# Are theists happier people?



## stringmusic (Jul 11, 2012)

Some study's say so....
http://www.lauraingraham.com/b/Stud...pier-than-secularists/164261786929379988.html

Why are y'all so upset?


----------



## TheBishop (Jul 11, 2012)

They say ignorance is bliss.


----------



## stringmusic (Jul 11, 2012)

TheBishop said:


> They say ignorance is bliss.



Just in case you missed it... "Religious people of all faiths are, on average, markedly happier than secularists, and this is true even when wealth, age and education are taken into account."


----------



## TheBishop (Jul 11, 2012)

Didn't miss it, nor does it change my statement.  Did you know that there are studies that show religiousity and IQ have a negative correlation?


----------



## stringmusic (Jul 11, 2012)

TheBishop said:


> Didn't miss it, nor does it change my statement.  Did you know that there are studies that show religiousity and IQ have a negative correlation?


Yes, I did know that.


----------



## Four (Jul 12, 2012)

Can't find the source study... article you referenced just goes back to an article referenced by a mormon church newspaper...  any help?


----------



## vowell462 (Jul 12, 2012)

Yea id like to know where this came from and how many were asked the questions. Im skeptical on polls simply because ive never been asked to be involved.


----------



## stringmusic (Jul 12, 2012)

Four said:


> Can't find the source study... article you referenced just goes back to an article referenced by a mormon church newspaper...  any help?


I can't find it either, I'm sure it's somewhere, I just don't know where.

This was meant to be more of a silly type thread, even though I think the article is mostly true. But who knows, we might be discussing evolution 30 or 40 posts from now.



vowell462 said:


> Yea id like to know where this came from and how many were asked the questions. Im skeptical on polls simply because ive never been asked to be involved.



Yea, I've never been asked either, don't guess they come lookin' for us country boys to ask questions too.


----------



## Four (Jul 12, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> I can't find it either, I'm sure it's somewhere, I just don't know where.
> 
> This was meant to be more of a silly type thread, even though I think the article is mostly true. But who knows, we might be discussing evolution 30 or 40 posts from now.



haha, mabye. I mainly wanted to look at were the study was done, i bet some interesting things could come from it.

What if it was done in a predominately religious area? Religious people might be happier just because thats the predominating position, butting secularists in more of an oppressed minority... Imagine being a secularist in Iran... not a big happy quotient!

This might make sense, i try to reconcile with the study a few years ago that said that the more secular the country, the happier it is overall..


----------



## JB0704 (Jul 12, 2012)

We could solve this by making a poll.  Just ask the resident skeptics if their happy, yes or no?

As far as theists being happier, who knows.  I do remember singing a stupid song about it in Sunday school when I was a kid......


----------



## ambush80 (Jul 12, 2012)

I wonder if people who believe in Santa Clause are happier.  Any guesses?


----------



## bullethead (Jul 12, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> I wonder if people who believe in Santa Clause are happier.  Any guesses?



They are on Dec. 25th! 
Wait ...that's the day.... ahhh nevermind.


----------



## TheBishop (Jul 12, 2012)

bullethead said:


> They are on Dec. 25th!
> Wait ...that's the day.... ahhh nevermind.



I love celebrating mirthra's birthday!


----------



## Asath (Jul 13, 2012)

Just an observation, again, but theism (for those of you taking notes and bandying about terms you fail to understand) is the belief in some sort of god WITHOUT rejecting the idea of revelation.  So, THIS position takes the side that SOMEBODY, SOMEWHERE, SOMETIME or another, in the here or in the far distant when, ACTUALLY SAW and GENUINELY SPOKE to a supernatural god, and brought the words of that supernatural god, literally as spoken, to all of mankind, so that you and I might understand, and fall to our knees before the spokesperson.

Not before the god in question, of course, because we have dozens of those, and dozens of similar 'revelations,' and thousands of self appointed spokespeople. And the god in question never appeared to US, personally, so we have to decide, oddly, just whose word we want to take on the matter.  The great roulette wheel of 'belief' requires that you never think about that problem -- your god is the god that exists in the place you were born, and the god that exists in the place the OTHER FELLA WAS BORN is just plain WRONG. We are asked to fall to our knees before the words spoken by the person who CLAIMS to relate the Word of god. That is the truth of the matter.  You didn't get a choice.  Odd, huh?  If you'd been born somewhere else, by some accident of being less than blessed by the god you were relentlessly told about, you'd be automatically wrong, from birth.  Same as the other guy was taught about you.  

Theism, ALL thiesm, of every variety, teaches that nonsense.  To children.

So we have on our hands a false question -- are Theists happier? How in the name of sweet Aphrodite on a skateboard would anyone be able to answer that?

Are Baptists happier than Shiites?  Nice.  Three completely undefinable terms contained in a single question.  Get over yourselves.  Define 'happy.'  Can't be done.  Define 'Baptist.' Can't be done.  Define 'Shiite.'  Also can't be done.  Y'all aren't arguing about anything real.  You're arguing just to argue, and to claim advantage, and to condemn others.  There is no other purpose to it other than sheer hubris and a personal elitism that gives YOU the advantage over everyone else.  Take some comfort in knowing that you're not alone.  Every other 'religious' person is doing the same thing.  But if any single one of them is 'WRONG,' then so are you.  

Every single one of them 'believes,' the same as you do, that everything they were told from the moment of their birth is true.  And they ALL have a BOOK to prove it.  So either SOMEBODY'S Book is right, or EVERYBODY'S Book is wrong.  Down here in this Forum, where y'all can't seem to keep yourselves away from, while repelling us violently from your own self-congratulation forums, we're pretty comfortable with the latter.


----------



## JABBO (Jul 13, 2012)

As "uncle Eddie" always says...... "BINGO"  



Asath said:


> Just an observation, again, but theism (for those of you taking notes and bandying about terms you fail to understand) is the belief in some sort of god WITHOUT rejecting the idea of revelation.  So, THIS position takes the side that SOMEBODY, SOMEWHERE, SOMETIME or another, in the here or in the far distant when, ACTUALLY SAW and GENUINELY SPOKE to a supernatural god, and brought the words of that supernatural god, literally as spoken, to all of mankind, so that you and I might understand, and fall to our knees before the spokesperson.
> 
> Not before the god in question, of course, because we have dozens of those, and dozens of similar 'revelations,' and thousands of self appointed spokespeople. And the god in question never appeared to US, personally, so we have to decide, oddly, just whose word we want to take on the matter.  The great roulette wheel of 'belief' requires that you never think about that problem -- your god is the god that exists in the place you were born, and the god that exists in the place the OTHER FELLA WAS BORN is just plain WRONG. We are asked to fall to our knees before the words spoken by the person who CLAIMS to relate the Word of god. That is the truth of the matter.  You didn't get a choice.  Odd, huh?  If you'd been born somewhere else, by some accident of being less than blessed by the god you were relentlessly told about, you'd be automatically wrong, from birth.  Same as the other guy was taught about you.
> 
> ...


----------



## JB0704 (Jul 13, 2012)

Asath said:


> Get over yourselves.  Define 'happy.'  Can't be done.  Define 'Baptist.' Can't be done.  Define 'Shiite.'  Also can't be done.  Y'all aren't arguing about anything real.  You're arguing just to argue, and to claim advantage, and to condemn others.  There is no other purpose to it other than sheer hubris and a personal elitism that gives YOU the advantage over everyone else.  Take some comfort in knowing that you're not alone.  Every other 'religious' person is doing the same thing.  But if any single one of them is 'WRONG,' then so are you.



Asath, I always enjoy your posts.  They are well thought and articulate.  You make your point with a finality that often makes response difficult......but......

*This thread was a joke. * I personally do not know a single person of faith who cares about which side is "happy."  In addition, most skeptics I know are extremely intelligent people, so my personal bias is against claiming any form of superiority over them.  The only common ties I know amongst the non-believers in my cirle of friends and acquaintences is they are very smart people, and they are rebelling against something be it childhood, parents, church, society in general....typically "abstract" folks who go against the grain which also tends to make them libertarian politically (I am 85% libertarian myself).

