You are hereRecent comments
Because your religion is wrong.
Get updates
Render unto Caesar
Godspeak
True character arises from a deeper well than religion.
Spread the Gospel
Spake the people
-
Thanks for the tip. I've nixed some false quotations in the past, and am happy to remove any...
-
Ben Franklin never said that...another of the many fake quotes circulating on the internet....
-
Thank you for the comments. Yes, the passivity and respect you mention are part of the special...
-
Indeed. It cracks me up when an Abrahamic fundamentalist calls atheists amoral, nihilistic, and...
-
This Christians' rhetorical questions translate into those lame accusations we hear from...
Hymn book
If I may toot my own shofar, a few of the posts I like best:
Thanks for the tip. I've nixed some false quotations in the past, and am happy to remove any remaining. (However, I'm going to mark this quotation as false, rather than remove it; otherwise, your comment will also disappear!)
According to Wikiquotes, the quotation doesn't appear in any known writings, but is apparently paraphrased from something Franklin did write in 1757 regarding an experience with a shipwreck:
The bell ringing for church, we went thither immediately, and with hearts full of gratitude, returned sincere thanks to God for the mercies we had received: were I a Roman Catholic, perhaps I should on this occasion vow to build a chapel to some saint, but as I am not, if I were to vow at all, it should be to build a light-house.
I'm glad to see that Franklin at least expresses a sentiment similar to that of the false quotation!
Thanks again –
Ben Franklin never said that...another of the many fake quotes circulating on the internet. http://fakehistory.wordpress.com/quotation-index/
Thank you for the comments. Yes, the passivity and respect you mention are part of the special treatment traditionally handed out to faith - while the lack of those traits is perhaps the signature characteristic of the "New Atheists" one hears about.
(Then again, it's not at all as new as people think; one of my moderate surprises upon learning about "atheist culture" is the legacy of atheists from many generations past who weren't afraid to speak openly about religion. The vocal atheists today are carrying on a fine tradition.)
Indeed. It cracks me up when an Abrahamic fundamentalist calls atheists amoral, nihilistic, and lacking meaning.
Amoral? Amorality is whining, "I have no view, or even a means of forming a view, on a moral question, other than deferring to – and never questioning – my god's decision."
Nihilistic? Nihilism is sighing, "We're sinners, we're scum, we're powerless on our own, all is lost without complete subjugation to my god (who might choose to torture me forever anyway if I don't do the subjugation thing right)."
Lacking meaning? A lack of meaning is deciding, "Only my god has meaning... so by definition, family, friends, laughter, experience, adventure, life, legacy, and everything else the atheists and I share in common must have no meaning."
Yech. No wonder more and more people are turning away from the amorality, nihilism, and meaninglessness of religion.
This Christians' rhetorical questions translate into those lame accusations we hear from fundamentalists... that anyone who doesn't believe in god (their god) is immoral or amoral, has no concept of love and is a nihilist. That everything apart from their pinched view of existence is random, pointless and without meaning.There is nothing more dismissive, arrogant and bigoted than this kind of world view. It is a form of philosophical bigotry that has no place in the field of thoughtful inquiry.
This Christians' rhetorical questions translate into those lame accusations we hear from fundamentalists... that anyone who doesn't believe in god (their god) is immoral or amoral, has no concept of love and is a nihilist. That everything apart from their pinched view of existence is random, pointless and without meaning.There is nothing more dismissive, arrogant and bigoted than this kind of world view. It is a form of philosophical bigotry that has no place in the field of thoughtful inquiry.
Thanks for the great site. It's a bit whelming to be a
free thinker in the Land of Nod, particularly the armpit
South (where I currently am entrenched!)
The internet certainly provides a myriad of support to
all aspects of an outcast whose views are not shared (or, at
least publicly proclaimed) by the masses.
I had, for a long time, struggled to make peace with allowing others to do and say and feel what they wished.
Of course, as anyone paying attention can tell you, this is the passivity we are taught. To be resepctful and contrite and not oppose, ever.
Well, to Hell with that. It's no longer simple 'difference of opinion.' It truly is a culture war, and you're either fighting back or being trampled upon. I choose reality and inner strength, not supersticion and fear-mongering.
