“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#597485 Oct 2, 2013
AnnieJ wrote:
I heard the same sermons preached from "the church" that all of these people did...I read the same Bible...said the same prayers. In the end it was my choice what I took away from that and how I used it.
That's consistent with what I was saying. The sermons don't make people good. Good people will filter them in a positive way, but lesser people will hear a different message which will facilitate something undesirable.
AnnieJ wrote:
Let's take for example the word "pervert" that some Christians use to describe homosexuals. They use that word because they choose to...they don't have to. Epi...Senecus...OYE...Al Garcia...heard the same messages preached by "the church"...they choose to not use those words.
There's a fine example right there. Some people will reject the homophobic message, and others will justify their willingness to hate using it. The point is that the church is promoting an unkind and unfair point of view, and the fact that there are good Christians is not an endorsement of the church, but of those people and what they bring into the church.
AnnieJ wrote:
They all heard the message that we "unbelievers" will burn in hell...some brandish that phrase around as often as they use "God Bless"...yet many would never dream of wearing that t-shirt.
That's yet another example of my point. The church's message is a destructive one dressed in a little sugar coating ("Love the sinful perverts that nauseate our Lord"), which some people reject, and others gulp down voraciously.

Judged:

14

14

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#597486 Oct 2, 2013
AnnieJ wrote:
I heard those messages over and over...I never bought in to that...maybe I didn't make a very good Christian because I didn't...I don't know.
No, you weren't a very good Christian. You were asked to submit to the authority and wisdom of the church's teaching on faith, but you refused.
AnnieJ wrote:
Do I think that "the church" plays a role in all of this...yes...but only for those that would condemn another with or without religion...IMO...they use "faith" to justify their assholiness.
Did you think that we were in disagreement? The form of your answer seems to be that of a rebuttal. But I think we're on the same page.
AnnieJ wrote:
I could list many factors that came in to play in my decision to leave the church but the main one is...I could not look at my fellow man and see him in the terms that "the church" wanted me to see him as. I could not believe in a God that would want me to.
Well done.

Judged:

14

14

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#597487 Oct 2, 2013
AnnieJ wrote:
Even while I was a practicing Christian...I never saw God in the words printed in a book...the god that it spoke of was alien to me. I did however experience God as I walked through open fields...wandered down paths through the woods...cool breezes on my face...the kindness of a stranger...and even water droplets hitting the surface of a mud puddle...this was the God that I knew...not some monster that would torture someone because they happened to think differently.
You were having spiritual experiences that clearly not only didn't depend on any church, but required you to disregard it. I have the same experiences. The difference is that you prefer to understand them in terms of a god. I will wait for evidence of such a thing before I insert it into my understanding of such experiences.

That's not a big difference between us. It only becomes significant if that god concept results in the church shaping your thought. From the outside, a god concept is really just a personification of nature, what some people might call Mother Nature. You can be grateful to that if you prefer, and I will be grateful to the same thing without the name.

Judged:

14

14

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#597488 Oct 2, 2013
AnnieJ wrote:
I came to this thread to hopefully share what we have in common and to better understand our differences...it hasn't worked out real well to be honest with you. I keep hoping.
You're doing that now. I think that a lot of posters don't recognize how much quality discussion goes on here notwithstanding all of the fighting. Many busy people with active minds come back here day in and day out. There is a reason for that. The thread offers them something that at some level they understand has value.

I think that you also know that only some of the posters present contribute to that. It's not hard to imagine that if you weeded out that contingent and left only the others, that the thread would pall quickly for you and you would leave it for good. Isn't that correct? If so, then as I said, you understand at some level that there is something of value here.
AnnieJ wrote:
Christianity doesn't have to die...it just needs to become a little kinder...more compassionate...show more empathy.
I don't think the church has any interest in that. It will consistently pull in the opposite direction. If you want to see more compassion and empathy, you need less church influence. I think that you might be missing the fact that the church is Christianity. You seem to have little good to say about the one, but find value in the other. Let people be "Christian" without the church, meaning let them pursue their spirituality without the destructive message.

Isn't this the kind of discussion you come here for?

