Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel

Full story: Newsday 69,378
Safety pins and screws are still lodged in 15-year-old Ami Ortiz's body three months after he opened a booby-trapped gift basket sent to his family. Full Story

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#70696 Apr 1, 2014
former res wrote:
...So maybe I can babysit Frijoles kid(s) one day.$10 cash/ hour
Are you forgetting about the whole "atheists eat babies" meme? Pink elephant believing nannies is one thing, but baby eating atheists?
Abolish The Fed

Washington, DC

#70697 Apr 1, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought you were a sort of a libertarian? You don't believe in separation of church and state?
You may have had a bad experience with atheists. You'll find believers do a lot more preaching than nonbelievers.
This bad experience may make you turn away from atheism.
I don't bring it up much as the believers may take a torch to my house.
More so I don't believe in aggression, so who is the aggressor in the separation issue?
former res

Cheshire, CT

#70698 Apr 1, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
There is a difference between seeing God in everything, and having God talk to you. One is less theistic than the other. I admit you might not have caught the distinction since you are not familiar with the nuances of Hasidic vs normative Jewish theology. In my circles, the former is still within the realm of normal.
I could have sworn though you made fun of fundies who saw Jesus on their toast, but I could easily be wrong about that.

But I can understand seeing the wonder and grace of life everywhere, the thrill of being alive in such a beautiful world, smelling the roses and so on.

Some may call the seeing god. May or may not be the same thing. Obviously can't say for sure.
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
But bottom line, I would expect a nanny to be able to perform her day to day nanny duties without having to consult with God. I would define that as normal. What she(he) does during formal worship is not my business.
Absolutely.

But having limited to data to go on, as in most employment interview situations, was just probing what flags might be cause for alarm, mental stability-wise.
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
I think there are 2 issues here. What I think of as normal. And whether what I may feel is normal still may appear as within the realm of pink elephant to you.
Now you're at the crux of the issue of what I was attempting (admittedly clumsily) to determine: where is that line, for you vs me?
former res

Cheshire, CT

#70699 Apr 1, 2014
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>
When you say atheist you mean agnostic-atheist? Don't you know that agnostic atheism is part of agnosticism and not of atheism as you and CoR thought?
By the way you gave the defitition of weak agnosticm, rather than agnostic atheist..
It's like Steve Martin used to say, "Those French have a different word for everything!"

I only recently learned this newer nomenclature. People use different words but as long as we know what we're talking about, more or less.

I don't state there is no god, because I don't know that. I only state that I myself do not believe in god. The belief switch is turned off until further information is received.


<quoted text>
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>
Yup. On a second thought I retire my affermationn of agnosticism being a conclusion .
Excellent!

<quoted text>
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>
Never understood the mentality of a believer
.
Your or me? Or you and me?

How do you describe yourself, if you do at all, or care to?
former res

Cheshire, CT

#70700 Apr 1, 2014
Cult of Reason wrote:
<quoted text>
Another negative thing about faith (at least in regards to Xtianity), is that if you don't have it, then you must be doing something wrong. I.e. it's your fault. You have a cold heart, you're angry at god, you're angry at the church, you had a bad experience, you're being selfish, yada..yada..yada... It's unfathomable to this people that someone can approach the problem rationally and with introspection and come to a conclusion different than them.
A few years back my older born-again brother made me promise to try "and open myself" up to what he calls his own gift. I even agreed to watch a few hours of a tv preacher that he likes.(I wanted to kill myself....but I did it...)

I think I really tried. Really don't know what else I could have done.

But it's true, you can easily start to wonder if you have some parts missing why you can't have this thing they have.

Unfortunately he won't give it up so it affects things negatively. Not just me, he says we're all going to hell.
former res

Cheshire, CT

#70701 Apr 1, 2014
Cult of Reason wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you forgetting about the whole "atheists eat babies" meme? Pink elephant believing nannies is one thing, but baby eating atheists?
To me they all taste like chicken.

Very young, very tender chicken!
former res

Cheshire, CT

#70702 Apr 1, 2014
Abolish The Fed wrote:
<quoted text>
More so I don't believe in aggression, so who is the aggressor in the separation issue?
Make sure you don't practice dissent.

It's incompatible with democracy and patriotism.

