  Autism and savants fall into a category outside of the curve.  They typically score very poorly if they have to read something and try to tell what the people are thinking but they may score off the charts on pattern recognition.  They make great engineers but poor counselors.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 21, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> I did watch it back in the beginning but am also mixing in whats being said (typed) on here.
> To my point -
> 
> I get his overall concept.
> ...



He believes in the validity of IQ tests and he believes that IQ is one of the determining factors in success.  He also believes in evolutionary biology.  That means he thinks that If you have low IQ (as determined by the tests) that you're better off following the herd that follows the old proven ways of doing things.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Miguel, even and especially among believers of the same faith, people always seem to feel the need to "one up" the next person. No different than the kids on the playground.
> 
> you are not of the chosen that is allowed to get the results that I did" "you/they are not REAL Christians"



To be clear, this is only an accusation / claim that you have created in your head when referencing my post. I made no such claim to better or doing it right. My response to someone saying I am making up the "receiving after you believe comment" -

_Spotlite - No Sir. Receiving the spirit is scripture. Remember the conversation several weeks back concerning something that happens and unless you experience it you can’t unders it?  I believe Ambush related it to a phenomenon? Something good happening is not what we are talking about. This is an unexplainable instant change that occurs. _

_ 
bullethead -That happens in many religions, among many beliefs and at quite a few concerts( especially Greatful Dead ones)....Are you saying that an overwhelming sense, feelings and extreme emotions overcome you? Or are you actually visited by and talk to Jesus/God?    _

_Spotlite -Nope. Not what I’m saying. See, you don’t have this figured out kind you think you did._

_bullethead - Ohh right, it's the same thing only different, because you NEED to make it different so your god stands out from the pack...
I do have it figured out. Your invisible friend is "better" than their invisible friend. You aren't the first kid on the jungle bars to claim it and you won't be the last._

You and science think you have it figured out on what we experience but you are clueless and the more you make it up the more it reveals how clueless you are with it.

Now, without putting words in others mouths, do you have an answer to Miguels question that isn't an attempt to validate your own fabricated accusations / ideology?.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 21, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> To be clear, this is only an accusation / claim that you have created in your head when referencing my post. I made no such claim to better or doing it right. My response to someone saying I am making up the "receiving after you believe comment" -
> 
> _Spotlite - No Sir. Receiving the spirit is scripture. Remember the conversation several weeks back concerning something that happens and unless you experience it you can’t unders it?  I believe Ambush related it to a phenomenon? Something good happening is not what we are talking about. This is an unexplainable instant change that occurs. _
> 
> ...



Science doesn't claim to know the truth about anything.  They claim "best knowledge" of things....for now.  I do that, too.  I use the best knowledge available to try to determine what's most likely is true.  Everyone does that as they stand on the edge of a cliff. I am clueless if I claim to know with 100% certainty that I won't fall up if I jump.  Sociology, Anthropology, Psychology, Philosophy, and Theology all have things to say about religious beliefs; all of them are best guesses.  I like using the best guesses that the sciences have come up with.  Going against their best guesses has often ended up with bad results for me. As they say, "Your mileage may vary".


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Science doesn't claim to know the truth about anything.  They claim "best knowledge" of things....for now.


While true, science and the non believer will say what “isn’t” there or tell me what I don’t have rather than saying we just haven’t discovered it yet.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 21, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> While true, science and the non believer will say what “isn’t” there or tell me what I don’t have rather than saying we just haven’t discovered it yet.


What hasn't been discovered yet..... isn't there.
If you have claimed to discover something its on you to prove it.
That's just the way it works.
The other option is not to claim anything you cant prove and be satisfied that  "you know for yourself".

Nonbelievers wouldn't exist if believers didn't claim something they cant prove.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 21, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Whatever some use to convince themselves that an experience they have had came from a god(Christian god mostly in here), *there never seems to be a limit to which some believers will go in order to make their experience somehow better than the last or next.*


Of course it's only Religious people that do this. Never an atheist, right?

SADT (Same Argument, Different Thread)

Every thread over here is like watching a dog chasing his tail.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 21, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Of course it's only Religious people that do this. Never an atheist, right?
> 
> SADT (Same Argument, Different Thread)
> 
> Every thread over here is like watching a dog chasing his tail.


I can't think of a thread in here where any atheist or agnostic has accused anyone else of unbelieving incorrectly.

Can you provide of an example of an atheist that tends to want to "one up" the last or next?


This area of the site is no different than any other.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 21, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> To be clear, this is only an accusation / claim that you have created in your head when referencing my post. I made no such claim to better or doing it right. My response to someone saying I am making up the "receiving after you believe comment" -
> 
> _Spotlite - No Sir. Receiving the spirit is scripture. Remember the conversation several weeks back concerning something that happens and unless you experience it you can’t unders it?  I believe Ambush related it to a phenomenon? Something good happening is not what we are talking about. This is an unexplainable instant change that occurs. _
> 
> ...


My reply stands based off of previous conversations which coincide with this conversation.

You claim what you experience is an unexplainable instant change so there is nothing further that you think you can be held to. You don't have to go onto any details and we should just accept that answer.
What if I say that my reply is unexplainable but trust me.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 21, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I can't think of a thread in here where any atheist or agnostic has accused anyone else of unbelieving incorrectly.
> 
> Can you provide of an example of an atheist that tends to want to "one up" the last or next?
> 
> ...


You clearly have no reference to how condescending, insulting and arrogant it sounds when you refer to someone's God as a magic man or invisible being. 

You want neutral debate and respect, then show some.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 21, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> You clearly have no reference to how condescending, insulting and arrogant it sounds when you refer to someone's God as a magic man or invisible being.
> 
> You want neutral debate and respect, then show some.


So for the sake of "neutrality" (which really has no place in debate...….)
What might some Christian beliefs/claims be that could be considered condescending, insulting and arrogant?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 21, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> While true, science and the non believer will say what “isn’t” there or tell me what I don’t have rather than saying we just haven’t discovered it yet.



The non believer will say what's most likely true or not true based on the best available evidence (from science). People are non believers not because they know what believers claim if false.  They're non believers because they think that what believers believe in is most likely untrue.  I like that you used the word "Non Believers" because it can be applied to any belief.  Non believer in aliens.  Non believer in the predictive power of Tarot cards. Non believer that a tea pot is orbiting Mars.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 21, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> You clearly have no reference to how condescending, insulting and arrogant it sounds when you refer to someone's God as a magic man or invisible being.
> 
> You want neutral debate and respect, then show some.



And it's hard to talk about how someone's wife or mom  or kids looks.  But if we want to have that kind of discussion we may have to go to our "objective place".  I think I could do that.  I think I could hear someone say that my wife or daughter is fat or ugly as long as they told me why they think that.  It may be true even if it's not necessarily true to me.  I've told my friends that I'm concerned about my daughters weight.  I said "I think she's getting fat".  They told me to enroll her in a sport, which we did.  People are too sensitive to discuss things openly these days.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 21, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> You clearly have no reference to how condescending, insulting and arrogant it sounds when you refer to someone's God as a magic man or invisible being.
> 
> You want neutral debate and respect, then show some.


My reference is the standard type of replies given in the PF. Are you honestly suggesting that you are ANY different?
I do not feel sorry for anyone who makes the claims made in here and thinks backing them up is to make more assertions and claims. That is insulting to me. BooHoo
I have always tried to start conversations politely especially when I was the new guy and I still do with any newcomer that participates.
But the regulars in here are long past the Pretty Please stage. All debates start neutral until it is time to answer claims that the individual themselves make. I just have to keep thinking of ways to ask for someone to back up their claims. Nice, respectful, harsh, condescending etc have not gotten anyone to back up what they with facts.
It really is the same old same old so I have to change up my tactics in the hopes of someone stepping up.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 21, 2018)

I would have thought that after all these years that we could speak openly about things.  If I call God, any God or Gods invisible beings it's because so far they are.  If you disagree, tell me how you saw him.  I won't laugh.  I won't make fun.  I'll listen.  I might ask questions but don't get upset about that.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 21, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I would have thought that after all these years that we could speak openly about things.  If I call God, any God or Gods an invisible beings it's because so far they are.  If you disagree, tell me how you saw him.  I won't laugh.  I won't make fun.  I'll listen.  I might ask questions but don't get upset about that.


ExactAmundo!!!


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 21, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> You clearly have no reference to how condescending, insulting and arrogant it sounds when you refer to someone's God as a magic man or invisible being.
> 
> You want neutral debate and respect, then show some.



While driving my mom to the airport we were talking about my neighbor who thinks that the Earth is 6,000 years old.  I told her that I might not initially believe him if  relayed some kind of scientific understanding to me. She said that I was closed minded and that I should follow one of Jordan Peterson's principles of assuming that the other person knows something you don't (she just read my copy of his book).  I told her that based on past conversations about scientific subjects that a pattern had formed that indicated to me that he gets his information from only one type of very biased sources.  She insisted that I should listen to him.  I then told her that he believes that 9/11 was a government conspiracy.  She laughed out loud and I said "See!!!!".  There's got to be some consideration of how we talk about things and vet information.  Not all ideas are the same.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> What hasn't been discovered yet..... isn't there.
> If you have claimed to discover something its on you to prove it.
> That's just the way it works.
> The other option is not to claim anything you cant prove and be satisfied that  "you know for yourself".
> ...


You haven’t discovered God yet.

 I don’t get concerned with proving God to anyone. I can claim I know for myself and sleep well with that, the issue is when someone says it ain’t because they didn’t / couldn’t find him. You’re in sense claiming I’m not experiencing what I say I am.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> The non believer will say what's most likely true or not true based on the best available evidence (from science). People are non believers not because they know what believers claim if false.  They're non believers because they think that what believers believe in is most likely untrue.  I like that you used the word "Non Believers" because it can be applied to any belief.  Non believer in aliens.  Non believer in the predictive power of Tarot cards. Non believer that a tea pot is orbiting Mars.


I can agree, but just because I don’t believe in a little green man flying in a round object means exactly what to those that do? Does it make me more rational, smarter, or simply just relying on the my best available evidence that I can hang my hat that convinced me it ain’t so? Or if I take a stand and claim it ain’t there, it’s based on what? Me not seeing one yet? My finding no evidence? How do I prove they didn’t see what they say they saw?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 21, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> You haven’t discovered God yet.
> 
> I don’t get concerned with proving God to anyone. I can claim I know for myself and sleep well with that, the issue is when someone says it ain’t because they didn’t / couldn’t find him. You’re in sense claiming I’m not experiencing what I say I am.


Is it possible that:
There is no god to find?
Some people are destined to not never find god by god's own doing?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2018)

bullethead said:


> My reply stands based off of previous conversations which coincide with this conversation.
> 
> You claim what you experience is an unexplainable instant change so there is nothing further that you think you can be held to. You don't have to go onto any details and we should just accept that answer.
> What if I say that my reply is unexplainable but trust me.


Then you should keep it in context and address those that claim theirs is better during those conversations 

But I can agree, there are those that think and a t the way you have described.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Is it possible that:
> There is no god to find?
> Some people are destined to not never find god by god's own doing?


No cause I found him. The door is open for all.


----------



## Israel (Sep 21, 2018)

Ambush...Is your mom any part Cherokee?
Know anyone part of the Tuskegee Syphilis experiment?
Maybe know of someone part of the MK Ultra/Midnight Climax matter?
(A Doc I work with is also involved with movie production and has a stake in the film's soon release of the same name "Midnight Climax", funny, right?)

To some...or many, the notion of "government conspiracy" is not as far fetched as a laugh might indicate to others.

Today I saw a man wearing two watches.
His reason?

"One might be wrong."


----------



## bullethead (Sep 21, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> No cause I found him. The door is open for all.


But there were bible verses posted in here, admittedly not by you, that states god decides who he wants (paraphrase).


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 21, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> You haven’t discovered God yet.
> 
> I don’t get concerned with proving God to anyone. I can claim I know for myself and sleep well with that, the issue is when someone says it ain’t because they didn’t / couldn’t find him. You’re in sense claiming I’m not experiencing what I say I am.


