Wow! It sounds like someones thinking!?
Couldn’t have said it better myself Jeho.
Nice post, keep em comin!

I agree DB, you couldn’t have said it better. So far, you’ve had trouble saying much of anything.

Jehoshaphat, it’s funny that you should bring up the law of gravity as it’s one of my favorite examples to use against folks who argue that evolution is “just a theory.” Like evolution, gravity is also still just a theory. We know it exists and we can make predictions on how it will behave, but we still don’t know what it is exactly or how it works. We have lots of theories about how it works, but we haven’t proven any of them beyond a shadow of a doubt yet no one argues that gravity is “just a theory” and therefor should be disregarded.

In regards to the question of is there an outside force that determines absolute right and wrong. I can’t speak for Serai, but I don’t believe that there is. Your argument that if there is no “absolute truth” then everything is irrelevant is not correct as is your assertion that without a God to define right and wrong society is impossible.

Any student of history will see that the concepts of right and wrong are most certainly relative and change over time in every society. For example, “killing” in the U.S. is wrong, except in self-defense or to punish particularly horrible crimes. Unless you’re in Michigan or one of the other States where capital punishment has been outlawed. In Texas you can put a man to death for a crime, you can’t in Michigan. Sounds like a relative truth to me. I’ve heard arguments for and against capital punishment that both used the Bible to back them up. Who’s right? What good is your infallible book if it can be used to argue that a particular truth is both right and wrong at the same time?

Slavery today in the U.S. is “wrong” yet at one point in time is was “right” and again both sides of the issue were argued by many people using the Bible to backup their positions. The Bible certainly doesn’t say that slavery is wrong. Hell, it gives you instructions on how to treat your slaves.

Finally the problem with your last question is that it assumes that God does exist, which isn’t an established fact. “IF” God exists then it might make sense that he would be the one to determine right and wrong within his creation, but if he doesn’t then it still falls to us humans to work it out on our own anyway. Seeing as the Bible can be use to argue both sides of any particular issue it’s hardly a good guide to what is right and wrong and thus useless. If God were willing to show up and clarify things then that would resolve this problem, but God seems unwilling or unable to directly intervene these days and as such it still falls to us puny humans to work out right and wrong for ourselves.

And that, DB, is what thinking looks like.

Yeah DB, stop embarrassing me. I’ve fostered this belief that there is hope for you and I see a definite improvement in the way you communicate as opposed to the way you started out here, but I can’t believe you are that impressed with what Jehoshaphat said, or how he said it. Hitler was a sociopath and a lesson for us all. He was an example of how not to act, not a commercial for Christianity. We don’t need the Bible to show us how wrong he was. If we did we would also need a bible to tell us how to piss and eat and dress and so on. We would be in real trouble. The Bible, if taken literally, will leave one without a clue as to how to act responsibly in a decent society. It’s confusing in it’s sentence structure, full of abstract platitudes, contradictory in the messages it imparts, filled with archaic terms, insulting to the reader and rife with historical inexactness. It is vague and not to be taken literally in places, but no one can agree even where those places are. And thats only the old testament.

Do you guys really believe the Bible was necessary to teach us how to discern right from wrong and good from bad? I get the impression either of you have yet to read it through. How else can you explain your misconceptions? Drew, I have this feeling that you talk to a preacher or a friend constantly and say “please read this post in SEB and tell me how to respond. I want to look intelligent but pious.”
But thanks, you’re one of my favorite people too and I don’t mean to hurt you, but I wish you could just think for yourself a little more. You don’t have to be afraid to wonder. It’s ok to investigate other religions. It’s even ok to think about life beyond religion. Many of the truest things you will learn in life can be viewed without religion coloring your perception. But if you must stick with Christianity at least allow yourself to wonder why it has to be accepted through faith alone. It doesn’t have to be so illogical. What kind of decent superior being would say “I want you in heaven but only after I torture and confuse you beyond comprehension. I want you to follow me but only if you abandon the logical mind I allowed you to have. I want you to live your entire life in fear of your soul’s safety” or “I want you to do whatever you like and as long as you say ‘I accept you’, I don’t care how sordid and destructive a life you lived. You’re ok by me.” or “All that really matters is that you accept that my Son died for your sins and you can be a real shit for brains asshole who only cares about himself. I’ll still save you as long as you worship me.”

Can you really, and I mean really, respect a God like that?

I learned early on how to act responsibly. I learned not to steal, not to kill, not to hurt others through words and deeds and I learned how to be a decent person. I assure you that I did not need a God to scare me into acquiescing. I learned that he believed I was scum, just as you Christians believe you are. But the ME I had to face each night when the world was quiet and I was alone told me that I had a right to be alive and a fair chance to contribute to the world in a meaningful way. I didn’t need to be saved. I wasn’t sinful, just human, and willing to improve myself. I always wanted to be accepted and respected and good and still do. It’s just too bad that this God has so many hangups. We might have been friends otherwise.
I cringe each time I add to this string under the title “Oh, by the Way” and it’s all your fault DB. I keep expecting Mild Bill to walk in and say “you’re off topic again” and he would be right, and that would piss me off because he’s never right (jk)...but I have yet to see any of the Matrix movies and only a vague understanding of the plot lines. Oh well.

Brock,
I honestly do appreciate your concern, but you continually put words in God’s mouth and make him out to be something that he’s not, in order for you to not like him. Your only defeating yourself by doing that. Do I know your best friend better than you do just because I’ve read his biography? No, because I don’t have a personal relationship with him, the same way you don’t have a personal relationship with God. So don’t claim you know him and know what he’s like.
And as much as you’d like to think that I am, I’m not going to some pastor or friend for answers. haha do you know how many times I would have to call him?? He would probably hate me by now. I AM thinking for myself here.

“I wasn’t sinful, just human"-which is sinful by nature!
I know you guys don’t like the thought of satan getting into your minds, but if he did or could, thats somthing that he’d have you say.

You can invent fictional characters and character traits all day long to support anything you like ("That what the devil would say") But please, spare me this tripe that you have some inside track into the workings of God or Satan because you have a “personal relationship” with him.

People have personal relationships with others all the time, and especially when they think they are in love, tend to promote the good things (even invent them) and gloss over or ignore the bad. THAT is human nature.

I honestly do appreciate your concern, but you continually put words in God’s mouth and make him out to be something that he’s not, in order for you to not like him.

Do you know how much you sound like my ignorant girlfriend when confronted with the evidence that her boyfriend was a cheating pig?