Judged:

14

14

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#597489 Oct 2, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
I believe sweating is a chemical reaction ...
Phase changes of matter (liquid to gas or the reverse) are physical changes, not chemical changes.
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
... that resulted in heat being applied to our bodies and since our body's normal average temperature is approx 98 degrees, our bodies control our inner temperatures by sweating on the outside - similar to a cold can of soda pop sitting in a room of 75 degrees - condensation occurs and the can "sweats".
Those are pretty much opposites. If you're interested, I can elaborate:

Physiological sweating is an active process (meaning that it requires the expenditure of energy) by which heat is transferred from the body to the ambient environment by the evaporation of liquid from the surface of the body (meaning it becomes water vapor).

The other is a passive process in which the beads of liquid condense onto the can from water vapor in the atmosphere as heat is transferred from the ambient environment into it.

Judged:

14

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#597490 Oct 2, 2013
scaritual wrote:
Any institution that teaches death is a deserved or appropriate response for - non belief - a state of mind - should be eliminated.
I think it's worse than that. It teaches that endless torture is an appropriate reaction from what it also teaches is a just, merciful,compassionate and infinitely loving god. How can that not damage ones understanding of those qualities?

Judged:

14

14

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#597491 Oct 2, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Nobody's going to fool you, huh? You chose religion AND the Republicans. Well played. About half of America thinks just like you. Good luck.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Thanks, BooBoo. The way the Democrats are running this country into the ground, we all will need some luck...
It's always inspiring to hear the man on the street share his well informed opinions. Thanks for sharing yours.

By the way, which do you think is the better plan and more American, the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare?

Judged:

14

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#597492 Oct 2, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree. An echo doesn't twist your words.


Did you ever wonder why an echo, which is a reflection of sound, is not reversed like light reflected from a mirror?

Also, why does a mirror seem to reverse the image along the vertical axis but not along the horizontal axis? That is, why do letters with vertical symmetry like A, M, W, and Y look the same in a mirror, but the ones with horizontal symmetry like C, D and E look backwards? Why does the mirror seem to flip letters left to right but not top to bottom?

Incidentally, if you're interested, there is a third kind of symmetry in letters besides horizontal and vertical symmetry: rotational symmetry. Letters like N and Z look reversed whether you flip them left to right or top to bottom, but look unchanged if you rotate them 180.

Some letters have all three types, like H, I, O and X.

The same treatment can be applied to words. Even though the letters in the word "HI" each possess all three types of symmetry, the word itself has only horizontal symmetry. If you print it on clear paper and flip the paper top to bottom, it still says, "HI". But of you flip the paper left to right or rotate it 180, it says "IH"

A word like NOON has only rotational symmetry. It can be rotated 180 and look the same, but will be changed with a vertical or horizontal turn of the clear page.

And a word like MOM has only vertical (left/right) symmetry. Flipping it upside down or giving it a 180 rotation gives you WOW

HAH has horizontal and rotational symmetry, but if you flip it over, the "A" becomes nothing.

Which brings us to the longest word that possesses all three types of symmetry, a proper name well known in Mexico: OXXO. It's our 7-Eleven

https://www.google.com.mx/search...

That's mind candy. Enjoy.

Judged:

14

14

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Religion kills”

