# Preacher gets leniency after raping daughter



## atlashunter (May 20, 2019)

https://www.knoxnews.com/story/news...pted-daughter-david-lynn-richards/1143006001/



> The judge acknowledged Richards' longtime ministry — he began a Bible study among his fellow inmates while jailed at the Knox County Detention Facility — and the support he still receives as mitigating factors.



Facing a maximum of 72 years for his crimes he instead got 12.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (May 20, 2019)

wonder where is wife is?  The article says he was her sole guardian.  If they placed that child in a home with a single man, the adoption agency should be sued.


----------



## ambush80 (May 20, 2019)

I can see taking someone's lifetime contributions into account when sentencing them for a crime.


----------



## atlashunter (May 20, 2019)

The judge should have taken into account his refusal to take responsibility.


----------



## 4HAND (May 20, 2019)

ambush80 said:


> I can see taking someone's lifetime contributions into account when sentencing them for a crime.


I can't. Not in this case.



atlashunter said:


> The judge should have taken into account his refusal to take responsibility.


Yes he should have.


----------



## NCHillbilly (May 20, 2019)

Put a bullet in his head. That's inexcusable, and that's the man that is telling the rest of us how we should be living? Charlie Manson probably wouldn't have raped his own daughter.


----------



## 4HAND (May 20, 2019)

NCHillbilly said:


> Put a bullet in his head. That's inexcusable, and that's the man that is telling the rest of us how we should be living? Charlie Manson probably wouldn't have raped his own daughter.


The fact that he's a minister makes it so much worse, IMO.


----------



## Hillbilly stalker (May 20, 2019)

The inmates usually take care of child molesters and rapist in the pen. Its amazing what a pack of cigarettes will buy when you have a captive audience. 12 years is a long time to run.


----------



## DAVE (May 20, 2019)

Maybe he was innocent.


----------



## NCHillbilly (May 20, 2019)

DAVE said:


> Maybe he was innocent.


Maybe the moon is made of cheese, and Bernie Sanders just wants to make our lives better.


----------



## atlashunter (May 20, 2019)

DAVE said:


> Maybe he was innocent.



And his semen accidentally ended up on her bed frame?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 21, 2019)

NE GA Pappy said:


> wonder where is wife is?  The article says he was her sole guardian.  If they placed that child in a home with a single man, the adoption agency should be sued.



Agreed.  This is a situation that should never have happened.  Sole male guardian of female?  That’s a recipe for this allegation. As a man, I would never even consider putting myself in that position.  As a church leader, he should have shown better discernment.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 21, 2019)

After checking her twitter history I’m not convinced he is guilty.  This girl went rogue wayyyy back, and I could see her making this allegation to get her freedom.  Mom and Dad are both ex cons.  Still doesn’t excuse his bad judgement


----------



## 4HAND (May 21, 2019)

Hard to deny the "evidence" left on her bed frame.


----------



## spurrs and racks (May 21, 2019)

no one escapes death, or judgement


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 21, 2019)

4HAND said:


> Hard to deny the "evidence" left on her bed frame.



I have to trust the jury got it right.  That said seminal fluid can be present in urine rather routinely.  You go to bathroom before you kiss your kids goodnight and touch their bed post as you go in.....  We’ve been court appointed guardians for several children over the years.  Two things strike me as true
1) there’s “something” about kids from troubled past that makes them tend to gravitate back to those environs and groups as they get older no matter how much you try to raise them in a Christian environment.  The older they get the stronger the pull becomes.
2) when they get old enough to openly defy you, you better let them go back or you risk just what this guy is accused of or worse.  You can’t help anyone who doesn’t want it and that includes a rebellious teenager.  At that point you have to protect the integrity of your wife and kids.  It hurts, but once they want their freedom and are prepared to do anything to get it, you better let them go.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (May 21, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I have to trust the jury got it right.  That said seminal fluid can be present in urine rather routinely.  You go to bathroom before you kiss your kids goodnight and touch their bed post as you go in.....  We’ve been court appointed guardians for several children over the years.  Two things strike me as true
> 1) there’s “something” about kids from troubled past that makes them tend to gravitate back to those environs and groups as they get older no matter how much you try to raise them in a Christian environment.  The older they get the stronger the pull becomes.
> 2) when they get old enough to openly defy you, you better let them go back or you risk just what this guy is accused of or worse.  You can’t help anyone who doesn’t want it and that includes a rebellious teenager.  At that point you have to protect the integrity of your wife and kids.  It hurts, but once they want their freedom and are prepared to do anything to get it, you better let them go.



as a foster parent, I would never, ever be alone with a female.  I don't care if she were 2 years old or 17 years old.  I just would never put myself in a position that I didn't have a witness around when I was around a female.

I saw to many families be destroyed over the years by a female making an accusation against the father. It didn't have to be true, or be proven for it to take a toll on the family.  And some of the children coming into foster care had been abused before, and they could tell a very believable story.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 22, 2019)

4HAND said:


> The fact that he's a minister makes it so much worse, IMO.


Only if you expect "more" out of a  minister/priest/pastor.
I think we are learning/have learned that may not be a realistic expectation.


----------



## ky55 (May 22, 2019)

Anybody else notice how the believers like SFD and Pappy are so quick to blame the victim and the system?


----------



## 4HAND (May 22, 2019)

ky55 said:


> Anybody else notice how the believers like SFD and Pappy are so quick to blame the victim and the system?



I'm a believer & I blamed the man the jury convicted. However, sometimes innocent people are found guilty.
SFD & Pappy are just as entitled to their belief as any of the rest of us.


----------



## ky55 (May 22, 2019)

4HAND said:


> I'm a believer & I blamed the man the jury convicted. However, sometimes innocent people are found guilty.
> SFD & Pappy are just as entitled to their belief as any of the rest of us.



Yes they are. 
And I’d bet that they would be right there pleading for leniency in this case too:

https://www.wave3.com/story/1470905...on-lay-minister-serving-time-for-child-abuse/


----------



## NE GA Pappy (May 22, 2019)

ky55 said:


> Anybody else notice how the believers like SFD and Pappy are so quick to blame the victim and the system?



I suppose since I think the system failed too, I am a radical


----------



## NE GA Pappy (May 22, 2019)

ky55 said:


> Yes they are.
> And I’d bet that they would be right there pleading for leniency in this case too:
> 
> https://www.wave3.com/story/1470905...on-lay-minister-serving-time-for-child-abuse/



I didn't say he deserved any less because he was a minister.  I said the system should have never place a teenage girl in a home with a single man.  It is just common sense.  
Just like I don't think the school system ought to be placing these 24 to 27 year old girls in high schools teaching 18 to 19 year old boys.  It just ain't using your noggin.  If they want to teach, put them in teaching positions where the kids are much younger than them.  No need to put temptation there for the student or the teacher


----------



## 4HAND (May 22, 2019)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I didn't say he deserved any less because he was a minister.  I said the system should have never place a teenage girl in a home with a single man.  It is just common sense.
> Just like I don't think the school system ought to be placing these 24 to 27 year old girls in high schools teaching 18 to 19 year old boys.  It just ain't using your noggin.  If they want to teach, put them in teaching positions where the kids are much younger than them.  No need to put temptation there for the student or the teacher


I agree completely.


----------



## ky55 (May 23, 2019)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I suppose since I think the system failed too, I am a radical



Radical?
Your words-not mine.
But the adoption agency and anybody else seems to be a very convenient scapegoat for you to throw the blame onto, instead of placing it where it belongs....on a “man of god” in a position of trust.
Yeah, let’s just sue the adoption agency for placing a child in a home with a trusted servant of a god.


----------



## ky55 (May 23, 2019)

4HAND said:


> The fact that he's a minister makes it so much worse, IMO.



Now there’s a brief interval of rationality.


----------



## Israel (May 23, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> Only if you expect "more" out of a  minister/priest/pastor.
> I think we are learning/have learned that may not be a realistic expectation.




No one takes this honor upon himself; he must be called by God, just as Aaron was. So also Christ did not take upon Himself the glory of becoming a high priest, but He was called by the One who said to Him: “You are My Son; today I have become Your Father.”

And:


But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth your father, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Christ.

And:

you, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? You who forbid adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples?  You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? As it is written: “God’s name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.”

And:

My brethren, be not many teachers, knowing that we shall receive the severer judgment.

Walt, do you see these things? Your comment (to me at least) bears a tracing out in intuition.
No man escapes it, _no man_ is free of its instruction.
The quest for position. And _every one_ of its ramifications.

The mission always overrides _every other consideration._

Ain't it funny? Ain't it perfect?

Makes me wanna ask Spielberg "How facetious were you trying to be in calling your movie 'Saving Private Ryan'?"


----------



## atlashunter (May 23, 2019)

https://www.knoxnews.com/story/news...ker-guilty-adopted-daughters-rape/2830559002/

Here is more detail on the trial and findings of the investigation. He was married when the girl was adopted. Would be interesting to hear what his ex wife has to say. Based on what the investigators found it sure looks like he had something to hide.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 23, 2019)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I didn't say he deserved any less because he was a minister.  I said the system should have never place a teenage girl in a home with a single man.  It is just common sense.
> Just like I don't think the school system ought to be placing these 24 to 27 year old girls in high schools teaching 18 to 19 year old boys.  It just ain't using your noggin.  If they want to teach, put them in teaching positions where the kids are much younger than them.  No need to put temptation there for the student or the teacher



Wouldn’t let it bother me Pappy.  Our posts are plain to what we said.  His spin of it speaks more to his character than anything else, and you can’t change that with any words.


----------



## ky55 (May 23, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Wouldn’t let it bother me Pappy.  Our posts are plain to what we said.  His spin of it speaks more to his character than anything else, and you can’t change that with any words.



You’re getting a little distracted there, SFD. 
This thread is about the “character” of one of your god’s representatives.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 23, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> https://www.knoxnews.com/story/news...ker-guilty-adopted-daughters-rape/2830559002/
> 
> Here is more detail on the trial and findings of the investigation. He was married when the girl was adopted. Would be interesting to hear what his ex wife has to say. Based on what the investigators found it sure looks like he had something to hide.



Thanks for the link.  Honestly it brings up more questions than answers.  If the guy had a vasectomy the only way the seminal fluid got on the bed was through urine cross contamination.  Also was the other dna from the sample from a male or female?  The girls older sister essentially testified against her, but she may be having relations with the accused???  Or maybe not.  It was inferred my the DA  but not proven.  Jeez.  Finding the truth in this case .......  I don’t envy the jurist.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 23, 2019)

ky55 said:


> You’re getting a little distracted there, SFD.
> This thread is about the “character” of one of your god’s representatives.



No.  It’s quickly devolved into a display of your resentment against someone YOU deny exists,  and I’m not feeding that insanity.


----------



## atlashunter (May 23, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Thanks for the link.  Honestly it brings up more questions than answers.  If the guy had a vasectomy the only way the seminal fluid got on the bed was through urine cross contamination.  Also was the other dna from the sample from a male or female?  The girls older sister essentially testified against her, but she may be having relations with the accused???  Or maybe not.  It was inferred my the DA  but not proven.  Jeez.  Finding the truth in this case .......  I don’t envy the jurist.



They said he can't produce sperm. That's not the same as seminal fluid which they found matched his DNA. They find her bedding washed and in the dryer and both his and her phone which he had control over reset to factory default. That's one heck of a coincidence given the charges.


----------



## ky55 (May 23, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> No.  It’s quickly devolved into a display of your resentment against someone YOU deny exists,  and I’m not feeding that insanity.



Seems like almost every thread down here that you have participated in  has “devolved”, like this one is doing for you now. 
I think maybe you just get insulted when some of us don’t show reverence for your imaginings.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 23, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> They said he can't produce sperm. That's not the same as seminal fluid which they found matched his DNA. They find her bedding washed and in the dryer and both his and her phone which he had control over reset to factory default. That's one heck of a coincidence given the charges.


 
Look up the effects of vasectomy, how and where seminal fluid is excreted as far as the ducts and get back with me.  Also his dna would be present in sperm, fluid or urine.  I’m not saying he is innocent.  I just have a lot of questions.


----------



## atlashunter (May 23, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Look up the effects of vasectomy, how and where seminal fluid is excreted as far as the ducts and get back with me.  Also his dna would be present in sperm, fluid or urine.  I’m not saying he is innocent.  I just have a lot of questions.



https://www.mydr.com.au/mens-health/vasectomy-frequently-asked-questions

See the third question and answer at that link. The defense argued he couldn’t produce sperm. The didn’t argue he couldn’t produce seminal fluid. It’s not the same thing.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 24, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> https://www.mydr.com.au/mens-health/vasectomy-frequently-asked-questions
> 
> See the third question and answer at that link. The defense argued he couldn’t produce sperm. The didn’t argue he couldn’t produce seminal fluid. It’s not the same thing.



My point is it’s not abnormal, even in normal unsterilized men, for there to be some seminal fluid in the urine particularly in the morning.  I think the jury got it right, it’s just the DNA isnt the smoking gun IMHO.


----------



## atlashunter (May 24, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> My point is it’s not abnormal, even in normal unsterilized men, for there to be some seminal fluid in the urine particularly in the morning.  I think the jury got it right, it’s just the DNA isnt the smoking gun IMHO.



That’s true but looking at the totality of the evidence in this case it’s probably as it appears. Possible even that it could have been consensual on her part just to nail him. It does look like something happened though and he tried to destroy evidence. What I don’t understand is why involvement in religious activities should be a mitigating factor in sentencing.


----------



## GunnSmokeer (May 24, 2019)

12 years in prison isn't a slap on the wrist. That's a strong  sentence, if he hast to serve all or most of that. But I have no idea how the parole system works in his state.  Could it be that he'll make parole in two years? That would be too lenient if he molested his adopted daughter, having sex with her at age 14, 15 and 16.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 24, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> That’s true but looking at the totality of the evidence in this case it’s probably as it appears. Possible even that it could have been consensual on her part just to nail him. It does look like something happened though and he tried to destroy evidence. What I don’t understand is why involvement in religious activities should be a mitigating factor in sentencing.



 It shouldn’t.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 24, 2019)

GunnSmokeer said:


> 12 years in prison isn't a slap on the wrist. That's a strong  sentence, if he hast to serve all or most of that. But I have no idea how the parole system works in his state.  Could it be that he'll make parole in two years? That would be too lenient if he molested his adopted daughter, having sex with her at age 14, 15 and 16.



I sat as a juror on a very, very similar case about 5 years ago.  He got 35 years with no possibility of early parole.


----------



## 660griz (May 24, 2019)

Israel said:


> No one takes this honor upon himself; he must be called by God, just as Aaron was. So also Christ did not take upon Himself the glory of becoming a high priest, but He was called by the One who said to Him: “You are My Son; today I have become Your Father.”


So, Jesus called himself. Heard voices. Was a man and a God. Seems plausible to me. J/K


----------



## 660griz (May 24, 2019)

Israel said:


> No one takes this honor upon himself; he must be called by God, just as Aaron was. So also Christ did not take upon Himself the glory of becoming a high priest, but He was called by the One who said to Him: “You are My Son; today I have become Your Father.”


So, Jesus called himself. Heard voices, or just said it out loud? Did he have to say it or just think it? He was a man and a God. Seems plausible to me.


----------



## Israel (May 25, 2019)

Besides the fact that plausibility has nothing to do with any of it...(how would God, or anything about the One who is God be forced to submit, or be limited to what a man finds plausible?) the rest is as it is written.

I hear voices. Don't you?