Answer: The ones who are FOR separation. As stated in the Constitution.

ps..I think you might be a troll. What say you?

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#70703 Apr 1, 2014
Cult of Reason wrote:
<quoted text>
Another negative thing about faith (at least in regards to Xtianity), is that if you don't have it, then you must be doing something wrong. I.e. it's your fault. You have a cold heart, you're angry at god, you're angry at the church, you had a bad experience, you're being selfish, yada..yada..yada... It's unfathomable to this people that someone can approach the problem rationally and with introspection and come to a conclusion different than them.
Maimonedes, famous Jewish commentator and philosopher, argued his way INTO the problem at hand, solely using reason.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#70704 Apr 1, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
I could have sworn though you made fun of fundies who saw Jesus on their toast, but I could easily be wrong about that.
I did. I reserve the right to be multi dimensional and contradict myself at will (only human you know), however, what I meant by "see" was not see in the theistic sense. More like a state of generalized awareness.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#70705 Apr 1, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think we were ever taught to struggle with our faith but I know many Catholics (lay folks/priests/Jesuits/nuns) do struggle and struggle mightily. The church don't always make it easy to love her.
I would be shocked if there wasnt a legitimized tradition of struggle within your religion. I would argue that nothing comes easy. And nothing is ever settled. Whether the culture encourages it on the lay level is a different question.

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#70706 Apr 1, 2014
Cult of Reason wrote:
<quoted text>
In the US, we often abbreviate agnostic atheist as simply atheist since a vast majority of atheists are, in fact, agnostic atheists (as opposed to gnostic atheists). Very few people are foolish enough to claim to be gnostic atheists.
If the vast majority of atheists in US are agnostic atheists, then it means those vast majority weren't atheists but part of a branch of agnosticism, hence agnostic. The fact that you label yourself atheists is wrong, and misleading then.

Even your source Wiki labels agnostic atheism as a branch of agnosticism.

Since there are so many branches withtin atheism and agnosticism sometimes it's pretty tough to delineate a border between them.
artfulman

Pittsburgh, PA

#70707 Apr 1, 2014

Heres the real Persecution-its real

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#70708 Apr 1, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
I think it could be but not for most atheists.
I can't point to a study but would guess most atheists won't tell you they were raped by a priest and that turned them atheist.
I think most would say they have no evidence for the existence of god so they choose not to believe. Same goes for the Easter bunny. Santa Claus etc
And don't forget the pink elephants. I'm atheist on them too, for the record.
So maybe I can babysit Frijoles kid(s) one day.$10 cash/ hour
Never said most of the atheists, I made a generic statement when I said that.
.
former res wrote:
<quoted text>That's a word that means believing in something without any evidence.
Otherwise faith would not be needed to believe in it.
Correct?
Still it's only one reason why all believers believe. But on a step back there could be several reasons why a person choose to believe.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#70709 Apr 1, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
Now you're at the crux of the issue of what I was attempting (admittedly clumsily) to determine: where is that line, for you vs me?
I think I provided my line. I imagine its not the same for you?

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#70710 Apr 1, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
It's like Steve Martin used to say, "Those French have a different word for everything!"
I only recently learned this newer nomenclature. People use different words but as long as we know what we're talking about, more or less.
Well, some time ago I introduced in this thread that terminology - agnostic atheism with its definition. You then stated you fit in it.
former res wrote:
<quoted text>I don't state there is no god, because I don't know that. I only state that I myself do not believe in god. The belief switch is turned off until further information is received.
Well, at the question do you believe in god, I say define god and tell me what do you know about it then I tell you. Second I find odds with the word believe. Believe means to think that something is correct, right or real But thinking something is correct doesn't mean it is. If you know something is correct you have more solid basis than a thought. So I don't think nor I can't think the existence of something that supposedly created the universe(s) and any thing in it should be based on a thought but to objective evidence(s).

I reject the spaghetti monster and any anthropopathic, anthropomorphic gods with the same criteria I can reject the existence of an invisible teapot that gravitate between our planet and Mars and that make a revolution around the sun.
former res wrote:
<quoted text>Excellent!
You sound so Montgomery Burns. LOL
former res wrote:
<quoted text>Your or me? Or you and me?
Me. I don't understand what faith is good for. It doesn't prove anything, aside the lack of evidence(s) fooled by some questionable as well as objective fact(s), opinion(s) and conviction(s).
former res wrote:
<quoted text>How do you describe yourself, if you do at all, or care to?
I don't describe myself nor I care do it. Others do that for me.