Since: Jun 13

Horse Trailer

#597493 Oct 2, 2013
Epiphany2 wrote:
Is History boring?
They used to use urine to tan animal skins, so families used to all pee in a pot & then once a day it was taken & sold to the tannery.....if you had to do this to survive you were "Piss Poor" But worse than that were the really poor folk who couldn't even afford to buy a pot.....they "didn't have a pot to piss in" & were the lowest of the low. The next time you're washing your hands and complain because the water temperature isn't just how you like it, think about how things used to be. Here are some facts about the 1500s:-
Most people got married in June because they took their yearly bath in May, and they still smelled pretty good by June. However, since they were starting to smell ....... brides carried a bouquet of flowers to hide the body odour. Hence the custom today of carrying a bouquet when getting Married.
Baths consisted of a big tub filled with hot water. The man of the house had the privilege of the nice clean water, then all the other sons and men, then the women and finally the children. Last of all the babies. By then the water was so dirty you could actually lose someone in it.. Hence the saying, "Don't throw the baby out with the Bath water!"
Houses had thatched roofs-thick straw-piled high, with no wood underneath. It was the only place for animals to get warm, so all the cats and other small animals (mice, bugs) lived in the roof. When it rained it became slippery and sometimes the animals would slip and fall off the roof... Hence the saying "It's raining cats and dogs."
There was nothing to stop things from falling into the house. This posed a real problem in the bedroom where bugs and other droppings could mess up your nice clean bed. Hence, a bed with big posts and a sheet hung over the top afforded some protection. That's how canopy beds came into existence.
The floor was dirt. Only the wealthy had something other than dirt. Hence the saying, "Dirt poor."
The wealthy had slate floors that would get slippery in the winter when wet, so they spread thresh (straw) on floor to help keep their footing. As the winter wore on, they added more thresh until, when you opened the door, it would all start slipping outside. A piece of wood was placed in the entrance-way. Hence: a thresh hold.
In those old days, they cooked in the kitchen with a big kettle that always hung over the fire... Every day they lit the fire and added things to the pot. They ate mostly vegetables and did not get much meat. They would eat the stew for dinner, leaving leftovers in the pot to get cold overnight and then start over the next day. Sometimes stew had food in it that had been there for quite a while. Hence the rhyme: Peas porridge hot, peas porridge cold, peas porridge in the pot nine days old.
Sometimes they could obtain pork, which made them feel quite special. When visitors came over, they would hang up their bacon to show off. It was a sign of wealth that a man could, "bring home the bacon." They would cut off a little to share with guests and would all sit around and "chew the fat".
Those with money had plates made of pewter. Food with high acid content caused some of the lead to leach onto the food, causing lead poisoning death. This happened most often with tomatoes, so for the next 400 years or so, tomatoes were considered poisonous.
Bread was divided according to status. Workers got the burnt bottom of the loaf, the family got the middle, and guests got the top, or the upper crust.
**Continued
All fascinating stuff. Thanks, Epi.

Judged:

12

12

12

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Religion kills”

Since: Jun 13

Horse Trailer

#597494 Oct 2, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
And one Christian infects another.
RR's homophobia is being picked up by his pal Skum.
Skum's "bathhouse" posts are intended to "brand" me as a homosexual.
Not that I care, but it shows you the true nature of these god-fearers.
Some men would take that as a real insult. Personally from some of the ones I know, I reckon he could call you something much much worse.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#597495 Oct 2, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>I think the point thats being missed is that there is a big difference between knowledge of a name coming from being recorded in a book and the existence of something having a boof for its origin. Gravity exists. If someone didnt think to name it gravity it would still exist. But because someone did that is what it is called. God would exist without the Bible. And if nobody wrote down Jesus told us it is God the Father we might not know to call him that but He would still exist. Jesus lived and preached what has been written in the Bible. Historians outside the faith confirm he taught and his followers believed him to be the Son of God. We know about it becsuse of a book, much like we know anything about history. But God nor Christianity came from a book. But that is how we learned of them
I think the point was that even if there is a god named Jesus, that unless he returns again or we meet him in an afterlife, there is no way to know that without a book or its oral equivalent, word of mouth.

By contrast, the effects of gravity are known intuitively by all conscious creatures with a sense of up and down and an expectation that dropped objects fall. An infant cringing at the sight of a precipice knows this even without language or the ability to conceptualize abstractly.

An unbeliever would say that that is because gravity is real, and the god a construct of the imagination.

We expect real things that are not localized to a particular time and space - things like time, space, and gravity - are known immediately by all sentient creatures everywhere capable of dealing with reality as if there is a here and a there, a now and a then, and an up and a down, whether they can conceive of such things in the abstract and give them names or not.

You mentioned history. The elements of history not witnessed directly also cannot be known without a book or an oral tradition. That's because they were localized events involving localized people - things that may have actually occurred at one time in a particular place, but no longer exist today.