----------



## ProAngler (May 25, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I have to trust the jury got it right.  That said seminal fluid can be present in urine rather routinely.  You go to bathroom before you kiss your kids goodnight and touch their bed post as you go in.....  We’ve been court appointed guardians for several children over the years.  Two things strike me as true
> 1) there’s “something” about kids from troubled past that makes them tend to gravitate back to those environs and groups as they get older no matter how much you try to raise them in a Christian environment.  The older they get the stronger the pull becomes.
> 2) when they get old enough to openly defy you, you better let them go back or you risk just what this guy is accused of or worse.  You can’t help anyone who doesn’t want it and that includes a rebellious teenager.  At that point you have to protect the integrity of your wife and kids.  It hurts, but once they want their freedom and are prepared to do anything to get it, you better let them go.



I don’t know if they referenced it in the trial, but they can tell how much genetic material is there. Not just positive or negative.


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Agreed.  This is a situation that should never have happened.  Sole male guardian of female?  That’s a recipe for this allegation. As a man, I would never even consider putting myself in that position.  As a church leader, he should have shown better discernment.





NE GA Pappy said:


> wonder where is wife is?  The article says he was her sole guardian.  If they placed that child in a home with a single man, the adoption agency should be sued.


I don’t agree with this concept. Good men have and should be able to have sole custody. I wouldn’t want the crimes of others dictating an outcome in my situation if I were in a place to have sole custody. Being a Father has absolutely nothing to do with being a church leader. It actually should have made a more severe punishment since he should be teaching others that those actions are wrong. He should have shown better character and morals as a Father. If you harm a child in your care, I hate it, you can’t do enough good elsewhere to get any leniency from me.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 27, 2019)

Spotlite said:


> I don’t agree with this concept. Good men have and should be able to have sole custody. I wouldn’t want the crimes of others dictating an outcome in my situation if I were in a place to have sole custody. Being a Father has absolutely nothing to do with being a church leader. It actually should have made a more severe punishment since he should be teaching others that those actions are wrong. He should have shown better character and morals as a Father. If you harm a child in your care, I hate it, you can’t do enough good elsewhere to get any leniency from me.



I would not even consider sole custody of a foster child of the opposite sex.   It has nothing to do with being a “good” man, but much to do with being a wise man.  We’ve had foster children, quiet a few actually.  I know what I speak of and it’s not worth the risk.  Not everything that can be done, should be done.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (May 27, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I would not even consider sole custody of a foster child of the opposite sex.   It has nothing to do with being a “good” man, but much to do with being a wise man.  We’ve had foster children, quiet a few actually.  I know what I speak of and it’s not worth the risk.  Not everything that can be done, should be done.



To those of us who have fostered,  not putting yourself in this position is very understandable.  Not allowing the system to put you in that position, even more understandable.

To those who have never been part of the foster care system, or the issues bringing children into your home who have been abused, sexually, physically, or emotionally, understanding is difficult.

To sit with a 5 year old girl, and have her tell you that her mom held her down so that her daddy ( read mom's current shack up) could hurt her is one of the most painful things I have ever experienced.  And to not be able anything to relief that childs pain except to care for them and love them, is almost a painful


----------



## ky55 (May 27, 2019)

NE GA Pappy said:


> To sit with a 5 year old girl, and have her tell you that her mom held her down so that her daddy ( read mom's current shack up) could hurt her is one of the most painful things I have ever experienced.  And to not be able anything to relief that childs pain except to care for them and love them, is almost a painful



Pappy, could you please tell us how you can get down on your knees and worship a god who allows such horrible suffering?
You can bypass the “for His glory” part for those of us who have heard it before.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (May 27, 2019)

ky55 said:


> Pappy, could you please tell us how you can get down on your knees and worship a god who allows such horrible suffering?
> You can bypass the “for His glory” part for those of us who have heard it before.



I'll just skip the entire thing, since you have no intentions of listening or reconsidering. You have heard it all before, and one day, you will be held accountable.  

Accept that or not.  It is your choice.


----------



## ky55 (May 27, 2019)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I'll just skip the entire thing, since you have no intentions of listening or reconsidering. You have heard it all before, and one day, you will be held accountable.
> 
> Accept that or not.  It is your choice.



Yeah you can just skip a question you can’t answer.
All you can do is just throw out the usual garbage that your god is gonna get me in the end, and you’ll just sit there grinning with your arms folded saying I told you so.
You don’t know any more than the rest of us know. 
There is the exact same possibility that a god other than yours will hold you accountable.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 28, 2019)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I'll just skip the entire thing, since you have no intentions of listening or reconsidering. You have heard it all before, and one day, you will be held accountable.
> 
> Accept that or not.  It is your choice.



I swear, it’s like some of these guys never matured emotionally and socially past early elementary school.  It’s sad.  It really is.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 28, 2019)

ky55 said:


> Pappy, could you please tell us how you can get down on your knees and worship a god who allows such horrible suffering?



I can.  I can look at those who perpetrate such acts and the hatred of those such as yourself, who despise anything pure and innocent, who twist and contort all that is good and true for the sake of their selfish pleasure, and see very clearly they are one-in-the-same.  I see that and recognize it as the living embodiment of evil.  I don’t need science to prove that.  My revulsion proves it’s real.  Given that, I thank God that he has seen fit to save me from such evil, lest it be me, and I thank him for his goodness, because aside from it this world would be completely and totally evil and hopeless.  The reality of the situation is that it isn’t God who perpetrates such heinous acts, but those such as yourself who have no fear of him.


----------



## ky55 (May 28, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I can.  I can look at those who perpetrate such acts and the hatred of those such as yourself, who despise anything pure and innocent, who twist and contort all that is good and true for the sake of their selfish pleasure, and see very clearly they are one-in-the-same.  I see that and recognize it as the living embodiment of evil.  I don’t need science to prove that.  My revulsion proves it’s real.  Given that, I thank God that he has seen fit to save me from such evil, lest it be me, and I thank him for his goodness, because aside from it this world would be completely and totally evil and hopeless.  The reality of the situation is that it isn’t God who perpetrates such heinous acts, but those such as yourself who have no fear of him.



You have a nice day, SFD.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 28, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I can.  I can look at those who perpetrate such acts and the hatred of those such as yourself, who despise anything pure and innocent, who twist and contort all that is good and true for the sake of their selfish pleasure, and see very clearly they are one-in-the-same.  I see that and recognize it as the living embodiment of evil.  I don’t need science to prove that.  My revulsion proves it’s real.  Given that, I thank God that he has seen fit to save me from such evil, lest it be me, and I thank him for his goodness, because aside from it this world would be completely and totally evil and hopeless.  The reality of the situation is that it isn’t God who perpetrates such heinous acts, but those such as yourself who have no fear of him.





> The reality of the situation is that it isn’t God who perpetrates such heinous acts, but those such as yourself who have no fear of him.





> 'For I will go through the land of Egypt on that night, and will strike down all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments--I AM THE LORD'


Its stuff like that ^, that makes your assessment of the "reality of the situation" questionable to us.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 28, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> Its stuff like that ^, that makes your assessment of the "reality of the situation" questionable to us.



Maybe it’s youre assessment you should be questioning.  After all, it’s the only one you can change and you are the main one who suffers the consequences if you’re wrong.


----------



## atlashunter (May 28, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I can.  I can look at those who perpetrate such acts and the hatred of those such as yourself, who despise anything pure and innocent, who twist and contort all that is good and true for the sake of their selfish pleasure, and see very clearly they are one-in-the-same.  I see that and recognize it as the living embodiment of evil.  I don’t need science to prove that.  My revulsion proves it’s real.  Given that, I thank God that he has seen fit to save me from such evil, lest it be me, and I thank him for his goodness, because aside from it this world would be completely and totally evil and hopeless.  The reality of the situation is that it isn’t God who perpetrates such heinous acts, but those such as yourself who have no fear of him.



The reality is that you worship a deity who you believe has the power to stop such abuse yet stands by with folded arms and watches as it happens.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 28, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Maybe it’s youre assessment you should be questioning.  After all, it’s the only one you can change and you are the main one who suffers the consequences if you’re wrong.


I agree and I frequently question my assessments.
I assess that this -


> The reality of the situation is that it isn’t God who perpetrates such heinous acts, but those such as yourself who have no fear of him.


and this -


> 'For I will go through the land of Egypt on that night, and will strike down all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments--I AM THE LORD'


Contradict each other.
And although I have questioned my assessment, I cant get around that the killing of the first born of both man and beast as punishment would fall under "heinous acts".
If the average Joe did that he would be labeled as an evil child murderer no matter what his excuse was.


----------



## bullethead (May 28, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I swear, it’s like some of these guys never matured emotionally and socially past early elementary school.  It’s sad.  It really is.


And you are constantly outwitted and outdone by those you call immature.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 28, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> I agree and I frequently question my assessments.
> I assess that this -
> 
> and this -
> ...



Those 2 instances do not contradict each other.  One portrays man playing God acting out his selfish desire.  The other is God handing out judgement.  That “If” you speak of even denotes your acknowledge of that fact, and in that “If” is all the difference in the world.


----------



## ky55 (May 28, 2019)

bullethead said:


> And you are constantly outwitted and outdone by those you call immature.



Yes, and when he has nowhere else to go that’s when the personal insults start. 
They seem to be getting worse every time he loses his argument on behalf of his god. 
It has to be a terrible experience to be a self-appointed defender of a god, and then to constantly get outdone and outwitted by folks he sees as “early elementary school”  level.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 28, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> The reality is that you worship a deity who you believe has the power to stop such abuse yet stands by with folded arms and watches as it happens.



No.  The reality is you purposely and disingenuously use the parts of the Bible as truthful to portray God as evil, yet deny the entire story and when your dishonesty is called out say none of it is true anyway.  The sad part about it is any literate person, regardless of their belief can see it for what it is: blatant dishonesty, childishly crafted and poorly disguised.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 28, 2019)

ky55 said:


> Yes, and when he has nowhere else to go that’s when the personal insults start.
> They seem to be getting worse every time he loses his argument on behalf of his god.
> It has to be a terrible experience to be a self-appointed defender of a god, and then to constantly get outdone and outwitted by folks he sees as “early elementary school”  level.



Ahhhh excuse me, but I think if you will recall (or care to review the posts in the thread) you would see it was YOU, ever playing the child bully, who  couldn’t help yourself, changed the entire course of the thread by denigrating both myself and Pappy because you felt you had to get your God hating meme of the day in.  The fact that you felt insulted when the petty ignorance of the simpletons meme was pointed out and the shoe fit you when it was exposed as a poorly contrived lie is your own fault.  Hatred of God is the most ideologically bankrupt form of insanity.  Don’t blame me for pointing that fact out.


----------



## Spotlite (May 28, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I would not even consider sole custody of a foster child of the opposite sex.   It has nothing to do with being a “good” man, but much to do with being a wise man.  We’ve had foster children, quiet a few actually.  I know what I speak of and it’s not worth the risk.  Not everything that can be done, should be done.


Foster and adopted are not the same thing. When you foster, the state actually has custody of the child. 

This story calls her his adopted daughter. You can’t just wash your hands of adopted kids because your marriage went south.


----------



## Spotlite (May 29, 2019)

NE GA Pappy said:


> To those of us who have fostered,  not putting yourself in this position is very understandable.  Not allowing the system to put you in that position, even more understandable.
> 
> To those who have never been part of the foster care system, or the issues bringing children into your home who have been abused, sexually, physically, or emotionally, understanding is difficult.
> 
> To sit with a 5 year old girl, and have her tell you that her mom held her down so that her daddy ( read mom's current shack up) could hurt her is one of the most painful things I have ever experienced.  And to not be able anything to relief that childs pain except to care for them and love them, is almost a painful


My family has fostered. My wife was also a CASA volunteer. The story eludes to her being his adopted daughter. When you adopt, they’re yours.


----------



## atlashunter (May 29, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> No.  The reality is you purposely and disingenuously use the parts of the Bible as truthful to portray God as evil, yet deny the entire story and when your dishonesty is called out say none of it is true anyway.  The sad part about it is any literate person, regardless of their belief can see it for what it is: blatant dishonesty, childishly crafted and poorly disguised.



Which part exactly of my characterization do you believe is untrue? The part where your deity is omnipotent or the part where they are omniscient? Or the part where evil happens and your deity kicks back watching it and doesn’t intervene? Or the part where you worship said deity?


----------



## GunnSmokeer (May 29, 2019)

WHY DOES GOD ALLOW EVIL?

1-  Because He gave humans "free will," which would not exist if God either directly controlled all our thoughts and actions, OR, even if HE allowed us to act-out evil but then He immediatelyand miraculously reversed the negative consequences from that.  

2- Because He can turn evil into good by using bad situations to teach people lessons, cause sinful people to repent,  cause  believers to get even stronger in their faith and find a level of comfort in it that they had not previously known.  To allow humans to feel and express their full range of emotions, including fear, hatred, anger, grief, etc.
All of this is related to the concept of free will to a full range of emotions coming from a wide variety of life experiences both good and bad .

3-- Perhaps God restores and compensates "innocent victims" in heaven, not necessarily on this earth. And I don't mean born-again Christians, but innocent babies, victims of war or plagues in non-Christian countries, etc.

(On the other hand, plenty of Christian scholars would say there are NO "innocent" people other than saved, professing, bible-quoting  Christians. All the rest of humanity  deserves to die and suffer, either here on earth and in the afterlife. Even the little babies whose undeveloped minds cannot even grasp the concept of a God or Jesus's sacrifice on the cross are contaminated from birth with the original sin of Adam & Eve.  

As applied to adults,  knowing that non-Christians are under a death sentence and alienated from God's protection here on earth ---it's supposed to motivate these people, these adults, to embrace God and change their destiny.  The Bible uses both a carrot and stick approach.  But applied to children, I don't know how the prospect of having your kids raped, killed, etc.  is supposed to motivate people to convert.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 29, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Those 2 instances do not contradict each other.  One portrays man playing God acting out his selfish desire.  The other is God handing out judgement.  That “If” you speak of even denotes your acknowledge of that fact, and in that “If” is all the difference in the world.


Your justification "God handing out judgement" only works for some folks.
Other folks would want to know what those first born did to deserve such a judgement.
Im guessing there is no other "person" you would defend for committing the heinous act of slaughtering the first born children that are not guilty of anything other than existing.
For you who did it is what matters.
For others, murdering children is what matters regardless of who done it.
Let me take another guess -
You are against abortion. Probably view it as the murder of an innocent child...….


----------



## Israel (May 29, 2019)

Capacity is what is always addressed.

"And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes."

Bearable stripes vs unbearable stripes.

But the one who unknowingly does things worthy of punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and from him who has been entrusted with much, even more will be demanded.

You and I may think we can control "how much we want to know"...but each is appointed his calling and station.

Do you want to be a "good person"? Or have a "good spot" on the dais next to Him at His feast?

Then the mother of Zebedee’s sons came to Jesus with her sons and knelt down to make a request of Him. “What do you want?” He asked. She answered, “Declare that in Your kingdom one of these two sons of mine will sit at Your right hand, and the other at Your left.” “You do not know what you are asking,” Jesus replied. “Can you drink the cup I am going to drink?” “We can,” the brothers answered.

“You will indeed drink My cup,” Jesus said. “But to sit at My right or left is not Mine to grant. These seats belong to those for whom My Father has prepared them.”


Now ain't that sumthin'? Drink the cup...but still not be guaranteed the best seats in the house!

Goes a long way toward winnowing out in a man the quest for position and all that self serving would seek to acquire in "service".