I have no stake in liking or not liking her boyfriend. I care about HER, but she seems convinced beyond all reason that my motivation is that I “just really don’t WANT to like him”...or am not trying hard enough.

Of course she only sees what she wants to see because she is so desperate to be in a relationship.

Alright, I must firstly reply to Les.  I have heard arguements like the one you put out so many times. There is clearly a lack of logical thinking in your arguement though.  The whole notion that, “Gravity can’t be proven, but we believe it!!, and evolution can’t be proven either so we’ll believe that too!” To me, that is the most ignorant arguement I have ever heard.
Gravity and evolution can, in NO way be compared. Gravity has emperical or scientific evidence to stand for it.  The religion of evolution has NO proof...not any!! I can’t believe that someone who believes they are so smart, like yourself, would believe a rubbish arguement like that, much less use it in a debate! Anyone can test gravity validity so simple...drop a ball and watch it hit the floor! Try and test evolution...you can’t, because there is no proof; it’s not true!

Moving forward, to the second topic, of absolute truth.  You say that any historian will tell me that, what was right and wrong throughout history has changed.  That is no arguement to say that truth is relative, that just proves how inconsistant we are! What is the point believing anything if truth is relative? To Les and Brock, I’ll ask you this question; who do you think you are to say to anyone else, that they’ve done something wrong? Brock, you say “we don’t need the bible to tell us how wrong he was”, well what are you basing your judgement of wrong off of then? He is as right in what he did, as you are in saying that he was wrong! Don’t you see the circularness of that logic? You CAN’T say he was wrong under any cercumstances, because in relativity, everyone is right!
Les, you say that people use the bible to argue two sides of arguements.  Well, people use the constitution to do that all the time, in a court of law.  All you proved, is that people can twist truth! But thank you for pointing that out to all of us. And to say that because people do things differently does not prove that relativism is truth.  Yeah, some people have capital punishment and some don’t, but thats not proof that its right or wrong.  All you are doing is stating what happens, and letting that be your proof. Well for me, that doesn’t cut it.  You assume that because some makes a statement about a certain topic, using the bible as a source of reasoning, that it nulifies the bibles validity. And moving on to the slavery comment, all I have to say is....CONTEXT! Yes, I will admit, that the bible does say how to treat slaves; however, what you must realize is that in that time slaves worked for MONEY! Actually a slave/master relationship in those times is quite similar to the relationship now between a employee and employer; well fancy that! And...for you bible scholars who didn’t read the second half of that verse, it clearly teaches MASTERS how to treat slaves.  And let me point out, that it is probablly a lot better than most employers treat their employees! Les, don’t discredit the bible, because ignorant people misread it and twist it to prove their point.
Ah, Brock my friend,
I must ask you if you have ever even read the bible? Because I have, and quite frankly, I don’t see where you are coming from? How can you possibly say that after reading the bible you don’t have a clue as to how to live responsibly in a decent society? Without trying to slam you, I must say that you couldn’t have read the bible all that thouroughly, or you didn’t understand what it was saying. There are different versions of the bible, which make it easier to understand.  Typically most non-believers will read a King James version, which I couldn’t even read to undertand.  The most accurately translated version of the bible, which is in fact easy to read, is the New American Standard Edition. This has the best word for word translation from Greek and Hebrew to English. I suggest reading that first before making idiotic remarks like you did.  The bible give clear instruction, how to live a responsible life in society.
Brock, you genius, you! I must bow to your holiness, because you know so much about the bible!! you make me laugh, because your pride is so great that you miss the truth in the bible. You would rather be right than happy, and that is a very sad state to be in.  I would like to ask you where all these contradictions in the bible are, because I would like to try and clarify them for you, so that you don’t think less of my God! if you can’t find any that is ok, because there aren’t any real contradictions; some hard verses to understand but no contradictions.  There is a very important word I would like you to learn, if you haven’t already, and that word is, hermeneutics.  This word means, “the theory and methodology of interpretation, especially of scriptural text.” In other words, your interpretation of the bible.  Everyone who reads, anything will interpret what the information means, the bible is no different.  Just because there are different human interpretations of the bible, doesn’t make them right. I’m sorry if you thought that, but it isn’t the case.  I’m sorry that the bible is so hard for you to undertand.  I could sum it up in one word though; Love.  The bible is all about love; God’s love for us, and His desire for love from us.  He made a way to be with him, and its up to you to accept it; Jesus Christ.  You will most definitely mock me for this, but it is, in fact absolute truth.  You all need Jesus Christ to forgive your sins.

I’d love to try and help you guys sort through some differences of interpretation that you have of the bible. I can assure you that there is truth to be found.

Les....one more thing,

GET OVER YOURSELF!! You are so cocky....
“And that, DB, is what thinking looks like.”
Oh my!!...give me a break! If you had thought about what you were writing, you would’ve realized the lack of logic that your reason has.
Sorry to burst your buble…

I agree with Jehoshaphat on that one Les, I think you really jumped the gun on giving him credit for thinking. His last screed decrying the “religion of evolution” is the same weak church supported garbage that so many like him have trotted out before. Call it a religion then challenge it as baseless hocus pocus - oh, but god is real.

If Les was saying that because we believe in gravity which is unprovable then we MUST believe in evolution then I would agree that his position was suspect, but that is not what he was saying. Look at it more like if you cannot disprove gravity out of hand you also cannot simply discount the evidence of evolution because you do not have a life that will span the eons required that you might see it in action. Dropping a bowling ball from a rooftop is observable in mere seconds while the growth of a tree takes decades, maybe even centuries. Would you argue that trees do not grow after observing one for a day or two?

I know that you are the final arbiter of all things “truthful” so forgive my impertinence but I think that you are trying to disprove something you have no understanding of what so ever.

Alright, I must firstly reply to Les. I have heard arguements (sic) like the one you put out so many times. There is clearly a lack of logical thinking in your arguement (sic) though. The whole notion that, “Gravity can’t be proven, but we believe it!!, and evolution can’t be proven either so we’ll believe that too!” To me, that is the most ignorant arguement (sic) I have ever heard.

That would be a pretty ignorant argument if that’s what I had said, but that’s not what I said.

I never said “gravity can’t be proven” rather I said that we don’t know what it is or how it works. That it is “just a theory” as so many Creationists are fond of saying about evolution. I also never claimed that evolution can’t be proven. There’s quite a bit of evidence that supports evolution already, we just don’t have a one hundred percent understanding of the process as of yet just like we don’t have a one hundred percent understanding of gravity. The comparison is apt and reasonable.