So, I hope you can understand now that nobody thinks they are happier than you.  I am sure your life is full of good and wonderful things.


----------



## stringmusic (Jul 13, 2012)

Asath said:


> Just an observation, again, but theism (for those of you taking notes and bandying about terms you fail to understand) is the belief in some sort of god WITHOUT rejecting the idea of revelation.  So, THIS position takes the side that SOMEBODY, SOMEWHERE, SOMETIME or another, in the here or in the far distant when, ACTUALLY SAW and GENUINELY SPOKE to a supernatural god, and brought the words of that supernatural god, literally as spoken, to all of mankind, so that you and I might understand, and fall to our knees before the spokesperson.
> 
> Not before the god in question, of course, because we have dozens of those, and dozens of similar 'revelations,' and thousands of self appointed spokespeople. And the god in question never appeared to US, personally, so we have to decide, oddly, just whose word we want to take on the matter.  The great roulette wheel of 'belief' requires that you never think about that problem -- your god is the god that exists in the place you were born, and the god that exists in the place the OTHER FELLA WAS BORN is just plain WRONG. We are asked to fall to our knees before the words spoken by the person who CLAIMS to relate the Word of god. That is the truth of the matter.  You didn't get a choice.  Odd, huh?  If you'd been born somewhere else, by some accident of being less than blessed by the god you were relentlessly told about, you'd be automatically wrong, from birth.  Same as the other guy was taught about you.
> 
> ...


Did you not catch this?...... 


stringmusic said:


> This was meant to be more of a silly type thread,





> Every single one of them 'believes,' the same as you do, that everything they were told from the moment of their birth is true.  And they ALL have a BOOK to prove it.  So either SOMEBODY'S Book is right, or EVERYBODY'S Book is wrong.  Down here in this Forum, *where y'all can't seem to keep yourselves away from*, while repelling us violently from your own self-congratulation forums, we're pretty comfortable with the latter.


I have heard this many times in here, why does everyone forget what that last "A" stands for?

Would you rather "we" leave you non-believers down here alone to start threads where everyone agrees on everything? Thats would seem kinda lame.



JABBO said:


> As "uncle Eddie" always says...... "BINGO"


Asath, Asath, he's our man, if he can't write a long post ranting and driveling about theology, nobody can!!


----------



## JABBO (Jul 13, 2012)

Call it what you want. He hit the nail on the head as usual!!!!! 



stringmusic said:


> Asath, Asath, he's our man, if he can't write a long post ranting and driveling about theology, nobody can!!


----------



## Ronnie T (Jul 13, 2012)

"If you're happy and you know it clap your hands." 

Certainly, Christians and unbelievers alike can be happy in life.  But since their world-view is different they'll be happy for different reasons.  At least, their reasons should be different.

Things that make one happy might seem insignificant to the other.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jul 13, 2012)

I heard a guy on Good Morning America this week, "Happiness is not a place of residence, it's a vacation spot".  LOL


----------



## Asath (Jul 13, 2012)

Don’t know about anyone else, but most of the things that make ME happy would cause a hard-core fundamentalist to shriek aloud, and reach for a flame-thrower to deliver to me their idea of justice in the here and now . . .

There’s nothing ‘silly’ about creeping elitism in religion, since it takes the same form as creeping, incremental intrusion by governments – once you let these folks get a foot in your door they tend to use that as a precedent to kick your door open and take over your thoughts and, most importantly, your wallet.

Perhaps, as some have suggested, I over-react to this sort of thing, and within their own context, personally, they would be right.  But look around.  There remain religions that wish to impose themselves by force, the same as Christianity did initially, and they show no signs of having a sense of humor about it.  To be fair, and even-handed, I have little choice but to treat all religions the same, and I cannot respect one while condemning another – that would truly be silly.  Not a one of them, once boiled down to basics, offers anything other than their own assertions, backed up by their own Book, which they wrote themselves and continue to revise and ‘interpret’ daily.  From a broad overview, and having read them all and given each and all of them a fair hearing, I find no real distinctions.

An ‘Apologist’ is merely that – a non-believer still wearing the clothes of a lamb.  If one lacks the convictions contained in the ‘belief-system’ one pretends to adhere to, and feels the need to personally re-interpret and offer new ‘explanations,’ then all we get from an ‘Apologist’ is their own personal religion, invented by themselves on the spot.  Can’t see that sort of endlessly reactive, constantly rationalizing nonsense ever really catching on.  Spending one’s life sitting on top of the fence is certainly an approach, but one can’t really expect anyone to take you seriously from up there.

Can’t find anything in any of the Books that says something like, “Go forth, and be happy.”  Mostly it is structures, strictures, commands, and punishments.  Not a single silly bit of humor inserted in any of it.  Well, unless you’re of my mind, and consider all of it too humorous to ever be taken seriously enough to build a temple.  I’ll leave the actual ranting and driveling to the passionate believers, who have nothing other than their temples.

If one’s own approach to the real world in front of us makes one ‘happy,’ then more power to you.  Go with that, and leave the rest of us be.  We don’t part company until the proselytizing machine goes on, and the TRUE BELIEVERS begin demanding and even trying to legislate their own odd beliefs into OUR reality, not content to simply have their own thoughts, but loudly and actively intent on making EVERYONE have those same thoughts.  Just a thought, but I think that most of us are happier when the Bible-Thumpers AREN’T knocking on our doors and demanding a hearing of their views.


----------



## Ronnie T (Jul 14, 2012)

Asath,
I'll assure you that I am one good ol "Bible-Thumper"(your words) that am likely to be happier than the person who wrote the above.

This thread was obviously begun in fun.  Your words above make it appear that your life is on the verge of being destroyed by religious people!  I wouldn't give us that much credit.

Hey, you need to put a smile on your face.


----------



## Asath (Jul 16, 2012)

“This thread was obviously begun in fun. Your words above make it appear that your life is on the verge of being destroyed by religious people! I wouldn't give us that much credit.

Hey, you need to put a smile on your face.” 

Understood, and I smile just by hearing responses like yours.  Some folks understand, as you do, and can just talk about it in the spirit of civil discourse and often passionate disagreement.  We’re all stuck with the same pile of historic nonsense, and we’re all stuck on the same planet, and not one of us was given a choice in the matter.  

But allow me a few disagreements – this thread was NOT started in the spirit of fun – it was started by a partisan zealot, quoting another partisan zealot, in a deliberately non-Christian Forum, for the sole purpose of stirring the pot and making a point that cannot be supported except by the wholly biased ‘evidence’ that particular zealot wishes to put forward.  The standards applied to the argument are soft, emotional, unproven, and made entirely by assertion, and the conclusions drawn require an existing acceptance of the premise, which apply several forums above this one.

In short, the OP was nonsensical, objectively, and meant only to provoke.

I’m told that this sort of thing is discouraged.

I’ll also politely disagree with the thought that it is paranoid to consider that religious people aim to destroy my life.  Tell that to the folks who died on 9/11, when ‘religious people’ decided to teach the world a lesson in obedience to their own cause.  There can be no argument that this act was based on religious zealotry.  The world has a very long history of this sort of terror – all based on religions – and the list of those who have been killed in the name of religious ideologies, of one form or another, is so extensive as to be undeniable.  Religion is NOT some sort of benign, harmless, personal and private set of thoughts – though we would wish it to be.  

In actual truth, religion has been, and continues to be, an aggressive, expansive, violent, intrusive, and arrogant attempt to create and maintain control over other people.  Not one of them has a single objective, truthful basis, and never have – and not one has ever delivered on a single promise.  

So what could be the point of coming down here and asserting that ‘religious’ people are ‘happier?’  I fail to understand just what the man is trying to say.  I’m not feeling threatened – honest – since all of the assertions in favor of religion are nonsense – but let’s be honest – ALL religions have conquest and conversion of the ‘heathens’ to only their own point of view as a stated objective.  