Here a man finds out first, _if he is loved, _and from there made _of capacity _to respond in love. Nothing surprises a man more than being given the gift to see he is made able to love.


Yeah, the believer knows he is being seen.

But there's a promise...the One watching sees you...because He delights in being with you. But, yeah...there's many stripes along the way...and every single one worth it...to know that.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 29, 2019)

GunnSmokeer said:


> WHY DOES GOD ALLOW EVIL?
> 
> 1-  Because He gave humans "free will," which would not exist if God either directly controlled all our thoughts and actions, OR, even if HE allowed us to act-out evil but then He immediatelyand miraculously reversed the negative consequences from that.
> 
> ...


1. There's a chunk of Christians who don't buy into the whole "free will" thing. Their belief is "you do what you do because God predestined (not just knew but predestined) you to do it".
2. I would expect an omni-everything god to be able to come up with a better teaching method. It would appear its not working.
3.  #3 is kind of related to #2.
And seem likes some of those folks might prefer to use their "free will" and decide not to be God's training aid.


> (On the other hand, plenty of Christian scholars would say there are NO "innocent" people other than saved, professing, bible-quoting  Christians. All the rest of humanity  deserves to die and suffer, either here on earth and in the afterlife. Even the little babies whose undeveloped minds cannot even grasp the concept of a God or Jesus's sacrifice on the cross are contaminated from birth with the original sin of Adam & Eve.


Almost sounds repulsive doesn't it?


> But applied to children, I don't know how the prospect of having your kids raped, killed, etc.  is supposed to motivate people to convert.


Tragedy of some sort plays a role in a lot of folks converting/believing.


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> 1. There's a chunk of Christians who don't buy into the whole "free will" thing. Their belief is "you do what you do because God predestined (not just knew but predestined) you to do it".
> 2. I would expect an omni-everything god to be able to come up with a better teaching method. It would appear its not working.
> 3.  #3 is kind of related to #2.
> And seem likes some of those folks might prefer to use their "free will" and decide not to be God's training aid.
> ...



Here's a concept:
All are born into sin from the first Adam, but all are justified by the second Adam(Jesus).


----------



## NCHillbilly (May 29, 2019)

_"So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them."_

That would tend to make me a bit suspicious of him and his motives.


----------



## atlashunter (May 29, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> 1. There's a chunk of Christians who don't buy into the whole "free will" thing. Their belief is "you do what you do because God predestined (not just knew but predestined) you to do it".
> 2. I would expect an omni-everything god to be able to come up with a better teaching method. It would appear its not working.
> 3.  #3 is kind of related to #2.
> And seem likes some of those folks might prefer to use their "free will" and decide not to be God's training aid.
> ...



How do the unborn dead exercise their free will? They just go straight from conception to heaven without even being born.


----------



## atlashunter (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Here's a concept:
> All are born into sin from the first Adam, but all are justified by the second Adam(Jesus).



Vicarious guilt and redemption. Immoral on both counts. Imagine a justice system with that as its basis.


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Vicarious guilt and redemption. Immoral on both counts. Imagine a justice system with that as its basis.



It's called grace. The just for the unjust. Imagine that.


----------



## atlashunter (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> It's called grace. The just for the unjust. Imagine that.



“The declaration which says that God visits the sins of the fathers upon the children is contrary to every principle of moral justice.”

“The story of the redemption will not stand examination. That man should redeem himself from the sin of eating an apple by committing a murder on Jesus Christ, is the strangest system of religion ever set up.”

~Thomas Paine


----------



## NCHillbilly (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> It's called grace. The just for the unjust. Imagine that.


How is it just for me or you to be punished and condemned to eternal torment because of something some guy did thousands of years ago? After God created him to act exactly like he did? That isn't just. I don't believe people are inherently unjust, wicked, or sinful just because Adam and Eve liked fruit. I certainly don't believe that every human on earth deserves to burn in Hades if they don't beg forgiveness for acting just like God created them to be.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (May 29, 2019)

If God is all knowing and humans are not, how can the unknowing determine that the knowing is wrong in His decisions?


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

NCHillbilly said:


> How is it just for me or you to be punished and condemned to eternal torment because of something some guy did thousands of years ago? After God created him to act exactly like he did? That isn't just. I don't believe people are inherently unjust, wicked, or sinful just because Adam and Eve liked fruit. I certainly don't believe that every human on earth deserves to burn in Hades if they don't beg forgiveness for acting just like God created them to be.



It would be just, even if it was like you describe. But the good news is that it is not.
(keywords-good news)


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> “The declaration which says that God visits the sins of the fathers upon the children is contrary to every principle of moral justice.”
> 
> “The story of the redemption will not stand examination. That man should redeem himself from the sin of eating an apple by committing a murder on Jesus Christ, is the strangest system of religion ever set up.”
> 
> ~Thomas Paine



"That man should redeem himself.." 

Very flawed premise.


----------



## atlashunter (May 29, 2019)

NE GA Pappy said:


> If God is all knowing and humans are not, how can the unknowing determine that the knowing is wrong in His decisions?



Maybe this god isn’t all knowing. Or maybe it’s all knowing but isn’t good. Or maybe it doesn’t exist at all. Based on what we know to be true the least likely of all probabilities is that Yahweh exists and is all knowing and good.

I’m reminded of what Christopher Hitchens said about the Bible. I can’t say with absolute certainty the Bible isn’t the work of god but if it is I can only hope he was having a really bad day.


----------



## atlashunter (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> "That man should redeem himself.."
> 
> Very flawed premise.



Exactly our point.


----------



## atlashunter (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> It would be just, even if it was like you describe. But the good news is that it is not.
> (keywords-good news)



You claimed it would be just. You didn’t answer his question, how would it be just?


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Exactly our point.



Before you celebrate too much, we need to agree that God is the only one who redeems. ???


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> You claimed it would be just. You didn’t answer his question, how would it be just?



The reason it would be just, if it were so, is the sovereignty of God the creator of all things.


----------



## atlashunter (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> The reason it would be just, if it were so, is the sovereignty of God the creator of all things.



Might makes right?


----------



## atlashunter (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Before you celebrate too much, we need to agree that God is the only one who redeems. ???



First demonstrate that a god exists. Then we can look at the criteria your religious book places on the individual to be redeemed.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 29, 2019)

Spotlite said:


> Foster and adopted are not the same thing. When you foster, the state actually has custody of the child.
> 
> This story calls her his adopted daughter. You can’t just wash your hands of adopted kids because your marriage went south.


 
Agreed.


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> First demonstrate that a god exists. Then we can look at the criteria your religious book places on the individual to be redeemed.



How can I, a mere mortal man, open eyes that the Immortal has chosen to be shut?
You'll see Him in His own good time. No sooner, no later.


----------



## NCHillbilly (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> It would be just, even if it was like you describe. But the good news is that it is not.
> (keywords-good news)


Really? I grew up the son of a preacher, and have read the whole Bible through more than once, and listened to thousands of sermons. According to all that, the default position of humanity is you are dammed to eternal fiery torment, even if you live a near-perfect life and are good, kind, and righteous and moral. You still go to the hot place by default if you don't beg God for forgiveness, because you are flawed and nasty and sinful as a human, even though God made you in his image.

That default setting of burn in Hades is one reason that turned me against organized religion. If God thinks like that, and is twisted enough to burn people alive forever for acting exactly like he designed them to act, then God isn't love. He is on a power trip like a kid torturing flies. Justness would be if you only get dammed if you do evil things. I'm sorry, I don't believe in inherited sin, or the inherent evil of humanity. Some people are naturally good, some people are naturally evil. And going to church and professing to be a good Christian doesn't seem to make the evil ones any less evil. Behold our righteous, God-fearing reverend in the OP. I doubt if Charlie Manson would have raped his own daughter, but this guy who tells everybody else how to live did repeatedly? It would be different if this was an isolated incident.


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Might makes right?



Right has all might.


----------



## atlashunter (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Right has all might.



Not according to your post above. You justify it by saying it’s the creator doing it. That’s a might makes right argument my friend. And your attempt to dodge acknowledging it speaks volumes. You know it’s not just. So you resort to an appeal to authority.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 29, 2019)

NE GA Pappy said:


> If God is all knowing and humans are not, how can the unknowing determine that the knowing is wrong in His decisions?


Pretty convenient for Christianity that one of the things that those non all knowing humans DO know.... is that God knows all.


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

NCHillbilly said:


> Really? I grew up the son of a preacher, and have read the whole Bible through more than once, and listened to thousands of sermons. According to all that, the default position of humanity is you are dammed to eternal fiery torment, even if you live a near-perfect life and are good, kind, and righteous and moral. You still go to the hot place by default if you don't beg God for forgiveness, because you are flawed and nasty and sinful as a human, even though God made you in his image.
> 
> That default setting of burn in Hades is one reason that turned me against organized religion. If God thinks like that, and is twisted enough to burn people alive forever for acting exactly like he designed them to act, then God isn't love. He is on a power trip like a kid torturing flies. Justness would be if you only get dammed if you do evil things. I'm sorry, I don't believe in inherited sin, or the inherent evil of humanity. Some people are naturally good, some people are naturally evil. And going to church and professing to be a good Christian doesn't seem to make the evil ones any less evil. Behold our righteous, God-fearing reverend in the OP. I doubt if Charlie Manson would have raped his own daughter, but this guy who tells everybody else how to live did repeatedly? It would be different if this was an isolated incident.



I do not subscribe to the default setting of "burn in Hades", so I don't know what to tell you except that you should abandon that notion.


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Not according to your post above. You justify it by saying it’s the creator doing it. That’s a might makes right argument my friend. And your attempt to dodge acknowledging it speaks volumes. You know it’s not just. So you resort to an appeal to authority.



Did you catch the part where I said "if it were so" ?


----------



## NCHillbilly (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> I do not subscribe to the default setting of "burn in Hades", so I don't know what to tell you except that you should abandon that notion.


So, do you believe that you can go to Heaven without being saved and repenting of your sins? If so, you are the only Christian I have ever talked to who believed that. Most say that if you don't repent and get saved, you are bound for Hades on the express elevator.


----------



## atlashunter (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> How can I, a mere mortal man, open eyes that the Immortal has chosen to be shut?
> You'll see Him in His own good time. No sooner, no later.



Your eyes are no better than mine.


----------



## atlashunter (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Did you catch the part where I said "if it were so" ?



Is there anything that would be unjust, “if it were so”?


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Your eyes are no better than mine.



Amen


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Is there anything that would be unjust, “if it were so”?



No. There's nothing unjust about God and what He does. Nothing.


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

NCHillbilly said:


> So, do you believe that you can go to Heaven without being saved and repenting of your sins? If so, you are the only Christian I have ever talked to who believed that. Most say that if you don't repent and get saved, you are bound for Hades on the express elevator.



It's so simple you're missing it. 
Going to heaven is not contingent upon anything that you can DO. Salvation is of the Lord. period


----------



## NCHillbilly (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> It's so simple you're missing it.
> Going to heaven is not contingent upon anything that you can DO. Salvation is of the Lord. period



No I'm not. I've heard it 1,000000000000000000000000x. It's so simple that you're missing it:
Yes or No: Can you have salvation without repenting and being saved? Your evasiveness is telling me all I need to know, and you're reinforcing my point that default position to a Christian is eternal dammnation.

To put it another way: You are born. You live. You are a decent person. You die. You never begged the Lord for salvation or repented for being born human. Maybe you never heard that you had to. Maybe you were born into another religion. Maybe you just never believed. Where do you wind up for eternity?

Simple answer to both. No beating around the bush or evasive maneuvers.


----------



## atlashunter (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Amen



So don’t pretend to be able to see things that others can’t. If you say you have an invisible friend that your eyes can see but mine can’t your claim has no more validity than similar claims of other religions.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 29, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Which part exactly of my characterization do you believe is untrue? The part where your deity is omnipotent or the part where they are omniscient? Or the part where evil happens and your deity kicks back watching it and doesn’t intervene? Or the part where you worship said deity?





atlashunter said:


> Which part exactly of my characterization do you believe is untrue? The part where your deity is omnipotent or the part where they are omniscient? Or the part where evil happens and your deity kicks back watching it and doesn’t intervene? Or the part where you worship said deity?



How do you know the suffering a person endures doesn’t save them from a worse fate.  How do you know an untimely death doesn’t have a future purpose that saves others from suffering. You don’t.  You can’t.  The only way you COULD would be if you yourself were omnipresent, a power YOU DENY EXISTS yet here you are passing judgement on a God using implied omnipresence to do so.  Congrats.  You have made yourself God, a being you deny exists.  I’ll say it again, the insanity that comes from the hatred of God is the most ideologically bankrupt form of insanity known to man.


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

NCHillbilly said:


> No I'm not. I've heard it 1,000000000000000000000000x. It's so simple that you're missing it:
> Yes or No: Can you have salvation without repenting and being saved? Your evasiveness is telling me all I need to know, and you're reinforcing my point that default position to a Christian is eternal dammnation.
> 
> To put it another way: You are born. You live. You are a decent person. You die. You never begged the Lord for salvation or repented for being born human. Maybe you never heard that you had to. Maybe you were born into another religion. Maybe you just never believed. Where do you wind up for eternity?
> ...



There is a resurrection of life and a resurrection of dammnation. We know this from John 5.
Resurrection is a change from death to life. When your body rises out of the grave, you will either enter into life or into dammnation. What is this dammnation for eternity? I don't know. But I don't believe it's a literal fire torture. I believe it's an absence of the intimate relationship as a bride with the Bridegroom.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 29, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> Your justification "God handing out judgement" only works for some folks.



No Brother, it works for everyone if you acknowledge the eternal nature of the soul and a just, omniscient God.  ITS THE ONLY WAY to satisfy our sense of injustice we feel every day.  No other explanation gives us peace with regards to justice.


----------



## NCHillbilly (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> There is a resurrection of life and a resurrection of dammnation. We know this from John 5.
> Resurrection is a change from death to life. When your body rises out of the grave, you will either enter into life or into dammnation. What is this dammnation for eternity? I don't know. But I don't believe it's a literal fire torture. I believe it's an absence of the intimate relationship as a bride with the Bridegroom.


So, basically, dammnation is the default unless you seek salvation. That's what I thought. No yes or no, I noticed. And if you believe the words of Jesus, he talked about eternal burning torments.


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

NCHillbilly said:


> So, basically, dammnation is the default unless you seek salvation. That's what I thought. No yes or no, I noticed. And if you believe the words of Jesus, he talked about eternal burning torments.



The bride is chosen(elected). If you are elect, you WILL believe. And you will have life. You are predestined to that. 
Being the bride is not contingent on belief(as you keep saying).
Rather, belief is contingent on being the bride.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> "That man should redeem himself.."



tell me again just how that works????


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

NE GA Pappy said:


> tell me again just how that works????



Go back and read the rest of the post.
I was disagreeing with that premise in the quote.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Go back and read the rest of the post.
> I was disagreeing with that premise in the quote.





welderguy said:


> Go back and read the rest of the post.
> I was disagreeing with that premise in the quote.



yeah.. I got that... I was just wondering how a broken vessel can make itself unbroken?

How do that work?


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

NE GA Pappy said:


> yeah.. I got that... I was just wondering how a broken vessel can make itself unbroken?
> 
> How do that work?



It cannot. Did I give an impression that it could?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> It cannot. Did I give an impression that it could?



nope, but Thomas Paine did.  I was just putting it out there for thought.