Gravity and evolution can, in NO way be compared. Gravity has emperical (sic) or scientific evidence to stand for it. The religion of evolution has NO proof…not any!! I can’t believe that someone who believes they are so smart, like yourself, would believe a rubbish arguement (sic) like that, much less use it in a debate! Anyone can test gravity validity so simple…drop a ball and watch it hit the floor! Try and test evolution…you can’t, because there is no proof; it’s not true!

Evolution is not a religion and it has plenty of empirical evidence to support it. I suggest you start with the 29 Evidences in Support of Macro Evolution I would then suggest you move on to the Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ for information on those transitional fossils Creationists are always claiming don’t exist. These are but small samples and summaries. If you really want to see what evidence is out there then you’ll have to dig through some good books and research papers on evolution. Just about anything by http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=books&field-keywords=Stephen%20Jay%20Gould%20%2B%20Evolution&search-type=ss&bq=1/103-8526189-4171814 “>Stephen Jay Gould is a good start.

My argument is only rubbish if you are ignorant of what evidence there is in support of evolution and, for that matter, if you are ignorant of our true understanding of gravity. Certainly gravity is easier to demonstrate than evolution, but that doesn’t eliminate its status as “just a theory” and I never claimed that gravity was invalid. Tell me exactly why gravity causes that ball to fall to the floor? If you can do that then you’re smarter than many research scientists who have been trying to figure it out for hundreds of years. A good theory explains the answer to queries of why. The various theories on gravity attempt to do just that, just like the theory of evolution. Your rebuttal reveals your ignorance of more than just evolution.

Moving forward, to the second topic, of absolute truth. You say that any historian will tell me that, what was right and wrong throughout history has changed. That is no arguement (sic)to say that truth is relative, that just proves how inconsistant (sic)we are! What is the point believing anything if truth is relative? To Les and Brock, I’ll ask you this question; who do you think you are to say to anyone else, that they’ve done something wrong? Brock, you say “we don’t need the bible to tell us how wrong he was”, well what are you basing your judgement (sic) of wrong off of then? He is as right in what he did, as you are in saying that he was wrong! Don’t you see the circularness (sic) of that logic? You CAN’T say he was wrong under any cercumstances, (sic) because in relativity, everyone is right!

We’re inconsistent? You make it sound like we flip-flop back and forth on various issues all the time rather than the slow process of gradual change in attitudes that actually takes place. Please show me, for example, the passage in the Bible that declares slavery to be wrong. If it’s not wrong according to the Bible then why do we consider it wrong in our society today? This shouldn’t be too hard for a scholarly sort such as you.

You ask, “What is the point in believing anything if truth is relative?” I suppose I’d have to ask if you mean the “truth” of what is right and wrong from a moral perspective or the “truth” with regard to objective reality. Part of the problem is your overuse of the word “truth” to mean anything from the correctness of abstract societal constructs such as whether premarital sex is OK to observable physical phenomena such as the effect of gravity on a ball. When I speak of the “truth” being relative I am speaking of the former issue as opposed to the latter one.

In answer to your question of who do I think I am to say to anyone else that they’ve done something wrong I’ll say that I am part of a functioning society and as such it’s my responsibility to contribute to the ongoing debate on societal mores. As for the implied question of what might make my opinion on what is right and wrong any better than someone else’s opinion the answer lies in the reasoning behind my opinions.

Let’s take the prohibition on killing as an example. There are sound reasons why a prohibition on killing each other makes for a good moral for people to hold. Humans are, by nature, social creatures and we stand a better chance of surviving and thriving when we cooperate. If I were to randomly kill people for no apparent reason I would become a threat to the survival of anyone around me. At a minimum this would probably cause people to be less likely to help me in the day to day quest to survive and at the worst it could prompt a decision by others to kill me to eliminate the threat to their own survival. Thus if I want to maximize my survivability it’s probably best to assume that killing others would be “wrong” and it would also be a good idea to convince others of the “rightness” of my viewpoint. People who have a desire to survive for as long as possible will probably agree that my opinion is “right” and I arrived at that opinion using sound reasoning. Your claim that without God no one has any reason to believe anything is clearly not correct. I can probably reason out valid arguments on any of a number of moral issues without relying on “because God says so or he’ll fry your ass for eternity” as a justification.

Les, you say that people use the bible to argue two sides of arguements. (sic) Well, people use the constitution to do that all the time, in a court of law. All you proved, is that people can twist truth! But thank you for pointing that out to all of us. And to say that because people do things differently does not prove that relativism is truth. Yeah, some people have capital punishment and some don’t, but thats (sic) not proof that its right or wrong. All you are doing is stating what happens, and letting that be your proof. Well for me, that doesn’t cut it. You assume that because some makes a statement about a certain topic, using the bible as a source of reasoning, that it nulifies (sic) the bibles validity.

I’m pointing out the obvious. That truth with regards to morality is open to interpretation regardless of whether or not the Bible is used as a justification and the proof of that lies in the wildly varying laws on all manner of things from country to country, state to state and even city to city. Nothing you said above refutes this.

Hell, the Bible itself is open to interpretation and various groups will often have major differences in their opinion on what exactly the Bible defines as right and wrong. That’s why the protestant branches of Christianity exist! Someone decided that the Catholic church was “twisting the truth” so they decided to start up their own sect of Christianity and then someone else disagree with both this new branch and the Catholics and so they started their own sect and the next thing you know there are over 1,200 Christian denominations in North America alone! This alone shows that the “truth” of the Bible is relative as Christians can’t even agree on what it says in except the most broad generalizations. If the “truth” on morality in the Bible were so clear-cut one would expect fewer disagreements over just what it says.

Now allow me to reverse a question you posed to me earlier: Who do you think you are to tell me that your interpretation of right and wrong as defined by the Bible is any more correct than any other Christian’s? Please, provide me with one sound reason why your opinion on what the Bible says is superior to anyone else’s?

And moving on to the slavery comment, all I have to say is….CONTEXT! Yes, I will admit, that the bible does say how to treat slaves; however, what you must realize is that in that time slaves worked for MONEY! Actually a slave/master relationship in those times is quite similar to the relationship now between a employee and employer; well fancy that! And…for you bible scholars who didn’t read the second half of that verse, it clearly teaches MASTERS how to treat slaves. And let me point out, that it is probablly (sic) a lot better than most employers treat their employees! Les, don’t discredit the bible, because ignorant people misread it and twist it to prove their point.