Thanks again,
Robert
Neither Frodo, Harry Potter, nor Winnie the Pooh created or took away anything.
Indeed. And as far as we know, neither did Vishnu, Darth Vader, Yahweh, gremlins, Allah, Quetzlcoatl, or Anne of Green Gables. Which is fine; we certainly don't expect fictional characters to do things in the real world.
One can make as many blind insertions as they please, although they do not necessarily pertain to what is important.
True! One can even fill whole books of scripture with blind insertions (assertions?), yet not get to what's important.
No, hypothetically no one can restore an amputated limb.
In reality, true. (According to religion, there are gods, beings, spells, etc. that can restore limbs – though somehow never in verifiable fashion.)
However, love and grace can get you through the trials of losing a part of your body.
Exactly! Love and grace will help immensely. While supernatural beings are not yet shown to help at all.
Harry Potter may have been a New York Times bestseller, but we know very well the author who wrote those books - books that were made to be fictitious. The Bible was written with the intent of sharing something real to everyone.
Yes! Both books (or both collections of books, I should say) were written by real, live people, with the intent of sharing something - stories, beliefs, ideas. Not with the same emphasis on those components or with the same content, obviously, but the core is the same: People creating works of fiction. And in these two cases, with results that have touched many, many readers.
There have been more copies found of the letters from the Bible than there have been of the findings of Plato or Socrates.
Sorry, I honestly don't catch the gist of that closing sentence. But I appreciate the input; thanks!
Neither Frodo, Harry Potter, nor Winnie the Pooh created or took away anything. One can make as many blind insertions as they please, although they do not necessarily pertain to what is important. No, hypothetically no one can restore an amputated limb. However, love and grace can get you through the trials of losing a part of your body. Harry Potter may have been a New York Times bestseller, but we know very well the author who wrote those books - books that were made to be fictitious. The Bible was written with the intent of sharing something real to everyone. There have been more copies found of the letters from the Bible than there have been of the findings of Plato or Socrates.
I do like the blog. Let me see if I understand its proposition correctly: You're suggesting (with evidence) that the Yahweh character may have originated with, or have been conflated with, worship of a volcano as a god?
Maybe you'll like my new blog.... http://ohmyvolcano.blogspot.com If so, let's swap links.
I think you're on to something. Love is a wonderful thing – but it's also a fuzzy, it-means-what-you-want-it-to-mean thing, and thus a convenient place to hide a god or a Jesus or a cosmic consciousness or whatever you want to stuff in there. (Convenient because the believers are rapidly running out of places to hide these things!)
Did you know there are strong correlations between religion and lack of education?I think every argument put forth by all these religious folk definitely supports this argument considering not a single religious person knows what "love" actually is. I guess I'll be the one to burst your bubbles.. "love" is a chemical reaction triggered by neurotransmissions, typically from chemicals such as dopamine and serotonin which provide a feeling of euphoria. So, evidently the so lovable god you speak of makes sense; they're both in your head :) Note: Please don't respond until someone has found some valid, conclusive evidence that "god" is real.
this is so true..i see lot of people constantly obsessed about religion....but they do it for their own purpose..manipulate it use it supress others...damn it...
It may "make sense" from a theological perspective – but as a claim indistinguishable from one that's made up out of thin air, it should seem foolish to anyone who approaches it with honesty.
Nice post! I do research using planarians as an animal model. I have a couple of posts about them in my blog, if you are interested.
Hello...
I have had experiences with psychics, some on Keen.com, that were surprisingly accurate, and these people are usually nowhere near as expensive as Erin is. Many are basically no more than counselors, not psychics, and that pisses me off-I have encountered a few of them, for sure. BUT there are several who have nailed some things about me that they could not have possible know, including one woman who predicted something that, months in advance when she said it, I never in my wildest dreams would have thought would be going on with my ex until I found out what it was-these events have convinced me that there are some real psychics out there. After I knew about it, and my ex revealed it to me, it all started to make sense (and it helped us heal a part of our life, at least for that time)...