----------



## atlashunter (May 29, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> How do you know the suffering a person endures doesn’t save them from a worse fate.  How do you know an untimely death doesn’t have a future purpose that saves others from suffering. You don’t.  You can’t.  The only way you COULD would be if you yourself were omnipresent, a power YOU DENY EXISTS yet here you are passing judgement on a God using implied omnipresence to do so.  Congrats.  You have made yourself God, a being you deny exists.  I’ll say it again, the insanity that comes from the hatred of God is the most ideologically bankrupt form of insanity known to man.



Could always be worse? Really? That is what you are going with? Wonder how you would respond to that if you learned it was your five year old daughter that was held down and hurt while someone who could have intervened stood by and watched? You continue to ignore the obvious which is for those who endure such trauma it could have been better, much better. You worship a deity that you believe could have made it so and chose not to. There is no escaping that.


----------



## Squadron77 (May 29, 2019)

I'm confused. Not about my salvation because I confident of it. I'm confused about what point either of you are trying to make.


----------



## atlashunter (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> The bride is chosen(elected). If you are elect, you WILL believe. And you will have life. You are predestined to that.
> Being the bride is not contingent on belief(as you keep saying).
> Rather, belief is contingent on being the bride.



If it’s all predetermined then free will goes out the window and you are left with a bunch of needless suffering.


----------



## welderguy (May 29, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> If it’s all predetermined then free will goes out the window and you are left with a bunch of needless suffering.



What needless suffering?


----------



## atlashunter (May 29, 2019)

welderguy said:


> What needless suffering?



All of it.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 30, 2019)

NE GA Pappy said:


> If God is all knowing and humans are not, how can the unknowing determine that the knowing is wrong in His decisions?



Sorry Pappy but it takes just a morsel of intellectual honesty to get that one.  You’re not likely to get an HONEST answer if any at all.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 30, 2019)

NCHillbilly said:


> No I'm not. I've heard it 1,000000000000000000000000x. It's so simple that you're missing it:
> Yes or No: Can you have salvation without repenting and being saved? Your evasiveness is telling me all I need to know, and you're reinforcing my point that default position to a Christian is eternal dammnation.
> 
> To put it another way: You are born. You live. You are a decent person. You die. You never begged the Lord for salvation or repented for being born human. Maybe you never heard that you had to. Maybe you were born into another religion. Maybe you just never believed. Where do you wind up for eternity?
> ...



Tell me something NCH.  Would you be content if you had just a tiny bit of cancer but 99.99999% of your body was free of it?  I think not.  Sin is just like cancer in one respect: just a little bit in an otherwise morally good person can destroy him, yet you resent God for treating sin like you would treat cancer.  However unlike cancer sin doesn’t just destroy the individual who has it, it can and will, if left unchecked destroy all of humanity.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 30, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Could always be worse? Really? That is what you are going with?



You imply you know different.  Tell me how you came by this power.  I'll sit back and listen.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 30, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> All of it.



GOD SIGHTING.  GOD SIGHTING HERE.  DON'T MISS IT FOLKS.   POST 118.   JUST BELOW THE FRUITS AND NUTS, but watch the floor.  It's slippery.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 30, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Tell me something NCH.  Would you be content if you had just a tiny bit of cancer but 99.99999% of your body was free of it?  I think not.  Sin is just like cancer in one respect: just a little bit in an otherwise morally good person can destroy him, yet you resent God for treating sin like you would treat cancer.  However unlike cancer sin doesn’t just destroy the individual who has it, it can and will, if left unchecked destroy all of humanity.


That all sounds very dramatic and the cancer analogy is a nice touch but......


> if left unchecked


Is it your claim that "sin" is being kept in check by God??


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 30, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> That all sounds very dramatic and the cancer analogy is a nice touch but......
> 
> Is it your claim that "sin" is being kept in check by God??



Well if NCH's premise is true, that none get to Heaven without repentance of sins and forgiveness/cleansing of them through the atoning work of Christ on the cross, (and I believe it is) then I would have to say yes.  That was the context of my answer to him.  It's all another matter if sin is being kept in check by God here presently on earth.  I believe it is patently obvious it is, but that's a separate subject altogether, and I'm not exactly sure which context you question to me is referring.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 30, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Well if NCH's premise is true, that none get to Heaven without repentance of sins and forgiveness/cleansing of them through the atoning work of Christ on the cross, (and I believe it is) then I would have to say yes.  That was the context of my answer to him.  It's all another matter if sin is being kept in check by God here presently on earth.  I believe it is patently obvious it is, but that's a separate subject altogether, and I'm not exactly sure which context you question to me is referring.


I'm asking more in a generic/overall context.
It just struck that these 2 concepts completely contradict each other -
"All men sin/are sinners". Note that doesn't say "would sin" or "might sin". But that they/we DO sin.
And -
"God keeps sin in check".
I dont know what your version of "in check" is but to me it would mean prevents/mitigates man from doing it.
Its almost like claiming speed limit signs keep speeding in check.


----------



## atlashunter (May 30, 2019)

welderguy said:


> No. There's nothing unjust about God and what He does. Nothing.



So if he mandates you rape and murder a child there is nothing unjust about that because he is a creator?


----------



## atlashunter (May 30, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> You imply you know different.  Tell me how you came by this power.  I'll sit back and listen.



The argument doesn’t help you whatsoever. If I sit back and watch your kids burn up in a fire and do nothing when I could have saved them it is no justification of my inaction to say well it could have been worse because your wife wasn’t also in the fire.

This is perhaps the most disgusting aspect of religion. It requires you to suspend your own moral judgment and look the other way. Just pathetic.


----------



## NCHillbilly (May 30, 2019)

welderguy said:


> The bride is chosen(elected). If you are elect, you WILL believe. And you will have life. You are predestined to that.
> Being the bride is not contingent on belief(as you keep saying).
> Rather, belief is contingent on being the bride.





SemperFiDawg said:


> Well if NCH's premise is true, that none get to Heaven without repentance of sins and forgiveness/cleansing of them through the atoning work of Christ on the cross, (and I believe it is) then I would have to say yes.  That was the context of my answer to him.  It's all another matter if sin is being kept in check by God here presently on earth.  I believe it is patently obvious it is, but that's a separate subject altogether, and I'm not exactly sure which context you question to me is referring.


It's not my premise. I got it from the Bible and ever sermon I've heard in my life. Basically, you are crap because you were born human because of something a man and woman you don't even know did thousands of years ago, and because of that, you are destined for torment unless you ask forgiveness for being and acting like a human, who was supposedly created in God's image, but has now somehow become inherently bad just by being born and existing. I don't buy it.

Why worship a being who created something, and when it turned out flawed, blames the thing he created for his mistakes, and punishes it for existing just like he created it? If we were created in the image of God, why do we have to go through a convoluted process that makes no sense in order to gain his favor and keep him from smiting us and casting us into eternal torment?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 30, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> I'm asking more in a generic/overall context.
> It just struck that these 2 concepts completely contradict each other -
> "All men sin/are sinners". Note that doesn't say "would sin" or "might sin". But that they/we DO sin.
> And -
> ...



Gotcha.  I do think it’s clear God does keep sin in check today in a number of ways both direct and indirect.  “In check” meaning to me limiting its full effect, buffering it, or hedging it in, definitely not eradicating it completely therefore it poses no contradiction for me.


----------



## ky55 (May 30, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> The argument doesn’t help you whatsoever. If I sit back and watch your kids burn up in a fire and do nothing when I could have saved them it is no justification of my inaction to say well it could have been worse because your wife wasn’t also in the fire.
> 
> This is perhaps the most disgusting aspect of religion. It requires you to suspend your own moral judgment and look the other way. Just pathetic.



And even more pathetic to defend it, and assert their morals come from their god.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 30, 2019)

NCHillbilly said:


> It's not my premise. I got it from the Bible and ever sermon I've heard in my life. Basically, you are crap because you were born human because of something a man and woman you don't even know did thousands of years ago, and because of that, you are destined for torment unless you ask forgiveness for being and acting like a human, who was supposedly created in God's image, but has now somehow become inherently bad just by being born and existing. I don't buy it.
> 
> Why worship a being who created something, and when it turned out flawed, blames the thing he created for his mistakes, and punishes it for existing just like he created it? If we were created in the image of God, why do we have to go through a convoluted process that makes no sense in order to gain his favor and keep him from smiting us and casting us into eternal torment?



I did not mean it was your personal belief only that it was the point I felt you were trying to convey.  If I missed your point I was mistaken.  Feel free to correct me, but I believe you are, for the most part, correct in your interpretation on sin to the best of my understanding.  That's all I was saying.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 30, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Gotcha.  I do think it’s clear God does keep sin in check today in a number of ways both direct and indirect.  “In check” meaning to me limiting its full effect, buffering it, or hedging it in, definitely not eradicating it completely therefore it poses no contradiction for me.


That sounds a lot like "it could be worse".
You figure "it could be worse" therefore it must be being kept in check by God.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Here's a concept:
> All are born into sin from the first Adam, but all are justified by the second Adam(Jesus).


There was no actual first Adam.
Concept is extremely flawed


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 30, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> The argument doesn’t help you whatsoever. If I sit back and watch your kids burn up in a fire and do nothing when I could have saved them it is no justification of my inaction to say well it could have been worse because your wife wasn’t also in the fire.
> 
> This is perhaps the most disgusting aspect of religion. It requires you to suspend your own moral judgment and look the other way. Just pathetic.



Again your hatred of God has suspended any good judgement. You hold empiricism has the only knowable answers yet in the next statement say if YOU don't know the reason for any action there isn't a valid one.  How hubristically silly.  Well it's a good thing the early scientist didn't feel that way lest there be no such thing as science at all.  

No sane person would subscribe to that notion.  My car won't start, but there's no valid explanation for it.  The injection hurt my child when he received his immunization.  No valid reason for that suffering.  The mason dropped a brick on my head when I walked under his ladder and it hurt.  No valid reason for that pain.  Is that you Atlas?  Of course not. You don't subscribe to that notion here on earth, where you understand very little. You don't subscribe to the idea that just because you can't understand why and action took place there is no valid reason, yet you not tout that when it comes the actions(or inaction) of and omniscient God (which no sane person would claim to comprehend) YOU not only can say that his actions have no valid reason, but go further charging him with evil.  THAT is insanity, pure hatred driven, illogical, unreasonable, irrational INSANITY.   

As to your example above, it just highlights your delusion.  You sitting back and watching and him sitting back and watching are NOT the same, because YOU ARE NOT GOD. No matter what you think, no matter how much your ego compels you to equate yourself with him and your intellect to his, it just ain't so and you're hatred of him has destroyed any sense of reason you might have ever possessed.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 30, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> That sounds a lot like "it could be worse".
> You figure "it could be worse" therefore it must be being kept in check by God.



No Walt.  There's many days, especially here recently, where I can't honestly see how it could be much worse, and then I remind myself that over the course of my life, it's days like these where God has been the most active, turning hopelessness, not necessarily into hope, but into peace, which is infinitely better than hope, and it reassures me that he is there and in control with my best interest at heart.  I may not understand the reason for the pain and suffering, and may never. It doesn't matter. I don't need to understand.  The trust he has developed in me, on him,  through past experiences has me convinced me that no matter how it all ends it's gonna be better than I ever could imagine.

That's my personal answer to your post.

The ideological and theological one is something along these lines.  His influence on events, people, through the actions of the Holy Spirit or his direct action, do act as a counter-force either directly opposing evil and/or buffering it's full effect on humanity.  Mankind has some degree of free will, if no more than to make him culpable for his actions.  I don't know many, actually any, believers who would deny that.  Not saying there isn't one.  As crazy as people tend to be about religion nothing surprises me anymore, but I have never heard of one. For what it's worth that's pretty much what I got.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2019)

NCHillbilly said:


> Really? I grew up the son of a preacher, and have read the whole Bible through more than once, and listened to thousands of sermons. According to all that, the default position of humanity is you are dammed to eternal fiery torment, even if you live a near-perfect life and are good, kind, and righteous and moral. You still go to the hot place by default if you don't beg God for forgiveness, because you are flawed and nasty and sinful as a human, even though God made you in his image.
> 
> That default setting of burn in Hades is one reason that turned me against organized religion. If God thinks like that, and is twisted enough to burn people alive forever for acting exactly like he designed them to act, then God isn't love. He is on a power trip like a kid torturing flies. Justness would be if you only get dammed if you do evil things. I'm sorry, I don't believe in inherited sin, or the inherent evil of humanity. Some people are naturally good, some people are naturally evil. And going to church and professing to be a good Christian doesn't seem to make the evil ones any less evil. Behold our righteous, God-fearing reverend in the OP. I doubt if Charlie Manson would have raped his own daughter, but this guy who tells everybody else how to live did repeatedly? It would be different if this was an isolated incident.


I Nominate this ^^^ , post of the thread so far.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2019)

welderguy said:


> There is a resurrection of life and a resurrection of dammnation. We know this from John 5.
> Resurrection is a change from death to life. When your body rises out of the grave, you will either enter into life or into dammnation. What is this dammnation for eternity? I don't know. But I don't believe it's a literal fire torture. I believe it's an absence of the intimate relationship as a bride with the Bridegroom.


Sign me up!
I will absolutely take eternal absence.  I live a good life now without. No change needed.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 30, 2019)

NCHillbilly said:


> No I'm not. I've heard it 1,000000000000000000000000x. It's so simple that you're missing it:
> Yes or No: Can you have salvation without repenting and being saved? Your evasiveness is telling me all I need to know, and you're reinforcing my point that default position to a Christian is eternal dammnation.
> 
> To put it another way: You are born. You live. You are a decent person. You die. You never begged the Lord for salvation or repented for being born human. Maybe you never heard that you had to. Maybe you were born into another religion. Maybe you just never believed. Where do you wind up for eternity?
> ...



I understand your point.  To it I would temper it paraphrasing C.S. Lewis who said something along the lines of "We know all people must be saved through Christ.  What we don't know is that do all people need to know Christ to be saved."  It's a very clear distinction and your point above, while not untrue, only presents a partial picture that many have never considered or even heard of in most churches.  I don't know the answer, but it certainly should be given it's weight in any such discussion.


----------



## atlashunter (May 30, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Again your hatred of God has suspended any good judgement. You hold empiricism has the only knowable answers yet in the next statement say if YOU don't know the reason for any action there isn't a valid one.  How hubristically silly.  Well it's a good thing the early scientist didn't feel that way lest there be no such thing as science at all.
> 
> No sane person would subscribe to that notion.  My car won't start, but there's no valid explanation for it.  The injection hurt my child when he received his immunization.  No valid reason for that suffering.  The mason dropped a brick on my head when I walked under his ladder and it hurt.  No valid reason for that pain.  Is that you Atlas?  Of course not. You don't subscribe to that notion here on earth, where you understand very little. You don't subscribe to the idea that just because you can't understand why and action took place there is no valid reason, yet you not tout that when it comes the actions(or inaction) of and omniscient God (which no sane person would claim to comprehend) YOU not only can say that his actions have no valid reason, but go further charging him with evil.  THAT is insanity, pure hatred driven, illogical, unreasonable, irrational INSANITY.
> 
> As to your example above, it just highlights your delusion.  You sitting back and watching and him sitting back and watching are NOT the same, because YOU ARE NOT GOD. No matter what you think, no matter how much your ego compels you to equate yourself with him and your intellect to his, it just ain't so and you're hatred of him has destroyed any sense of reason you might have ever possessed.



Well we can certainly agree that I am not a god. The point remains that you give your god a pass for not exercising his ability to stop a kid from being molested along with all the other evils taking place at any given moment. Maybe you can tell yourself that little girl being held down by her mother while she is molested is ok because it serves some greater purpose. To me it’s grotesque that you not only look the other way but actually worship a being that you believe allows that to happen.