What makes this particular assertion different?


----------



## Ronnie T (Jul 17, 2012)

Well, I'm happy and I hope no Christian has ever caused you to not be happy.


----------



## stringmusic (Jul 17, 2012)

Asath said:


> this thread was NOT started in the spirit of fun – it was started by a partisan zealot, quoting another partisan zealot, in a deliberately non-Christian Forum



But I put  in the OP.


----------



## TheBishop (Jul 17, 2012)

Ronnie T said:


> Well, I'm happy and I hope no Christian has ever caused you to not be happy.



I can think of one.


----------



## stringmusic (Jul 17, 2012)

TheBishop said:


> I can think of one.


----------



## centerpin fan (Jul 17, 2012)

*Musically expressed ...*

Christians:




Everybody else:


----------



## stringmusic (Jul 17, 2012)

centerpin fan said:


> Christians:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



 You zealot you.


----------



## centerpin fan (Jul 17, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> You zealot you.



I bet TheBishop is shavin' his eyebrows off as I type.


----------



## stringmusic (Jul 17, 2012)

centerpin fan said:


> I bet TheBishop is shavin' his eyebrows off as I type.



 You ain't right.


----------



## atlashunter (Jul 19, 2012)

Ronnie T said:


> "If you're happy and you know it clap your hands."
> 
> Certainly, Christians and unbelievers alike can be happy in life.  But since their world-view is different they'll be happy for different reasons.  At least, their reasons should be different.
> 
> Things that make one happy might seem insignificant to the other.



"This is the day that the lord has made. I will rejoice and be glad in it."

Can't tell you how many times I heard this song recited as if folks were trying to convince each other.

There are happy and miserable folks of all beliefs. No doubt about it. I do know for a fact though that a lot of christians put on their happy faces as they walk through those church doors. Always struck me as very disingenuous.


----------



## stringmusic (Jul 19, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> "This is the day that the lord has made. I will rejoice and be glad in it."
> 
> Can't tell you how many times I heard this song recited as if folks were trying to convince each other.
> 
> There are happy and miserable folks of all beliefs. No doubt about it. I do know for a fact though that a lot of christians put on their happy faces as they walk through those church doors. *Always struck me as very disingenuous.*



.. and you would be correct. "Come as you are, not how you want others to percieve you".


----------



## Michael F. Gray (Jul 19, 2012)

While I dislike the term you used, as it lacks any definition of what the group in question actually believes in. I can tell you from personal experiance that CHRISTians who have been blood bought, redeemed by the only begotten SON of the Living Lord share, and enjoy PEACE the world knows nothing about. When a lost sinner becomes SAVED he can lay his head on his pillow at night and sleep like a baby.


----------



## gemcgrew (Jul 19, 2012)

Michael F. Gray said:


> When a lost sinner becomes SAVED he can lay his head on his pillow at night and sleep like a baby.



A CPAP machine doesn't hurt anything either, at least in my case.


----------



## Ronnie T (Jul 19, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> "This is the day that the lord has made. I will rejoice and be glad in it."
> 
> Can't tell you how many times I heard this song recited as if folks were trying to convince each other.
> 
> There are happy and miserable folks of all beliefs. No doubt about it. I do know for a fact though that a lot of christians put on their happy faces as they walk through those church doors. Always struck me as very disingenuous.



That's the truth.


----------



## mtnwoman (Jul 31, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> I wonder if people who believe in Santa Clause are happier.  Any guesses?



Well of course....as in bahhumbug.


----------



## mtnwoman (Jul 31, 2012)

TheBishop said:


> They say ignorance is bliss.



Are you blissful?


----------



## mtnwoman (Jul 31, 2012)

TheBishop said:


> Didn't miss it, nor does it change my statement.  Did you know that there are studies that show religiousity and IQ have a negative correlation?



So are you saying you're a rocket scientist.....


----------



## mtnwoman (Jul 31, 2012)

Four said:


> haha, mabye. I mainly wanted to look at were the study was done, i bet some interesting things could come from it.
> 
> What if it was done in a predominately religious area? Religious people might be happier just because thats the predominating position, butting secularists in more of an oppressed minority... Imagine being a secularist in Iran... not a big happy quotient!*Well we are blessed here...you can believe as you wish and so can I.*
> 
> This might make sense, i try to reconcile with the study a few years ago that said that the more secular the country, the happier it is overall..


*Take Russia for example.....*


----------



## mtnwoman (Jul 31, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> "This is the day that the lord has made. I will rejoice and be glad in it."
> 
> Can't tell you how many times I heard this song recited as if folks were trying to convince each other.*People don't usually go to places that makes them unhappy...do they? I don't...do you?*
> 
> There are happy and miserable folks of all beliefs. No doubt about it. I do know for a fact though that a lot of christians put on their happy faces as they walk through those church doors. Always struck me as very disingenuous.


 I'm happy all the time...even if I only have 14 cents in checking account....and it's beyond my understanding why I am still joyful...and I still smile, every day...all the time...in and out of church. I may not have money to give an unhappy person, but I still smile and go out of my way to speak to 'pityful' people..rich or poor. My cup runneth over with joy.

I agree there are many unhappy people of all walks of life.


----------



## mtnwoman (Jul 31, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> There are happy and miserable folks of all beliefs. No doubt about it. I do know for a fact though that a lot of christians put on their happy faces as they walk through those church doors. Always struck me as very disingenuous.



Yes, that is very true.

The only place I don't wanna smile is when I go get my drivers license...hahahahahahahaha.  "we've been lookin' for you, old woman'.


----------



## ross the deer slayer (Aug 1, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> "This is the day that the lord has made. I will rejoice and be glad in it."
> 
> Can't tell you how many times I heard this song recited as if folks were trying to convince each other.
> 
> There are happy and miserable folks of all beliefs. No doubt about it. I do know for a fact though that a lot of christians put on their happy faces as they walk through those church doors. Always struck me as very disingenuous.



Maybe they aren't completely commited to God. Maybe they are forced to go and are not actually believers.. ?


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 1, 2012)

ross the deer slayer said:


> Maybe they aren't completely commited to God. Maybe they are forced to go and are not actually believers.. ?



Maybe. I guess only they know. I never did care much for the "Look at how happy we are" songs. They always came off so phony. Preferred the old hymns much more.


----------



## mtnwoman (Aug 2, 2012)

ross the deer slayer said:


> Maybe they aren't completely commited to God. Maybe they are forced to go and are not actually believers.. ?


 I call them churchgoers.


----------



## mtnwoman (Aug 2, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Maybe. I guess only they know. I never did care much for the "Look at how happy we are" songs. They always came off so phony. Preferred the old hymns much more.


 Even the old hymns were new at one time, ya know?


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 2, 2012)

mtnwoman said:


> Even the old hymns were new at one time, ya know?



But written for a very different purpose, and a very different motivation.  Old hymns, for me, are much more "pure" in that respect.


----------



## mtnwoman (Aug 3, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> But written for a very different purpose, and a very different motivation.  Old hymns, for me, are much more "pure" in that respect.



Oh I agree totally. Nothing can replace those good old hymns. Especially Amazing Grace, I Surrender All, It is Well with My Soul. Our church does only old hymns on Sunday and Wed nights. And of course we still sing them in other services. I do like praise and worship songs, too. Because they show that even today in our lives, which are much more 'out there' than our grandparents, we still need Christ. We are so busy in our everyday lives, we don't take the time to praise and worship sometimes and be joyful as we should....and I sure make up for it in praise and worship service.