If you want you can try to define my position by reading what I wrote at half of this post.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#70711 Apr 1, 2014
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>
If the vast majority of atheists in US are agnostic atheists, then it means those vast majority weren't atheists but part of a branch of agnosticism, hence agnostic. The fact that you label yourself atheists is wrong, and misleading then.
Even your source Wiki labels agnostic atheism as a branch of agnosticism.
Since there are so many branches withtin atheism and agnosticism sometimes it's pretty tough to delineate a border between them.
Again, the terms are not interchangeable. One (agnostic/gnostic) pertains to knowledge and is used as a modifier to another (theist/atheist) which pertains to belief. Related terms, but obviously different.

But I agree, lots of terms do add to the confusion, and getting hung up on labels is counter-productive. That's why to simplify, if someone states a lack of belief in deities, we simply refer to them as atheists, regardless of their stance on knowledge. If you read "The God Delusion", Richard Dawkins spends some time on this topic.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#70712 Apr 1, 2014
Cult of Reason wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, the terms are not interchangeable. One (agnostic/gnostic) pertains to knowledge and is used as a modifier to another (theist/atheist) which pertains to belief. Related terms, but obviously different.
But I agree, lots of terms do add to the confusion, and getting hung up on labels is counter-productive..
I agree.

It may be more relevant to Christianity, which puts emphasis on belief, but not as relevant to other religious systems. Though, not surprisingly others have adopted the schema and applied it to these others areas regardless.

For example, I can be described as a panentheist, but is pantheism compatible with atheism? or not? It doesnt make a lot of sense to apply the schema. Evidence- the silly conversations I have been having with Joel.
Abolish The Fed

Stamford, CT

#70713 Apr 1, 2014
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
Make sure you don't practice dissent.
It's incompatible with democracy and patriotism.
Answer: The ones who are FOR separation. As stated in the Constitution.
ps..I think you might be a troll. What say you?
Do you have any facts that the constitution is applicable?

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#70714 Apr 1, 2014
In future, I will quote extensively from Richard Dawkins "The God Delusion" to show all the logical fallacies. There are plenty of logical errors in his book. Besides, most of the evidence that he presents to support his case can be shown inaccurate or fraudulent.

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#70715 Apr 1, 2014
REASON FOR THE GROWTH OF ATHEISM

Judaism, Christianity and Islam are the 3 major worldviews that're mainly responsible for misrepresenting the reality since the sages of these religions were men of ignorance and the later day followers made a bigger mess of the faiths which has caused people everywhere to view the scriptures of these religions with disgust. No one sensible wishes to submit to or to acknowledge an extra-cosmic G-d who creates from nothing and who judges people like a tyrant and who orders genocides and who orders human/animal sacrifices and who orders that babies be eaten or bashed to death and who orders that those who worship other Gods be put to death and so on. Such crude religions are on the retreat everywhere and Judaism, the mother of all abominations, has lost most of its adherents to atheism or to Eastern mystical faiths. Islam would have faced the same fate as Judaism but the death penalty for apostasy prevents many Muslims from quitting the faith. Christianity has lost tens of millions of believers because of the nonsensical teachings of the church.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Pinos Altos Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Grant Co.---rotten corner of NM (Sep '11) 13 hr Insect Trust 30
Dr. Twana Sparks (Dec '09) Sep 11 FEDUPw-dumb-mean-... 45
Their view: No clear gain in dispute over Falkl... (Mar '10) Sep 7 Tony 608
To ban or not to ban - the future of plastic ba... Sep 5 Yes 11
Mimbres Valley woman still missing Sep 5 Raquel Placencio 7
Review: High Country Collision Specialist Jul '14 Jeff 1
NM Republican Martinez claims NM governor's seat (Nov '10) May '14 kyle richards 232
•••

Flash Flood Watch for Grant County was issued at September 18 at 5:40AM MDT

•••
Pinos Altos Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Pinos Altos Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Pinos Altos People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Pinos Altos News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Pinos Altos
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••