Why I’m no longer a Christian

“Live Love Laugh”

Since: Aug 07

Rings of Saturn Emporium

#422557 Nov 25, 2012
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Well, they're both, erm, detached...
That's the thing about skulls...they are usually missing the rest of the body. That can limit information. But I was primarily interested because all I have is this rather mundane nail collection and thought I'd start something more interesting.

“Live Love Laugh”

Since: Aug 07

Rings of Saturn Emporium

#422558 Nov 25, 2012
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>Apologetics on Ice! Coming soon to your town....;)
And here I thought the package had already arrived. Now you're telling me there's more?

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#422559 Nov 25, 2012
water_nymph wrote:
<quoted text> ....How you present information here and apply your education to daily dealings with others is the only thing I actually care about.....
My training in history and anthropology goes towards proof of my claims.
Proof is something that is always asked here but rarely given. Then when it is...wham you get whacked.

I have provided more evidence to support my scholarly opinions than there is proof offered for any theology, let alone the amatuer opinions and fabrications on both sides of the aisle.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#422560 Nov 25, 2012
water_nymph wrote:
<quoted text> ...I dismiss quite a bit of the information given here because it's the same apologetics I spent 50 years learning and am still trying to undo the damage.....
Apologetics is simply the deceitful art of making the Bible say whatever you want it to.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#422561 Nov 25, 2012
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You remind me of Brother Marine. He was (is?) a Christian, very interested in engaging in theological discussions. I had some interesting exchanges with him. He left, ostensibly to study theology formally, saying he would return later. He lived in upstate New York.
It's nice to meet you. I'm Catcher, a nonbeliever.
I've never studied theology formally. History yes. You say he lived (lives) in upstate NY? Interesting. I live in southern NY near the NY/PA line. I wonder if he's the goober that I had issues with when I had my own apologetics web page. He called himself "Militant Monk" or some such nonsense. I gave him permission to use my material in his "debates" but somebody else informed me that he was basically copying and pasting my stuff as his own. Plagiarism. We apologists do use the same material, but sadly most people don't research it for themselves. I however, have. Nice to meet you. Be warned. I have an ego.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#422562 Nov 25, 2012
water_nymph wrote:
<quoted text> I only have one word for this comment: Resurrectionist.
Tide with Bleach linked a post to Katlin someone. He thinks that is also someone amed Brother Main. Although I saw Catcher ask Resurrectionist if he is Brother Maine. But it was Tide that linked it

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#422563 Nov 25, 2012
water_nymph wrote:
<quoted text>He is still recovering and doing well by every Dr's standard. He has several more surgeries to go but has put those off until his wife more recovered from her transplant. Thank all those who asked.
Ok thanks for the update. Will make a reminder to keep in prayer and gonna share this with WSJLM

(T) Peace

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#422564 Nov 25, 2012
Resurrectionologist wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe we should debate the JFK assassination. Thanks! I know I picked an excellent analogy, but not for the reasons you stated.
My point that you're conveniently ignoring is that a reliable history can be written from a small number of sources so long as those primary sources or secondary sources are still alive to relate what they saw and heard in relation to an event. Hearsay isn't allowed in criminal court, but it's almost essential in recording history so long as it's in close relation to the original sources of information. Like I said. Your expectation are way too high, either out of ignorance or convenience. Go ask a bunch of historians. I'm not talking about people who just remember facts. I'm talking about people who analyze material and sources using established criteria.
Alright, that works.

You go ahead and survey a random and representative set of unaffiliated historians on the relative quality and reliability of NT sources in toto, and get back to us on the results, won't you?

While we're waiting, what's your guess about the general lean?

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#422565 Nov 25, 2012
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey I don't let what other people are doing or happen to be talking about at the time get in the way of what I feel like saying! LOL
Good to see ya too!
(T) Peace
Well, carry on, by all means. Was there some history behind the post on another thread, maybe, or was it something you recently read about, or...?

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#422566 Nov 25, 2012
T-Town Clown wrote:
<quoted text>you're dumb
i'm dumb.

Oh! That damned jedi mind trick!

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#422567 Nov 25, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> No. It is selective skeptism which is not rational. A skeptism applied to others but exempted from their own conclusions. Or, perhaps they do not have any? Everything is a big question mark. Unbelief is not validated by attacking Theism only. It seems few here ask themselves, what if i am wrong? Only assume Christians are wrong or arrogant. Actually kitty, i do not care to respond to your posts because nothing sinks in!
A pure, unbiased skeptic position would hold that no claim, from any source, should be accepted without evidence - including one's own personal claims.