All my daughter and her daughters listen to is Christian music. I have more time being older and not working, to do what I need/want to do at home....don't know if the neighbors appreciate all that singin' and dancing around though....hahahahahahahaha


----------



## bigreddwon (Aug 7, 2012)

Michael F. Gray said:


> While I dislike the term you used, as it lacks any definition of what the group in question actually believes in. I can tell you from personal experiance that CHRISTians who have been blood bought, redeemed by the only begotten SON of the Living Lord share, and enjoy PEACE the world knows nothing about. When a lost sinner becomes SAVED he can lay his head on his pillow at night and sleep like a baby.



That's becasue he is wallowing in his delusion that some higher power has _forgiven him_ of the heinous crimes he committed to the living or the dead, who may or _may_ NOT have forgiven him, might not _ever_. He gets from that imaginary deity what he does not deserve. If the people you've wronged don't forgive you, you get no forgiveness,_* ever*_. That's reality. The _saved_ wallow in fantasy and scoff at reality, because reality is harsh. My opinion anyways.


----------



## Nastytater (Aug 7, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> We could solve this by making a poll.  Just ask the resident skeptics if their happy, yes or no?
> 
> As far as theists being happier, who knows.  I do remember singing a stupid song about it in Sunday school when I was a kid......




"If your happy and you know it,clap your hands"


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 7, 2012)

bigreddwon said:


> He gets from that imaginary deity what he does not deserve......The _saved_ wallow in fantasy and scoff at reality.....



BRW, it is the pink elephant placing these hideous thoughts in your head.  Resist and flee him, and find comfort in the shadow of the great unicorn kahuna.....we will ride our talking donkey until we meet you there before the next solstice.  If we don't make it.....you will know who to blame.....


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 7, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> BRW, it is the pink elephant placing these hideous thoughts in your head.  Resist and flee him, and find comfort in the shadow of the great unicorn kahuna.....we will ride our talking donkey until we meet you there before the next solstice.  If we don't make it.....you will know who to blame.....





Oh man I just jumped outta my chair. I wasn't ready for that pic in this thread. I'm skeered......


----------



## ambush80 (Aug 7, 2012)

Lets try some of this tongue in cheek approach upstairs a few floors, shall we?  I bet it will be a riot.


----------



## ambush80 (Aug 7, 2012)

Maybe some Jesus jokes?  With lots of smilies of course, so that people know that we're just funnin'.


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 7, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> Maybe some Jesus jokes?  With lots of smilies of course, so that people know that we're just funnin'.



Head on up there with it.... we're right behind you.......


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 7, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> Lets try some of this tongue in cheek approach upstairs a few floors, shall we?  I bet it will be a riot.



I'm in!  Let's go........


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 7, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> Maybe some Jesus jokes? With lots of smilies of course, so that people know that we're just funnin'.



Thing is, up there, they believe in all this "imaginary" stuff.  Wouldn't be quite as fun.........


----------



## ambush80 (Aug 7, 2012)

I think Red makes a great point.  Say a believer wrongs me.  In his mind, feeling like he has been forgiven by the make believe sky daddy is more important to him than being forgiven by me.  What a crock and a gyp.


----------



## ambush80 (Aug 7, 2012)

Imagine feeling the same degree of levity when talking about the imaginary son of god, Jesus as you do talking about pink elephants.  Can you?


----------



## ambush80 (Aug 7, 2012)

Rose form the dead......


Still funny?


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 7, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> I think Red makes a great point.  Say a believer wrongs me.  In his mind, feeling like he has been forgiven by the make believe sky daddy is more important to him than being forgiven by me.  What a crock and a gyp.



Well of course it is ambush. The believer actually believes in God which by default would make that person feel confident that they are forgiven by Him. That should not take away from the fact that they should also want to be forgiven by you, but for a believer, the forgivness offered by Christ takes precident over your forgivness.


----------



## ambush80 (Aug 7, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> Well of course it is ambush. The believer actually believes in God which by default would make that person feel confident that they are forgiven by Him. That should not take away from the fact that they should also want to be forgiven by you, but for a believer, the forgivness offered by Christ takes precident over your forgivness.



That's the great mind job.  ('job' is not the exact word but you know what I mean)


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 7, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> Imagine feeling the same degree of levity when talking about the imaginary son of god, Jesus as you do talking about pink elephants.  Can you?



Getting a little upset ambush? That we are turning your, and most of your friends, childish argument tactics against you. Is this how most of you unbelievers think that debates go down in a scholarly atmosphere, where there are adults who act like adults discussing theology?


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 7, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> That's the great mind job.  ('job' is not the exact word but you know what I mean)



Thanks for sharing with us how you feel, but if that is the best retort you have for my answer to your post please abstain from using phrases like "sky daddy". Thanks


----------



## bigreddwon (Aug 7, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> Well of course it is ambush. The believer actually believes in God which by default would make that person feel confident that they are forgiven by Him. That should not take away from the fact that they should also want to be forgiven by you, but for a believer, the forgivness offered by Christ takes precident over your forgivness.



This is just so wrong in so many ways I cant even begin to explain it.. wow.. a blank check to commit crimes and sins..


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 7, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> Imagine feeling the same degree of levity when talking about the imaginary son of god, Jesus as you do talking about pink elephants.  Can you?



Sure.  I think you all should know by now I do not take myself that seriously.....I understand your perspective of my beliefs, and I have always shown you respect...'cause both perspectives make sense to me, it's just that in my life, believing in God makes more sense.  So that's where I am.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 7, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> Well of course it is ambush. The believer actually believes in God which by default would make that person feel confident that they are forgiven by Him. That should not take away from the fact that they should also want to be forgiven by you, but for a believer, the forgivness offered by Christ takes precident over your forgivness.



A person who believes is not given any reason to expect forgiveness.  Even in the Bible, acts had long term consequences.  There is no "free pass" as far as life is concerned......and that's where your stuck until you die.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 7, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> Rose form the dead......
> 
> 
> Still funny?



Man, we have been hearing it as long as we've been here.  Those of us who haven't left are clearly not offended, otherwise, why would we still be here?

And yes, it's still funny 

I enjoyed envisioning the unicorns and such, a lot more room for creativity.  With faith, I am limited by "the good book."  But, if you are offended by me running with your caracature of my faith, then I will stop.  It's all good (I thought you were cool with it).


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 7, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> I enjoyed envisioning the unicorns and such, a lot more room for creativity.  With faith, I am limited by "the good book."  But, if you are offended by me running with your caracature of my faith, then I will stop.  It's all good (I thought you were cool with it).



Deuteronomy 33:17 His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.

Job 39:9-10 Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?

Psalms 22:21 Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.

Psalms 29:6 He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn.

Psalms 92:10 But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil.


Numbers 23:22 God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn.

Numbers 24:8 God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows.

Isaiah 34:7 And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 7, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Deuteronomy 33:17 His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.
> 
> Job 39:9-10 Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?
> 
> ...



Yeah, but I'm not really allowed to elaborate on that.

Like I said, I have limitations.

but......the great Kahuna says he's not happy with any of us ..... and I will be stuck making popcorn necklaces for Enoch my first 10,000 years on mt. candy cane .....


----------



## ambush80 (Aug 7, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> Thanks for sharing with us how you feel, but if that is the best retort you have for my answer to your post please abstain from using phrases like "sky daddy". Thanks



Here's the interesting thing to me.  If you make jokes about an elephant but change the color from pink to blue someone might actually get upset.  If I call Zeus "sky daddy" no one cares.  See the hypocrisy.



JB0704 said:


> Man, we have been hearing it as long as we've been here.  Those of us who haven't left are clearly not offended, otherwise, why would we still be here?
> 
> And yes, it's still funny
> 
> I enjoyed envisioning the unicorns and such, a lot more room for creativity.  With faith, I am limited by "the good book."  But, if you are offended by me running with your caracature of my faith, then I will stop.  It's all good (I thought you were cool with it).



I had fun with the game but Red brought up a point that I never really considered and it went straight to the laugh track.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 7, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> I had fun with the game but Red brought up a point that I never really considered and it went straight to the laugh track.



I understand.  His point had a few "imaginary" and "fantasy" comments in it.  But it was a good one, and I did eventually address it.  