----------



## atlashunter (May 30, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> So if he mandates you rape and murder a child there is nothing unjust about that because he is a creator?



Someone pass the butter.


----------



## atlashunter (May 30, 2019)

ky55 said:


> And even more pathetic to defend it, and assert their morals come from their god.



Next he compares the harm of allowing child molestation to the harm of vaccination. You don’t need to be a god or omniscient to know that any one, deity or not, that allows kids to be molested is evil. And he accuses me of bad judgment. smh...


----------



## WaltL1 (May 30, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Well we can certainly agree that I am not a god. The point remains that you give your god a pass for not exercising his ability to stop a kid from being molested along with all the other evils taking place at any given moment. Maybe you can tell yourself that little girl being held down by her mother while she is molested is ok because it serves some greater purpose. To me it’s grotesque that you not only look the other way but actually worship a being that you believe allows that to happen.


While your example above probably isn't a chapter in "How to Win Friends and Influence People" , there is no getting around that its the unavoidable ugly flip side of believing in an omni-everything deity.


----------



## ky55 (May 30, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Next he compares the harm of allowing child molestation to the harm of vaccination. You don’t need to be a god or omniscient to know that any one, deity or not, that allows kids to be molested is evil. And he accuses me of bad judgment. smh...



Yeah it all sounds absolutely unbelievable and absurd to me.
I think he feels some sort of obligation to defend a god who stands by and watches horrible atrocities, because he imagines that same god has provided him with comfort and “peace” in his hard times.


----------



## Spotlite (May 30, 2019)

welderguy said:


> It's so simple you're missing it.
> Going to heaven is not contingent upon anything that you can DO. Salvation is of the Lord. period


I get Free Will, Elect, etc....but scripture is clear that “whosoever will” and “unless a man is born of spirit and water”........

So, you DO have to repent, ask for it, accept it?????? That’s a DO part that you must do???? I think that’s where NCHillbilly is at. You can be a good person and not do anything about your salvation and the default is the burn pit.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (May 31, 2019)

Spotlite said:


> I get Free Will, Elect, etc....but scripture is clear that “whosoever will” and “unless a man is born of spirit and water”........
> 
> So, you DO have to repent, ask for it, accept it?????? That’s a DO part that you must do???? I think that’s where NCHillbilly is at. You can be a good person and not do anything about your salvation and the default is the burn pit.



There’s really no such thing as a “good person” except in the eyes of others.  Even the worst of humanity are considered good by some and the best of humanity considered bad by some.  Both are true to a degree.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 3, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> there is no getting around that its the unavoidable ugly flip side of believing in an omni-everything deity.



Sure there is. it's so simple a child can understand it, atheist just deny it exists. But then again, atheist have no qualms about denying the existence of reality or truth.  If someone was to say "there's no getting around the fact that there is no answer to the 2+2= equation." They would instantly declare the person that said that insane, yet they do the same and declare themselves "enlightened" or "free thinkers".  That, my friend, IS insanity; denying the actual state of reality in order to satisfy your own selfish desires.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 3, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Sure there is. it's so simple a child can understand it, atheist just deny it exists. But then again, atheist have no qualms about denying the existence of reality or truth.  If someone was to say "there's no getting around the fact that there is no answer to the 2+2= equation." They would instantly declare the person that said that insane, yet they do the same and declare themselves "enlightened" or "free thinkers".  That, my friend, IS insanity; denying the actual state of reality in order to satisfy your own selfish desires.


The only things you constantly lack in your posts are truth, and facts that back up your assertions.  Other than that.....


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 3, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Sure there is. it's so simple a child can understand it, atheist just deny it exists. But then again, atheist have no qualms about denying the existence of reality or truth.  If someone was to say "there's no getting around the fact that there is no answer to the 2+2= equation." They would instantly declare the person that said that insane, yet they do the same and declare themselves "enlightened" or "free thinkers".  That, my friend, IS insanity; denying the actual state of reality in order to satisfy your own selfish desires.


What in God's name are you talking about??
The point -
If you believe in an omni-everything god and credit him with the power to do "good", then he he also gets the credit for not stopping "bad"......


> it's so simple a child can understand it,


Yes


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 3, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> What in God's name are you talking about??
> The point -
> If you believe in an omni-everything god and credit him with the power to do "good", then he he also gets the credit for not stopping "bad"......
> 
> Yes



He drones on about reality and truth. Like we said before there is no getting around the reality that he worships a deity that he believes has the awareness of kids getting rape, the power to stop it and yet chooses not to. That is his belief and his response whether such a deity really exists or not.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 4, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> What in God's name are you talking about??
> The point -
> If you believe in an omni-everything god and credit him with the power to do "good", then he he also gets the credit for not stopping "bad".....



My point is this Walt.  You stated in your previous post



> there is no getting around that its the unavoidable ugly flip side of believing in an omni-everything deity.



which is patently untrue.

The answer or “get around” is very simple.  It is this: What you perceive and interpret as “bad” may very well be for a greater benefit.  My child can’t see the benefit of the pain from an immunization shot.  I can.  It’s a matter of perspective.  You and I cant conceive of the benefit of the suffering we see around us.  That doesn’t mean there isn’t one, one  that an omniscient and omnipotent God CAN. 

You may not accept that as an answer.  You may not believe in a God, but you can’t maintain that there is no logically plausible  answer to the problem which you implicitly imply in the above quote which is not “bad” or “ugly” and maintain any shred of intellectual honesty.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 4, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> My point is this Walt.  You stated in your previous post
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's a cop out and you know it. Even if a god used child rape for some good purpose he would be an evil monster unworthy of reverence. And that's best case scenario for you. We point out that you're worshipping a god that chooses to allow child rape to happen and your defense is that he might actually be using child rape as a tool?


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 4, 2019)

https://ktla.com/2019/04/29/one-of-...rgery-after-being-raped-alabama-man-arrested/

As this went on you believe your god was in the room and rather than intervene he sat back and watched it all play out? You're telling us this is all part of his plan? That the rapist was actually doing gods good work? Couldn't lift a finger to stop this little girl from being raped but he helps find lost wedding rings at the beach.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 4, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> https://ktla.com/2019/04/29/one-of-...rgery-after-being-raped-alabama-man-arrested/
> 
> As this went on you believe your god was in the room and rather than intervene he sat back and watched it all play out? You're telling us this is all part of his plan? That the rapist was actually doing gods good work? Couldn't lift a finger to stop this little girl from being raped but he helps find lost wedding rings at the beach.



Already told you.  I’m not feeding your insanity.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 4, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Already told you.  I’m not feeding your insanity.



You're the one analogizing child rape to vaccination.


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jun 4, 2019)

as usual, I glanced at these threads in the beginning to see what's going on, but then my curiosity ever takes me as it becomes eight pages long and I have to go back to see where the conversation went.
High points so far:

An 'omnipotent' God keeps sin in check but does nothing to prevent the worst of it such as child rape and incest etc.

A person can know such and such from the Bible instead of just knowing it is written in the Bible. And then say others are not grounded in reality.

Got it. I'll check back in a few more pages.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 4, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> My point is this Walt.  You stated in your previous post
> 
> 
> 
> ...


First....


> which is patently untrue.


If it was untrue you wouldn't need to try to work around it......
A workaround doesn't make it false, it doesn't make it go away...... it proves that's its true.
I guess you don't see the irony in the fact that you are explaining to me HOW TO GET AROUND THE TRUTH/facts and you end your post with -


> and maintain any shred of intellectual honesty.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 4, 2019)

Believes an omniscient being requires child rape to achieve their ends while accusing others of lacking intellectual honesty.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Jun 4, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> There’s really no such thing as a “good person” except in the eyes of others.  Even the worst of humanity are considered good by some and the best of humanity considered bad by some.  Both are true to a degree.


I would mostly disagree. I would say there are no perfect people, but there are definitely good people and bad, even downright evil people. I think most of humanity would agree with this. Unless you believe what you read in an ancient book that says all people are inherently evil unless they get fixed, because somebody ate an apple a few thousand years ago.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 4, 2019)

NCHillbilly said:


> I would mostly disagree. I would say there are no perfect people, but there are definitely good people and bad, even downright evil people. I think most of humanity would agree with this. Unless you believe what you read in an ancient book that says all people are inherently evil unless they get fixed, because somebody ate an apple a few thousand years ago.





> SemperFiDawg said:
> There’s really no such thing as a “good person” except in the eyes of others.  Even the worst of humanity are considered good by some and the best of humanity considered bad by some.  Both are true to a degree.


I think, the way I read it, is you both are saying pretty much the same thing but coming at it from different angles.
Good and bad are judgement calls/how we see things. To SFD's point... there are serial murderers in prison right now receiving love letters and marriage proposals from women on the outside.....
And to NCH's point.... yes I think most of humanity would agree with you.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 4, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> First....
> 
> If it was untrue you wouldn't need to try to work around it......
> A workaround doesn't make it false, it doesn't make it go away...... it proves that's its true.
> I guess you don't see the irony in the fact that you are explaining to me HOW TO GET AROUND THE TRUTH/facts and you end your post with -



No what I explained was a totally logical explanation of pain and suffering that a child could understand.  It’s a well accepted and respected explanation acknowledged by critical thinkers regardless of their stance on the actual existence of a God.  The fact that YOU won’t acknowledge that fact has nothing to do with its validity nor your intellect and everything to do with your emotional resentment of God.  That said, the old saying applies: ‘you can’t reason someone out of a position they used no reason to arrive at or keep’ so there’s no point continuing with this.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 4, 2019)

NCHillbilly said:


> I would mostly disagree. I would say there are no perfect people, but there are definitely good people and bad, even downright evil people. I think most of humanity would agree with this. Unless you believe what you read in an ancient book that says all people are inherently evil unless they get fixed, because somebody ate an apple a few thousand years ago.



brilliant


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 4, 2019)

SFD really made himself look bad on this one and is looking for the exits.


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jun 4, 2019)

Brilliance is the cessation of trying to impose one's beliefs on another who doesn't believe that.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Jun 4, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> I think, the way I read it, is you both are saying pretty much the same thing but coming at it from different angles.
> Good and bad are judgement calls/how we see things. To SFD's point... there are serial murderers in prison right now receiving love letters and marriage proposals from women on the outside.....
> And to NCH's point.... yes I think most of humanity would agree with you.


The main point I'm making is that I don't have a belief in the inherent evilness/sinfulness/ lostness/unredeemedness of the species as a whole. We are what we are. Some of us are mostly good, some of us are mostly bad. And some who are fascinated by and attracted to the bad ones.

Most Christians, however, in my experience, see the whole human race as inherently flawed, sinful, and bad at birth; cursed by and carrying the sins of their fathers and mothers until they pray to Jesus, and then you're a good person who is no longer dammned to eternal punishment for just being born human.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 4, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> No what I explained was a totally logical explanation of pain and suffering that a child could understand.  It’s a well accepted and respected explanation acknowledged by critical thinkers regardless of their stance on the actual existence of a God.  The fact that YOU won’t acknowledge that fact has nothing to do with its validity nor your intellect and everything to do with your emotional resentment of God.  That said, the old saying applies: ‘you can’t reason someone out of a position they used no reason to arrive at or keep’ so there’s no point continuing with this.





> The fact that YOU won’t acknowledge that fact has nothing to do with its validity


You didnt provide any facts for me to acknowledge or not acknowledge.
You provided a "could be". You do understand that your "logical explanation" is not actually a fact right?


> everything to do with your emotional resentment of God.


I do not believe a god exists so therefore do not and can not resent one or any of them.


----------



## ky55 (Jun 5, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> SFD really made himself look bad on this one and is looking for the exits.



He does that every time, then leaves some insults and bails out.


----------



## Oak-flat Hunter (Jun 13, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> https://www.knoxnews.com/story/news...pted-daughter-david-lynn-richards/1143006001/
> 
> 
> 
> Facing a maximum of 72 years for his crimes he instead got 12.


There is no excuse for what this judge did.He should rot in **** with the man who did this to His own daughter!!!


----------



## 660griz (Jun 14, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> That said, the old saying applies: ‘you can’t reason someone out of a position they used no reason to arrive at or keep’ so there’s no point continuing with this.


Not true. I once believed in God for no apparent reason other than my parents did. Went to church, and the preacher, and everyone I knew said God was real.
Then, reasoned my way out of that non-sense. So, don't give up hope.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 14, 2019)

660griz said:


> I once believed in God for no apparent reason



Pretty much says it all right there.  Sadly, it’s much more profound than you will probably ever realize.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 14, 2019)

660griz said:


> Not true. I once believed in God for no apparent reason other than my parents did. Went to church, and the preacher, and everyone I knew said God was real.
> Then, reasoned my way out of that non-sense. So, don't give up hope.



You “reasoned” your way out of what ‘everyone you knew’ found to be true and real?   You do realized you just painted a picture of insanity, and No, I don’t expect you to see it.  They almost never do until faced with an emotionally traumatic event, which is another sign of insanity.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 14, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> You “reasoned” your way out of what ‘everyone you knew’ found to be true and real?   You do realized you just painted a picture of insanity, and No, I don’t expect you to see it.  They almost never do until faced with an emotionally traumatic event, which is another sign of insanity.


Griz doesn't have an invisible sky buddy and does not believe in worshipping ascending zombies and HE is the insane one....


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 14, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> You “reasoned” your way out of what ‘everyone you knew’ found to be true and real?   You do realized you just painted a picture of insanity, and No, I don’t expect you to see it.  They almost never do until faced with an emotionally traumatic event, which is another sign of insanity.



You’re quite the expert on insanity. Had you been born in a non Christian part of the world it’s very unlikely you would be a Christian. Does that mean you also are insane?


----------



## j_seph (Jun 14, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> You’re quite the expert on insanity. Had you been born in a non Christian part of the world it’s very unlikely you would be a Christian. Does that mean you also are insane?


No, would mean you have false hopes.

The insane one would be the subject of this thread "
*Preacher gets leniency after raping daughter"*


----------



## 660griz (Jun 14, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> You “reasoned” your way out of what ‘everyone you knew’ found to be true and real?   You do realized you just painted a picture of insanity, and No, I don’t expect you to see it.


 Good. I bet they thought the first white man that said slavery was bad to be crazy too. 





> They almost never do until faced with an emotionally traumatic event, which is another sign of insanity.


 How do you possibly know that I have not faced an emotionally traumatic event? I am sure of one thing. You need to check out the (real) definition of insanity.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 14, 2019)

> "SemperFiDawg, post: 11755949, member: 25640"]You “reasoned” your way out of what ‘everyone you knew’ found to be true and real?   You do realized you just painted a picture of insanity, and No, I don’t expect you to see it.  They almost never do until faced with an emotionally traumatic event, which is another sign of insanity.





> The Greek mathematician Pythagoras was the first to propose the idea of a round Earth,


Obviously insane ^


----------



## Israel (Jun 15, 2019)

There is no reason for God's being.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 15, 2019)

Israel said:


> There is no reason for God's being.


People create the reason.
We are here so God must "be".


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 15, 2019)

Israel said:


> There is no reason for God's being.



There's no apparent necessity for god being either, particularly the one described by all religious texts and indigenous mythologies


----------



## ky55 (Jun 15, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> People create the reason.
> We are here so God must "be".



Yep, and SFD’s totally absurd rants about the “insanity” of non-believers are prime examples of the lengths the believers will go to when they are trying to back up and justify their totally unfounded and unsupported supernatural claims.


----------



## Israel (Jun 15, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> People create the reason.
> We are here so God must "be".