Such a stance would require evidence from any believer - but believers are incapable of presenting non-subjectively experienced evidence. All believers in all religions rely upon their religion's construction of human experience to interpret, filter and understand their spirituality.

Believer's experiences are real. They're valid ways of understanding life. But that doesn't make them objective descriptions of the reality outside the personal experience of reality. Your experience does not dictate my experience (and vice versa). Depending on the disconnect between our two cultures, your personal experience may not have much to say to mine at all.

All this above, I find that believers are not able to fully grasp. They - you - constantly mistake your own experience for objective reality. Certainly, humans are adapted to do just that. Yet it describes the limitations of faith based belief systems and religious enculturation.

There's nothing wrong with cultivating spiritual experience. The danger lies in the willful submission of one's reason to faith based belief systems - the loss of moral accountability that our civil society requires, the loss of perspective in the scientific, the inability to build bridges of compassion and understanding to believers of other religions and to nonbelievers.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#422568 Nov 25, 2012
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>Well, carry on, by all means. Was there some history behind the post on another thread, maybe, or was it something you recently read about, or...?
Actually I saw a discussion on it elsewhere. Believe it or not I saw the discussion AFTER I just so happened to find the quotes. I was originally looking up something else when on a work website someone made a comment about how the founding fathers were against democracy. The poster was actually correct, at least from the quotes I found on the same page:

"Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself."

John Adams ~

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!"

~Benjamin Franklin

But then when I saw the others ones I was surprised at how quickly I had a chance to use them as there was literally an ongoing discussion elsewhere on it. Then I thought about how many times I have heard this argued over and figured why not just put it out for general consumption as people may want to know these quotes and find others on the page interesting. I posted this on 2 other sites as well.

See, not as crazy and out of the blue as it first seemed! But I would have done it even if it was! LOL

http://www.cancertutor.com/Quotes/Quotes_Pres...

Catcher1

Since: Sep 10

Hermosa Beach, CA

#422570 Nov 25, 2012
Resurrectionologist wrote:
<quoted text>
I've never studied theology formally. History yes. You say he lived (lives) in upstate NY? Interesting. I live in southern NY near the NY/PA line. I wonder if he's the goober that I had issues with when I had my own apologetics web page. He called himself "Militant Monk" or some such nonsense. I gave him permission to use my material in his "debates" but somebody else informed me that he was basically copying and pasting my stuff as his own. Plagiarism. We apologists do use the same material, but sadly most people don't research it for themselves. I however, have. Nice to meet you. Be warned. I have an ego.
As do I.

Catcher1

Since: Sep 10

Hermosa Beach, CA

#422571 Nov 25, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
A pure, unbiased skeptic position would hold that no claim, from any source, should be accepted without evidence - including one's own personal claims.
Such a stance would require evidence from any believer - but believers are incapable of presenting non-subjectively experienced evidence. All believers in all religions rely upon their religion's construction of human experience to interpret, filter and understand their spirituality.
Believer's experiences are real. They're valid ways of understanding life. But that doesn't make them objective descriptions of the reality outside the personal experience of reality. Your experience does not dictate my experience (and vice versa). Depending on the disconnect between our two cultures, your personal experience may not have much to say to mine at all.
All this above, I find that believers are not able to fully grasp. They - you - constantly mistake your own experience for objective reality. Certainly, humans are adapted to do just that. Yet it describes the limitations of faith based belief systems and religious enculturation.
There's nothing wrong with cultivating spiritual experience. The danger lies in the willful submission of one's reason to faith based belief systems - the loss of moral accountability that our civil society requires, the loss of perspective in the scientific, the inability to build bridges of compassion and understanding to believers of other religions and to nonbelievers.
Perfectly and beautifully presented.

Keep it.

“Live Love Laugh”

Since: Aug 07

Rings of Saturn Emporium

#422572 Nov 25, 2012
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
My training in history and anthropology goes towards proof of my claims.
Proof is something that is always asked here but rarely given. Then when it is...wham you get whacked.
I have provided more evidence to support my scholarly opinions than there is proof offered for any theology, let alone the amatuer opinions and fabrications on both sides of the aisle.
I don't remember anyone asking you for your credentials. They trashed you *before* you gave them. You originally said you got tired of people saying you didn't have the qualifications you claimed. So it was your choice to provide them to prove it rather than someone asking for them.