 
Walt was a believer like the rest of us.  In order for it to be true that we didn't discover God yet then we "Must not have done it right" before.  Is that what you want to claim?  If you come to that conclusion then you open yourself to the same criticism.  I know you're fine with that.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I would have thought that after all these years that we could speak openly about things.  If I call God, any God or Gods invisible beings it's because so far they are.  If you disagree, tell me how you saw him.  I won't laugh.  I won't make fun.  I'll listen.  I might ask questions but don't get upset about that.


That’s where I am. I understand that’s he’s invisible or hidden to those that haven’t found him. I haven’t saw him so I take no offense in someone saying he’s invisible. He’s a spirit without flesh and bones. However, I can see and experience his workings in my and others lives.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Walt was a believer like the rest of us.  In order for it to be true that we didn't discover God yet then we "Must not have done it right" before.  Is that what you want to claim?  If you come to that conclusion then you open yourself to the same criticism.  I know you're fine with that.


No I’m not saying you didn’t do it right. You could have been misled by those that would pervert the Gospel. Some people just stop looking. Doesn’t mean they done anything wrong with the way they searched and where they searched, they just gave up.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2018)

bullethead said:


> But there were bible verses posted in here, admittedly not by you, that states god decides who he wants (paraphrase).


After the cross, the door is open for all that will.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 21, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> That’s where I am. I understand that’s he’s invisible or hidden to those that haven’t found him. I haven’t saw him so I take no offense in someone saying he’s invisible. He’s a spirit without flesh and bones. However, I can see and experience his workings in my and others lives.



I completely understand that.  Have you seen the movie _Contact_?


----------



## Israel (Sep 21, 2018)

"If you continue in my word..."


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 21, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Walt was a believer like the rest of us.  In order for it to be true that we didn't discover God yet then we "Must not have done it right" before.  Is that what you want to claim?  If you come to that conclusion then you open yourself to the same criticism.  I know you're fine with that.


Yet when a famous Atheist finds God later in life and expands on his experience in print they are ostracized and expelled from the circle of non-believers, labelled as mentally unstable or quacks. Funny how it never works the other way around.


----------



## Israel (Sep 21, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I completely understand that.  Have you seen the movie _Contact_?




!

Something, right...what she experienced? "In a moment...in the twinkling of an eye".


----------



## Israel (Sep 21, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Walt was a believer like the rest of us.  In order for it to be true that we didn't discover God yet then we "Must not have done it right" before.  Is that what you want to claim?  If you come to that conclusion then you open yourself to the same criticism.  I know you're fine with that.



How many times would "discovery of God" be necessary to know...that He is discovered? Would one burning bush do it? If he never showed Himself again...(like that) what does that mean? What obligation is He under to prove Himself, if once is not...enough?

How many "onces" is enough?

I won't embed this because of some language...but I believe grown-ups can handle it.

Oops...had a bit of a problem. You Tube..."The Sunset Limited"..."ending scene"


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 21, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> No I’m not saying you didn’t do it right. You could have been misled by those that would pervert the Gospel. Some people just stop looking. Doesn’t mean they done anything wrong with the way they searched and where they searched, they just gave up.


Perfect example of the contradiction I mentioned in Ambush's post.
Election.
Misled/stopped looking/gave up.

2 completely opposing concepts.
One (or both) aint right.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 21, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Yet when a famous Atheist finds God later in life and expands on his experience in print they are ostracized and expelled from the circle of non-believers, labelled as mentally unstable or quacks. Funny how it never works the other way around.



Where?  On Twitter?  Look at some debates between public atheists and the Born Again.  It's nothing but civil.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 21, 2018)

Israel said:


> !
> 
> Something, right...what she experienced? "In a moment...in the twinkling of an eye".



Build the thing again and let someone else try.  If nothing happens then that says something.  If something happens then that says something, too.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Perfect example of the contradiction I mentioned in Ambush's post.
> Election.
> Misled/stopped looking/gave up.
> 
> ...


I lean more towards a people problem rather than a concept problem. If it was the concept, so many that share the same experience would not do so.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> I completely understand that.  Have you seen the movie _Contact_?


No I haven’t but will look it up.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 21, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Yet when a famous Atheist finds God later in life and expands on his experience in print they are ostracized and expelled from the circle of non-believers, labelled as mentally unstable or quacks. Funny how it never works the other way around.


Although I don't think he was a famous Atheist we had a member here convert right before our very eyes.
He wasn't ostracized, expelled or labeled as anything. He was welcome then and is welcome now.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 21, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I lean more towards a people problem rather than a concept problem. If it was the concept, so many that share the same experience would not do so.


The concept of Election doesn't give me a choice or need to find, look, be misled or give up.Those are things that "I" do. Nothing I do impacts Election..
So didn't find, gave up, was misled are NOT legitimate.
Or Election isn't.
Its one or the other.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> The concept of Election doesn't give me a choice or need to find, look, be misled or give up.Those are things that "I" do. Nothing I do impacts Election..
> So didn't find, gave up, was misled are NOT legitimate.
> Or Election isn't.
> Its one or the other.


I get what you’re saying. I think it may be the way I’m looking at “elect”

When I think of the elect, or “his”,  it’s those that chose to follow, not those that he chose.

I don’t believe he chose me over you, I chose to follow, if that makes sense?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 21, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Where?  On Twitter?  Look at some debates between public atheists and the Born Again.  It's nothing but civil.


You really have no clue how dismissive and condescending your posts are, do you? 

Research the life of Anthony Flew.


----------



## Israel (Sep 22, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> The concept of Election doesn't give me a choice or need to find, look, be misled or give up.Those are things that "I" do. Nothing I do impacts Election..
> So didn't find, gave up, was misled are NOT legitimate.
> Or Election isn't.
> Its one or the other.



So...!


----------



## Israel (Sep 22, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Build the thing again and let someone else try.  If nothing happens then that says something.  If something happens then that says something, too.




Yes!


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 22, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> You really have no clue how dismissive and condescending your posts are, do you?
> 
> Research the life of Anthony Flew.




I suppose I don't know.  It doesn't feel like I'm being dismissive and condescending.  I can be, if you want to see what that REALLY looks like.  I'd prefer not to though.  Maybe you can show me an example of something I say that's condescending and dismissive.


----------



## furtaker (Sep 22, 2018)

Just curious, do you atheists ever get on other forms or websites debating the existence of Allah and other gods, or is it only the Christian God that offends you and upsets you?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 22, 2018)

furtaker said:


> Just curious, do you atheists ever get on other forms or websites debating the existence of Allah and other gods, or is it only the Christian God that offends you and upsets you?



I don't.  The only other forum I go to (rarely) is Sam Harris' forum.  If there were any Hindus or Muslims here I would tell them why I think their beliefs are poorly founded as well.  We just happen to live in a mostly Christian country and that's who we have to discuss with.  I don't like most things about all religions.  I like a few things about most of them.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 22, 2018)

furtaker said:


> Just curious, do you atheists ever get on other forms or websites debating the existence of Allah and other gods, or is it only the Christian God that offends you and upsets you?


I stick to forums that are specifically titled Atheists/ Agnostics /Apologetics. It is almost as if the title was made for those three to get together and converse/debate.

If someone does not believe that a God exists, why would they be offended or upset by something that does not exist?

Are you offended by the Super Lord IshKabibble?
Me neither.
But if someone claimed that IshKabibble is active in their life, saves people from harm, is all knowing, is all powerful,  can leap tall buildings in a single bound.....wouldn't you be curious and ask for proof? Especially if they say that if you do not worship IshKabibble you will spend eternity suffering..
I get awfully curious to see if they know what the heck they are talking about...if they can prove to me that what they say is truthful,  I may need to rethink things.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 22, 2018)

furtaker said:


> Just curious, do you atheists ever get on other forms or websites debating the existence of Allah and other gods, or is it only the Christian God that offends you and upsets you?


A/As don't believe gods exist therefore aren't offended or upset by the god they don't believe exists.
Having said that, this is the only religious forum I take part in so its always Christian beliefs/the Christian God that gets debated.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 22, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I get what you’re saying. I think it may be the way I’m looking at “elect”
> 
> When I think of the elect, or “his”,  it’s those that chose to follow, not those that he chose.
> 
> I don’t believe he chose me over you, I chose to follow, if that makes sense?


Yep that makes sense.
Its actually exactly how I used to look at it. 
From discussing here, my understanding of Election has changed some.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 22, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Yep that makes sense.
> Its actually exactly how I used to look at it.
> From discussing here, my understanding of Election has changed some.


I can relate. I know folks that fully believe there are those are chosen to be and chosen not to be.


----------



## Israel (Sep 22, 2018)

A simple test.
A universe populated only by your own clone.
How does that appear?

Would "another you"...believe YOU are the original? Would you care? _Should you?_


_DO...you?_

Or, are you...not? (the _original?_)

Would you even know?

Would you _even know_ that you are of a population of clone?

Would there be ONE necessity for you to know, (and entrance into that) in any way...what you are, who you are?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 22, 2018)

Israel said:


> A simple test.
> A universe populated only by your own clone.
> How does that appear?
> 
> ...


Maybe I am the clone?


----------



## Israel (Sep 23, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Maybe I am the clone?




!!!Yes!!!



No?



I'm Spartacus!


No...wait...


Yikes!


...it seemed like such a cool idea at the time...excuse me...could you scratch my nose...?

Oh, you can't reach it either...?

As Ambush said:



> Build the thing again and let someone else try. If nothing happens then that says something. If something happens then that says something, too.








Fair disclosure:

I am far more the guy on the left hand side they pass in that wagon, shouting out to them..."Hey...could you go back and tell them I'm not really Spartacus?"

(All my betters simply keep their mouths shut)


----------



## bullethead (Sep 23, 2018)

furtaker said:


> Just curious, do you atheists ever get on other forms or websites debating the existence of Allah and other gods, or is it only the Christian God that offends you and upsets you?


Where did you go?
You got three people to answer your question, can you answer what was asked of you also?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 23, 2018)

Israel said:


> A simple test.
> A universe populated only by your own clone.
> How does that appear?
> 
> ...


How is that test simple?


----------



## furtaker (Sep 23, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Where did you go?
> You got three people to answer your question, can you answer what was asked of you also?


Answer what?  Your rhetorical question about Super Lord IshKabibble?

I'm not angry at him.  I don't believe he exists.  That's why you'll never catch me wasting hours of my life discussing it on the internet.  And acting angry and hostile about it all the time on top of that.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 23, 2018)

furtaker said:


> Answer what?  Your rhetorical question about Super Lord IshKabibble?
> 
> I'm not angry at him.  I don't believe he exists.  That's why you'll never catch me wasting hours of my life discussing it on the internet.  And acting angry and hostile about it all the time on top of that.





> That's why you'll never catch me wasting hours of my life discussing it on the internet.


Kinda seems like you are in a discussion to me.
Just sayin'.

The vast majority of the A/As in here were once Christians so the subject means more to us than Ishkabibble probably means to you.


----------



## furtaker (Sep 23, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Kinda seems like you are in a discussion to me.
> Just sayin'.
> 
> The vast majority of the A/As in here were once Christians so the subject means more to us than Ishkabibble probably means to you.


I stop in here occasionally because I'm a believer.  You won't catch me discussing Ishkabibble or the Cookie Monster.
It appears that the Christian God consumes about 44.68% of the atheist's life.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 23, 2018)

furtaker said:


> I stop in here occasionally because I'm a believer.  You won't catch me discussing Ishkabibble or the Cookie Monster.
> It appears that the Christian God consumes about 44.68% of the atheist's life.


You asked a question.
We responded.
No need to throw in wacky percentages that have 0 facts behind them.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 23, 2018)

furtaker said:


> I stop in here occasionally because I'm a believer.  You won't catch me discussing Ishkabibble or the Cookie Monster.
> It appears that the Christian God consumes about 44.68% of the atheist's life.