I cannot create reason for God's being.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 15, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> People create the reason.
> We are here so God must "be".



If we look at what people get out of religion the reasons conveniently turn out to be self serving.


----------



## Israel (Jun 16, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> If we look at what people get out of religion the reasons conveniently turn out to be self serving.



Do you find "self serving" odious?

If so, what would you recommend that would lead to something otherwise? 

_Is there_...something otherwise?


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 16, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> If we look at what people get out of religion the reasons conveniently turn out to be self serving.


To be honest, I think most things we do are self serving in one way or another.
For me, its what happens after that that matters the most.
If YOU want to "create" a god to serve YOUR need for answers now or serve YOUR need to worship or for whatever reason.... I say have at it.
Its when you decide that I need it too is when it moves into a different realm.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> To be honest, I think most things we do are self serving in one way or another.
> For me, its what happens after that that matters the most.
> If YOU want to "create" a god to serve YOUR need for answers now or serve YOUR need to worship or for whatever reason.... I say have at it.
> Its when you decide that I need it too is when it moves into a different realm.


I agree. 
People should use whatever is needed to serve their needs. And I agree that then claiming I need it also is where the line is drawn.
This 2+2=9 routine believers use where the excuse is I am just incapable of, or not doing the math right excuse is worse than telling me that is the correct math in the first place.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 16, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> To be honest, I think most things we do are self serving in one way or another.
> For me, its what happens after that that matters the most.
> If YOU want to "create" a god to serve YOUR need for answers now or serve YOUR need to worship or for whatever reason.... I say have at it.
> Its when you decide that I need it too is when it moves into a different realm.



How has that been working out?


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 16, 2019)

Israel said:


> Do you find "self serving" odious?
> 
> If so, what would you recommend that would lead to something otherwise?
> 
> _Is there_...something otherwise?



I find it human. We wouldn’t be here if not for an instinct to act in our own self interest. I don’t begrudge that in anyone. What matters more is how that self interest is expressed. If it’s in the form of wish thinking then yes I find that odious.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 16, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> How has that been working out?


I think its been working out in the only way it could have.
Whats the alternative? Outlawing belief in a god? If thats the answer well.... you'll find me in the trenches WITH the Christians.
As soon as Im being forced through laws etc. to honor/worship their god well..... you'll find me in the trenches AGAINST the Christians.
I may have a false sense of security but I dont find Christianity to have the power/be a threat like it used to be nor do I think they ever will again.
Im perfectly comfortable with there being Christians, Christians having their own beliefs, Christians having churches, Christians having Christian schools etc.
I think thats the way it SHOULD be. That would include any religion.
BUT as soon as it goes beyond that its a whole different ball game.
This is a big world. Theres room for everybody to "own" a piece of the pie.
Just dont try to force me to eat from yours.


----------



## Israel (Jun 16, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> I find it human. We wouldn’t be here if not for an instinct to act in our own self interest. I don’t begrudge that in anyone. What matters more is how that self interest is expressed. If it’s in the form of wish thinking then yes I find that odious.



How would you know what a man holds in self interest is what you call wish thinking? Or not?

It seems the subject has gone from self interest to now a particular from of what you call self interest.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 16, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> I think its been working out in the only way it could have.
> Whats the alternative? Outlawing belief in a god? If thats the answer well.... you'll find me in the trenches WITH the Christians.
> As soon as Im being forced through laws etc. to honor/worship their god well..... you'll find me in the trenches AGAINST the Christians.
> I may have a false sense of security but I dont find Christianity to have the power/be a threat like it used to be nor do I think they ever will again.
> ...



I’m not saying people shouldn’t be free to believe whatever they want. But that doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be a social cost.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 16, 2019)

Israel said:


> How would you know what a man holds in self interest is what you call wish thinking? Or not?
> 
> It seems the subject has gone from self interest to now a particular from of what you call self interest.



Well the thought that you can escape your mortality in an afterlife is a pretty obvious wish. There is no evidence whatsoever that is the reality and the self serving motive behind it is pretty obvious. A religion that says you get one life and then it’s over for you for eternity is one that would never get off the ground.

I would call it an expression of self interest. Both theft and voluntary trade are done out of the same self interest. It’s not the self interest itself that is good or bad. It’s the particular manifestation. The point of my original comment is that people believe in their religion not because an observation of the facts led them there but for their own selfish reasons. It’s one thing to say I wish it were so. Another to say it is so because I wish it.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 16, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> I’m not saying people shouldn’t be free to believe whatever they want. But that doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be a social cost.


As stated, Im going to disagree with you.
If they keep it to themselves I dont see any reason anyone should exact a "cost" on them.
Now about the only "grey area" for that ^ in my mind, MIGHT be the indoctrination of children who cant think for themselves yet. And that opens up a gigantic can of worms because children get indoctrinated in all sorts of ways by parents on all sorts of subjects.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 16, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> As stated, Im going to disagree with you.
> If they keep it to themselves I dont see any reason anyone should exact a "cost" on them.
> Now about the only "grey area" for that ^ in my mind, MIGHT be the indoctrination of children who cant think for themselves yet. And that opens up a gigantic can of worms because children get indoctrinated in all sorts of ways by parents on all sorts of subjects.



It’s never kept to themselves.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 16, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> It’s never kept to themselves.


Not willingly anyway.
But we are chipping away at it. Its up to society to determine how much power/influence we want to allow them to have.
And no I don't see chipping away at it as "exacting a cost". 
Oh and we've got to be careful about this exacting a cost thing.
Don't forget who is still in the minority. Wasn't long ago that this conversation alone would have been more dangerous than a scorned psyco blonde with a drinking problem.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 16, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> Not willingly anyway.
> But we are chipping away at it. Its up to society to determine how much power/influence we want to allow them to have.
> And no I don't see chipping away at it as "exacting a cost".
> Oh and we've got to be careful about this exacting a cost thing.
> Don't forget who is still in the minority. Wasn't long ago that this conversation alone would have been more dangerous than a scorned psyco blonde with a drinking problem.



Well exacting a cost can cover a pretty broad range so maybe I should be more specific. I’m not suggesting coercion but I’m thinking more along the lines of Sam Harris talking about people who claim Elvis is alive or that they have been abducted by aliens. You’re free to claim it but if you do it damages your credibility with others. Same should hold true for invocations of the gods.

That’s what I meant by the term social cost. Not some sort of intervention by the state.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 16, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Well exacting a cost can cover a pretty broad range so maybe I should be more specific. I’m not suggesting coercion but I’m thinking more along the lines of Sam Harris talking about people who claim Elvis is alive or that they have been abducted by aliens. You’re free to claim it but if you do it damages your credibility with others. Same should hold true for invocations of the gods.
> 
> That’s what I meant by the term social cost. Not some sort of intervention by the state.



Social shaming.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 16, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Well exacting a cost can cover a pretty broad range so maybe I should be more specific. I’m not suggesting coercion but I’m thinking more along the lines of Sam Harris talking about people who claim Elvis is alive or that they have been abducted by aliens. You’re free to claim it but if you do it damages your credibility with others. Same should hold true for invocations of the gods.
> 
> That’s what I meant by the term social cost. Not some sort of intervention by the state.


Ok gotcha.
Interesting conversation. I think Im finding out Im less "militant"? more "open minded"? more "understanding"? on this subject.
I just don't put belief in a god in the same box as belief that Elvis is still alive or being abducted by aliens. I think maybe its the psychological components involved that I find different.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 17, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> Ok gotcha.
> Interesting conversation. I think Im finding out Im less "militant"? more "open minded"? more "understanding"? on this subject.
> I just don't put belief in a god in the same box as belief that Elvis is still alive or being abducted by aliens. I think maybe its the psychological components involved that I find different.



How about belief in Poseidon? If they told you he spoke to them? Maybe you’ve just been conditioned.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 17, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> How about belief in Poseidon? If they told you he spoke to them? Maybe you’ve just been conditioned.


I don't think Im conditioned. Of course that may be a component of being conditioned .
You are giving examples that draw parallels to being "nuts".
Many folks who believe have been indoctrinated since they were knee high to a grasshopper.
Many folks who believe are surrounded by folks who believe. That tends to reinforce the indoctrination. I still have habits/thought processes (indoctrination) etc that I picked up by being in the military and that was 40 years ago and Im not around anybody in the military.
Many folks who believe view themselves and their lives through the prism of their belief.
For many folks who believe their hopes/dreams/fulfillment/self worth/world view.... all tied into their belief.
Poseiden? Elvis? Aliens?
I dont put them on the same planet, never mind in the same ball park, when it comes to the human psyche.
And to me thats what this entire subject is about. The human psyche.
Sure, I can argue/debate all day long against some of the wacky arguments/claims etc that some believers sometimes make but when you strip all that away it all boils down to the individual psyche.
Even our lack of belief boils down to our individual psyche.
For all the above reasons and more I find this subject to be FAR more complicated than to just proclaim or to draw parallels to...…. "they're nuts".


----------



## Israel (Jun 17, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> I don't think Im conditioned. Of course that may be a component of being conditioned .
> You are giving examples that draw parallels to being "nuts".
> Many folks who believe have been indoctrinated since they were knee high to a grasshopper.
> Many folks who believe are surrounded by folks who believe. That tends to reinforce the indoctrination. I still have habits/thought processes (indoctrination) etc that I picked up by being in the military and that was 30 years ago and Im not around anybody in the military.
> ...



Because you said these things, and I am the unnecessary one, will you grant me acting according to my non-necessity?
I offer what is unnecessary to you...because _you_ already said them...my agreement. 

You already have an agreement within that has led you to speak to what is outside. You have thought about them, tested them "inside", found them congruent to what you know of knowing...and out they popped. My agreement is (merely to me) that something of whatever that is going on inside you, whatever form of knowing you have, I too have working "inside me" so that in that sense, your exposition rings also the bell inside me.

What will (according to that knowing _I have within_) lead me to state, reiterate, in my useless agreement to you, my "amen"...is that the first high lighted statement of yours:




> I don't think Im conditioned. Of course that may be a component of being conditioned


 
holds far more truth, and also of what _you are_ in being unafraid to state it, than I often see men willing to broach. But here it is...amen. 

Useless? To you?  Of course! 
But not useless to me...this seeing. Someone able to concede that "even though I do not think (my thinking) is all and only subject to a 'conditioning'...it may well be that that is precisely how and what the conditioned would think and say" 

I hear someone say outwardly...what I also know...inwardly.

But now I speak, and if you respond, _we speak_...but we do so in the presence of others. For me to speak what _I know of this thing...will have effect. _Just as your speaking has affected me. What_ I know_, and have already stated, I will state again..."few men are willing to broach it". (This statement will will affect those who want to show they are not among the _many timid, _they will take it as challenge, not willing to suffer such from a thing given to "inane ramblings".)

Nevertheless they must take observation of themselves as challenge. Just as I have.

It is because the second observation I highlighted (though you said quite bit more than just what has "stuck out to me") is also "amen" worthy (to me).




> For many folks who believe their hopes/dreams/fulfillment/self worth/world view.... all tied into their belief.



Can we, just for a moment, forget "sides"? Even though I am inclined to think that what you may have in view as you state this is "religious people"...theists, "christians" hindus, muslims...I ask you...of whom in all the world...is this not true? Who is not operating according to some form of belief...to which their (all the things you mentioned)



> hopes/dreams/fulfillment/self worth/world view



are not "tied"? Does any man in his belief...hope he is wrong? Does the fellow hoping he will hit the lottery, win the Nobel prize, be found among his peers as superior, get that new boat, marry that woman he loves...be president, King of the whole world...(find another rat to feed his family)...is he not as equally tied/bound/imprisoned(?) to some inner metric of "success" in his belief...? Who is free of this?

Watch when the clever man is told he is not as clever as he thinks. He _must_ come out and fight. When the so called intelligent man is told "you are not as bright as you imagine...in fact...in all the world none is half as bright as you imagine yourself to be..." Watch what happens when what is being observed...has such observations made known to them. Something is tied to defense. Self...defense. And it matters not, at all, upon what "side" in our little exchanges one speaks (according to his belief about himself and what he believes _there, in his core_) appears.
Touch what any man believes "about himself" and you have touched the man's core, and in that touched the things you enumerate:

hopes/dreams/fulfillment/self worth/world view.

Do you know why these are so vigorously defended?
Idols always...must be.




> Even our lack of belief boils down to our individual psyche.



_noun_
noun: *psyche*; plural noun: *psyches*

the human soul, mind, or spirit.
"their childhood made them want to understand the human psyche and to help others"
synonyms:soul, spirit, (inner) self, innermost self, (inner) ego, true being, essential nature, life force, vital force, inner man/woman, persona, identity, personality, individuality, makeup, subconscious, mind, intellect; More





antonyms:body 
Origin





mid 17th century: via Latin from Greek _psukhē_ ‘breath, life, soul’.


Even if a man denies "having one"  watch what proves he does indeed "have one"...by his response to its being approached or touched.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 17, 2019)

At one time it was Christians who were viewed as the nuts. Maybe they still should be. Or rather the beliefs themselves should be viewed as nutty as they are and not granted an undeserved veneer of respect. If an adult believes in Santa Claus because they were indoctrinated from childhood to believe and never told otherwise yes they are victims of indoctrination but at the same time at some point it’s time to grow up. And if they tell you Santa speaks to them or they have met and had intercourse with Santa or Santa lives etc I’m not going to say they are crazy but something is amiss. They aren’t being honest with themselves or with you.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 17, 2019)

If a member of the Lord Our Righteousness church tells me Wayne Bent is the messiah I’m not going to shrug that off regardless of whether it’s someone who came to the cult as an adult or a kid who was born into it. Yes the kids are more victims having been born into it but in either case the persons head has been screwed with and they are engaged in a delusion. Harmless? Perhaps but probably not. Carrying nutty beliefs should carry a social stigma with it IMO.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 17, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> If a member of the Lord Our Righteousness church tells me Wayne Bent is the messiah I’m not going to shrug that off regardless of whether it’s someone who came to the cult as an adult or a kid who was born into it. Yes the kids are more victims having been born into it but in either case the persons head has been screwed with and they are engaged in a delusion. Harmless? Perhaps but probably not. Carrying nutty beliefs should carry a social stigma with it IMO.


Carrying nutty beliefs does have a social stigma with it. It's just the nutties don't think their beliefs are as nutty as the as next when in reality they are all in the same group.

With 40,000 denominations one denomination is certain that the other 39,999 stand out socially as being different.
God talking to an individual is "normal", until the same god talks to another individual and tells him something that the 1st individual disagrees with or doesn't like.
The Christian group is used as a whole and individual when convenient.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 17, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> At one time it was Christians who were viewed as the nuts. Maybe they still should be. Or rather the beliefs themselves should be viewed as nutty as they are and not granted an undeserved veneer of respect. If an adult believes in Santa Claus because they were indoctrinated from childhood to believe and never told otherwise yes they are victims of indoctrination but at the same time at some point it’s time to grow up. And if they tell you Santa speaks to them or they have met and had intercourse with Santa or Santa lives etc I’m not going to say they are crazy but something is amiss. They aren’t being honest with themselves or with you.


I think we are going to have to agree that we just view this differently. Which Im totally cool with, no harm no foul.
In fact, what we are doing is giving credence/proof to that which we often preach which is ... An Atheist doesnt believe in the existence of gods. The End. Requirements fulfilled. And after that "anything goes". No handbook to follow, no thought process "rules", no other qualifying or disqualifying requirements.