So you’re saying that as long as a slave is being paid that makes their slavery OK? Could you please point me to the Biblical passage that supports your claim that slaves were paid?

I am astounded that you would try to downplay slavery in Biblical times as being akin to a modern day worker/boss relationship. Last I checked I can quit my job and find better work anytime I want; don’t believe slaves could do that. I believe that if my boss were to beat me I could file a lawsuit and press criminal charges, but according to Exodus 21:20-21 a slave owners is only to be punished if he strikes a slave and the slave dies shortly afterwards. As long as the slave lives a couple of days before he dies then the owner will go unpunished. You think that makes this OK? If your boss treats you in a similar manner, would you put up with it? Your defense of this practice is weak and would be laughable if it weren’t so sad to think you believe it.

Ah, Brock my friend,
I must ask you if you have ever even read the bible? Because I have, and quite frankly, I don’t see where you are coming from? How can you possibly say that after reading the bible you don’t have a clue as to how to live responsibly in a decent society? Without trying to slam you, I must say that you couldn’t have read the bible all that thouroughly, (sic) or you didn’t understand what it was saying. There are different versions of the bible, which make it easier to understand. Typically most non-believers will read a King James version, which I couldn’t even read to undertand. (sic) The most accurately translated version of the bible, which is in fact easy to read, is the New American Standard Edition. This has the best word for word translation from Greek and Hebrew to English. I suggest reading that first before making idiotic remarks like you did. The bible give clear instruction, how to live a responsible life in society.

So clear that Christians can’t even agree on it. Oops. You’d think if it were the perfect word of God you wouldn’t need three different attempts at translations. The truth is there are hundreds if not thousands of different translations which again supports my arguments that the truth of the Bible is entirely relative to the person reading it. So why is your version of the Bible superior to all the other versions out there? How do you know it’s the most accurate translation from Greek to Hebrew to English?

Brock, you genius, you! I must bow to your holiness, because you know so much about the bible!! you make me laugh, because your pride is so great that you miss the truth in the bible. You would rather be right than happy, and that is a very sad state to be in. I would like to ask you where all these contradictions in the bible are, because I would like to try and clarify them for you, so that you don’t think less of my God! if you can’t find any that is ok, because there aren’t any real contradictions; some hard verses to understand but no contradictions.

Numerous http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0879754168/qid=1065815048/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-8526189-4171814?v=glance&s=books">books have been http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1573928089/qid=1065815139/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-8526189-4171814?v=glance&s=books">written on the http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0879759267/qid=1065815188/sr=1-3/ref=sr_1_3/103-8526189-4171814?v=glance&s=books">contradictions in the http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0939040158/ref=pd_sim_books_1/103-8526189-4171814?v=glance&s=books">Bible. Pick one and start reading.

There is a very important word I would like you to learn, if you haven’t already, and that word is, hermeneutics. This word means, “the theory and methodology of interpretation, especially of scriptural text.” In other words, your interpretation of the bible. Everyone who reads, anything will interpret what the information means, the bible is no different. Just because there are different human interpretations of the bible, doesn’t make them right. I’m sorry if you thought that, but it isn’t the case. I’m sorry that the bible is so hard for you to undertand. (sic) I could sum it up in one word though; Love. The bible is all about love; God’s love for us, and His desire for love from us. He made a way to be with him, and its (sic) up to you to accept it; Jesus Christ. You will most definitely mock me for this, but it is, in fact absolute truth. You all need Jesus Christ to forgive your sins.
I’d love to try and help you guys sort through some differences of interpretation that you have of the bible. I can assure you that there is truth to be found.

So, again, I ask you to explain why your suggestion of which of the translations should be accepted as the most correct and reliable? And as for love, yes God certainly loves his creation. So much so that if he doesn’t get that love back he’ll leave you to rot in Hell. Such a loving God. Hardly a despot by any stretch of the imagination.

Say, didn’t Saddam run his country in a similar manner?

Les….one more thing,
GET OVER YOURSELF!! You are so cocky….
“And that, DB, is what thinking looks like.”
Oh my!!…give me a break! If you had thought about what you were writing, you would’ve realized the lack of logic that your reason has.
Sorry to burst your buble…(sic)

You have no idea how hard I am laughing at this right now. Burst my bubble? Dude, you haven’t even found my bubble yet. What’s most amusing is that you honestly think your arguments so far have involved deep and meaningful logic as opposed to just repeating the same arguments we’ve heard countless times before. I hope you won’t mind, but I took the time to list off your spelling mistakes throughout your response. I tried to ignore them, but there were just too many and I got the giggles.

This reply is a bit outdated and connects with a bunch of earlier postings but I’m a newbie so give me a break seriously……First of all, “Bible Thumpers,” haha that is so clever and original and to go as low to make accusations of people’s sentence structure and grammer, that’s so sweet…uh no.. seriously do you have anything better to accuse us of. Oh yah that’s right… you don’t! Les, you seem to be a favorite first target, so I’ll start by saying something to you. You say you have read the Bible, the actual word of God, four times from cover to cover. That’s great for you but I don’t believe that is truth. How are you not pissing yourself of fright because of what God can actually accomplish in this world. Here’s a little suggestion try reading Revelation again, it seems you didn’t comprehend it. I actually know where I’m going when I die and I am still fearful of the wrath of the Lord. One more question did you actually read the Bible with an open mind or one of a selfish fool? Also I see a bunch of you are satisfied with being your own little “Gods.” Hm, that must be real assuring to know that when your in trouble to you have to rely on your own humanly strength to save you. I bet your feeling pretty confident in yourself right now. Are you all just too prideful to put your trust and faith in someone else? And Les, Serai, Brock or anyone else, who are you to say what is truth. I’m not a genius that’s for sure, but if you look anywhere, you will only see the topic of evolution as a theory. To clarify, the word “theory” is defined as, “ not practical or impractical.” Just to let you in on a little secret, impractical in any dictionary is defined as, “ Not a part of experience OR fact and unwise to implement or maintain in practice. If you look anywhere you will not see it stated as the “theory of the Bible” or the “Theory of God or Christianity.” I encourage you to look. It is full out truth!! But of course, a couple of you wouldn’t know truth if it was standing right in front of you. Go on living for yourself, God gave us free will and of course, since he is infallible, he knew that some of us would use their freedom in the wrong way. God felt it was worth the risk, maybe you disagree, but there is a problem with disagreeing with God. He is the very source from which all your reasoning power comes from. When you are arguing against God you are arguing against the very power that makes you able to argue at all. Okay so now is the time for your pointless babbling to prove truth and say your witty comebacks, Please let me have them. God and I would love to hear them.
God Bless my fellow.. “bible-thumpers” that’s just hilarious.
I cant wait for the day when all of you are face down on the ground in adoration to our God, be afraid, for you can’t even imagine the holiness of the Lord!