See this is why we discuss things...people make a claim like 44.68% of an atheists life being consumed by the Christian god, and then we ask them to back that up with facts.
Do you have anything that would confirm your number or are you just expecting someone to take your word on it. (Which is the exact reason we like to discuss things in here)

What I don't understand is why you question another person about the way they choose to spend some of their time. I personally am incredibly interested in hearing what others have to say. If I can give an argument against and someone can counter with something that I have not thought of or can show me proof to back up their claim, I would enjoy that even more. I want someone to come up with something substantial. Despite differences in religious beliefs I enjoy talking to many in here as much as I do about hunting and reloading.
??So what??


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 23, 2018)

Israel said:


> Ambush...Is your mom any part Cherokee?
> Know anyone part of the Tuskegee Syphilis experiment?
> Maybe know of someone part of the MK Ultra/Midnight Climax matter?
> (A Doc I work with is also involved with movie production and has a stake in the film's soon release of the same name "Midnight Climax", funny, right?)
> ...




Nope.  She's most likely got some Spanish Colonizer in her.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 24, 2018)

bullethead said:


> See this is why we discuss things...people make a claim like 44.68% of an atheists life being consumed by the Christian god, and then we ask them to back that up with facts.
> Do you have anything that would confirm your number or are you just expecting someone to take your word on it. (Which is the exact reason we like to discuss things in here)
> 
> What I don't understand is why you question another person about the way they choose to spend some of their time. I personally am incredibly interested in hearing what others have to say. If I can give an argument against and someone can counter with something that I have not thought of or can show me proof to back up their claim, I would enjoy that even more. I want someone to come up with something substantial. Despite differences in religious beliefs I enjoy talking to many in here as much as I do about hunting and reloading.
> ??So what??


So what Fur is really doing is the 'ol "for people who don't believe in the Christian God, you sure do talk about the Christian God a lot". Yawn.
But here's what gets missed pretty much all the time -
In this conversation with Fur we have now talked about -
Ishkabibble, why A/As chat here, what Fur doesn't discuss, a wacky claim of 44.68%, The Cookie Monster...….. that's just off the top of my head.
A whole plethora of subject matter except one...…. the Christian God.
Seems like most of the Christian's here translate that to "denying God, talking about God, trying to prove God doesn't exist, spending 44.68% of your life discussing the Christian God...".


----------



## bullethead (Sep 24, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> So what Fur is really doing is the 'ol "for people who don't believe in the Christian God, you sure do talk about the Christian God a lot". Yawn.
> But here's what gets missed pretty much all the time -
> In this conversation with Fur we have now talked about -
> Ishkabibble, why A/As chat here, what Fur doesn't discuss, a wacky claim of 44.68%, The Cookie Monster...….. that's just off the top of my head.
> ...


Agreed,
When we do talk about anything else that would require an honest answer all we get in reply is that he didn't want to answer rhetoric, wouldn't waste time talking about something that does not exist(even though some believers tell us that something exists until someone can prove it doesn't), and I get the feeling that he believes the Christian god exists yet does not want to discuss that in here either.
I can't understand why someone pops in to make drive by comments about what is being discussed when they themselves don't want to discuss anything.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 24, 2018)

I don't believe in Unicorns, nor do I spend hours each day talking about them trying to disprove their existence. Futility is a pointless exercise.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 24, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I don't believe in Unicorns, nor do I spend hours each day talking about them trying to disprove their existence. Futility is a pointless exercise.



If someone's belief in unicorns was the reason that they flew a plane into a building, protested dead soldiers, or killed abortion doctors I would find talking about their belief more pertinent and interesting.  I would find someone's belief in unicorns interesting regardless.  I wish a unicorn believer would show up so that I could discuss their belief with them.  I really want to know what makes them tick.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 24, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> If someone's belief in unicorns was the reason that they flew a plane into a building, protested dead soldiers, or killed abortion doctors I would find talking about their belief more pertinent and interesting.  I would find someone's belief in unicorns interesting regardless.  I wish a unicorn believer would show up so that I could discuss their belief with them.  I really want to know what makes them tick.


We really don't discuss Allah though............and I find it hard to believe that any Christian would protest dead soldiers and kill abortion doctors. That goes against everything I have ever known about Christianity. Maybe to Furtakers defense, the Christian God seems to take the blame for all of that.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 24, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I don't believe in Unicorns, nor do I spend hours each day talking about them trying to disprove their existence. Futility is a pointless exercise.


I am the same way, almost.

The difference here is that I used to believe in Unicorns(God), and then I started to not believe in Unicorns(God) based off of inconsistencies that I couldn't over look. I did the best that I could to research why what I once was SURE of was not adding up and the more that I researched the more I questioned. The more I questioned the more I researched until I hit the point where I learned the history of my religion and what I learned along the way did not seem god-like at all to me. When I talked to Clergy(of various denominations)at various times about it I was told that I should overlook these things and go with what I've been taught, or go with what is in my heart, and when pressed by me with many things that I ask in here, I was flat out told that maybe Christianity was not for me...
So I continue on. I am flat out curious and incredibly interested in finding out why something that is touted as being the Ultimate Truth is so incredibly hard to back up.
I am dying to talk to someone who can answer my questions. I cannot use a source as evidence to back up that same source(bible). I am fully willingly open for a god, any god, to drop kick me in the face for a wiser-upper. I figure that a god would know EXACTLY what it would take for me to believe again. I cannot say that I even know...but a god should. So & And until that happens I frequent the place that is specifically made for and contains people who want to discuss such things with me. I am open to have my mind changed. I am willing to accept solid evidence.
I am not saying that a god in some sort of capacity does not exist, I am saying that I have not seen any evidence of one and the religions that man has made are not as universally correct as they want me to believe. I am convinced so far that if there is a god man has not been able to narrow it down let alone provide specifics.
I think that people want to make sense of and explain an unknowable force that is our Universe and at the same time deal with their own mortality.
The ex-christian in me is still willing to hear something that may change my mind. The skeptic in me will have me think of every way I can to put it to the test.

Is it too much to ask of someone who makes a claim to back it up ?

We want to see big buck pics or big fish pics if someone claims to have gotten one that is beyond exceptional. In daily life we are skeptical of most everything that is too good to be true and we ask for proof.
Is it honestly too much ask from someone, who claims something is so exceptional that it is the cause of our very existence and is involved in our daily lives, to just back it up with the same type of evidence that we use throughout our daily life for everything else? It baffles me why something touted as a god is so hard to prove.  It makes me think someone is not being honest.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 24, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I don't believe in Unicorns, nor do I spend hours each day talking about them trying to disprove their existence. Futility is a pointless exercise.


I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer but I get the feeling that you do not hold political office and something tells me that you are not a Democrat or Liberal or are a Commie Union Member... yet I have noticed that occasionally(?)  you tend to pop in the Political forum to discuss things about politics and hold some Democrat/Liberal feet to the fire when they seem to make claims that you happen to not agree with. It may be because you are interested in those types of discussions(which at times get insulting, degrading, personal, and even come across as dismissive and condescending) and are passionate about how things can and do affect you in daily life. It seems to me that you enjoy taking some time out of your life to participate in such discussions. I am no different politically. I like to discuss those thing too.
If I am wrong about you, I apologize.
If I am right then hopefully you understand why I frequent here.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 24, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> We really don't discuss Allah though............and I find it hard to believe that any Christian would protest dead soldiers and kill abortion doctors. That goes against everything I have ever known about Christianity. Maybe to Furtakers defense, the Christian God seems to take the blame for all of that.



Who do they worship?



> Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) is an American church known for its use of inflammatory hate speech, especially against LGBT+ people (homophobiaand transphobia), Catholics (anti-Catholicism), Orthodox Christians (anti-Orthodoxy), Muslims (Islamophobia), Jews (antisemitism), Romani people(antiziganism), and U.S. soldiers and politicians (anti-Americanism).[4][5] It is widely known as a hate group[6] and is monitored as such by the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center. The church has been involved in actions against gay people since at least 1991, when it sought a crackdown on homosexual activity at Gage Park six blocks northwest of the church.[7] In addition to conducting anti-gay protests at military funerals, the organization pickets celebrity funerals and public events.[8]Protests have also been held against Jews and Catholics, and some protests have included WBC members stomping on the American flag or flying the flag upside down on a flagpole. The church also has made statements such as "thank God for dead soldiers," "God blew up the troops," "thank God for 9/11," and "God hates America."[9] The church has faced several accusations of brainwashing[10][11][12] and has been criticised for resembling a cult.[13][14][15]


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 24, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Who do they worship?


The answer is right there in your quote - "it is widely known as a hate group"


----------



## bullethead (Sep 24, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> The answer is right there in your quote - "it is widely known as a hate group"


Filled with Christians .
I know you do not like it, but they are Christians as sure as you are.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 24, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I don't believe in Unicorns, nor do I spend hours each day talking about them trying to disprove their existence. Futility is a pointless exercise.



Its always interesting to me when you guys put the subject of your god on the same level as unicorns etc.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 24, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Filled with Christians .
> I know you do not like it, but they are Christians as sure as you are.


Something inside me wants to give you the benefit of the doubt and not believe that you really are that gullible.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 24, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Something inside me wants to give you the benefit of the doubt and not believe that you really are that gullible.


I am not gullible at all.
They all call Christ their Lord. They all find and use scripture to back up their beliefs. They are one of 40,000 denominations that all call themselves Christians.
Despite your differences with theirs, you all get to the same place but in different ways. In their mind you are not as Christian as they are. In your mind they are not Christians let alone as Christian as you.
Where does it end?
Who honestly is the best Christian? Which denomination,  which parish, which individual? You?
I know it isn't you because you are violating a couple of Jesus's commands by merely judging the WB crowd.
It is all comical.


----------



## Israel (Sep 24, 2018)

bullethead said:


> How is that test simple?



I think it's simple because what once could only be conceptualized (at best) is now fairly commonly able to be pictured. And pictographs are easier for us.

That's the simpler part. Seeing ourselves in the picture then, though still needing some navigating, is also made much easier.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 24, 2018)

Israel said:


> A simple test.
> A universe populated only by your own clone.
> How does that appear?
> 
> ...


What does any of that have to do with a pictograph?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 24, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I am not gullible at all.
> They all call Christ their Lord. They all find and use scripture to back up their beliefs. They are one of 40,000 denominations that all call themselves Christians.
> Despite your differences with theirs, you all get to the same place but in different ways. In their mind you are not as Christian as they are. In your mind they are not Christians let alone as Christian as you.
> Where does it end?
> ...


Doesn’t matter what they call who. A follower of Christ and keeping his commandments are important, regardless how one wants to spin it. They are not following Christ doing what they do, it ends when you see the the fruit they bear, not our opinions.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 24, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I am not gullible at all.
> They all call Christ their Lord. They all find and use scripture to back up their beliefs. They are one of 40,000 denominations that all call themselves Christians.


And by the way, the label “Christian” that’s attached by so many.......do a little research on that if you want to debate this.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 24, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Doesn’t matter what they call who. A follower of Christ and keeping his commandments are important, regardless how one wants to spin it. They are not following Christ doing what they do, it ends when you see the the fruit they bear, not our opinions.


Like judging others...THAT type of not real Christian?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 24, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> And by the way, the label “Christian” that’s attached by so many.......do a little research on that if you want to debate this.


I want to know what they do that is different from you.
Not the high and mighty internet persona, but what you do when nobody is looking. You already broke a Jesus command above even questioning others.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 25, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I want to know what they do that is different from you.
> Not the high and mighty internet persona, but what you do when nobody is looking. *You already broke a Jesus command above even questioning others*.



Well aren't you just a little pot calling the kettle black

 They promote hate. That is different from me.

There`s no such thing as a commandment not to question anyone. Maybe Jim Jones followers should have questioned him???????..........but the way you are going about this they`re better off dying rather than question anyone. In one discussion, we are told that we do not think for ourselves and fail to research, and then in another we are judging if we do question. 