You're going to get trashed here no matter what you do.

My amateur opinion may not mean anything to you. I don't care. I'm having a discussion here and there. I realize that there are people who know much more than I and I learn from them. Other than that, whether highly educated or an 8th grade dropout, everyone has an opinion and everyone has something to say. That's what this type of forum is for.

It seems that it's much more important to you and a few others to prove yourself than it is to the rest of us.

You can be pissy because the 'amateurs' have called you on the silliness of feeling you need to prove to strangers that you are more qualified to answer any and every question than are the rest of us. At this point, it's just boring and inane.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#422573 Nov 25, 2012
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Perfectly and beautifully presented.
Keep it.
Woohooo! Thank you Sir Catcher!

I'm about to go out about Hong Kong - we'll see what horrible mischief I can get up to!

“No Invisible Means of Support ”

Since: Nov 12

Simian Crease

#422574 Nov 25, 2012
Skombolis wrote:
Can't remember the last time I was here, someone just linked a post. Hey Hip!
The following is simply to provide some background. I have heard a lot of people claim to know what the foundering fathers believed and intended for this country and what they felt it was founded on. I think the following will clear that up:
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
John Adams
"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here."
~Patrick Henry
"Man will ultimately be governed by God or by tyrants."
~Benjamin Franklin
"We have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious hand which preserved us in peace and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us, and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own. Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us."
~Abraham Lincoln's 1863 Thanksgiving Proclamation
http://www.cancertutor.com/Quotes/Quotes_Pres...
Oh, you quote mining little putz. Those are all quotes fabricated by David Barton of Wallbuilders fame. When the Christian liar was exposed in his duplicity, he exclaimed, "We'll, that's what they would have said." Man, you Christians are either willfully dishonest, easily duped, or both. It saddens and sickens me.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#422575 Nov 25, 2012
water_nymph wrote:
<quoted text> I don't remember anyone asking you for your credentials.....
You missed Red Apples and others calling me a liar for a few months on WSJLM ?

As well as several christians and Kate here claiming I had no education ?

Get a grip WN. I am damned proud of what I have accomplished in my life and see no reason to hide it under a blanket just because you find it egotistical.

“No Invisible Means of Support ”

Since: Nov 12

Simian Crease

#422576 Nov 25, 2012
Grace Walker wrote:
<quoted text>
A 75 is better than a 0-65..nobody cant fault the man for trying. He passed the class...Better than failing and laughing at someone who tries
Oh Grace, more logical fallacies? You're weird.

“No Invisible Means of Support ”

Since: Nov 12

Simian Crease

#422577 Nov 25, 2012
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>I cordially loathe most remakes.
I mean, Jeff Bridges is a decent character actor, but as Rooster Cogburn??!!?
At least he wasn't an immoral, racist hypocrite like The Duke.

From 1939-1944 he got a 3A deferment (deferred for dependency reasons). In 1944, Wayne received a 1-A classification (ready for immediate induction), but the president of RKO Pictures threatened to sue the government and Wayne personally if he enlisted. A month later the Selective Service reclassified him 2-A (deferred in the national interest). Wayne made 13 (mostly war) films during the war and became the very image of the American soldier.

Wayne spent the rest of his life , preening around as the swaggering, uber
patriotic tough guy, cheering for each war and castigating war opponents as subversives and cowards. He tirelessly crusaded for wholesome American Christian values while his personal life was a never ending carousel of adultery, divorces, new wives, shattered families, pills and booze ,and unrestrained hedonism. Moral crusader Wayne had an alcohol addiction and a barbiturate and amphetamine habit for years. His three ugly divorces all had allegations of abuse. He also enthusiastically embraced white supremacy. His 1971 Playboy interview claimed he did not support relinquishing any leadership to blacks until they 'proved ' they were educated.

The Duke was a kook.

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
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 7 min Trumpler 983,265
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 11 min Star Wars 17,490
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 31 min hojo 683,935
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 43 min lil whispers 619,711
Girl snapchat names (Feb '15) 58 min eli_mitchell137 2
Looking for girls to snapchat 2 hr aldenmorgan737 3
Blindfolded, hands tied and forced to their kne... 3 hr Leave None Alive 1
More from around the web