So: I have not tried Erin yet, and may be finally ready for someone of her caliber, but what kept coming to me as I read this blog is this: Why have you, 'defaithed', not actually tried a session with her to see if its the real deal? How else will you ever REALLY know? You can sit there smug with all the stuff you wrote above, which I actually thought was quite good and detailed, but until you try her (or another) you wont ever really know. Wouldn't it be a lot better to 'disprove' her powers if you had actually tried them and found them lacking? What if she truly did open, say, a 'hidden' part of your life that you have long been missing/aware of, but it was in the dark, etc, etc,,and allowed you to, FINALLY, move forward...
Its like dissing a book in detail you have never read, only heard certain things about. Go on, give it a try-that would be a fascinating blog for sure to see what actually happens! And all you need to do is the 15 minute reading..to get at taste for what she is about....Yes they are (too?) expensive, but so is doubt/fear/mis-information and..you get the picture...! Cant wait to hear on this one...Seriously!
Man is sinful from birth. If left to our own devices, without Christ, we are a slave to sin or as the billboard announces a “slave to Satan.” By “free thinker,” the Pastor is presumably referring to someone who is not guided by scripture or the Holy Spirit, but instead considers himself an autonomous free agent and is left in their sin.
This makes sense from a Christian theological perspective, but no doubt seems foolish to non-Christians.
JWs believe Jesus Christ existed, was the son of God, performed the miracles attributed to him in the Bible, died to atone for humanity's sins, will judge mankind at Armageddon, and will rule over a paradise Earth afterward. Jesus Christ is the Messiah, the Savior, the role model for all, blah blah blah.
Er, if that's not Christian, then what is?
Re cult: Yes, the JWs are a cult. They're a small cult which, along with many other cults both large and small, make up the very large cult called Christianity.
Actually, the Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christians, as defined. They are a cult.
I guess that means God did 9/11
You're of course right that a rumor can be false; Sally certainly should be given – and take – every opportunity to defend herself against the accusation. But let's also realize that critical watchers are under no obligation to take the stance of "gosh, I can't assume she's a fraud until someone proves it". Even the most ardent believers in "psychics" know that the field has been a magnet for false practitioners from time immemorial, whether these are smirking con artists or well-meaning but self-deluded people. Whereas (and here many believers may protest) no "psychic" has ever demonstrated his/her claimed abilities under stringent test conditions.
Fortunately, in this age of the Internet, Sally has the opportunity to demonstrate true psychic abilities to the entire world – and even take home a fortune for her troubles. If she'd step up to the James Randi Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge, she'd both put the doubters to rest and have a million dollars to make her life easy or to contribute to good causes. (And if she runs from that challenge… well, what are we to assume from that?)
Anyway, your point about publicity is both saddening and true. Peter Popoff is the classic example: he was publicly exposed (via clear evidence) by James Randi for the same earpiece fraud that Sally is alleged to have committed, and yet, years later, is bringing in more money than ever from his exposed "miracles". Sadly, there are people who want to believe things so badly they'll even follow known scam artists.
allegdely - I feel quite bad for Sally as she is high profile and this particular bandwagon has been jumped on. It only takes one nutty person to start a career destroying rumour. Playing devils advocate here. Of course, even if this is true and she has used deception (which I wholeheartedly do not agree with in any way, shape or form) then it's amazing how much publicity it has gleaned her! And if the marketing gurus are to be believed, this is never a bad thing.
food for thought
Monty from Psychic Reviews
Try reading the book of Revelations, you say? Which translation, and through the lens of what interpretation? Or shouldn't I be getting my answer from the Koran instead? The Torah? Buddhist sutras? Hindu texts? L Ron Hubbard?
How to resolve this disagreement? The question stands.
Thank you for the well-meaning thoughts. I don't doubt that they're offered in a sincere gesture of kindness.
But, if you've dug around this site a bit, you should be able to guess my response to the God content of your message:
The gods of the Great Trinity love you, and are constantly working in your life to bring you back into a closer relationship with Them. I feel that Vishnu has great things in store for you. Good luck trying to deny the existence of Brahma the creator when all you have to do is open your eyes.
Sound good?
(Incidentally, should you talk to your God in the near future, ask him to quit worrying about my well-being – I think I enjoy more wealth and comfort than 99% of the people on this planet – and ask him to instead heal the children in your local hospital's pediatric cancer ward. You might ask him that… but you know it'll have the exact same effect as asking a brick wall. Some "god".)