Since you dont know where to start researching, start with Galations 5. Then research the word Christian, you brought it up, that's the least you could do.  

But I really thought you had already did this in order to rule out the Christian belief. 

And if you are convinced that everyone that claims to be something is "that", you are gullible. If that line of thinking is true, it must not apply to politicians.


----------



## Israel (Sep 25, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I want to know what they do that is different from you.
> Not the high and mighty internet persona, but what you do when nobody is looking. You already broke a Jesus command above even questioning others.


For the christian there's never a time when nobody is looking.

It's only we who may fail at it.

But looking may not be the same as paying attention...just as the understanding of being watched, may differ from the understanding of being watched over.

Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. This is why I speak to them in parables:‘Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.’ In them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled: ‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving For this people’s heart has grown callous; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and turn, and I would heal them.’


----------



## bullethead (Sep 25, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Well aren't you just a little pot calling the kettle black
> 
> They promote hate. That is different from me.
> 
> ...



The early church was called “Christians” by the powers-that-be for the first time in Antioch (Acts 11:26). It wasn’t a name Jesus’ disciples gave themselves—it was a name given to them by the society in Antioch. 

It changed to mean Christ-like


“Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.”


----------



## bullethead (Sep 25, 2018)

Israel said:


> For the christian there's never a time when nobody is looking.
> 
> It's only we who may fail at it.
> 
> ...


Seriously, a Pictograph???


----------



## Israel (Sep 25, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Seriously, a Pictograph???


yes.

John 3:14


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 25, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Like judging others...THAT type of not real Christian?


The whole "judging others" thing is another one of those contradictions that to me, has the stench of man all over it.
As humans, we are wired to "judge". People, situations, benefit vs risk etc etc.
Its a defense/survival thing.
Now if God poofed us into existence he would know that because he wired us that way.
Its another one of those "now why would God make you that way then supposedly make the rule that you cant be the way he made you"?
Only man would come up with a rule that you cant do what you are wired to do.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 25, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> The whole "judging others" thing is another one of those contradictions that to me, has the stench of man all over it.
> As humans, we are wired to "judge". People, situations, benefit vs risk etc etc.
> Its a defense/survival thing.
> Now if God poofed us into existence he would know that because he wired us that way.
> ...


Yes agreed.
And
Westboro Baptist can find enough scripture within the Bible to justify their actions the same as others use scripture to justify themselves and the points they wany to make.
40,000 Christian denominations and all the the others have it wrong.....priceless.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 25, 2018)

Israel said:


> yes.
> 
> John 3:14


Lifting up a serpent and man ...

Explain the pictograph reference


----------



## welderguy (Sep 25, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> The whole "judging others" thing is another one of those contradictions that to me, has the stench of man all over it.
> As humans, we are wired to "judge". People, situations, benefit vs risk etc etc.
> Its a defense/survival thing.
> Now if God poofed us into existence he would know that because he wired us that way.
> ...



When God re-wires a person, then he is able. It's called a transformation. You go from a dead state to a live state in a moment of time. You are set at liberty to walk in newness of life. Someday I truly hope you experience this transformation. It will be a permanent life changer.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 25, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I am the same way, almost.
> 
> The difference here is that I used to believe in Unicorns(God), and then I started to not believe in Unicorns(God) based off of inconsistencies that I couldn't over look. I did the best that I could to research why what I once was SURE of was not adding up and the more that I researched the more I questioned. The more I questioned the more I researched until I hit the point where I learned the history of my religion and what I learned along the way did not seem god-like at all to me.



I had a friend who was an Engineer. He'd research an idea he had slap to death five times before he would ever start implementing the idea to attempt to bring it to fruition. By the time he got around to it somebody else had already done it and made five upgrades making his original idea obsolete. 

He had a deeply religious mother and an abusive drunkard for a dad, so he had heard about God, been to church as a little boy, and decided he would read the bible start to finish to see if it was true and what this God thing was about. I told him that is not how it works, that the Bible is not a novel by Tom Clancy and that he most likely wouldn't find his answers by simply reading it like a set of instructions. He persisted anyway and after about 4 months had more questions than he did answers, sort of like researching one of his own ideas. 

I once again explained to him that the Bible cannot simply be read to gain an understanding of God. I told him to look at it more as a two volume set. The first set is a history lesson that requires extensive research into the different periods of times and what the theologies of the regions were. An exercise in anthropology if you will, understanding the different cultures and how different characters from the Bible treated each culture and theological system differently in order to get the same message across to them. An age of persecution if you will. 

Then I told him the second volume was instructional, which 90% of people miss, even most Christians. It is a story of redemption, sacrifice, salvation and a text book (if you will) example on how we should live and treat each other through. Tools such as mercy, faith, understanding, forgiveness were to be part of that message as  well. I made sure he understood that society, both Christian and non-Christian has spent too much time focusing on the first volume and not near enough time focusing on the second, which is more instructional than the first. It even has a character in it that takes the lead and sets the example of how we should lead our lives and treat each other, and in true reflective fashion against society in the end he is persecuted by those insistent on following Volume I and brutally punished and murdered in a most horrible fashion. 

I don't know if he ever went back and dissected the Bible in the manner I suggested, but he did end up marrying a beautiful Christian woman, having kids and living a less tumultuous life.

Research the old can be a good thing when done properly. Merely reading for instruction can be terribly time consuming and wasteful when the true answers lie in the design of the newer model concept. 



bullethead said:


> If I am wrong about you, I apologize.
> If I am right then hopefully you understand why I frequent here.



I am passionate about my God given rights guaranteed in our US Constitution. This is the only country in the world where our rights are granted by and guaranteed by our Creator and thus cannot be removed by any human. No other country in the world has this, and our Constitution even gives us instruction and tools, the means to right the ship should any men think them self more powerful than the Creator and able to remove these rights from our grasp. 

I oppose anyone of ignorance or deceit that believes it is within their right to infringe upon mine. One of those is the freedom to worship my God, to which I will never infringe upon anyone's right to NOT believe or worship in a creator, as long as they do not infringe upon me and my families rights to worship. 

Believe in a creator or not, I do not care, but do not ostracize, insult or attack those that do. It is an affront to them and a form of attack on their rights as Citizens of this unique experiment in Liberty and Freedom. 

Not everything in life is a gray area, there are some definite black and white topics, and without conviction one may be lead to choose the wrong shade of truth.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 25, 2018)

bullethead said:


> The early church was called “Christians” by the powers-that-be for the first time in Antioch (Acts 11:26). It wasn’t a name Jesus’ disciples gave themselves—it was a name given to them by the society in Antioch.
> 
> It changed to mean Christ-like
> 
> ...


The key is why where they called Christians?

What they do and don’t do determines what they are. I haven’t called them anything. I said simply they’re not following Christ if they’re promoting hate. You are welcome to call that judging if it pleases you.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 25, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Its always interesting to me when you guys put the subject of your god on the same level as unicorns etc.


If you are looking through a paper towel tube I suppose you could see it that way.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 25, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> The whole "judging others" thing is another one of those contradictions that to me, has the stench of man all over it.
> As humans, we are wired to "judge". People, situations, benefit vs risk etc etc.
> Its a defense/survival thing.
> Now if God poofed us into existence he would know that because he wired us that way.
> ...


Or only man could pick and choose what parts of the Bible he chooses to use as a weapon and ignore the important parts. Those that put more faith in the Old Testament than they do in their Savior and his instructions for how to live life have a harsh reality to face come the day of judgement. 

Men are inherently fallible. This goes for non-believers as well as believers. To set oneself on a pedestal in either case is a deadly mistake, where eternity is concerned.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 25, 2018)

> Miguel Cervantes, post: 11370744, member: 28230"]Or only man could pick and choose what parts of the Bible he chooses to use as a weapon and ignore the important parts. Those that put more faith in the Old Testament than they do in their Savior and his instructions for how to live life have a harsh reality to face come the day of judgement.
> 
> Men are inherently fallible. This goes for non-believers as well as believers. To set oneself on a pedestal in either case is a deadly mistake, where eternity is concerned.


I can go along with that.
But for me its not that cut and dry.
We also know that man pick and chose what went in the Bible to begin with.
With man's penchant for choosing weapons and ignoring important parts …….


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 25, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> I can go along with that.
> But for me its not that cut and dry.
> We also know that man pick and chose what went in the Bible to begin with.
> With man's penchant for choosing weapons and ignoring important parts …….


Just an observation here, “judging” is used to loosely in this case by someone with motives of nothing but continuing to attack the Christian. Bullet is free to do that if it floats his boat.

I do believe it was you that made some form of a comment in another thread that you wouldn’t lump scum of the earth with WBC? Yet it is only the Christian that becomes judgmental by saying they’re not following Christ by promoting hate.

Anyone that can see Christian in what thise folks do really needs help, even just for the sake of being stable in a society.


----------



## Jack Ryan (Sep 25, 2018)

Obviously not.
Proof, there are more freaking stupid people in this country than EVER BEFORE and they are MORE STUPID THAN EVER BEFORE, yet religion is on the decline.

Therefore I propose stupid people are disinclined toward religion.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 25, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> I can go along with that.
> But for me its not that cut and dry.
> We also know that man pick and chose what went in the Bible to begin with.
> With man's penchant for choosing weapons and ignoring important parts …….


It would be interesting to read all of the original texts before they were parsed down again and again and again.............


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 25, 2018)

bullethead said:


> The early church was called “Christians” by the powers-that-be for the first time in Antioch (Acts 11:26). It wasn’t a name Jesus’ disciples gave themselves—it was a name given to them by the society in Antioch.
> 
> It changed to mean Christ-like”


Think about that and why they called them Christians and see if applies to someone that promotes hate


----------



## bullethead (Sep 25, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Believe in a creator or not, I do not care, but do not ostracize, insult or attack those that do. It is an affront to them and a form of attack on their rights as Citizens of this unique experiment in Liberty and Freedom.
> .


Believe in Liberalism, The Democratic Party and Unions or not, I do not care, but do not ostracize, insult or attack those that do. It is an affront to them and a form of attack on their rights as Citizens of this unique experiment in Liberty and Freedom.

Is that that any different than what you are saying about believing in a Creator??

Should the same rules apply in the Political Forum??


----------



## bullethead (Sep 25, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Think about that and why they called them Christians and see if applies to someone that promotes hate


Ok, so that cancels them out AND 99.9 % of every other person that identifies themself as a Christian.
Don't think hate is the only factor, there are dozens of other qualities and commands which you and most others are unable to adhere to.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 25, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Believe in Liberalism, The Democratic Party and Unions or not, I do not care, but do not ostracize, insult or attack those that do. It is an affront to them and a form of attack on their rights as Citizens of this unique experiment in Liberty and Freedom.
> 
> Is that that any different than what you are saying about believing in a Creator??
> 
> Should the same rules apply in the Political Forum??


Show me where the liberal, democrat and Union platforms conform with the Constitution and we'll talk.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 25, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Show me where the liberal, democrat and Union platforms conform with the Constitution and we'll talk.


https://www.encyclopedia.com/politi...and-maps/political-parties-constitutional-law


Since you use the Constitution as your guide for proper forum etiquette. I will use the same to guide me..



> It has often been seen on the Internet that to find God in the Constitution, all one has to do is read it, and see how often the Framers used the words "God," or "Creator," "Jesus," or "Lord." Except for one notable instance, however, none of these words ever appears in the Constitution, neither the original nor in any of the Amendments. The notable exception is found in the Signatory section, where the date is written thusly: "Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven". The use of the word "Lord" here is not a religious reference, however. This was a common way of expressing the date, in both religious and secular contexts. This lack of any these words does not mean that the Framers were not spiritual people, any more than the use of the word Lord means that they were. What this lack of these words is expositive of is not a love for or disdain for religion, but the feeling that the new government should not involve itself in matters of religion. In fact, the original Constitution bars any religious test to hold any federal office in the United States.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 25, 2018)

bullethead said:


> https://www.encyclopedia.com/politi...and-maps/political-parties-constitutional-law
> 
> 
> Since you use the Constitution as your guide for proper forum etiquette. I will use the same to guide me..