----------



## Israel (Jun 18, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> At one time it was Christians who were viewed as the nuts. Maybe they still should be. Or rather the beliefs themselves should be viewed as nutty as they are and not granted an undeserved veneer of respect. If an adult believes in Santa Claus because they were indoctrinated from childhood to believe and never told otherwise yes they are victims of indoctrination but at the same time at some point it’s time to grow up. And if they tell you Santa speaks to them or they have met and had intercourse with Santa or Santa lives etc I’m not going to say they are crazy but something is amiss. They aren’t being honest with themselves or with you.





> At one time it was Christians who were viewed as the nuts.


Say it ain't so!



> Maybe they still should be.


Maybe? Where is this "maybe" being considered...where is the power of this "should" originating that "should" extend?



> Or rather the beliefs themselves should be viewed as nutty as they are and not granted an undeserved veneer of respect.



Again with the "should"...and the rest sounds like a man threatening to take off the gloves...as though "this time" he's really ready to withhold what he in once benevolence granted by his supreme graciousness...that undeserved veneer of respect. 

Yes...as needed and by all means, mince no words, spare the "christian" _your benevolence, _and tell him what you really think! Oh, wait...that invitation may be a bit late for _this party_. So, take the leftovers home with you. I'm sure there are even family members, (or friends?) of some of you who can't wait to hear of, and from, your ironclad sanity. Unlike a caveat that may have issued from the Manhattan project "don't try this at home kids" the opposite is quite recommended. Many co-workers and associates are, no doubt, in drought for your wisdom. Probably some customers, too. After all it would seem:



> They aren’t being honest with themselves or with you.



This matter is elevated to some importance.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 18, 2019)

Commentary without Refutation


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 18, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Commentary without Refutation


----------



## Israel (Jun 18, 2019)

Tighter. I think you may need to be bundled...a little tighter.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 18, 2019)

Israel said:


> Tighter. I think you may need to be bundled...a little tighter.


Says Martini...


----------



## Israel (Jun 18, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Commentary without Refutation



Do you understand the differences among commentary, refutation, and exhortation/encouragement at all?

It is obviously neither refutation or commentary.

Think of it rather...as it is.

One stating what "should" be done, how a people and their beliefs "should" be viewed,



> Maybe they still should be.





> the beliefs themselves should be viewed as nutty as they are



with a should coupled there to this consequence by the conjunction "and"



> and not granted an undeserved veneer of respect.



I am merely moved to concede to those shoulds. Knowing how very beneficial they are to the believer. Take it as one not wanting to interfere with your "shoulds" and whatever compelling they lay upon you.

You _should_ remind the believer he believes God is a Father, and that this Father has sent His Son (specifically) to die for the sins of the world, and that this Son is raised from the dead to never die again. And is in communion with those who are His.

Yes! Even if you feel the need to add whatever is your opinion about such, or (even if you must) refer to the Son who is raised as a zombie, by all means...be used to remind the believer what he believes. That the life in that One is greater than all of death. Derisions don't count much here, they've been accounted for.

You are like men who won't take "yes" for an answer, yes, by all means...be who you are. And be free to _do fully_, what you claim you "should" do.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 18, 2019)

atlashunter said:


>


The advice to "mince no words"... from the Ronco Mincer.....priceless


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 18, 2019)

Israel said:


> Because you said these things, and I am the unnecessary one, will you grant me acting according to my non-necessity?
> I offer what is unnecessary to you...because _you_ already said them...my agreement.
> 
> You already have an agreement within that has led you to speak to what is outside. You have thought about them, tested them "inside", found them congruent to what you know of knowing...and out they popped. My agreement is (merely to me) that something of whatever that is going on inside you, whatever form of knowing you have, I too have working "inside me" so that in that sense, your exposition rings also the bell inside me.
> ...


Holy carp!
I think this is the first time I understood your ENTIRE post. I gotta mark this down on my calendar! 



> Useless? To you?  Of course!


I have never found your posts/thoughts/presence on this forum "useless".
Whether in agreement or disagreement.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 18, 2019)

Israel said:


> Do you understand the differences among commentary, refutation, and exhortation/encouragement at all?
> 
> It is obviously neither refutation or commentary.
> 
> ...


ShouldA WouldA CouldA


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 18, 2019)

We are in agreement. Those who go about in public wearing a clown costume are not surprised at the reaction they draw. Nor _should_ they be. I take yes for an answer.


----------



## Israel (Jun 18, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> We are in agreement. Those who go about in public wearing a clown costume are not surprised at the reaction they draw. Nor _should_ they be. I take yes for an answer.



For me to care at all of the opinion of others as to my clothing would only show a gross lack of any consideration of the very possible presence of _conditioning_ in that particular area. 

But, at least we are in agreement...there may be concessions made _to not offending_, concessions made from a _desire to offend_, concessions made to peer pressure...to "fashion du jour", or the simple matter that someone has been dressed by another.

How one appears to another is entirely out of that man's hands, for even how he may appear to himself is beyond any surety. He has weighed his desire to appear right and finds it skews the scales...every time.

I do not know if I am dressed...even if it be as clown...to stand out here...or more likely...fit in.

I have come to be among the "more intelligent". And how silly that does indeed appear.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 18, 2019)

You dress yourself my friend. Nobody put a gun to your head and made you proclaim you’ve met and had intercourse with someone that lived and died 2,000 years ago.


----------



## Israel (Jun 18, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> You dress yourself my friend. Nobody put a gun to your head and made you proclaim you’ve met and had intercourse with someone that lived and died 2,000 years ago.


Correct...it is in the hand of the everything else in which I have found the gun.

Why would I not, as I have breath, speak as warmly as I am allowed of the one who receives without hostility?


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 18, 2019)

Israel said:


> Correct...it is in the hand of the everything else in which I have found the gun.
> 
> Why would I not, as I have breath, speak as warmly as I am allowed of the one who receives without hostility?



It was in your own hands and still is. Free will and all that. Own it and do you.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 18, 2019)

HEY! I like this dish that we often eat. Ya'll quit trying to change one of the ingredients!


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 18, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> HEY! I like this dish that we often eat. Ya'll quit trying to change one of the ingredients!


By the way... this is said tongue in cheek, which may not be apparent ^.
Its an even matchup so its kind of entertaining


----------



## Israel (Jun 19, 2019)

Walt, there's a joke that goes (as every workplace usually has some particular to their endeavors)

"When you're at a party how will you know which one is the brain surgeon?"


Pause.


"Don't worry, he'll tell you..."



I'm just at a party among the "more intelligent".

Nobody "wills" themselves to be the butt of a joke, it's all bound up in _their endeavor_ of ascendancy. Their idolizations.

You know, like Jed Gurley says to Hiram in "Partners at the Great Divide"...after they found Robert Highsmith, the town's resident intellectual, dead on his toilet from an apparent overdose.

Hiram said, "Well I guess there's no more of his running off to those Mensa meetings he was so fond of..."

"Yeah", Jed replied, "I don't think he ever missed a one, just like he never let pass an opportunity to remind us he was going."
"Yep," Jed continued, "he sure was a bright guy. But there's one thing I don't think I'll ever understand..."

"Wassat Jed?"

"Well Hiram, wouldn't you think that if someone was smart enough to make Mensa, they'd also be smart enough to see how silly it was to join? Carry that little card and all..."

Hiram look puzzled. "I don't get you at all Jed, I wish I was smart enough to be in something like Mensa. I was so dumb I didn't even know what it was till ole Bob here told me. Yeah, I sure do wish I was smart enough"

"Yeah" said Jed, "that's kinda the whole point of it..."

"Huh?" came the dumbfounded syllable.

And again..."Huh?"

"And Jed, they get cards, too?"


----------



## bullethead (Jun 19, 2019)

There are many examples in here of intelligent and intellectual people not purposely trying to cover up their ignorance by using big words and flamboyant styles but instead advertise their ignorance with humility in the hopes that someone more knowledgeable can help them become less ignorant.

There is evidence of a few pseudointellectuals who constantly use intellectual words, styles and terms but lack the intellectual rigor to consistently pull it off.

Sorry, no joke involved.


----------



## Israel (Jun 19, 2019)

here...lemme help you pat yerself on the back...it's kinda strainin' you...


"but instead advertise their ignorance with humility in the hopes that someone more knowledgeable can help them become less ignorant."

He's been my help all along.

But I can't lie, I don't advertise my ignorance with humility, I boast of it, gladly.

Here's a true thing of how very wrong I have been...and which so many have been more than eager to help me see, and so I thank God for them. The mercy of God. I thought I had some sort of appreciation of it,His forbearance, His longsuffering...and I see how little I have known of it. In fact, my ignorance was such as it could easily be said  "I didn't know it at all..." that's how grossly ignorant I was.

I'd be worse than a fool to think "now I have seen it all to its limits", no, for in any moment...  I may look at this very moment, in seconds, minutes, days or years and find myself no less in greater awe as to say "no, there also I severely underestimated God's mercy as to show myself completely ignorant of it..."

In truth, it is precisely what a man "like me" needs...far more mercy than he could ever imagine.

Yer all (as many as might agree) completely correct...I am nothing but a tool.

My hope lay in the One who, regardless of _my outcome,_ has revealed not all tools will be discarded.

And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, Behold, this _child_ is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against; 

If my Lord were content in being made no more than a sign, a thing stuck in the ground (earth) for men to see and there show their regard...to hope to escape that, is all the most wrong aspiration there is.

Serve yer gods men...you are free to show.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 19, 2019)

Israel said:


> In truth, it is precisely what a man "like me" needs...far more mercy than he could ever imagine.
> 
> Yer all (as many as might agree) completely correct...I am nothing but a tool.



Ever get tired of whipping your own butt? Seems like it would get old after a while.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 19, 2019)

Israel said:


> here...lemme help you pat yerself on the back...it's kinda strainin' you...


Humility does not allow me urge to want to pat myself on the back




Israel said:


> "but instead advertise their ignorance with humility in the hopes that someone more knowledgeable can help them become less ignorant."


This^ was not about you, at all. (Insert Carly Simon video here)



Israel said:


> He's been my help all along.


???



Israel said:


> But I can't lie, I don't advertise my ignorance with humility, I boast of it, gladly.


Nor were you accused of it, again that section of my post did not include you. You are inserting yourself into it to make some sort of point I guess..



Israel said:


> Here's a true thing of how very wrong I have been...and which so many have been more than eager to help me see, and so I thank God for them. The mercy of God. I thought I had some sort of appreciation of it,His forbearance, His longsuffering...and I see how little I have known of it. In fact, my ignorance was such as it could easily be said  "I didn't know it at all..." that's how grossly ignorant I was.
> 
> 
> I'd be worse than a fool to think "now I have seen it all to its limits", no, for in any moment...  I may look at this very moment, in seconds, minutes, days or years and find myself no less in greater awe as to say "no, there also I severely underestimated God's mercy as to show myself completely ignorant of it..."
> ...



Sounds a lot like an example of the "don't worry he will tell you" punchline of a brain surgeon joke someone recently told in here...


----------



## Israel (Jun 19, 2019)

> Sounds a lot like an example of the "don't worry he will tell you" punchline of a brain surgeon joke someone recently told in here...


only if he had to work hard to be who and what he is...


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 19, 2019)

The version of the joke I heard was "When you go to a party, how can you tell who is the vegan, the triathlete, and the evangelical?  They will tell you in the first five minutes."


----------



## Israel (Jun 19, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Ever get tired of whipping your own butt? Seems like it would get old after a while.




The grace of it is in assurance, that though I may know nothing much at all, I can find my butt with both hands. It's enough. It saves me from the terror of that to which I so naturally incline...

Do you really believe I think so little of myself? Without an intervention I am the grandest thing I know.

(and believe it or not...help comes in the strangest form to let me know I am in need of intervention)


----------



## Israel (Jun 19, 2019)

ambush80 said:


> The version of the joke I heard was "When you go to a party, how can you tell who is the vegan, the triathlete, and the evangelical?  They will tell you in the first five minutes."



Hey, that's pretty good, too.

Who is the one touting or boasting himself as _the_ evangelical?

Oh, wait, I think I know by looking at the wives...I see one with a look on her face that is saying "Can someone for the love of God, save me?"

Durn, too late for you to see, she found out someone was watching her...she's got that plastered smile all over her face now.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 19, 2019)

Israel said:


> only if he had to work hard to be who and what he is...


Now you feel the need to defend your own joke... okay.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 19, 2019)

Israel said:


> The grace of it is in assurance, that though I may know nothing much at all, I can find my butt with both hands. It's enough. It saves me from the terror of that to which I so naturally incline...
> 
> Do you really believe I think so little of myself? Without an intervention I am the grandest thing I know.
> 
> (and believe it or not...help comes in the strangest form to let me know I am in need of intervention)



So you’re actually a raging narcissist at heart who has found genuine humility thanks to your imaginary friend? Sounds like more self flagellation to me. Might be a good sales pitch for masochists. For the rest of us I’m afraid it needs work.


----------



## Israel (Jun 19, 2019)

LOL...look I know it's rough for the "top tier" atheists to get nothing more for all their efforts than to end up in exchange with...well...me. I'd probably be disappointed too.


----------



## Israel (Jun 19, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> So you’re actually a raging narcissist at heart who has found genuine humility thanks to your imaginary friend? Sounds like more self flagellation to me. Might be a good sales pitch for masochists. For the rest of us I’m afraid it needs work.




Ya ever hear how opposites attract? I simply got my eyes open to the one in whom there is no pride, at all.

It makes sense now. But even before its making sense, he was willing to be a friend. Patience is another thing he's got in abundance. And again, that opposites attract thing shows itself at work.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 19, 2019)

Cannot get more opposite than exist/non exist


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 19, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Ever get tired of whipping your own butt? Seems like it would get old after a while.


Its also possible that its warranted. We only know a tiny fraction about each other.
With more info its possible you/we would say "Ok now I get it"......


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 19, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> Its also possible that its warranted. We only know a tiny fraction about each other.
> With more info its possible you/we would say "Ok now I get it"......



Don’t think I’ve ever known anyone where it was so continuously warranted. I’m not so sure it actually is. Maybe for some it has more to do with some pleasure or gratification they get out of it. Is that what we are really dealing with here? Do we have a legit modern day flagellant among us? Or just a pretender?


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 19, 2019)

Israel said:


> Ya ever hear how opposites attract? I simply got my eyes open to the one in whom there is no pride, at all.
> 
> It makes sense now. But even before its making sense, he was willing to be a friend. Patience is another thing he's got in abundance. And again, that opposites attract thing shows itself at work.



Yeah that sounds like an apt description of the god of the Bible. Someone who insists you continuously sing their praises and worship them lest they throw you into a fiery lake for eternity. No pride there.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 19, 2019)

There is no god as patient and long suffering as the one that doesn’t exist.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 19, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Don’t think I’ve ever known anyone where it was so continuously warranted. I’m not so sure it actually is. Maybe for some it has more to do with some pleasure or gratification they get out of it. Is that what we are really dealing with here? Do we have a legit modern day flagellant among us? Or just a pretender?


All possibilities also ^
But just a point -


> Don’t think I’ve ever known anyone where it was so continuously warranted.


Doesnt really matter what we determine to be warranted if an individual is convinced that it IS warranted for themselves (for whatever reasons) .....


----------



## Israel (Jun 20, 2019)

WaltL1 said:


> All possibilities also ^
> But just a point -
> 
> Doesnt really matter what we determine to be warranted if an individual is convinced that it IS warranted for themselves (for whatever reasons) .....





WaltL1 said:


> Its also possible that its warranted. We only know a tiny fraction about each other.
> With more info its possible you/we would say "Ok now I get it"......