Yes. I too cannot wait until your loving god makes all unbelievers cower in fear shortly before casting us into a pit of fire for all eternity! I mean a god like that is surely the loving father you “bible thumpers” can’t wait to sing praises to for the rest of known time. I can only hope that he afflicts me with painful boils and scabs long before his coming...it will make me adore him all the more.

Rep

It’s déjà vu all over again.  Les must get bored answering the same idiotic questions over and over.  Is Rep short for Represent?  I like the way you represent Christians you vindictive, condescending little person.  U R A JERK!  Eat poop and die!  Your idiotic statements deserve an equally idiotic reply, which I believe this is.

Love

Mild Bill

PS

You are a doody head what needs to lern to right better and learn to red a dictionary to.

This reply is a bit outdated and connects with a bunch of earlier postings but I’m a newbie so give me a break seriously…

I give everyone the benefit of the doubt until they give me reason to do otherwise.

First of all, “Bible Thumpers,” haha that is so clever and original and to go as low to make accusations of people’s sentence structure and grammer, that’s so sweet…uh no.. seriously do you have anything better to accuse us of. Oh yah that’s right… you don’t!

And you’ve already given me reason to think otherwise.

If you’re not going to take the time to at least make an attempt at halfway decent spelling and a coherent sentence structure then why should I take anything you have to say seriously? We are, after all, supposedly discussing the fate of my eternal soul. Would you trust a brain surgeon who couldn’t put together a half-way decent sentence, let alone be able to spell “neurosurgeon,” to operate on your brain? 

Les, you seem to be a favorite first target, so I’ll start by saying something to you. You say you have read the Bible, the actual word of God, four times from cover to cover. That’s great for you but I don’t believe that is truth.

You can believe whatever you want, but unless you can prove otherwise you’re going to have to accept my word on this matter.

How are you not pissing yourself of fright because of what God can actually accomplish in this world.

It’s hard to be afraid of something you don’t believe in. Tell me, do you cower in fear at the possibility of the “boogey man” coming to get you?

Here’s a little suggestion try reading Revelation again, it seems you didn’t comprehend it.

I have read it many times and I’ve comprehended it just fine. I just don’t believe it. It’s an easy argument to say “if you read it and you’re not scared shitless then you didn’t understand it.” But it’s not a very good argument.

I actually know where I’m going when I die and I am still fearful of the wrath of the Lord.

I know people who are afraid of the aliens coming to abduct them as well. You’d fit right in with them.

One more question did you actually read the Bible with an open mind or one of a selfish fool?

The answer to this question has already been presented many times on this site. I don’t see the need to answer it again. Not that you’d believe it anyway.

Also I see a bunch of you are satisfied with being your own little “Gods.”

I haven’t seen anyone here claim to be their own little “gods.”

Hm, that must be real assuring to know that when your in trouble to you have to rely on your own humanly strength to save you.

Actually it’s the opposite. It would be wonderful if a supernatural being existed that was concerned with and looked out for my personal well-being. That would be reassuring. Realizing the Universe is impersonal and doesn’t give a shit if you live or die is anything but reassuring. Your’s is a common argument from theists though.

I bet your feeling pretty confident in yourself right now.

Well it’s not like you’re putting up much of a challenge at this point. You’ve certainly not given anyone any good reason to doubt their stance.

Are you all just too prideful to put your trust and faith in someone else?

Not at all. I put my trust and faith into a number of people. Most notably my wife, my parents, my siblings and several close friends. I have no issues with putting my trust and faith into other people. I just don’t have any belief in a magical old guy who hands out wishes and only wants to be loved by his creation.

And Les, Serai, Brock or anyone else, who are you to say what is truth.

Your arrogance is typical. Who are YOU to say what is the truth? Yet in this reply you’ve already tried to dictate to me whether or not I have read the Bible through four times or not. In other words, you tried to tell me the “truth” of what I’ve done with no basis for your conclusion other than your own preconceptions of what someone who has read the Bible should be fearful of. Before you ask that question of others, perhaps you should ask it of yourself.

I’m not a genius that’s for sure, but if you look anywhere, you will only see the topic of evolution as a theory.

That’s probably because it’s a theory. And it’s readily apparent that you’re not a genius.

To clarify, the word “theory” is defined as, “ not practical or impractical.”

Is it now. Here’s the definition of theory I was always taught:

A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

Slightly different from your version, but then that’s not at all surprising.

Just to let you in on a little secret, impractical in any dictionary is defined as, “ Not a part of experience OR fact and unwise to implement or maintain in practice. If you look anywhere you will not see it stated as the “theory of the Bible” or the “Theory of God or Christianity.”

That’s certainly one definition of impractical. And of course it’s not called the “theory of the Bible” or “the theory of God”, those are called “myths.”

I encourage you to look. It is full out truth!! But of course, a couple of you wouldn’t know truth if it was standing right in front of you.

I’ve looked, read and studied it. There are bits of it I don’t have a problem with, but it’s far from full out truth from where I’m standing. No better than a lot of other religious texts I’ve read.

As for knowing the truth, you seem to feel you have a lock on it so enlighten us.

Go on living for !
yourself, God gave us free will and of course, since he is infallible, he knew that some of us would use their freedom in the wrong way.

I’m living for more than just myself. I’m living for my daughter and my wife and my friends and just for the pure fun of it. Why do so many Christians think that if you’re not living for some imaginary God that you’re only living for yourself? Very narrow-minded perspective.

God felt it was worth the risk, maybe you disagree, but there is a problem with disagreeing with God.

There is no problem in disagreeing with an imaginary construct that does not exist. You may as well be saying “There’s a problem with disagreeing with Tinkerbell! She’ll get pissed!” OK, sure, whatever.

He is the very source from which all your reasoning power comes from. When you are arguing against God you are arguing against the very power that makes you able to argue at all.

Unless, of course, he doesn’t exist in which case I’m literally arguing against nothing and those tend to be easy arguments to win.

Okay so now is the time for your pointless babbling to prove truth and say your witty comebacks, Please let me have them. God and I would love to hear them.