That's cool. Start a thread in the political forum if you wish to debate this subject and I'll join in complete with the foundation of how our Constitution and it's contents were formed and who the contributors were.


----------



## Brother David (Sep 25, 2018)

Miguel remember that  the Jewish leaders crucified our Lord over political differences and called it blasphemy . Matthew 24:10 states that many will offended , many betrayed and offered up in the latter days . Stay strong your Brother in Christ !!!!


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 25, 2018)

Brother David said:


> Miguel remember that  the Jewish leaders crucified our Lord over political differences and called it blasphemy . Matthew 24:10 states that many will offended , many betrayed and offered up in the latter days . Stay strong your Brother in Christ !!!!


I make have no compunction of where I stand on my faith or the foundation of this country's documents. Those that acted in a manner that lead up to Jesus crucifixion were also addressed by Jesus as the least among us. Heretics and Pharisees prevail to this very day and how they should be dealt with has not changed in 2000 years either. The least tolerable in my eyes are the Pharisees, those that know the letter of the Bible inside and out, pretending to be theologians and using it for a weapon against those that do not deserve their misplaced wrath. They are the most damaging in the cause for Christianity, not the non-believers. Even Jesus recognized that those multitudes he fed with a fish and a loaf of bread were only there for the sustenance he provided, but cared nothing for the salvation he offered, thus why he left them before daylight. Their intentions were not of his true offering.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 25, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> That's cool. Start a thread in the political forum if you wish to debate this subject and I'll join in complete with the foundation of how our Constitution and it's contents were formed and who the contributors were.


We already covered that in here years back.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 25, 2018)

Funny I don't remember any mention of Jonathan Winthrop.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 25, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Funny I don't remember any mention of Jonathan Winthrop.


Possibly because you didn't bring him up.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 25, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Possibly because you didn't bring him up.


Then we didn't have that exact discussion.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 25, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Then we didn't have that exact discussion.


He wasn't around for the Constitution  so no need.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 25, 2018)

bullethead said:


> He wasn't around for the Constitution  so no need.


He and his writings were the foundation for all that the Constitution was built upon.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 25, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> He and his writings were the foundation for all that the Constitution was built upon.


And let the facts fly to back that up.
I'll listen


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 25, 2018)

bullethead said:


> And let the facts fly to back that up.
> I'll listen


Start the thread in the PF and I'll be glad to.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 25, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Start the thread in the PF and I'll be glad to.


I don't need to know that badly.
I know what a founding influence he was in Massachusetts/Boston.
My understanding is that his writings helped guide Mass and Conn and any religious references based from his writings and others were purposefully left out of the Constitution.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 25, 2018)

welderguy said:


> When God re-wires a person, then he is able. It's called a transformation. You go from a dead state to a live state in a moment of time. You are set at liberty to walk in newness of life. Someday I truly hope you experience this transformation. It will be a permanent life changer.


Did you forget that you believe in the Elect?
That = prewired not rewired.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 25, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Did you forget that you believe in the Elect?
> That = prewired not rewired.




If I may, "When you get re-wired, as was predetermined......."


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 25, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> If I may, "When you get re-wired, as was predetermined......."


So before you existed God elected you, then when he made you he did so without this wiring...…... just so that he could change (rewire) you later.
Yeah that makes sense.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 25, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Just an observation here, “judging” is used to loosely in this case by someone with motives of nothing but continuing to attack the Christian. Bullet is free to do that if it floats his boat.
> 
> I do believe it was you that made some form of a comment in another thread that you wouldn’t lump scum of the earth with WBC? Yet it is only the Christian that becomes judgmental by saying they’re not following Christ by promoting hate.
> 
> Anyone that can see Christian in what thise folks do really needs help, even just for the sake of being stable in a society.


I don't remember if it was me but it sounds like something I would say.
WBC are Christians. They worship the Christian God.
Having said that, I don't think anybody with half a brain believes they represent your typical Christian.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 25, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> So before you existed God elected you, then when he made you he did so without this wiring...…... just so that he could change (rewire) you later.
> Yeah that makes sense.


Is not an apprentice of a trade elected? Chosen if you will showing the desire to learn and the skill set to do so? Is he not re-wired through his experiences to Journeyman and even more so when he finally reaches Master of his Trade? He is not the same man he was when he started this venture.

I suppose re-wired could be viewed in a few different contexts.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 25, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> I don't remember if it was me but it sounds like something I would say.
> WBC are Christians. They worship the Christian God.
> Having said that, I don't think anybody with half a brain believes they represent your typical Christian.


I can agree with this.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 25, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Ok, so that cancels them out AND 99.9 % of every other person that identifies themself as a Christian.
> Don't think hate is the only factor, there are dozens of other qualities and commands which you and most others are unable to adhere to.


You sure seem to judge alot while accusing others of judging. They intentionally promote hate and cause division. That’s not something the Christian faith is taught. I’m ok with whatever you and they want to call them, it’s thrur fruit that will bear their true colors.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 25, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Yes agreed.
> And
> Westboro Baptist can find enough scripture within the Bible to justify their actions the same as others use scripture to justify themselves and the points they wany to make.
> 40,000 Christian denominations and all the the others have it wrong.....priceless.


Lol so I can assume you’re Christian now since you can pop up a scripture here and there to prove your point?? Nice lol ?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 25, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> You sure seem to judge alot while accusing others of judging. They intentionally promote hate and cause division. That’s not something the Christian faith is taught. I’m ok with whatever you and they want to call them, it’s thrur fruit that will bear their true colors.


I am just stating the obvious from the facts at hand.
Not judging.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 25, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Lol so I can assume you’re Christian now since you can pop up a scripture here and there to prove your point?? Nice lol ?


I don't remember while reading your suggested what makes a christian homework assignment that a scripture "pop" makes one a Christian. Did I miss something? Or are you trying to* ignore the verses WB uses on their protest signs and the criteria that you told me to research?*


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 25, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I don't remember while reading your suggested what makes a christian homework assignment that a scripture "pop" makes one a Christian. Did I miss something? Or are you trying to* ignore the verses WB uses on their protest signs and the criteria that you told me to research?*


All jokes aside, you know as well as I do that anyone can pick up the Bible, hunting regs, stand your ground laws and justify anything they want. 

I asked you to research the word Christian because it’s used to loosely and it started by basically the way you described, people labeled the Apostles because they were “Christ-like”

My only point is being Christ like is not promoting hate and violence. 

The scripture you quoted to prove your point of judging, etc is what I’m referring to above.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 25, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I am just stating the obvious from the facts at hand.
> Not judging.


I was too.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I can agree with this.


So in one quote you agree they are Christians, in the next you say anyone can call themselves Christians 

I guess when you cover all the bases you can only be half wrong.

Wwjd...


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I was too.


The difference is they are STILL as Christian as the other 39,999 Denominations. They interpret scripture as needed exactly like you do. They do not consider themselves to be a hate group when they also believe their sovereign god not only dislikes the same people but commands them through scripture to follow his lead.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I told him to look at it more as a two volume set. The first set is a history lesson that requires extensive research into the different periods of times and what the theologies of the regions were. An exercise in anthropology if you will, understanding the different cultures and how different characters from the Bible treated each culture and theological system differently in order to get the same message across to them. An age of persecution if you will.
> 
> Then I told him the second volume was instructional, which 90% of people miss, even most Christians. It is a story of redemption, sacrifice, salvation and a text book (if you will) example on how we should live and treat each other through. Tools such as mercy, faith, understanding, forgiveness were to be part of that message as  well. I made sure he understood that society, both Christian and non-Christian has spent too much time focusing on the first volume and not near enough time focusing on the second, which is more instructional than the first. It even has a character in it that takes the lead and sets the example of how we should lead our lives and treat each other, and in true reflective fashion against society in the end he is persecuted by those insistent on following Volume I and brutally punished and murdered in a most horrible fashion.
> 
> ...


So if the the first part of the bible is a history lesson why was Jesus using it as religious text the same as you want to use the 2nd part of the bible?
Lets face it, Jesus was a Yaweh following Jew. He followed the Torah. His goal was not to start a new religion. He didn't command anyone to do so. He never said he was God. He never wrote down the new rules for a new religion or a 2nd chapter. He never told anyone to worship him.

Your 2nd part is no different than the first due to mankind making out things as they want them to be in order to satisfy themself. The world was full of those writings. That area was full of various people writing about various messiahs. No potential messiah fulfilled all the prophesy. None were ever a god.


----------



## welderguy (Sep 26, 2018)

WaltL1 said:


> Did you forget that you believe in the Elect?
> That = prewired not rewired.



My point is that the elect are the very ones who undergo this transformation.
And, I see a possibility of you being an elect.

The sick need a physician far more than the whole do.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> So in one quote you agree they are Christians, in the next you say anyone can call themselves Christians
> 
> I guess when you cover all the bases you can only be half wrong.
> 
> Wwjd...


Maybe I should have been more clear with what I agree with. 

“Having said that, I don't think anybody with half a brain believes they represent your typical Christian”


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Maybe I should have been more clear with what I agree with.
> 
> “Having said that, I don't think anybody with half a brain believes they represent your typical Christian”


Typical Christian...yes
Christian, none the less.

Every denomination differs to their own standards on a denominational level and every individual in every denomination differs from the next person on a personal level.
Name one that is truly like the Christ portrayed in the bible.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> The difference is they are STILL as Christian as the other 39,999 Denominations. They interpret scripture as needed exactly like you do. They do not consider themselves to be a hate group when they also believe their sovereign god not only dislikes the same people but commands them through scripture to follow his lead.


If that works for you, go with it. I guess we could rejax the definition or the purpose of the label that was given by onlookers. Of course, it’s still just a label. We have been called many labels.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Typical Christian...yes
> Christian, none the less.
> 
> Every denomination differs to their own standards on a denominational level and every individual in every denomination differs from the next person on a personal level.
> Name one that is truly like the Christ portrayed in the bible.


I think you’re missing the point. No one is claiming perfection, but when you intentionally provoke you’re on a different level.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Maybe I should have been more clear with what I agree with.
> 
> “Having said that, I don't think anybody with half a brain believes they represent your typical Christian”


To add:
What in all heck is a Typical Christian?
If typical means most....then I would say the typical Christian doesn't act Christ like the overwhelming majority of their daily life for the entirety of their life but has themself convinced they do while pointing at others for do the same thing.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I think you’re missing the point. No one is claiming perfection, but when you intentionally provoke you’re on a different level.


So what IS Christ like if not perfect?

So everyone but Christ is non Christ like,  but some are worse so focus on them??


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> So what IS Christ like if not perfect?
> 
> So everyone but Christ is non Christ like,  but some are worse so focus on them??


Striving to be like him is not the same as intentionally doing the opposite.

Think of this way, are you a thief just because you drove off and forgot to pay for your gas? Legally, technically, you did drive off but I believe that if you realized it, you’d go back and pay.

That’s the difference in striving and still making honest mistakes / failures and intentionally doing something.

I guess in a sense these folks honestly believe they’re following Christ. If that’s the case, I will just have stand on the terms that they’re not following the Christ that I am familiar with.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Striving to be like him is not the same as intentionally doing the opposite.


A fail is a fail.
Lose by 1 or lose by 100, still a loss.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> A fail is a fail.
> Lose by 1 or lose by 100, still a loss.


Not playing ball and counting points. Talking about the difference in ones actions.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Not playing ball and counting points. Talking about the difference in ones actions.


Sure you are.
If you were miced up and followed by a camera crew 24/7 you would cringe at how unlike Jesus you are.
But it feels better to point out that you don't consider yourself to be as bad as them Westboro Baptists..
Are there levels of sin?
Is one unchristlike action less than the next??