Is Jesus a mortal from the past of some region like the rest of history, or an eternal, ubiquitous, and universal principle like gravity? If the former, he can only be known by a book.

Even if there is a god that we can intuit directly like time,space, and gravity, we cannot know it is Jesus without the book.

Judged:

14

14

12

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Bongo

Brentwood, NY

#597496 Oct 2, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
And one Christian infects another.
RR's homophobia is being picked up by his pal Skum.
Skum's "bathhouse" posts are intended to "brand" me as a homosexual.
Not that I care, but it shows you the true nature of these god-fearers.
Being a woman fearer and head counsel for nambla brands you more than skombys observation of your bathhouse escapades. Perhaps you should take Ians lead and attempt to make peace with skomby?

Judged:

14

14

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#597497 Oct 2, 2013

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#597498 Oct 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Maybe he thinks that DNA didn't exist until it was discovered. Maybe not, after all dab is in a book, it MUST'VE originated from that book and didn't exist until the book was written.
Maybe...
DNA is just the name for the heritable principle that has been known to exist for centuries. Even the ancients understood that something in the parents accounted for the qualities of the offspring. It just took time to discover cells, then nuclei, then chromosomes, then deoxyribonucleic acid, then its structure. But the concept of a gene is ancient. It's etymology is related to that of the word Genesis, but it refers to the genesis of a single organism rather than of the "creation".

Let's apply this to the genesis of the universe (cosmogenesis) and the genesis of life (abiogenesis). By analogy, the universe is the effect of something, something. You call that something a god named Jesus who created it all in six days, and who possesses certain specific characteristics.

That god isn't comparable to DNA, which was found, studied, and named, and the reality of one doesn't support the reality of the other.

Judged:

14

14

12

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#597499 Oct 2, 2013

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#597500 Oct 2, 2013

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#597501 Oct 2, 2013
Then you will be arrested, persecuted, killed. You will be hated all over the world because of your allegiance to me. And many will turn away from me and betray and hate each other. And many false prophets will appear and will lead many people astray. Sin will be rampant everywhere and the love of many will grow cold. But those who endure to the end will be saved. And the good news about the Kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world so that all nations will hear it and then finally the end will come. Matthew 24:11

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#597502 Oct 2, 2013
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, I'm continually amazed at the very narrow viewpoint concerning the knowledge of the religion by the practitioners.
Any subject that I'm interested in or a subject that I claim to hold some sort of 'expertise' in, I endeavor to know as much as I can about, and I try to draw that knowledge from multiple sources.
Not just one source.
Due diligence and research of ALL evidence is required if one is seeking the truth.

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: May 11

UK

#597503 Oct 2, 2013
lil whispers wrote:
Then you will be arrested, persecuted, killed. You will be hated all over the world because of your allegiance to me. And many will turn away from me and betray and hate each other. And many false prophets will appear and will lead many people astray. Sin will be rampant everywhere and the love of many will grow cold. But those who endure to the end will be saved. And the good news about the Kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world so that all nations will hear it and then finally the end will come. Matthew 24:11
...most modern day cults have that in their literature too.

A good persecution complex is essential for cult cohesion.

Judged:

12

12

12

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#597504 Oct 2, 2013
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
BTW, what you're doing now is the red herring fallacy.
We aren't talking about George Washington, and there is evidence that George Washington was a real person - outside - of books.
We're talking about your deity belief.
There is no evidence outside of books concerning your deity belief. Not for the Jesus! nor the Yahweh! If those books(the bible, OT/NT) did not exist, your deities would have nothing to say they existed.
I've been through this with you before,
G
Yup, and there's evidence of Jesus outside of the Bible, too. You refuse to see it and accept it.

Ah well

Judged:

12

12

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 6 min Oxbow 542,111
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 8 min Lost In Transition 173,641
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 14 min Chris Clearwater 738,731
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 15 min Porkpie Hat 259,213
How to get 600MB with Just #100 On Airtel 17 min Kalamo 2
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 21 min An NFL Fan 118,217
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 26 min WasteWater 4,465
Sims 4 Key Generator (Oct '13) 5 hr Chlo-chan 149
•••
Enter and win $5000

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••