How could I possibly respond to such a clever and insightful bit of commentary from the likes of a mental giant such as yourself? Why I’d never be so presumptuous to think I could possibly offer up anything in the way of a worthy response to such deep and critically sound thinking! Your intellect is barely within my capacity to comprehend! Truly, you are an extraordinary example of brillance among your peers!

There’s a typo there, Les,

its “you are an extraordinary example of brilliance among pears.”

Try, try to be a little more careful when you’re constructing your closing remarks.

Heh, a fruit joke. I get it. I’m not as dumb as Rep thinks I am.

He is the very source from which all your reasoning power comes from.

One of the greater gifts, in my opinion. Surely the gift-giver should be insulted if we rejected it in favor of “faith”. (although I don’t believe in a higher power capable of the emotions of human weakness) “Reason is haaaaaaaard. I want someone to GIVE me all the answers. No, teacher, of course I can’t show my work, but I have FAITH it is right. What do you mean I don’t get credit for faith?”

Much of the evil in the world could be overcome or removed if humanity had embraced our [creation]-given reason from our earliest evolutionary stages. After all, all the laws of nature that we’ve discovered and learned to use to our advantage that make everything from computers to medicine to space travel have existed eternally. But we’ve decided we’d rather live in superstition and fear instead of learning and gaining knowledge. It’s much more soothing to believe we’re not responsible for our own actions than to actually do the hard work required for success. - World Union of Deists

Yeah Chris, I can’t be expected to copy you and catch your spelling mistakes. Nice of you to be such a good spurt, though...heh heh.
By the way, I’m a GUY......Aren’t I?...Oh my god, am I a gal?...Where is my hand going now?......(poke.....insertion)....Stop that!........ Oooooommm...ahhhhh...(poke poke)..I know I want it....That’s right… I’m gonna make me beg me to stop....gaaaaahhh....(twist)..oh yeah...ohhhhh yeah...Here’s THREE fingers bitch.....Sweeeet jeeeesus...save me, yessssss....(inserting foot)...(major poke poke)....weeeeeee uhhhh...gurahhhhhh...(pant pant)..Just like I like it.....Do I want more? Well I’m gonna give it to me, anyway.....I’m a baaaad girl....Spaaaaank me lord! Spank meeeeeee!....wuhhhh..ohhh....wuh........ooohhhaaahhh......YESSSSSSS........Pwhew......(breathe)............(wipe)
(wipe)..........(pat pat).................................................Uhm, well...How unfortunate.....That certainly wasn’t very civilized of me was it? Sorry. I’m still at that self discovery stage and didn’t know I could do that.

I must say that has to be the single most disturbing thing I have ever read on my blog. Wow.

Until I read the ‘most disturbing thing’ above I was going to make some other comment about why I do not have the patience to run a blog like this, and why Les is probably more altruistic than a bus-full of preachers going to Las Vegas.

But I will content myself with stating that there are *no absolutes* and will just piss-off now knowing that most have no clue what I just said ...

WORDS

You’re right Rep(tile) - Christianity isn’t a theory, it’s a fabrication by a bunch of terrorist cowards that wanted power but couldn’t figure out any easier ways to encourage others to respect and obey them. Christianity began with a Jewish community’s struggles to avoid becoming enslaved and found followers who longed for independence and justice. Their impassioned vows that all were equal, that no person should oppress or exploit another and that all had the right to be free and independent masters of their own fate were rendered appropriate by their daily struggles. Those who wished to rule, and exploit these people took over their religion from within and changed its pattern of observance, so that it served the rulers and establishment instead of serving the people.

The natural world, with its life, death and renewal cycles clearly visible, suggested that man also, could live again, in some form, after apparent death. All that remained were discoveries of the conditions whereby this rebirth would be allowed. Though those in power, and those who craved it, had no more certainty whether rebirth could be expected, they realized that all of mans passions were dwarfed by this single ultimate desire. So they fashioned words into tales of heroic pursuits and whispered them to the common masses and waited for gossip to spread the words. And the words traveled from believer to receiver and eventually even wiser ones begin to think there might be great worth to these words. Especially since so many were beginning to speak them and cherish them, and so they considered the words and said “If these words have such power now, imagine what would happen if we altered some of the words and added others to suit our select purposes, and passed them on by requiring our scribes and priests to validate them. We could even co-opt cherished rituals to be performed along with the dispensing of these words, and we could surely look at our ministrations and say ‘this is good for us.’” Eventually, select new words and their resultant affectations were included in a manifest. While considering the construction of dogmatic absolutes, observations through millennia of God building had allowed them to suspect that a single God was preferable to a pantheon of them. Now human intermediaries could speak for humankind to one opportune deity. Additionally, having one absolute authority would surely focus select and preferential attention on specific groups, increasing their cache and maximizing group spirit potential. If the leaders questioned anything, it may have been to wonder why it had taken so long for one God to be imagined. Now all could witness just how streamlined and efficient worship could be. It was a brilliant advance in the dissemination potential of religion. One God would rule them while His self-proclaimed emissaries would administer justice, fully empowered by His absolute and final authority. Now clear-sighted selectmen would be expected to place themselves between the maker and the made. And so the words to promote the discovery of Jehovah grew in number and more writers came along to write even more words and add more chapters to a book that could hopefully someday be created, and soon a man came among them who some saw as a leader, of sorts.

Meanwhile, some of the words written before had caused more trouble than those who sought control wanted, and they realized these words could not be taken back. They needed to justify what had gone before while at the same time encouraging the masses, which knew these words, in a new direction. They realized this man, a dissident and rebel who spoke for some against the political powers of the time, could be utilized as a figurehead and a shepherd to lead the uneducated masses in directions they wanted them to go.