What appears the whipping of the butt varies from one to another.

Atlas was most close in his description of a man I know as a "raging narcissist", but actually narcissist itself falls a bit short. This guy is not only fully engaged with himself to exaltation, but more than willing to enter into judgments against the "not him"...or _others. _He surveys from a seat to which he believes he has right and is right_ enough _to dispense into creation what "should" and "should not" _be. _What should and should not _be allowed_ to be. How this thing gets fed is all the matter of issue. And whence it is fed.

This thing, this guy, this consciousness of a sort, has the most remarkable blindness to itself. In the thinking _it knows itself_ it presumes to itself the therefore knowing of others. It sets no parameter to itself or perimeter, to itself it seems to have the unlimited and infinite capacity. But it does not judge others so. They enter his eye in forms of limit, forms containable by his consciousness...able to be summed up in his courts. This is this (they are assigned and can never be more) and that is that, likewise. What is not hostile or rude to his throne as he brings them to his court he may call friend, lover, whatever description is fitting to him in what he considers amicable to him. What is hostile, rude, not respecting of _his self, in his court, _he deems enemy. He opens and closes gates at will. Contempt of court orders also assigned.
Close for some, arms length for others, weapons drawn and ready for certain others.

But regardless...all and everything in creation as he finds them pass through under his eye of judgment. And all are measured, weighed...judged according to this one thing...their relation to his self. The not rejecting or even homage paying may stay...all others...out. These "others" are firmly assigned as the "they". Definitely...other. The "no way is that anything like...me" Why?...because it doesn't like the "me". It is not like...me. And therefore, I do not like...it. It...should _not be_, and is banished to being the "they".

But it's the fool. It might even grant to itself some knowing that what it invites to stay at _his court, _no less has thrones _of their own. _And if, or when a rising up upon theirs is manifest to him, in his court, he must try to prove ascendancy over them. How many clever devices he may find at hand for this he never thinks a mere cleverness, to him it is direst motions of survival, and survival in its most bare and naked estate...so that in its direness, its most fundamental bid to survive intact, it assures itself there can never, ever be any judgment of this. Judgment against itself. Every motion against itself at which it rises up, it is well able to judge and trusts is plain..."this was all and only self defense". It is plain. It is necessary. It is right. And _it is good_...that_ I survive. _For what is there to me, if the me _is conquered_? Dethroned? Banished from my own court. Only the nothing. Only the "they" are left.
And, _I am_ essential. After all...why else would _I be?_

We talk, and have, even here about reason. Reasoning. Reasons. And whether we take the stand that creation has no "reason" to it to be found...it just...is, or there is no reason _in creation..._there is _no reason found_ in matter or space, atoms hold no reason, the distance (space) between Earth and Mars, the distance between my fingertips...holds no "reason"...isn't it odd that we may truly believe...we reason to this? The atom doesn't answer. (or so it _seems_) The space doesn't answer (or so it _seems_) What may even be of a god...doesn't answer (or so it seems). So I by reason reason, reason is not part nor able to attributed to anything..._else. _And that _else_ tells the whole story, for we actually do believe...every one of us...it is, and exists, and_ is available_ (in whatever measure, of both quantity and quality) to us. And so we judge "he is giving out good reason" or "he has, it seems much of it" or conversely "this fellow is not using reason at all!" He has "bad" reasoning ability...or...not "much". But each holds others to task _in their own court, _to either be accepted _"I like the way this fellow reasons, he is in some way...like me" or _the other. "Out you dammable [sic] fool"

And each of us, whether we believe we know the reasons or not, whether we seek to speak from a place of consistency...or just utter into the air (seemingly) nonsense syllables...believes there is "reason" that we do. And that others do. Some may gather and say "he has a brain injury"...that's _the reason_ he is like he is. He has an exceptionally high IQ and a Nobel Prize and is able to tell us things we never considered, that's _the reason_ we stand in awe.

And this all takes place in our little courts. Where reason is measured against threat to _my throne._

No wonder any longer why I was set to oppose Jesus Christ. He had first to be established firmly to me as "other", so that it might be so firmly established beyond any discrepancy of thought that would tell me "I am taker of thrones". That foolishness that would tell me "I am the one able to exalt my own to bring submission of other thrones...to it."

Of course men have to resist him...so they never afterwards are able to confuse themselves as to who He is, who they are.
What you may see of butt whipping is just me being reminded to remind myself, I can do nothing. I am not Him.

And how good it is...otherwise, I would be alone.

Ask yourselves...what is the end of my "reason" and ask yourself if this might be heaven...or he11...if I were able to so exert myself to a success of making everything...just like...me? I shudder to think if I had all and _only myself_ as final work.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 20, 2019)

This is life, Live it.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 20, 2019)

And now back to the verbal diarrhea...


----------



## Israel (Jun 21, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> And now back to the verbal diarrhea...



Is this in reference to you, me, or someone else?

Or

Is it you now permitting or allowing...as in "Now we can get back to verbal diarrhea"?

Or is it you describing a particular post, perhaps mine?

Or perhaps someone else's?

Do you see how any argument toward the "self evident" or self evidence can only make appeal to a self in some way "like it"? Able to receive its evidence?


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 21, 2019)




----------



## Israel (Jun 22, 2019)

atlashunter said:


>



Is that you or me? Resting in peace? Neither? Both? A mimic?

Do you speak in symbols, too?

That what is symbolic...may exceed mere symbol to the real and true?


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 22, 2019)

Somebody wake me up when we actually get an apologetics response.


----------



## welderguy (Jun 25, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Somebody wake me up when we actually get an apologetics response.



Rest in peace O lifeless one, until your name is called. Then you will awake to all truth.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 25, 2019)

> Somebody wake me up when we actually get an apologetics response.





welderguy said:


> Rest in peace O lifeless one, until your name is called. Then you will awake to all truth.


Aaaaatlas Oh Aaaaatlas.... wakey wakey.....


----------



## bullethead (Jun 25, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Rest in peace O lifeless one, until your name is called. Then you will awake to all truth.


Apologetic?


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 26, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Rest in peace O lifeless one, until your name is called. Then you will awake to all truth.



Why wait? Please share this truth you speak of and like my son in his algebra class, show your work.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 26, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Why wait? Please share this truth you speak of and like my son in his algebra class, show your work.



I'll play Jesus's Advocate.

The word of God is nothing like Algebra.  It must be taken as truth by faith, indeed it confounds the knowledge of man for it is divine.  Unless one be saved and have the veil lifted from their eyes, it seems as foolishness, like 2+2=7, yet this is the truth as told to us by Holy Scripture and proper discernment.  All things are possible through Christ.

Did I do a good job of Steelmanning their position?


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 26, 2019)

ambush80 said:


> I'll play Jesus's Advocate.
> 
> The word of God is nothing like Algebra.  It must be taken as truth by faith, indeed it confounds the knowledge of man for it is divine.  Unless one be saved and have the veil lifted from their eyes, it seems as foolishness, like 2+2=7, yet this is the truth as told to us by Holy Scripture and proper discernment.  All things are possible through Christ.
> 
> Did I do a good job of Steelmanning their position?



Not bad not bad. /golfclap


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 26, 2019)

If believers really held beliefs that were true and the Bible was the inerrant word of god the conversation would go something like this.

“God is real and the Bible is true and I can prove it. John 14:14 says if we ask anything in his name he will do it. Other scriptures make similar claims. We can put these assurances of the efficacy of prayer to the test.” Then the believer uses prayer to do things that would otherwise be impossible. Like the things Jesus is said to have done. That wouldn’t leave much room for doubt.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 26, 2019)

ambush80 said:


> I'll play Jesus's Advocate.
> 
> The word of God is nothing like Algebra.  It must be taken as truth by faith, indeed it confounds the knowledge of man for it is divine.  Unless one be saved and have the veil lifted from their eyes, it seems as foolishness, like 2+2=7, yet this is the truth as told to us by Holy Scripture and proper discernment.  All things are possible through Christ.
> 
> Did I do a good job of Steelmanning their position?


Perfect impersonation and great example of what we get as non Apologetic "answers" in here.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 26, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Not bad not bad. /golfclap





bullethead said:


> Perfect impersonation and great example of what we get as non Apologetic "answers" in here.





Furthermore, I might be told that even though I can elucidate their position in such a way that they themselves will find accurate, it doesn't matter. Because without the gift of the Holy Spirit the words are meaningless.  In other words "Even the Devil can quote scripture".


----------



## bullethead (Jun 26, 2019)

Many years ago when I tried to explain things in an Apologetic way I always could only get so far and then have to make that leap from reality to opinion to excuses to speaking for non existent and dead people who I had never even seen let alone met.

Kind of like.....


----------



## bullethead (Jun 26, 2019)

ambush80 said:


> View attachment 974180
> 
> Furthermore, I might be told that even though I can elucidate their position in such a way that they themselves will find accurate, it doesn't matter. Because without the gift of the Holy Spirit the words are meaningless.  In other words "Even the Devil can quote scripture".


And....what strikes me as funny is that with all the "power" the believers give to da Debbil, and demons and evil spirits.. none of them could ever fathom being under the spell of one which causes them to act as they do. Lucky for them only the "good" spirits find them and cause the believers to believe the right way to the right god.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 26, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> If believers really held beliefs that were true and the Bible was the inerrant word of god the conversation would go something like this.
> 
> “God is real and the Bible is true and I can prove it. John 14:14 says if we ask anything in his name he will do it. Other scriptures make similar claims. We can put these assurances of the efficacy of prayer to the test.” Then the believer uses prayer to do things that would otherwise be impossible. Like the things Jesus is said to have done. That wouldn’t leave much room for doubt.




The boilerplate response will be something like "God doesn't jump through hoops to prove himself to unbelievers.  If you believe, then you don't need proof".  While at the same time they might say something like "He proves himself to be real to me every day and he has never let me down". 

This contradiction will go uncontested because it clearly illustrates the inability of an unbeliever to discern.  They would do so much better to untether their religion from supernatural claims. It almost seems as if they need the magic to remain for fear that without it their belief may lose some power.  If there's anything useful in religion these days, it's only diluted by the supernatural claims.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 26, 2019)

bullethead said:


> And....what strikes me as funny is that with all the "power" the believers give to da Debbil, and demons and evil spirits.. none of them could ever fathom being under the spell of one which causes them to act as they do. Lucky for them only the "good" spirits find them and cause the believers to believe the right way to the right god.



If you want to see the real danger in any of this see:

http://forum.gon.com/threads/the-world-we-live-in.945757/page-2#post-11773194


----------



## bullethead (Jun 26, 2019)

ambush80 said:


> If you want to see the real danger in any of this see:
> 
> http://forum.gon.com/threads/the-world-we-live-in.945757/page-2#post-11773194


Yes, i follow along down there.
The same bunch throws a fit if an anti religious group wants something removed from Gov't property, but only if and when it is something of the religion they follow. The same keep god crowd is very picky on which god.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 26, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Yes, i follow along down there.
> The same bunch throws a fit if an anti religious group wants something removed from Gov't property, but only if and when it is something of the religion they follow. The same keep god crowd is very picky on which god.



The argument that they eventually throw out is "America was founded on Judeo Christian values, so they should get special recognition".  How would you argue against that.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 26, 2019)

ambush80 said:


> The argument that they eventually throw out is "America was founded on Judeo Christian values, so they should get special recognition".  How would you argue against that.


The Constitution Amendment #1


----------



## bullethead (Jun 26, 2019)

They forget the Native Americans were not Christians.
Not all the founding fathers were Christians.
And,  even the ones who were Christian were smart enough to want to separate religion from Gov't.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 26, 2019)

ambush80 said:


> The boilerplate response will be something like "God doesn't jump through hoops to prove himself to unbelievers.  If you believe, then you don't need proof".  While at the same time they might say something like "He proves himself to be real to me every day and he has never let me down".
> 
> This contradiction will go uncontested because it clearly illustrates the inability of an unbeliever to discern.  They would do so much better to untether their religion from supernatural claims. It almost seems as if they need the magic to remain for fear that without it their belief may lose some power.  If there's anything useful in religion these days, it's only diluted by the supernatural claims.



Yeah I've heard those too. Still, it's their own book that says the prayers will be answered. I didn't make it up and I didn't write it. It says what it says and their claim is that it is true. Well that is a testable claim and unfortunately for those who want to believe it fails the test. And they know it fails the test. Maybe there really is a god that refuses to keep their word if it means it would remove any doubts about their existence. If that is the case then they choose to remain hidden and unknown. Or it's possible that this deity simply doesn't exist and these are just ancient myths with no more basis in reality than any other ancient myth. In the absence of evidence I know which explanation I'm going with.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 26, 2019)

ambush80 said:


> The argument that they eventually throw out is "America was founded on Judeo Christian values, so they should get special recognition".  How would you argue against that.



Name one.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 26, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Name one.



Are you asking me to name a value that they would claim is Judeo Christian in origin?  The most popular one is that each individual is sovereign and has worth.  They claim that it is direct contradiction to the idea of monarchic sovereignty and is the basis for the notion that all men are created equal.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 27, 2019)

ambush80 said:


> Are you asking me to name a value that they would claim is Judeo Christian in origin?  The most popular one is that each individual is sovereign and has worth.  They claim that it is direct contradiction to the idea of monarchic sovereignty and is the basis for the notion that all men are created equal.



Would that be the same religion that came to power by way of the Roman Empire and sanctioned the “divine right” of monarchs for well over a thousand years? Natural rights theory that gained traction in the Enlightenment was an appeal to reason over religious dogma and a rebellion against the theory of divine right the church had sanctioned all they way back at least to Constantine. Render unto Caesar isn’t exactly the clarion call for individual liberty that the Declaration of Independence was.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 27, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> Would that be the same religion that came to power by way of the Roman Empire and sanctioned the “divine right” of monarchs for well over a thousand years? Natural rights theory that gained traction in the Enlightenment was an appeal to reason over religious dogma and a rebellion against the theory of divine right the church had sanctioned all they way back at least to Constantine. Render unto Caesar isn’t exactly the clarion call for individual liberty that the Declaration of Independence was.



They will say that that principle outlined in the DOI is Judeo Christian in origin.


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 27, 2019)

ambush80 said:


> They will say that that principle outlined in the DOI is Judeo Christian in origin.



They can say it but that doesn’t change the history. Christianity has championed divine right of rulers far longer than it has the principles of enlightenment thinkers like Locke, Paine, and Jefferson.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 27, 2019)

atlashunter said:


> They can say it but that doesn’t change the history. Christianity has championed divine right of rulers far longer than it has the principles of enlightenment thinkers like Locke, Paine, and Jefferson.



Why don't you ever bring this up in the PF?


----------



## atlashunter (Jun 27, 2019)

ambush80 said:


> Why don't you ever bring this up in the PF?



I probably have at some point.


----------



## bigbonner (Jul 16, 2019)

NE GA Pappy said:


> as a foster parent, I would never, ever be alone with a female.  I don't care if she were 2 years old or 17 years old.  I just would never put myself in a position that I didn't have a witness around when I was around a female.
> 
> I saw to many families be destroyed over the years by a female making an accusation against the father. It didn't have to be true, or be proven for it to take a toll on the family.  And some of the children coming into foster care had been abused before, and they could tell a very believable story.


Me and my wife thought about foster parenting but two thing came to our mind 
1 was we would get really attached to the kids 
2 False accusations that could ruin a foster parents life.


----------



## BassMan31 (Aug 8, 2019)

If he did commit the assault and/or rape then he should face the full penalty.


----------