I am more than happy to present a logical (to me anyway) defense of my faith any time it is challenged.  I am more than happy to be respectful.  I get along with you guys a lot better than I do a few floors up.  As far as you know somebody on an online forum, you all seem like decent people to me.

My point was that we can have this discussion without belittling each other.....and, honestly, you and Ham are the two funniest guys on this board, I figured I toss a little back.


----------



## ambush80 (Aug 7, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> Getting a little upset ambush? That we are turning your, and most of your friends, childish argument tactics against you. Is this how most of you unbelievers think that debates go down in a scholarly atmosphere, where there are adults who act like adults discussing theology?



Are you talking about how I am in complete denial that a man could have lived in a fish for three days or that someone rose from the dead and then flew up into the air?  I can discuss with a stone straight face exactly why I think that.


----------



## ambush80 (Aug 7, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> I understand.  His point had a few "imaginary" and "fantasy" comments in it.  But it was a good one, and I did eventually address it.
> 
> I am more than happy to present a logical (to me anyway) defense of my faith any time it is challenged.  I am more than happy to be respectful.  I get along with you guys a lot better than I do a few floors up.  As far as you know somebody on an online forum, you all seem like decent people to me.
> 
> My point was that we can have this discussion without belittling each other.....and, honestly, you and Ham are the two funniest guys on this board, I figured I toss a little back.



If I say that I think it's ridiculous for a grown man to believe in ghosts, holy or otherwise, I'm not trying to belittle.  It's exactly how I feel.

I admire your sense of humor and your reasoning ability.   Can I get an amen?


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 7, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> Are you talking about how I am in complete denial that a man could have lived in a fish for three days or that someone rose from the dead and then flew up into the air?  I can discuss with a stone straight face exactly why I think that.



Nah, man.  It's the "invisible friend in the sky," or the lyrics to "big rock candy mountain" being posted in response to a Christian stating their beliefs.  I understand that Christians come in here "guns a blazin'" from time to time.  I joined this forum because one Christian's actions on here made me very uncomfortable reading it, and I wanted to give another perspective.  So, I get that often this stuff is a reaction to actions you have seen.

But, I don't really believe in the whale story, and I think much of the OT is metaphorical.  But, I don't belittle those who do.  Their perspective on it's reality is just as important to them as yours is to you.  I don't make fun of Muslims, or Hindus, or whatever, really (I do scratch my head at scientology.....because those folks know there stuff is fiction, so I don't really "get it").

But, it's all good to me.  Make fun of my resurection, and my invisible friend, and whatever you want. At the end of it, I will still be happy to discuss whatever topic you like. I enjoy it.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 7, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> If I say that I think it's ridiculous for a grown man to believe in ghosts, holy or otherwise, I'm not trying to belittle.  It's exactly how I feel.



I hear 'ya.  I typed my last response before I read this.



ambush80 said:


> I admire your sense of humor and your reasoning ability.   Can I get an amen?



Amen, brother!  I was just trying to have fun with it all.....this forum has been draggin' a bit.


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 8, 2012)

bigreddwon said:


> This is just so wrong in so many ways I cant even begin to explain it.. wow.. a blank check to commit crimes and sins..



That's not it at all. In no way is it a blank check to commits sins, a relationship with Christ is about a heart change, not a free pass.


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 8, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> A person who believes is not given any reason to expect forgiveness.


... from other people, yes, we should know that we are forgiven by Christ. Thats not to diminish the fact that He will give us consequences for our actions, sometimes very harsh ones.


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 8, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> Are you talking about how I am in complete denial that a man could have lived in a fish for three days or that someone rose from the dead and then flew up into the air?  I can discuss with a stone straight face exactly why I think that.



Your funny as heck ambush, and I enjoy having discussions with you, but the condesending remarks and the sometimes total lack of respect we as Christians get in here sometimes from you guys gets old fast.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> ... from other people, yes, we should know that we are forgiven by Christ. Thats not to diminish the fact that He will give us consequences for our actions, sometimes very harsh ones.



Yes.  But my point was that we are not given a "free pass" in life.  We are not told to expect forgiveness.  We are told to give forgiveness.


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 8, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> Yes.  But my point was that we are not given a "free pass" in life.  We are not told to expect forgiveness.  We are told to give forgiveness.



Right! I didn't mean for my original post to come across that Christians somehow have a free pass.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> Right! I didn't mean for my original post to come across that Christians somehow have a free pass.



I knew what you were saying   Just trying to clarify the topic.

I think Red was talking about the concept of forgiveness of anything, which translates as a free pass.  But this is not the case.  We still have a life to live after we make mistakes.  The forgiveness part is manifested much later.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 8, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> Here's the interesting thing to me.  If you make jokes about an elephant but change the color from pink to blue someone might actually get upset.  If I call Zeus "sky daddy" no one cares.  See the hypocrisy.



I don't know if the Greeks ever referred to Zeus as their father but Christians refer to their God as "heavenly father". The "sky daddy" is a concept that they came up with.


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 8, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> I don't know if the Greeks ever referred to Zeus as their father but Christians refer to their God as "heavenly father". The "sky daddy" is a concept that they came up with.



Yes, but some of us don't appreciate the mockery of our Heavenly Father when trying to have a discussion, and "sky daddy" is just that, mockery.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> I don't know if the Greeks ever referred to Zeus as their father but Christians refer to their God as "heavenly father". The "sky daddy" is a concept that they came up with.



Come on, man.  You know that is drippin' with sarcasm.  I'm good with it, and all.  I was just having fun with stereotypes.  I certainly don't take myself seriously, I have seen about as much humor in religion as you have.

If I remember correctly, you were the one who posted the lyrics to "big rock candy mountain."  And I laughed when you did....it was funny.  But, I think we can run with it and have some fun when the forum starts to drag.

I think the last two days posting the unicorn and elephant stuff was the most fun I have had in here in a long while.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 8, 2012)

I don't know why you would consider it ridicule for someone to apply an informal expression to a concept that you hold. What exactly is the difference between heavenly father and sky daddy that makes one ridiculous but not the other?

Besides, ridiculous beliefs are deserving of ridicule.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> I don't know why you would consider it ridicule for someone to apply an informal expression to a concept that you hold. What exactly is the difference between heavenly father and sky daddy that makes one ridiculous but not the other?



Dude, you know it is intended to provoke.



atlashunter said:


> Besides, ridiculous beliefs are deserving of ridicule.



Problem is that "ridiculous" is subjective.  Your reality may be ridiculous to me.  And I am certain mine is ridiculous to you.

If all we (collectively)ever do is ridicule those of other beliefs.....how can we ever have an intelligent conversation about those beliefs?  The forum would be lame.


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 8, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Besides, ridiculous beliefs are deserving of ridicule.



So, you just want to go back and forth bantering like school children in here from now on?


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 8, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> Come on, man.  You know that is drippin' with sarcasm.  I'm good with it, and all.  I was just having fun with stereotypes.  I certainly don't take myself seriously, I have seen about as much humor in religion as you have.
> 
> If I remember correctly, you were the one who posted the lyrics to "big rock candy mountain."  And I laughed when you did....it was funny.  But, I think we can run with it and have some fun when the forum starts to drag.
> 
> I think the last two days posting the unicorn and elephant stuff was the most fun I have had in here in a long while.



I can understand why ambush or I see the sarcasm in it. If those who claim to believe in the sky daddy or the big rock candy mountain (that came up when we were getting various irreconcilable descriptions of heaven) see the sarcasm then maybe they don't really believe deep down in their gut. A true believer wouldn't be able to see how ridiculous it is when viewed from a different angle. To the true believer it would still all make perfect sense. There would be no room for it to be seen as silly.