The shepherd duly spoke to those who would listen and in time he rose to the status of a soothsayer and a sage. This was all propitious for those in charge, for they knew that those who listened were superstitious and fearful and words have the power to allay fears or move the emotional to act. Once active, it would be easier to lead that action in directions previously not contemplated. Words would lead the perceivers to convictions that would then inspire passionate responses. Much like sheep threatened by a man dressed in wolves skin, those who feared retribution and damnation craved salvation. The soul waiting on salvation was the method whereby the sheep could be controlled. This is how they could be inspired to follow the revealed path to succulent grasses, cool clean waters and deliverance from their foes.
Yet even the most accommodating pawn will act contrary to a plan eventually, and this “gentle” shepherd had potential to cause great harm. He had achieved such renown, even his friends who knew him before began to believe that he was more than a common preacher and sometimes agitator. Even they began to suspect that his presence was preordained; that his life was preternaturally endowed with purpose and importance. It was time for him to die, though too, in this, the plan would serve its designers, as his death would fashion a martyr. So they took him and publicly belittled and tried him and hung him to die. Next, his body was hidden in a cave and by and by agents of the king came and secreted his body away so that none could examine it and see that he had been only human after all.
At last a new messiah was finally fully fashioned, for the people believed the rumors that his body had arisen and ascended to the Maker. A plan for the rescue of the innocent had been demonstrated. A savior had been born and reborn who would outlive his co-creators, becoming one of the most potent enslavers the world had ever known. Much of his life would subsequently be refashioned and embellished to refine its import. Only then would his life truly begin, springing from the minds of men, formed and reformed until a suitable character emerged. Those alive when he lived eventually died and myth gained value and substance. Though His image would continue to be refashioned and the words he spoke, or was said to have spoken, would be modified to continue the advance of the grand design, the basic character remained; a dynamic embodiment of the fears and hopes each man carried in his psyche. It wasn’t so difficult to design this cult and its principals, for many of the archetypes and characters already familiar, were simply modified to allow ease of transition.
Words were formed and became paragraphs and paragraphs became chapters and chapters became oral traditions which became a book and the book became Holy. Individuals became collectives and collectives became societies, who sought wars when wars were advantageous, but longed for peace and prosperity when such could be obtained. The ascent of man continued, though some would always ascend more successfully than others. The ascent of the soul likewise, would not be denied.

SO WTF WAS UP WITH MY PREVIOUS POST?
I wanted to say something “disturbing” in order to set a behavioral level outside the mean: a level that could easily be considered beyond decorous speech. Words represent the power we assign to them and as we communicate, we always search for the most representative words we can find. When I first came here and read words that challenged my beliefs, I felt sickened and heated at times. I couldn’t believe some of the words and the messages they represented. As I became exposed to such messages I began to take them for granted. I no longer felt the level of affectation I had first felt. So words, especially mine, became to some extent, meaningless. What could I say that could excite and surprise others anymore? What could I read here that would challenge me? At a site where man was usually represented as destined to become either common fertilizer or a beholding soul ultimately reclaimed simply to forever express holy hosannas, I felt stymied by a lack of inspiration. I felt certain that anyone who offered suppositions contrary to these two would, by comparison, be seen as a halfwit or a mental case. I was sure now that “imagination” was as indecent and ignoble a word here as “masturbation” must be.

EITHER

There is a God of all life. He is a vengeful, jealous, vain and all-controlling entity. He has fashioned a complex reality that we are born into, and has caused us to be inquisitive and discerning, but His ways are mysterious; no man can know the mind of this God. We live to exalt Him and may live forever to continue doing so.  He expects from us a behavior more perfected than that which He would demonstrate. He caused the murder of His only son so that we might see how much He loves us. He sews riddles and contradictory information into the basic fabric of His great creation in order to deceive us, so that as we journey through our lives we will learn to trust in Him without benefit of a formal introduction.


-“Men hate the light because their deeds are evil, as the Good Book says.”

-“If there is a perfect being (Jehova God)to distinguish what is right and wrong for His creation, does that not make more logical sense, than us deciding for ourselves?”

-“’I wasn’t sinful, just human‘”-which is sinful by nature!”

-“The bible give clear instruction, how to live a responsible life in society.”

-“I actually know where I’m going when I die and I am still fearful of the wrath of the Lord. One more question did you actually read the Bible with an open mind or one of a selfish fool? Also I see a bunch of you are satisfied with being your own little ‘Gods.’”

-“He is the very source from which all your reasoning power comes from. When you are arguing against God you are arguing against the very power that makes you able to argue at all.”

-“I cant wait for the day when all of you are face down on the ground in adoration to our God, be afraid, for you can’t even imagine the holiness of the Lord!”

OR:

There is no continuation of individual awareness after death. Man is corporeal; a select expression of matter and he does not transmigrate. His body and mind, both being purely physical in construct and potentiality, will decompose and decay. His “stuff” will make up other physical constructs, free of any taint from a previous composition.

MY BELIEFS

The reasoning abilities of individuals are conveyed most efficiently through words. We think in a specific language of words. Actions “speak” louder than, but actions require objectives to be of worth. Words most adequately symbolize and communicate the objective. Words most often are necessary before two separate entities will agree to act together.

I am certain I have been “here” before and feel certain I will be “here” again. Every life expressed is actively involved in the creation and recreation of the physical world we perceive. Each scrap of consciousness must be considered equally valid. Here we are energy expressed through matter. All energy remains for future reuse. We exist as both physical and spiritual beings concurrently. Existence is a cooperative endeavor in every sense of the word. As we perfect our struggles we will evolve until each of us has no need of, or desire for a physical life to learn/ play in. Here we are silly, inexpertly educated, imperfectly constructed performers in a comedy of errors. Here we are beautiful, talent-filled, inspirational models and fitting love interests. We are students in the school of life together, learning to co-exist. The physical world gives each of us an opportunity to experience existence in a very specific and unique way. We are energy minus material expression in another state of being.  There we are spirit, in naked knowing, not in limbo, but actively involved in other vital concerns. There is no authoritative dispenser of life. I don’t accord man the authority to dispense continuance. I accord continuance the authority to dispense man. We work cooperatively to prove life demonstrable. Everything in life expresses a cyclical, perfectly renewable co-dependency.

Some have used words to describe a belief in the one life only finality of individual existence. Others used words that ascribe our right of existence to a feckless and selective creator. In any similar example, these to me are the “most disturbing” WORDS I have yet seen on Les‘ blog.

“The ancient poets animated all sensible objects with Gods or Geniuses, calling them by the names and adorning them with the properties of woods, rivers, mountains, lakes, cities, nations, and whatever their enlarged and numerous senses could perceive. And particularly they studied the genius of each city and country, placing it under its mental deity. Till a system was formed, which some took advantage of and enslaved the vulgar by attempting to realize or abstract the mental deities from their objects; thus began Priesthood. Choosing forms of worship from poetic tales. And at length they pronounc’d that the Gods had order’d such things.

Thus men forgot that All Deities reside in the human breast.”