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Sure you are.
> If you were miced up and followed by a camera crew 24/7 you would cringe at how unlike Jesus you are.
> But it feels better to point out that you don't consider yourself to be as bad as them Westboro Baptists..
> Are there levels of sin?
> Is one unchristlike action less than the next??


See post 351.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Striving to be like him is not the same as intentionally doing the opposite.
> 
> Think of this way, are you a thief just because you drove off and forgot to pay for your gas? Legally, technically, you did drive off but I believe that if you realized it, you’d go back and pay.
> 
> ...


Yeah, your version and rules suit you, theirs them.

But when you cursed the car in traffic today, snuck a peek at the chick with the low cut blouse, threw the gum wrapper on the ground, rolled your eyes at the handicapped person holding up the line, blew your top at the idiot employee, and a thousand other daily fully legal but extremely non christ like actions....just how christ like are you really? Well bullethead its not that i dont mean to not be, i try to be, and I am not breaking the law like them other "pretend christians(oops, another violation), but I am as good as I can be and I have allowed that to be suffecient.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Striving to be like him is not the same as intentionally doing the opposite.
> 
> Think of this way, are you a thief just because you drove off and forgot to pay for your gas? Legally, technically, you did drive off but I believe that if you realized it, you’d go back and pay.
> 
> ...


Bingo!
They honestly believe they are following Christ.
Or at least they have convinced themselves they are following Christ.
Im glad that they are the teeniest, tiniest portion of Christians that think like they do.
If the majority of Christians thought like them we wouldn't be debating we would be shooting


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> So if the the first part of the bible is a history lesson why was Jesus using it as religious text the same as you want to use the 2nd part of the bible?
> Lets face it, Jesus was a Yaweh following Jew. He followed the Torah. His goal was not to start a new religion. He didn't command anyone to do so. He never said he was God. He never wrote down the new rules for a new religion or a 2nd chapter. He never told anyone to worship him.
> 
> Your 2nd part is no different than the first due to mankind making out things as they want them to be in order to satisfy themself. The world was full of those writings. That area was full of various people writing about various messiahs. No potential messiah fulfilled all the prophesy. None were ever a god.


There were multiple times where Jesus contradicted the Old Testament ways and created a new doctrine, thus reflected in the New Testament, aka the Gospel. Secondly, to understand whether Jesus ever claimed to be God you would have to understand the significance of the use of the words "I Am" in both the Old and New Testament and the context in which He used it.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Yeah, your version and rules suit you, theirs them.
> 
> But when you cursed the car in traffic today, snuck a peek at the chick with the low cut blouse, threw the gum wrapper on the ground, rolled your eyes at the handicapped person holding up the line, blew your top at the idiot employee, and a thousand other daily fully legal but extremely non christ like actions....just how christ like are you really? Well bullethead its not that i dont mean to not be, i try to be, and I am not breaking the law like them other "pretend christians(oops, another violation), but I am as good as I can be and I have allowed that to be suffecient.


Well if you see me do that, call me out on it. Until then, you’re only fabricating actions and judging by assuming. 

Or, is this the standard of living you’re familiar with and think that everyone follows suit?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> There were multiple times where Jesus contradicted the Old Testament ways and created a new doctrine, thus reflected in the New Testament, aka the Gospel. Secondly, to understand whether Jesus ever claimed to be God you would have to understand the significance of the use of the words "I Am" in both the Old and New Testament and the context in which He used it.


Many apocalyptic preachers of that time period contradicted the new ways religion was going and used the Torah as a guide to back to or else suffer the consequences. 
If you understand the significance of the words of the time period you should also understand ALL of preachers who existed before, during and after Jesus who used the same words. The entire history of the Jewish religion is filled with multiple gods, multiple movements, multiple disciples of the various leaders of those various movements and many messiah candidates that to this day are not Messiahs yet fulfilled more prophesy than Jesus.

Of course if someone wants to have their followers believe in them, they will use terminology that helps their cause.
"I Am"..
Really, THAT is proof he is God?

Isnt that just the thing you would expect a writer to write???


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Well if you see me do that, call me out on it. Until then, you’re only fabricating actions and judging by assuming.
> 
> Or, is this the standard of living you’re familiar with and think that everyone follows suit?


I am including EVERYONE who identifies themselves as being Christian, you included.

I am not saying or implying that I am somehow better than anyone else. That is the Christian thing


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Many apocalyptic preachers of that time period contradicted the new ways religion was going and used the Torah as a guide to back to or else suffer the consequences.
> If you understand the significance of the words of the time period you should also understand ALL of preachers who existed before, during and after Jesus who used the same words. The entire history of the Jewish religion is filled with multiple gods, multiple movements, multiple disciples of the various leaders of those various movements and many messiah candidates that to this day are not Messiahs yet fulfilled more prophesy than Jesus.
> 
> Of course if someone wants to have their followers believe in them, they will use terminology that helps their cause.
> ...


The one certainty is, we will all learn the truth one day.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 26, 2018)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> The one certainty is, we will all learn the truth one day.



In the mean time, we should try to determine the truth to the best of our abilities with the faculties available to us.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I am including EVERYONE who identifies themselves as being Christian, you included.
> 
> I am not saying or implying that I am somehow better than anyone else. That is the Christian thing



I’m not sure if you can see the hypocrisy in your comments when it comes to judging and self centered but......

And no, it’s not the Christian thing, it’s a fabricated tool used by non believers to crutch their argument to create a diversion in order to take attention away from their disdain towards Christianity.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I’m not sure if you can see the hypocrisy in your comments when it comes to judging and self centered but......
> 
> And no, it’s not the Christian thing, it’s a fabricated tool used by non believers to crutch their argument to create a diversion in order to take attention away from their disdain towards Christianity.



I am not making any claims of my own person.
I have zero disdain for Christianity or Christians. Most of my family, friends, acquaintances, customers and people that I interact with daily are Christians.

I am discussing what is being said in here by Christians about other Christians.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I am not making any claims of my own person.
> I have zero disdain for Christianity or Christians. Most of my family, friends, acquaintances, customers and people that I interact with daily are Christians.
> 
> I am discussing what is being said in here by Christians about other Christians.


So basic English is required to complete school, at least in my state. We were not taught that disagreeing or forming difference in opinions meant you were better than than the one you disagree with.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I am not making any claims of my own person.


Of course not.
_ 
" - I would say the typical Christian doesn't act Christ like the overwhelming majority of their daily life for the entirety of their life_

_- But when you cursed the car in traffic today, snuck a peek at the chick with the low cut blouse, threw the gum wrapper on the ground, rolled your eyes at the handicapped person holding up the line, blew your top at the idiot employee,_

_- If you were miced up and followed by a camera crew 24/7 you would cringe at how unlike Jesus you are._

_- there are dozens of other qualities and commands which you and most others are unable to adhere to._

_- Who honestly is the best Christian? Which denomination, which parish, which individual? You? I know it isn't you because you are violating a couple of Jesus's commands by merely judging the WB crowd._

_- I want to know what they do that is different from you.
Not the high and mighty internet persona, but what you do when nobody is looking. You already broke a Jesus command above even questioning others."_

_- *I am not saying *or implying that *I am somehow better than anyone else*. *That is the Christian thing"*_


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Of course not.
> _
> " - I would say the typical Christian doesn't act Christ like the overwhelming majority of their daily life for the entirety of their life_
> 
> ...


I can only assume that in your stste required basic English class you were not taught to quote the entire reply to show the context, only a small snippet of what you want to use in order to make a point...no matter how incorrect it is.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> So basic English is required to complete school, at least in my state. We were not taught that disagreeing or forming difference in opinions meant you were better than than the one you disagree with.


Were you talking about who qualifies as being Christian or not?
A "D" grade is passing huh?
Was Reading & Comprehension also part of the curriculum?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Were you talking about who qualifies as being Christian or not?
> A "D" grade is passing huh?
> Was Reading & Comprehension also part of the curriculum?



No, I was not talking about qualifications. You ranted over who is a better Christian. I only said they are not following the teachings of Christ if they are promoting hate. 

I later recapped and said they are not following the Christ that I am familiar with. 

Following the teachings of Christ is exactly how the label came to be, so yes, reading and comprehension are important.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I can only assume that in your stste required basic English class you were not taught to quote the entire reply to show the context, only a small snippet of what you want to use in order to make a point...no matter how incorrect it is.


Unless you have added to it, the remainder of it will change the context?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> No, I was not talking about qualifications. You ranted over who is a better Christian. I only said they are not following the teachings of Christ if they are promoting hate.
> 
> I later recapped and said they are not following the Christ that I am familiar with.
> 
> Following the teachings of Christ is exactly how the label came to be, so yes, reading and comprehension are important.


What bible and scripture do they use then?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I can only assume that in your stste required basic English class you were not taught to quote the entire reply to show the context, only a small snippet of what you want to use in order to make a point...no matter how incorrect it is.


Here is an entire quote. lets see who gets into the "qualifications" and "claims".    

"I am not gullible at all.
 They all call Christ their Lord. They all find and use scripture to back up their beliefs. They are one of 40,000 denominations that all call themselves Christians.
 Despite your differences with theirs, you all get to the same place but in different ways. In their mind you are not as Christian as they are. *In your mind they are not Christians let alone as Christian as you.*
 Where does it end?
*Who honestly is the best Christian? Which denomination,  which parish, which individual? You?
 I know it isn't you because you are violating a couple of Jesus's commands by merely judging the WB crowd.*
 It is all comical"


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Unless you have added to it, the remainder of it will change the context?


Yes.
Absolutely. 
Where in all that was I talking about my own person?
The rest showed exactly who I was talking about.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> What bible and scripture do they use then?


You really want to go there since you brought up comprehension? You do realize that those folks arguing in court every day have read the same laws that you abide by and have an attorney arguing in their defense on their interpretations?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> Yes.
> Absolutely.
> Where in all that was I talking about my own person?
> The rest showed exactly who I was talking about.


The rest was your "own person". Your thoughts., your accusations, your conclusions.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Here is an entire quote. lets see who gets into the "qualifications" and "claims".
> 
> "I am not gullible at all.
> They all call Christ their Lord. They all find and use scripture to back up their beliefs. They are one of 40,000 denominations that all call themselves Christians.
> ...


This is the quote..


> I am not making any claims of my own person.
> I have zero disdain for Christianity or Christians. Most of my family, friends, acquaintances, customers and people that I interact with daily are Christians.
> 
> I am discussing what is being said in here by Christians about other Christians.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> The rest was your "own person". Your thoughts., your accusations, your conclusions.


If you interpret that as talking about Me, Myself, I....you have got it all very incorrect.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> You really want to go there since you brought up comprehension? You do realize that those folks arguing in court every day have read the same laws that you abide by and have an attorney arguing in their defense on their interpretations?


I'd like to establish what god they worship, I'm gonna say Jesus.

And what Bible/Scripture they use..
I'll say Old and New Testament 

Am I wrong?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> Here is an entire quote. lets see who gets into the "qualifications" and "claims".



"I am not gullible at all. Truth
They all call Christ their Lord. Truth They all find and use scripture to back up their beliefs.Truth 
They are one of 40,000 denominations that all call themselves Christians.Truth
Despite your differences with theirs, you all get to the same place but in different ways.Truth 
In their mind you are not as Christian as they are. Truth 
*In your mind they are not Christians let alone as Christian as you.Truth*
Where does it end? I still don't know, that is why I asked.
*Who honestly is the best Christian? Which denomination,  which parish, which individual? You? I am still waiting for your answer.
I know it isn't you because you are violating a couple of Jesus's commands by merely judging the WB crowd. You took yourself out of the running for casting the stone.*
It is all comical" As an outsider I stand corrected, it is Pathetic.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I'd like to establish what god they worship, I'm gonna say Jesus.
> 
> And what Bible/Scripture they use..
> I'll say Old and New Testament
> ...


I am sure the can use the same Bible and worship the same God. 
That same Bible also says "everyone that says Lord"............Matthew 7. 