If someone laughs at something you say or something you believe and you aren't asking why they are laughing that shows you understand why it is laughable. Deep down you know why they are laughing. If you didn't then you would be trying to figure out what is so funny. That string or anyone would take offense just further proves the point that the reason for the laughing is well understood. The believer who responds this way can see how ridiculous the belief is, how deserving of laughter it is, but they don't want to see it so they resent anyone pointing it out.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 8, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> Problem is that "ridiculous" is subjective.  Your reality may be ridiculous to me.  And I am certain mine is ridiculous to you.
> 
> If all we (collectively)ever do is ridicule those of other beliefs.....how can we ever have an intelligent conversation about those beliefs?  The forum would be lame.



I'm not saying ridicule should be used for ridicule's sake. My point is made in this video.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> I can understand why ambush or I see the sarcasm in it. If those who claim to believe in the sky daddy or the big rock candy mountain (that came up when we were getting various irreconcilable descriptions of heaven) see the sarcasm then maybe they don't really believe deep down in their gut. A true believer wouldn't be able to see how ridiculous it is when viewed from a different angle. To the true believer it would still all make perfect sense. There would be no room for it to be seen as silly.
> 
> If someone laughs at something you say or something you believe and you aren't asking why they are laughing that shows you understand why it is laughable. Deep down you know why they are laughing. If you didn't then you would be trying to figure out what is so funny. That string or anyone would take offense just further proves the point that the reason for the laughing is well understood. The believer who responds this way can see how ridiculous the belief is, how deserving of laughter it is, but they don't want to see it so they resent anyone pointing it out.



Gonna have to disagree with you on this point.  I see the humor because I can step outside my own perspective.  That doesn't mean I don't believe.

What would I think of God if I didn't believe in God?  What woudl I think of a resurection claim if I didn't believe a man could do such a thing?  It's the same concept as hearing somebody give a lame alibi for a crime.....so I get it.  And I understand it.

The difference is that I don't ridicule the atheist, or the muslim, or the hindu, or anybody who doesn't see the logic in my faith.  I prefer to have a conversaion about it....and sometimes, I learn something cool.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> I'm not saying ridicule should be used for ridicule's sake. My point is made in this video.



Yes.  But, it is when a person's beliefs (often subjective interpretations of evidence) are put on par with "Elvis is alive" (a claim that can be objectively refuted) that the ridicule becomes counter productive.....because the point is that nothing I say can or will be taken seriously.

And, that point was made with my "pink elephant" posts.  I was really just having fun, and honestly, with a few of them, I laughed till I cried....But, in a sense, I was trying to say "we get it, you think we're dumb, can we stop with pointing it out all the time."


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 8, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> Yes.  But, it is when a person's beliefs (often subjective interpretations of evidence) are put on par with "Elvis is alive" (a claim that can be objectively refuted) that the ridicule becomes counter productive.....because the point is that nothing I say can or will be taken seriously.
> 
> And, that point was made with my "pink elephant" posts.  I was really just having fun, and honestly, with a few of them, I laughed till I cried....But, in a sense, I was trying to say "we get it, you think we're dumb, can we stop with pointing it out all the time."



I would expect a similar response from someone who genuinely believed Elvis was still alive, or they had been abducted by aliens, etc.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> I would expect a similar response from someone who genuinely believed Elvis was still alive, or they had been abducted by aliens, etc.



Careful......he is getting through to you.....resist and flee, weary traveler......the unicorn has your back (he told me so).


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 8, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> Gonna have to disagree with you on this point.  I see the humor because I can step outside my own perspective.  That doesn't mean I don't believe.
> 
> What would I think of God if I didn't believe in God?  What woudl I think of a resurection claim if I didn't believe a man could do such a thing?  It's the same concept as hearing somebody give a lame alibi for a crime.....so I get it.  And I understand it.



You understand the reason for the laughter. That is exactly my point.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> You understand the reason for the laughter. That is exactly my point.



But I do not understand the act itself.  My preference is respectful dialog.


----------



## TheBishop (Aug 8, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> but the condesending remarks and the sometimes total lack of respect we as Christians get in here sometimes from you guys gets old fast.



So does the attitude of righteousness and elitism that is displayed by the Christians on this forum. Some deserve the ridicule they receive.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 8, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> But I do not understand the act itself.  My preference is respectful dialog.



If the laughable doesn't warrant laughter then what does? You see it as an act of meanness. I don't and I don't think that is the motive here. It isn't for me. It's just the appropriate response to the given claim.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> If the laughable doesn't warrant laughter then what does? You see it as an act of meanness. I don't and I don't think that is the motive here. It isn't for me. It's just the appropriate response to the given claim.



Then we should all be good with the pink elephants and unicorns 

Some of y'all seemed to take offense.  But, I do not agree that beliefs are "laughable."  Sometimes, the things which are funny are not appropriate to laugh at...a few examples:

1. At a recent funeral, there was a horrible singer, the worst ever.  While very laughable, I held it in.

2. When I was a kid, an old distinguished man let out some gas at deer camp, I laughed hysterically, and was severely admonished.

3. My son's reasoning abilities.....the world through a 12 yr old's eyes is laughable, but not appropriate when trying to get a point across if the intent is to educate.

That is just off the top of my head.  But, as with a few other things, we may have to agree to disagree.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

TheBishop said:


> So does the attitude of righteousness and elitism that is displayed by the Christians on this forum. Some deserve the ridicule they receive.



I do see some of the elitism.  It goes both ways for sure.  I guess I was just having fun with some of the "shots" sent my way.

Like I said, you fellas seem alright to me.


----------



## TheBishop (Aug 8, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> I do see some of the elitism.  It goes both ways for sure.  I guess I was just having fun with some of the "shots" sent my way.
> 
> Like I said, you fellas seem alright to me.



I've never seen it from you jb.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

TheBishop said:


> I've never seen it from you jb.



Thanks!


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 8, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> Then we should all be good with the pink elephants and unicorns



I'm good with it. I enjoy Lord of the Rings as much as anyone but if you tell me with a straight face that you consider it non-fiction because you have faith and it makes you feel good then that warrants a good laugh. That isn't a belief deserving of any respect at all. If you tell me I'm going to burn for eternity and lack any moral grounding because I don't believe as you, well... you'll have to excuse me for not giving a flip if your feelings get hurt when it is pointed out how baseless and absurd your beliefs are.


----------



## TheBishop (Aug 8, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> I'm good with it. I enjoy Lord of the Rings as much as anyone but if you tell me with a straight face that you consider it non-fiction because you have faith and it makes you feel good then that warrants a good laugh. That isn't a belief deserving of any respect at all. If you tell me I'm going to burn for eternity and lack any moral grounding because I don't believe as you, well... you'll have to excuse me for not giving a flip if your feelings get hurt when it is pointed out how baseless and absurd your beliefs are.



I almost find it my duty to point out its absurdity.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 8, 2012)

And by the way, if in the above scenario you really believed without any doubt and I laughed the natural response would be to ask what in the world was so funny. If you understand why I'm laughing then you know just as well as I do how ridiculous the claim was in the first place.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> If you understand why I'm laughing then you know just as well as I do how ridiculous the claim was in the first place.



I don't see my ability to appreciate your perspective as an indication of a lack of belief.  I just see it as being a little open minded to other perspectives.  Looks like a truce may not be happenning here, but I'm cool with that too.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 8, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> I don't see my ability to appreciate your perspective as an indication of a lack of belief.  I just see it as being a little open minded to other perspectives.  Looks like a truce may not be happenning here, but I'm cool with that too.



Maybe I've failed in communicating the point. If you showed me a picture your friend sent you with a whitetail buck he had killed and I busted out laughing your natural response is going to be to ask me why I'm laughing. If you show me a picture he sent you of a jackalope he killed and you know jackalopes are phony and I bust out laughing you'll probably laugh with me or at least understand my response. Perhaps you'll even crack a joke about the unicorn or pink elephant he killed the week before. If on the other hand you genuinely believe jackalopes are real animals and your friend killed one when I laugh at the picture your natural response should be the same as with the whitetail.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Maybe I've failed in communicating the point. If you showed me a picture your friend sent you with a whitetail buck he had killed and I busted out laughing your natural response is going to be to ask me why I'm laughing. If you show me a picture he sent you of a jackalope he killed and you know jackalopes are phony and I bust out laughing you'll probably laugh with me or at least understand my response. Perhaps you'll even crack a joke about the unicorn or pink elephant he killed the week before. If on the other hand you genuinely believe jackalopes are real animals and your friend killed one when I laugh at the picture your natural response should be the same as with the whitetail.