William Blake, The Marriage of Heaven and Hell

Brock

A+ for length, but B- for clarity.  You write at length about words, but some of your words confuse me (no, not just the ones with more than two syllables ).  Specifically, you give an “either or” about the existence of God and life after death.  In your “Or” section you say:

There is no continuation of individual awareness after death. Man is corporeal; a select expression of matter and he does not transmigrate. His body and mind, both being purely physical in construct and potentiality, will decompose and decay. His “stuff” will make up other physical constructs, free of any taint from a previous composition.

Then in your “My Beliefs” paragraph you say:

I am certain I have been “here” before and feel certain I will be “here” again.

Please define “here”.  Do you mean “here” as in you were here in a previous form; reincarnation?  Or do you mean “here” colloquially as in you have addressed this subject before?  If you believe the former, it contradicts your statement under the “Or” section…isn’t reincarnation transmigration of the “soul”?  If it’s the latter, you must clarify what you meant.  I may be convinced into grading you A-, but that’s about as far as I’ll go.

I do not support your supposition that it is either this or that…certainly there could be more than two possibilities!

Where the hell are Rep and DB and Jehosaphat?  Those boys are like guerilla fighters.  They engage in hit and run attacks then flee for the safety of their caves in the hills.  Then when confronted by superior forces, they do not engage these forces…waddup wid dat boyz?

Yeah, Mild Bill, I put the word “here” in quotation marks as an afterthought, not fully considering how much the decision might affect it’s interpretation. It was my intent to demonstrate how nebulous and inexact the term “here” actually is. I meant to suggest that I have been here, somewhere within this general location before, as in this physical reality. We tend to utilize terms like “here” as in this time and this space as specific qualifiers, but I think most of us are beginning to suspect their limitations. I tend to think of time as a false contruct, as I think all moments exist at once.

“Here” is defined as (1) “At or in this place.” (2) “At this time; now.” and (3) “In the present life or condition.” No matter which definition I choose, it appears that I may have used the term “here” sloppily.
I don’t know exactly how to convey my theory of existance. I only know what my gut tells me to suspect, and that is that we all wear many physical identities throughout “time”

Creationist tend to think we will each be here (in this universe) only once. I suppose it could be argued that some might believe Heaven is in this universe as well, but I don’t know, myself where, exactly they place heaven, or when.
As I understand it, athiests do not believe that man has a soul. Therefore, a person’s entire essence dies and rots away. So your question was a bit confusing to me, as I believe we have a spirit or self-aware representation that is composed of energy only. This is the aspect of our being that is, by neccessity, personified as a different physical construct for each birth event inside each time/space location. As in: now I am Jon, then, now I am Alie and now I am Michael; but I am always Brock. Make any sense?

To further confuse you, I believe that I, Brock am Jon, Alie and Michael all at once. Only my perception of time allows me to seperate the physical expressions into independant identities.
By the way, didn’t you see the apple I left on your desk to ensure preferential treatment? Then again, maybe it wasn’t your desk, but belonged instead to one of your alternates. Oops!

I don’t know where the God Posse is. I’m beginning to feel that if it doesn’t involve wasting away to nothing, or going with God, almost no one wants to talk to me. Then again maybe they just don’t want to bother with the large group of words I took the time to assemble. Thanks for proving it wasn’t a wasted (considerable) effort. ISFGIH

hey guys, I was away for thanksgiving weekend, sorry I missed “2 whole days” MB, you didn’t have to get all exited.

“Where the hell are Rep and DB and Jehosaphat? Those boys are like guerilla fighters. They engage in hit and run attacks then flee for the safety of their caves in the hills. Then when confronted by superior forces, they do not engage these forces…waddup wid dat boyz?”

Right MB, we’re hiding from “superior forces”, heh you figured us out…

I would agree with MB in that Brock’s post was a little all over the place. But Brock, I would tend to come to the conclusion that you think you’ve got everything figured out, which is far from true. Not to say that I have as much knowledge as you, but first of all, that whole masturbation thing was SO stupid. I mean, disrespectful to the highest degree, and just stupid. Then you go on with an even more stupid justification about why you said it, babbling on about how the words of christians are even more disturbing. Man, your getting nowhere, there was no reason for that at all, and your just making yourself look dumb. Don’t think just because you write some novel sized post to explain it makes it acceptable.

I do agree that there are only two options (God or no god) but certainly not the way you’ve described them. All you’ve done is warp the God view so it sounds unlikable, and dressed up your weak view of “energy recycling itself” and whatnot, speaking of it as straight fact.
It’s obvious that it’s much more seemingly enjoyable here on earth to disclaim the God option because you don’t have anyone to answer to except yourself. Regardless of what you claim, that’s what it basically boils down to, trying to get a sense of real freedom. Sadly though, it’s artificial freedom, and you can pump it up all you want. But come judgement day when you wimper and whine about how you “would have followed him if he just showed himself more”, you’ll have another thing coming. I think you’ve got to realize that you can’t believe God away, your opinion has no power to change what is. You can’t say “well I don’t believe in you, therefore you don’t exist”
I’m not here to condemn anyone, that’s between you and God, I deserve it as much as any of you, so believe it or not, I’m actually trying to help.

Brock, your concepts of reality and the nature of the human soul are intriguing to say the least.

Honestly, I wouldn’t be all that upset if the idea of reincarnation (of which you seem to be describing a variant thereof) were to turn out to be true. There’s a lot to the Universe that can’t be experienced in one go-round so multiple trips would be worthwhile, but I haven’t had any experiences that would suggest this is the case.

In short, your ideas are thought provoking, but not in any way likely to bring about conflict the same way the Creationist viewpoint does. At least with atheists like myself. I can’t speak for the Creationists, obviously.

Regardless of what you claim, that’s what it basically boils down to, trying to get a sense of real freedom. Sadly though, it’s artificial freedom, and you can pump it up all you want. But come judgement day when you wimper and whine about how you “would have followed him if he just showed himself more”, you’ll have another thing coming. I think you’ve got to realize that you can’t believe God away, your opinion has no power to change what is. You can’t say “well I don’t believe in you, therefore you don’t exist”

You still don’t get it. You still argue as though, deep down, we all secretly know that God’s existence is a fact. It’s not a fact and deep down secretly we don’t believe God exists. You can go ahead and sit there smugly saying “when the day comes and you’re in front of god blah blah blah” and pretend that his existence is an established fact, but that don’t make it so.

And, for the record, if the day should come and it turns out there is a God and he’s ANYTHING like what the Bible describes him to be then I will gladly accept the punishment of Hell over spending all of eternity associating with a bastard like him. God, as portrayed in the Bible, is worthy of nothing but contempt.

Not that it matters as I don’t believe that day will ever come.