Could it be me? Of course. Doesn't mean that myself or even them is a better Christian than the other because we have different interpretations. Since you are familiar with "odds"..........odds are they are misinterpreting because there are way more Christians that disagree with them than there are that agree with them. 

I cant view people the way I think you are doing, I could be wrong. It seems that you are saying if they share the same Bible and pray to the same God, then they all represent that group? If that is the case, I don't agree, I cant view the good muslims as the same as those that fly planes into buildings and cut folks heads off, especially when the good ones are saying "they don't represent who we are" and especially since I worked with one that condemned those acts.

One reason I struggle over this issue, I find it just honest everyday good living not to promote hate or flying planes into buildings, so it is easy for me to say or understand when others say "they don't represent us".


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> In their mind you are not as Christian as they are. Truth
> *In your mind they are not Christians let alone as Christian as you.Truth*
> 
> *Who honestly is the best Christian? Which denomination,  which parish, which individual? You? I am still waiting for your answer.
> ...


See this is the area of your own person, your own doing. You are blind to your own judgmental comments to the point that you cant discuss this without condemnation and accusations. I have never thought of myself as being better than anyone, never crossed my mind. You can win this one. I am crying Uncle


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> I am sure the can use the same Bible and worship the same God.


That pretty much goes for the majority of the 2.4 Billion(lets call them Self-Labeled) Christians
Do you agree?



Spotlite said:


> That same Bible also says "everyone that says Lord"............Matthew 7.


If you take scripture as the word of your God, then are we agreed that WB are Christians?



Spotlite said:


> Could it be me? Of course. Doesn't mean that myself or even them is a better Christian than the other because we have different interpretations.


So we have established that at regarding you and I, the WB denomination are Christians



Spotlite said:


> Since you are familiar with "odds"..........odds are they are misinterpreting because there are way more Christians that disagree with them than there are that agree with them.


I would say the odds are greater that the overwhelming majority of the 2.4 Billion (S.L.C.) interpret scripture differently and probably incorrectly. We see the difference in here all the time. So, if 2.39 Billion misinterprete scripture,  does the fact that there are more of them make it right by sheer numbers? Or is correct interpretation RIGHT, and incorrect interpretation WRONG no matter who has more on one side?



Spotlite said:


> I cant view people the way I think you are doing, I could be wrong. It seems that you are saying if they share the same Bible and pray to the same God, then they all represent that group?


It seems like you may be contradicting yourself above now.



Spotlite said:


> If that is the case, I don't agree, I cant view the good muslims as the same as those that fly planes into buildings and cut folks heads off, especially when the good ones are saying "they don't represent who we are" and especially since I worked with one that condemned those acts.


"Good" Muslims and "Bad" Muslims are still Muslims.
"Good" and "Bad" Christians are still Christians.
"Good" and "Bad" Whites are still Whites.
"Good" and "Bad" Pennsylvanians still are Pennsylvanians.

My point is how do you know who is what, and how do you compare yourself on the scale of " good, bad, real, fake"?
Like for example, Lets say you are a good Christian and Israel is a good Christian are you both equal or is one a higher notch?



Spotlite said:


> One reason I struggle over this issue, I find it just honest everyday good living not to promote hate or flying planes into buildings, so it is easy for me to say or understand when others say "they don't represent us".


I totally see why you would struggle over such things. I do to. It does not make logical sense to either one of us.
It does not make sense to me that a god representing any of them would allow it to happen in its name.


----------



## Israel (Sep 26, 2018)

Not like= unequal. (Everyone knows Pennsylvanians are not New Yorkers!)
Does unequal then = greater than, or less than? (Ask on the streets of Pittsburgh, and then in Manhattan)

But what if my first statement is all amiss?

What if _what sees_ "not like" (and then goes about to measure it)...is precisely equal to all?


And to just go one step further...what do we do when we think we encounter the unlike?

(Want to find _likeness_ among New Yorkers and Pennsylvanians? Probably ask both relative to Salt Lake City)


----------



## bullethead (Sep 26, 2018)

Israel said:


> Not like= unequal. (Everyone knows Pennsylvanians are not New Yorkers)
> Does unequal then = greater than, or less than? (Ask on the streets of Pittsburgh, and then in Manhattan)
> 
> But what if my first statement is all amiss?
> ...


New York city people differ from the rest of NY State....
But, What the heck are you talking about?
You are a compaction of complex contradictions.
I know exactly as much from your post now as I knew before you made it.

I am really trying to give you the benefit of doubt and I wait for just one clear and concise post that has a definitive assertion, claim, statement which is then backed up with an equally clear and concise explanation.


----------



## Israel (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> New York city people differ from the rest of NY State....
> But, What the heck are you talking about?
> You are a compaction of complex contradictions.
> I know exactly as much from your post now as I knew before you made it.
> ...



Yes! Precisely.
Even "New Yorkers" have as much variance _in themselves,_ and sometimes more_..._than an imposed grouping _might_ indicate. Does a "New Yorker" even get to decide what a New Yorker_ is_?
There are probably thousands, if not millions of New Yorkers who believe they are "more like" an Angelino than some guy milking cows in Cayuga County.


----------



## Israel (Sep 26, 2018)

> New York city people differ from the rest of NY State....
> But, What the heck are you talking about?
> You are a compaction of complex contradictions.
> I know exactly as much from your post now as I knew before you made it.
> ...




In some ways you are precisely like Jesus Christ...willing to talk to me.
And more than that perhaps, in being willing to wait for me to make sense.
I reap the benefit of the doubt you are made willing to give.

I too see variances within...for which I seek resolution. It becomes a very messy matter to behold for anyone who is moved to look. I don't deny something's going through me that looks like a maelstrom at work. Sometimes I can't even believe the junk that is subject to getting blown over...it looked so well rooted...once.

And I am compelled to admit Spotlite is a better man than me in that I see my default setting is to consider myself better than just about everyone...and most often move from that impetus. To myself, I have every "_good_" reason for why_ I am_ the _way I am_. Others...well I don't usually deign to attribute that. Most, at best usually either appear sheeple or malicious. (Thank God for my wife! Just when I think I am about to settle into the abyss of finding her "as the few" I have fooled into thinking I am a really good guy, and assigning her that abysmal lot of those made capable to fool!...
REAL words come out of her!)

But, I keep banging into something in this. In my own impetus. The impetus of crowning myself.

My invisible friend keeps reminding me the way_ I view_ others is the way I will respond to others...and regardless of how many times I may repeat His name, or write it, shout it...or even...think about it, in all...means less than nothing.

Only my view of what I consider "the least" measures for anything in how I respond to Him. And I never seem to run out of "leasts".

And so this thing keeps happening...it's unrelenting. This thing I bang into.
But I know it's _absolutely as real_...as He says. I am always, unceasingly presented with, encountering, what I consider least...of my imagining of Him.

And what seems a maelstrom...continues. Sweeping away even fondest imaginings.

And by this work of the wind, I find out "_even_ my wife is REAL!" Though I have almost ceaselessly sought to turn her into my imagination of who, and what...she is, and should be.

Yes, my invisible friend has told me "you have a lot to learn"...and I thought I believed Him.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 26, 2018)

bullethead said:


> My point is how do you know who is what, and how do you compare yourself on the scale of " good, bad, real, fake"?
> Like for example, Lets say you are a good Christian and Israel is a good Christian are you both equal or is one a higher notch?
> .


 We don’t compare. I think that’s the part you’re missing. I’m almost certain that Israel and myself do not agree 100% on some things, but who’s better? It’s never been a thought that I have made. 

We are no better than anyone in the WBC, we only disagree with their use of scripture and their actions.


----------



## Israel (Sep 27, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> We don’t compare. I think that’s the part you’re missing. I’m almost certain that Israel and myself do not agree 100% on some things, but who’s better? It’s never been a thought that I have made.
> 
> We are no better than anyone in the WBC, we only disagree with their use of scripture and their actions.



I have been persuaded of certain things no less than any other man. One of these, and I readily admit it's a thing...that even in persuasion, I always find I need further persuasion.

It's the matter of love, and as it pertains to agreement. They show themselves very intertwined to me. Generally speaking the more agreement I find to myself, the more affection I develop to the "offer-er". I like what is willing to offer, in whatever sense: "I am like you". Generally I am neutral to what does not offer it, hostile if I sense it's withholding...and more hostile if I sense an outright resistance. So, maybe I am not as neutral as I imagine.

What I know of _my above_ paragraph is that it is all of anti-christ if endorsed. I am persuaded of that. It is (to me) what Jesus says: "even unbelievers...love those that love them". It's _the natural_ way of things. And I see its working in me, by default. It's like water to a fish.

That is, until a blooming red tide. Then I am forced to leave my _natural habitat,_ that is then shown death to me, and even prefer land to flop and flip seeking oxygen. I never "die well". It's an absurdly beheld desperation, lacking anything of a gracefulness of once slipping through clean and cool water.

An absurd picture? Yes.

But accurate? Real?

So it is that Jesus and Peter's exchange, especially regarding John and "what will this man do?" comes into view. It was not enough for Peter to receive his instruction, he was pressed to know what another was going to be told. I am pretty convinced it was all propelled on the basis of Peter's need to know. And know _if he would_ approve. Jesus dismisses that need, summarily.

The only thing of Jesus concern regarding His disciples...is that they love one another. And I am likewise persuaded that even _by design it is ordained_ that the revelation of Jesus Christ might seem (among disciples) even at odds with what is given to one, and given to another. Instructions...may indeed vary. But to this very end...that the chiefest of instructions might be seen and recognized..."love one another". Even and especially, in apparent disagreements. Love is "easy in agreement"...but must be sought out (if it is to be kept)...when in seeming disagreement. And Jesus knows where a disciple must go...to find this. There's only one place. And that's the place of all and only comfort to any disciple...the_ knowing of_ the presence of the Lord.

And it is in this seeking to _maintain_ the unity of the spirit in the bond of love/peace, that the body grows. This is exercise for the disciple...and also a sure way of entrance into Him who found very little agreeable to Himself, but was willing to rather die than let go of the truth of salvation _for man_ in the God of _all love._

_Even...very disagreeable man._


----------



## bullethead (Sep 27, 2018)

Spotlite said:


> See this is the area of your own person, your own doing. You are blind to your own judgmental comments to the point that you cant discuss this without condemnation and accusations. I have never thought of myself as being better than anyone, never crossed my mind. You can win this one. I am crying Uncle


I AM being judgemental. No doubt. But I do not claim to be, or associate myself with Christ-like.

I do not differentiate myself from another non-believer by saying "well they are calling themselves non-believers but they are filled with hate so it goes against being a non-believer"....even though in reality they do not believe in a god regardless of which they are hateful.
Same applies to WB. Sure they are hateful but they are still Christians, they just find scripture to back up their ways.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 27, 2018)

bullethead said:


> I AM being judgemental. No doubt. But I do not claim to be, or associate myself with Christ-like.
> 
> I do not differentiate myself from another non-believer by saying "well they are calling themselves non-believers but they are filled with hate so it goes against being a non-believer"....even though in reality they do not believe in a god regardless of which they are hateful.
> Same applies to WB. Sure they are hateful but they are still Christians, they just find scripture to back up their ways.


I can mostly agree here, just wanted to clarify that disagreeing with another doesn’t mean one is better than the other. 

 The only difference really is the term Christian is prescriptive, people’s actions was how the term came to be that was given by on lookers. There’s nothing prescriptive to follow to non believe. 

I’m one that believes that our actions define us, not our verbal claims.

I don’t have to tell anyone I’m Christian, my actions are supposed to do that. And I honestly have not met anyone that would consider me Christian if I marched, protested and advertised promoting the hate that WBC does. 

But, I get your point and understand where you’re coming from now.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 27, 2018)

"Love One Another"

It's elegant and simple and utilitarian, until it isn't.  Do you love Hillary Clinton?  Ruth Ginsberg?  Bernie Sanders?  Those questions aren't just for you, Isreal.  They're also for everybody who might have wished them dead or called them evil or said that their children are ugly (and not in a constructive way).  