Or, I know you don't believe in them because you had never seen one, and such a creature could only be mythical, because myths were all you ever heard.....and you were certain this fella was selling snake oil.

I then, knowing your position, would understand completely why you would laugh at the picture of the deer.  

And, the difference with faith is that we all believe something a little different, so those of us who believe, even amongst Christians, are used to hearing things that don't add up to what we believe to be true.

At the very least, if I didn't believe in deer, I wouldn't laugh at you if you took it seriously.   Perhaps we would discuss a lack of evidence, and why such a thing would be impossible in a natural world, I certainly don't see myself making fun of your "horned headed forest fairy"


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 8, 2012)

TheBishop said:


> So does the attitude of righteousness and elitism that is displayed by the Christians on this forum.


This is something that you have conjured up in your own head Bishop. Giving a reasonable argument as to why I don't think all morals are subjective is in no way displaying a righteous or elitist attitude. That's the way my argument makes you feel, you should think about that.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 8, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> Or, I know you don't believe in them because you had never seen one, and such a creature could only be mythical, because myths were all you ever heard.....and you were certain this fella was selling snake oil.
> 
> I then, knowing your position, would understand completely why you would laugh at the picture of the deer.
> 
> ...



JB we regularly have that discussion about the lack of evidence. That's where faith comes to the rescue every time. There is no reasoning with someone who will believe anything on lack of evidence because it helps them sleep better at night.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> JB we regularly have that discussion about the lack of evidence.



That's why I put the  at the end of it.  People believe what they will for whatever reason they will.

In this situation, though, when you declare beliefs "absurd" or whatever, it is you placing your morals and judgement on them.  "Moral" being whatever you interpret to be intellectually honest.  "Judgement" is your  declaration that it is not deserving respect.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 8, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> In this situation, though, when you declare beliefs "absurd" or whatever, it is you placing your morals and judgement on them.  "Moral" being whatever you interpret to be intellectually honest.  "Judgement" is your  declaration that it is not deserving respect.



Absolutely it's a judgment. Not of the person but of their beliefs and their claims. There is nothing unique about that.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Absolutely it's a judgment. Not of the person but of their beliefs and their claims. There is nothing unique about that.



But, isn't judging other people's beliefs what atheists often get upset with Christians about?


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 8, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> But, isn't judging other people's beliefs what atheists often get upset with Christians about?



I don't know where you get that from.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

It seems that one thing that Christians get a bad name for, particularly amongst skeptics, is judging folks' lifestyle, actions, beliefs, etc.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 8, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> It seems that one thing that Christians get a bad name for, particularly amongst skeptics, is judging folks' lifestyle, actions, beliefs, etc.



Well there is certainly disagreement about the nature of those judgments but the bigger problem is the actions taken based on those judgments.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 8, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> ......but the bigger problem is the actions taken based on those judgments.



On that we can agree. 

Good conversation, I am clocking out!


----------



## mtnwoman (Aug 9, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> I think Red makes a great point.  Say a believer wrongs me.  In his mind, feeling like he has been forgiven by the make believe sky daddy is more important to him than being forgiven by me.  What a crock and a gyp.



If you were in my shoes, you'd know that I want forgiveness from the person I sinned against. Some refuse to forgive me but most do. I always say I'm sorry to someone I've hurt. It is also important for God to forgive me as well as the person I sinned against. So I don't get where you're coming from. Does your dad never want forgiveness from a person, only God? If so then I get where you're coming from. If that isn't true, and I don't believe your dad is that way, where do you get this stuff from? Is that the way you feel or something..


----------



## mtnwoman (Aug 9, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Well there is certainly disagreement about the nature of those judgments but the bigger problem is the actions taken based on those judgments.



And I guess you don't judge people? even Christians?
What's the difference? I know, I know, you don't abide by a book written by 'whoever'....so you can judge all you want, eh?


----------



## mtnwoman (Aug 9, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> It seems that one thing that Christians get a bad name for, particularly amongst skeptics, is judging folks' lifestyle, actions, beliefs, etc.



I can agree on that, I've been judged by Christians before, just as much as I have been judged by nonChristians. What's the difference? I mean if you in fact even have morals at all. No one should be judging anyone IMO.


----------



## Asath (Aug 9, 2012)

“Maybe they aren't completely commited to God. Maybe they are forced to go and are not actually believers.. ?”

Ah yes, of course . . . I have such fond memories . . . Age 6 . . . Sitting in Church . . . Completely committed to God in my heart and soul . . . Having made that decision of my own free will . . . Fully understanding that I could have told my parents ‘No,’ I don’t want to go . . . 

What? ???  Who WASN”T forced to go?  Be serious.  Religion depends ENTIRELY on brainwashing the young, and coercing them, BEFORE they reach an age where they might think for themselves . . . 

Forcing sex on children will get you a very long prison term – forcing religion on them seems to be required and encouraged, else religions would cease in one generation.  

NOBODY got a choice of religions – The fictional God didn’t put a menu in front of anyone, like a waiter in a Temple, and say something like, “ Hey, would you like to consume the ideology of the Christians this morning, or do you have a taste for Islamic thought?  We’re having a Special on Judaism, and the Buddhism is freshly caught.”

Be serious.  The entire danger of religion is that one’s own is an accident of birth – and that can’t be denied.  If you had been born someplace else, you’d hold different beliefs because you’d have been raised in different circumstances. Stuck in it, by nothing more than the place and time you were born.  

Think about that for a moment.

ALL ‘believers’ are forced to be ‘believers.’  It isn’t their choice. They were enlisted against their will at the moment of birth, and brainwashed by their ‘elders’ from that moment forward.  You made no ‘commitment’ at all – it was made for you before you were old enough to object, and saying different is lying out loud.  

Walking away from nonsense, as an adult, and learning better – THAT is a choice.  A true choice.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 9, 2012)

Asath said:


> ....one’s own is an accident of birth – and that can’t be denied.  If you had been born someplace else, you’d hold different beliefs because you’d have been raised in different circumstances. Stuck in it, by nothing more than the place and time you were born.



I agree to an extent.  One is able to change systems as they see fit.....as you seemed to do yourself.




Asath said:


> ....ALL ‘believers’ are forced to be ‘believers.’  It isn’t their choice.



I disagree.  I am no more forced to keep and defend my faith than you are yours.  



Asath said:


> .... They were enlisted against their will at the moment of birth, and brainwashed by their ‘elders’ from that moment forward.  You made no ‘commitment’ at all – it was made for you before you were old enough to object, and saying different is lying out loud.



Your argument falls apart the moment you admit that you were raised a believer and walked away......see your last comment below......



Asath said:


> ....Walking away from nonsense, as an adult, and learning better – THAT is a choice.  A true choice.



And then, coming back is also a true choice.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 9, 2012)

mtnwoman said:


> I can agree on that, I've been judged by Christians before, just as much as I have been judged by nonChristians. What's the difference? I mean if you in fact even have morals at all. No one should be judging anyone IMO.



I agree, but I would avoid saying that a few floors up......those fellas defend the judging quite vigorously.


----------



## fish hawk (Aug 9, 2012)

Asath said:


> ALL ‘believers’ are forced to be ‘believers.’  It isn’t their choice. They were enlisted against their will at the moment of birth, and brainwashed by their ‘elders’ from that moment forward.  You made no ‘commitment’ at all – it was made for you before you were old enough to object, and saying different is lying out loud.



Dont know where it is exactly that you get your info but your not nearly as smart as you think you are!!!