I can't think of anyone that I wish were dead right this second.  But I don't love every stranger.  If I go down to the gas station there will be some homeless guys down there.  I can walk passed them and tell them "I love you, Man".  I might even give them some change.  But I don't love them.  We're wired to be tribal.  We're motivated by ideas like "In Group Out Group".  We organize societies and make rules so that most of us can enjoy a reasonable amount of peace and prosperity.  Any wisdom to be gleaned from ancient texts will  in some way reflect the struggle to come up with a way to "live a good life".  The Devil is in the details.  WWJD?  Would he try to teach that insane homeless man at the gas station "to fish"?  Would he lay his hands on him and cast out the demons?  Would he offer him a way to peacefully and mercifully end his suffering with dignity?  You tell me.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 27, 2018)

What type of economic system does Jesus like?  How much would he spend on the military?  Would he have any welfare system?  How does he feel about universal healthcare?  Does he believe that there's systemic racism?  What caliber handgun would he keep around the house?


----------



## j_seph (Sep 27, 2018)

1 Corinthians 14:33 - For God is not [the author] of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 27, 2018)

j_seph said:


> 1 Corinthians 14:33 - For God is not [the author] of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.


_
The source is the two-volume World Christian Encyclopedia (Barrett, Kurian, and Johnson; Oxford University Press). Take note of the passage where the 33,000 figure comes up:

*World Christianity* consists of 6 major ecclesiastico-cultural blocs, divided into 300 major ecclesiastical traditions, composed [sic] of *over 33,000* distinct denominations in 238 countries (Vol. I, p. 16).

So according to the WCE, the 33,000 figure represents “world Christianity.” Now unless a Catholic wants to suppose that “world Christianity” means Protestantism, the number would have to be something less. 33,000, according to the source from which the number comes, means the whole of Christianity, not Protestantism specifically.

The WCE then goes on to break down “world Christianity” into the following broad categories:
_

 
_Independents: 22,000 denominations_
 
_*Protestants: 9000 denominations*_
 
_Marginals: 1600 denominations_
 
_Orthodox: 781 denominations_
 
_Catholics: 242 denominations_
 
_Anglicans: 168 denominations_


http://www.ncregister.com/blog/scot...that-there-are-33000-protestant-denominations


----------



## Israel (Sep 27, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> "Love One Another"
> 
> It's elegant and simple and utilitarian, until it isn't.  Do you love Hillary Clinton?  Ruth Ginsberg?  Bernie Sanders?  Those questions aren't just for you, Isreal.  They're also for everybody who might have wished them dead or called them evil or said that their children are ugly (and not in a constructive way).
> 
> I can't think of anyone that I wish were dead right this second.  But I don't love every stranger.  If I go down to the gas station there will be some homeless guys down there.  I can walk passed them and tell them "I love you, Man".  I might even give them some change.  But I don't love them.  We're wired to be tribal.  We're motivated by ideas like "In Group Out Group".  We organize societies and make rules so that most of us can enjoy a reasonable amount of peace and prosperity.  Any wisdom to be gleaned from ancient texts will  in some way reflect the struggle to come up with a way to "live a good life".  The Devil is in the details.  WWJD?  Would he try to teach that insane homeless man at the gas station "to fish"?  Would he lay his hands on him and cast out the demons?  Would he offer him a way to peacefully and mercifully end his suffering with dignity?  You tell me.



I don't even know them. Have never shared one word of conversation with them, or even been in the same town at the same time (as far as I know).
It's enough I don't get spiteful with the folks _I do know, _but failures in that I won't deny. That's when I "bang into" a very hard thing.

And I am far from claiming that experience unique to myself.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 27, 2018)

Israel said:


> I don't even know them. Have never shared one word of conversation with them, or even been in the same town at the same time (as far as I know).
> It's enough I don't get spiteful with the folks _I do know, _but failures in that I won't deny. That's when I "bang into" a very hard thing.
> 
> And I am far from claiming that experience unique to myself.


You don't know them, have not shared a word of conversation with them, or as far as you know have never been in the same town at the same time as any of them...

Yet, you worship a.....well you know the rest.....


----------



## Israel (Sep 27, 2018)

bullethead said:


> You don't know them, have not shared a word of conversation with them, or as far as you know have never been in the same town at the same time as any of them...
> 
> Yet, you worship a.....well you know the rest.....


In the context in which I responded, I believe the implied question was, have I ever derided them, mocked them (or their families), and generally...how do I feel about them.

Granted. someone does not have to "know" someone to do any of that, and I'd be lying if I said I had no knowledge of their names and even stances in regards to some political persuasion. It just means little to me and probably less than it ever has.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 28, 2018)

Israel said:


> In the context in which I responded, I believe the implied question was, have I ever derided them, mocked them (or their families), and generally...how do I feel about them.
> 
> Granted. someone does not have to "know" someone to do any of that, and I'd be lying if I said I had no knowledge of their names and even stances in regards to some political persuasion. It just means little to me and probably less than it ever has.


Can you REALLY know someone that you have never seen, never talked to, never actually met?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 28, 2018)

Israel said:


> In the context in which I responded, I believe the implied question was, have I ever derided them, mocked them (or their families), and generally...how do I feel about them.
> 
> Granted. someone does not have to "know" someone to do any of that, and I'd be lying if I said I had no knowledge of their names and even stances in regards to some political persuasion. It just means little to me and probably less than it ever has.




Like a true ascetic. I'm glad for people like you.  I'm glad people like you exist.  You make the world and interesting place.  One of these days I hope to disengage with the big bad world, too.  Probably after I get my kid through college.


----------



## Israel (Sep 29, 2018)

ambush80 said:


> Like a true ascetic. I'm glad for people like you.  I'm glad people like you exist.  You make the world and interesting place.  One of these days I hope to disengage with the big bad world, too.  Probably after I get my kid through college.



Is it that I find less interest in politics? The "grands" of this world seeking place? I seem to have very little choice in what bores me as what interests me.

Are ascetics given to the satisfaction of changing lower control arm bushings?

And having a hope for a 4 post car lift? And to learn how to weld competently? I don't know...

And lately I been thinking about bees, maybe a hive or two.




bullethead said:


> Can you REALLY know someone that you have never seen, never talked to, never actually met?



When I was speaking to, and thinking about my invisible friend recently, and not ignorant of you nor our brief speaking of pictographs...the idea? thought? concept? revelation? epiphany(?) came...that in one sense, and at least sensible to me...is that Jesus Christ was submitted to being nothing more than God's Rorschach.

Men see...what they see.

I can easily see where this sounds offensive to some, and probably more amongst my brothers than any other. I am pretty sure this sounds very reductive...if not almost blasphemous to a diminishing of Him.

Although I am well able to post ample scripture referring to Him as a sign, an emblem, an ensign...even His own reference to Moses' brazen serpent...(as we touched on together) I still think His awe filled work of emptying Himself that God might write upon Him as God wished is not easily consigned to a reduction of Him.

And I think, as I speak in the presence of any and all reading, that even here some may not have as great a difficulty (were they to stop and consider O! these many many conversations!) that almost at heart of every one has been a seeking to either present themselves...or seek to find themselves "blank page".

"What is man?" We struggle in this with all the labels. All with a bias...that somehow infects the image. Believing man/christian man...superstitious man...unbelieving man, atheist man, rational man...natural man, spiritual man...always some _sort of man_...but man, nevertheless _always in_ (and with) label. Trying...seeking to define man...and what is right or best...or most normal estate..._uninfected. _Even the term_ most normal _shows a seed of infection. But...I am also persuaded that to our very own selves...we are...normal.

I think..._we think..._"I have been once "blank slate/page"...and all that has been written upon me is legitimate to making me who I am...I am fully able to discern _all the significance_ of such writing" And reject, or include (depending upon judgment and discerning) the_ spurious _from_ the valid._

_I am essentially_, and therefore remain _essentially _the true blank slate. (Even though the over writing may seem _significantly slanted_ to others)

We are all engaged in this "what is man..._to be_?"
What is...true man?

So I do not (to myself) find I diminish that man, Jesus Christ, in the beholding of His work of maintaining Himself "clean slate"...yes, I believe that. That the only writing, and picture then presented through Himself is untainted...and this regardless of how He may, at any particular time...appear to me. It's not hard for me to admit how wrong I have learned myself to be in imaginings. How presumptuous I have often been in thinking I was _discerning Him_, when in fact, I _was only revealing _myself.

I have had to be, by all my inclinations, motivations, compellings to be "teacher's pet" and _thereby_ tormented to give right answer...been beaten down and beaten up until I have finally believed the instructor..."just tell me what you see, there are no wrong nor right answers..."

But I have also learned...just as there is no wrong nor right _answer_ to "come up with" that will make me _teacher's pet, _questions are not forbidden.

I've had to ask..._beyond care_ of how this might cause me to appear in instructor's view..."How can I truly believe you that there is no wrong nor right answer _I can give?" _How _do you_ expect _me to be_ where _I don't know_ if I am right or wrong...and that such does not matter, and _should not _matter..._to myself_?  Really, how can that be? Where...can that be?

In the world it is called fraud. In the world it is called scam. Offering what is not one's own in exchange for gain. The deceitful attempt at giving of what is not one's own in trade for something. That is so...wrong. Only a scoundrel would do it.

But...me? I have _absolutely no other_ recourse.

When thou shalt make _his soul_ an offering for sin...


It sure ain't _my own_...but I am persuaded it's the only place I can..._be_.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 29, 2018)

Israel said:


> Is it that I find less interest in politics? The "grands" of this world seeking place? I seem to have very little choice in what bores me as what interests me.
> 
> Are ascetics given to the satisfaction of changing lower control arm bushings?
> 
> ...


But We know all that already and for a long time.
You just find different words to say the same thing over and over and over.
Nobody doubts your loyalty and belief.
Nobody doubts who you call god.
Nobody doubts your ability to start an answer that almost sounds like a decent explanation and turn it into personal pulpit testifying.
Nobody doubts that you feel you are unworthy.
Nobody doubts that you feel that without HimHeOne you are nothing.

If there is anyone who doubts these things, it seems that it is you. You testify too much to stay sincere.


----------



## Israel (Sep 30, 2018)

Sincerity. I'm very glad you brought that up.
I'm becoming very fond of your reliability.

It's a tortuous and torturous place for a man to enter, in consideration of his own.

In essence though, it is the same place as "what is man?", with just a slight turn in the saying.

"Who" or what, "is _the sincere_ man?"

Man questions what man "_really is", _in the presumption he may find, and is able to find that "blank slate" state of being. Tearing away as best he can what he considers entrance of _spurious data_ (never knowing he is unequipped of himself to its recognition) to find what _he believes_ a pure, undefiled image of what true man is...in _purest estate. _That place of survey where he stands,_ uninfluenced by lie, _to now see all things...clearly. (But all, and only, to _his own thinking_)

Is man believer? _Underneath_ it all (so to speak)?
Is he unbeliever? _Underneath_ it all? ( "   ")

So that man _the unbeliever_ might look at man _the believer _and say "that man is _like me, _but (except in) just for this one thing...he has swallowed _the lie_".


He...is lying man.


Of course unbelieving man then thinks..."I am sincerest man, truest man, in _meaning_". I _mean_...what _I am_, I _mean_ what _I say_, _I am_ sincere. I am...the representation...of _true man_.

O! Man_ believes_.

He _believes_ he can discover..."what _true man_ is"...what man..._means._

I am pure man!...that (all other) is adulterated man.

_And this all works flawlessly._

_Even right up to the very moment he discovers..._


_"_Hey, but that's not what _I meant!"_


You do know, of course, the word reserved for the man caught_ trying_ to be sincere?




Liar.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 30, 2018)

Israel said:


> Sincerity. I'm very glad you brought that up.
> I'm becoming very fond of your reliability.
> 
> It's a tortuous and torturous place for a man to enter, in consideration of his own.
> ...


No need for another example to back up post #402. But great job.


----------