----------



## TheBishop (Aug 9, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> This is something that you have conjured up in your own head Bishop. Giving a reasonable argument as to why I don't think all morals are subjective is in no way displaying a righteous or elitist attitude. That's the way my argument makes you feel, you should think about that.



1. I have yet to see anything close to a reasonable arguement by you on this subject.  Not one.  The more we discuss it, the more your arguement comes apart. You vehemently deny the evidence, and points, made by myself and others, ad nausem.

2. It is not something I came up with string, though I wasn't calling you out specifically, your elitism does shine from time to time.  You, however, are quite tolerable, compared to some, and I do enjoy our discussions.  This place would be quite boring without you.


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 9, 2012)

TheBishop said:


> 1. I have yet to see anything close to a reasonable arguement by you on this subject.  Not one.  The more we discuss it, the more your arguement comes apart. You vehemently deny the evidence, and points, made by myself and others, ad nausem.
> 
> 2. It is not something I came up with string, though I wasn't calling you out specifically, your elitism does shine from time to time.  You, however, are quite tolerable, compared to some, and I do enjoy our discussions.  This place would be quite boring without you.



Appreciate that Bishop.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 9, 2012)

mtnwoman said:


> And I guess you don't judge people? even Christians?
> What's the difference? I know, I know, you don't abide by a book written by 'whoever'....so you can judge all you want, eh?



Again I judge their beliefs and their failure to apply the same critical thinking to their own religion that they apply to other religions but not them personally. Think of it as loving the sinner but hating the sin if that helps you relate.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 9, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Think of it as loving the sinner but hating the sin if that helps you relate.





Nice way to turn it around, well done.......not sure the "sinners" appreciate it when coming from Chritians, though.


----------



## Asath (Aug 10, 2012)

Do the Christians appreciate it when the Islamists accuse them of being ‘sinners,’ according to THEIR ideology?  

Show us which of you is correct.

No, don’t tell us – show us.

Failing that, you’re all wrong.  Truth is made by demonstration, not by endless declaration.  Speak all day, if that satisfies your own need, but in the end it is only speaking.  Any thirteen-year-old can do that, and it demonstrates only that they were taught how to talk.  

Got God?  Really?  Then quit rationalizing, justifying, imagining, interpreting, lecturing, bullying, and trying to patronize, and put this God of yours front and center.  Can you do that?

If not, then your God is imaginary.  No way around it.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 10, 2012)

Asath said:


> If not, then your God is imaginary.  No way around it.



.....


----------



## Asath (Aug 13, 2012)

Indeed.  

They tell us of their unicorn, and build cathedrals with our donations to the truth of their unicorn, and construct solemn and ‘holy’ rituals around their unicorn, but not a one of them has EVER actually seen, themselves, nor shown anyone at all that there genuinely IS such a unicorn.

Sad, really, that so many people are so tragically gullible.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 13, 2012)

Asath said:


> Indeed.
> 
> They tell us of their unicorn, and build cathedrals with our donations to the truth of their unicorn, and construct solemn and ‘holy’ rituals around their unicorn, but not a one of them has EVER actually seen, themselves, nor shown anyone at all that there genuinely IS such a unicorn.
> 
> Sad, really, that so many people are so tragically gullible.



The point was / is that when we go to extremes to belittle contrary perspectives (regardless of the value you place on such a perspective) very little productive conversation can occur.

Consider this, I get along with you guys (skeptics) relatively well, and I think we have developed a positive discourse.  I could completely destroy all of that good will with one post diminishing your cognitive abilities based on my perseption of your beliefs.

Now, put yourself in my (our) shoes.  Whether you agree or not, we do not see our beliefs as figments of our imagination.  We believe in a God.  Whether you choose to believe similarly is certainly your personal freedom.  I would never force my beliefs on you or anyone else.  Additionally, I would never belittle your perspective because it was different than my own.

Sometimes, the faithless get caught up in their own self-righteousness as well.  It's interesting to see how belief is handled the same way from opposing perspectives.


----------



## ambush80 (Aug 13, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> The point was / is that when we go to extremes to belittle contrary perspectives (regardless of the value you place on such a perspective) very little productive conversation can occur.
> 
> Consider this, I get along with you guys (skeptics) relatively well, and I think we have developed a positive discourse.  I could completely destroy all of that good will with one post diminishing your cognitive abilities based on my perseption of your beliefs.
> 
> ...




If I told people I believed in a four armed, blue skinned creature that rides on an eagle and lives on the Vaikuntha Planets 209,600,000 miles above Satyaloka, I would be met with snickers and chuckles.  Unless, maybe, I was in India.  

Those chuckles would be deserved and appropriate.


----------



## fish hawk (Aug 13, 2012)

Asath said:


> Indeed.
> 
> They tell us of their unicorn, and build cathedrals with our donations to the truth of their unicorn, and construct solemn and ‘holy’ rituals around their unicorn, but not a one of them has EVER actually seen, themselves, nor shown anyone at all that there genuinely IS such a unicorn.
> 
> Sad, really, that so many people are so tragically gullible.


Hey man thats all well and good that you think like that but I'm finding myself bored to tears ....It's like a broken record or something,the same thing over and over and over again!!!!Hit us with something different,maybe at least some caps,big bold fonts even some colors or really go out on a limb and shock us with an emoticon!!!!!


----------



## fish hawk (Aug 13, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> If I told people I believed in a four armed, blue skinned creature that rides on an eagle and lives on the Vaikuntha Planets 209,600,000 miles above Satyaloka, I would be met with snickers and chuckles.  Unless, maybe, I was in India.
> 
> Those chuckles would be deserved and appropriate.


Something new???......The same thing over and over and over again.I'm gonna cry a river hear!!!


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 13, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> If I told people I believed in a four armed, blue skinned creature that rides on an eagle and lives on the Vaikuntha Planets 209,600,000 miles above Satyaloka, I would be met with snickers and chuckles.  Unless, maybe, I was in India.
> 
> Those chuckles would be deserved and appropriate.



ok.


----------



## ambush80 (Aug 13, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> ok.



Do you believe in Vishnu?  What do you make of people who do?  Do you think they're wrong?  Would you tell them what an odd notion Vishnu is?  Do you think there is ANY possibility that the four armed, blue skinned god exists?


----------



## ambush80 (Aug 13, 2012)

fish hawk said:


> Something new???......The same thing over and over and over again.I'm gonna cry a river hear!!!



Nothing new on your end.  You're stuck in the antiquity.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 13, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> Do you believe in Vishnu??



No.  I believe in God.  Some Christians see an angry God.  Some see a loving God.  Some envision God as an old fashioned preacher sitting on a huge golden throne, some see a hippy in sandals.  Many people see God quite differently.  Even within Christianity people have different views of God......I assume it is a human condition to put a spin on the higher power to make him understandable to us......then we get into Jesus, and it goes in a whole different direction.

But, the logical origins could be similar.



ambush80 said:


> What do you make of people who do?



I think they believe in Vishnu.



ambush80 said:


> Do you think they're wrong?



Interesting question.......I think Jesus is the "way."  But that doesn't mean people haven;t been putting their own spin on God as long as there have been people.  So, no, they are not wrong that there is "a God."  



ambush80 said:


> Would you tell them what an odd notion Vishnu is?



Absolutely not.



ambush80 said:


> Do you think there is ANY possibility that the four armed, blue skinned god exists?



God could be whatever God is.  I could be wrong, and God could look like this.....

But, I believe I am right that there is a God.  And I believe I am right about Jesus.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 13, 2012)

And, really, you are justifying being rude to folks.  Regardless of what you think of their beliefs, I just think there is a better way of convincing folks you have it all figured out.


----------



## hunter rich (Aug 13, 2012)

try this...
http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/rush/totem.html


----------



## fish hawk (Aug 13, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> Nothing new on your end.  You're stuck in the antiquity.



Thats lame Bro!!!


----------

