About

n8207319_38302744_94925

Yes, that’s right. Here’s yet another atheist with a rinky-dink page who has decided his opinion needs to be sent out into the blogosphere. Are you bored yet?

There are lots of us. But that’s a good thing. Because despite the fact that atheists may be terribly over represented online (which I don’t think is necessarily true, but let’s go with it for a minute), each atheist blog is unique to that person.

Not, of course, to say that the theist blogs aren’t original. It can, however, be somewhat limited.

Take two blogs from two Catholics, for example. I used to be an RC, so I can at least talk about them with some knowledge. Now, you could have a pair of blogs that are very different. One could be a Republican and the other a Democrat. One could be a fundamentalist and the other a lapsed Catholic. When you get down to the bottom of it, though, they have the same spiritual background.

Atheists, on the other hand, can (and often do) have nothing in common with each other. I’m a former Roman Catholic who was always quite liberal and have been finding myself leaning, over the past few years and months, towards libertarian in my views. On the other hand, you have Sam Harris, who was somewhat atheistic his whole life, quite liberal (I think) and leaning towards Buddhist spiritualism. The only thing we really have in common is our shared opinion that god does not exist. (OK, ok, we’re also both pasty white men. But besides that!)

And so I’ve decided to share my views here. I doubt I’ll be heard over the rumble, but it’s worth a shot. What I say may not always be smart, or right (I’m wrong a surprising amount of the time), but it will be what I believe.

I also invite anyone and everyone to tell me what they think in response. Even if it involves screaming and tearing out your hair. Especially the tearing of hair. It makes me feel special.

Responses

  1. Well pasty white man, keep on keeping on. I’m enjoying this greatly.

  2. Best wishes on your blog. 🙂

  3. you are getting profiscient at hitting the christians where it counts. keep up the good work!

  4. Excellent “About” page.

  5. hey treefan, glad to see a new face. hopefully you’ll be a regular here! more discussion never hurt anyone – though i might if i don’t have it my way! Lol, kidding

  6. I really enjoyed your blog, it was a great read and I enjoyed your videos too

    anita marie

  7. I was just wondering about your time as and rc. Did you consider yourself to be a Christian? Did you consider yourself to be saved? the other thing I got from your post are the two words, Opinion,and believe. I was wondering is any faith involved there. Oh yes , it’s not like atheist to atmit wrongness.

  8. Rollin’ Ricky: where exactly is that spot?…………….So I can gaurd it.

  9. That spot is the spot where their knowledge of thier own scripture completely fails.

    “Oh yes , it’s not like atheists to admit wrongness.”

    The term for this in psychology is called “projection.”

  10. Your about page indicates that theists have less originality and more limitations than the athiest. I would submit that faith in God does not change your originality or limit you. It does, in fact, the exact opposite. First of all, you ignore that there is more than one religion, so there are differences in the way people view life and God there. In Christianity alone, everybody sees God in a unique way. Same God, different view… just like one might see the same sunset quite differently.

    The athiest, on the other hand, sees the universe quite the same. We happened by chance, we evolved, there is no God.

  11. Do you mean Like “the fool has said in his heart, there is no God”

  12. No, like all the contradictions rampant in scripture.

    Anselm started with that verse too, and ended up with what you have as well- nothing whatsoever.

  13. Rick, just an observation, but I’ve checked out the various sites out there claiming all these contradictions in the Bible etc. What it comes down to from what I see and read is that the explanations that easily clear up the ‘contradictions’ are always ignored or deemed wrong or irrevelvant. It’s easy to see a contradiction if you leave behind the ability to listen to answers. Give me your best contradiction website. Thanks!

  14. Here’s something treefan:

    http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/otarch.html

    http://www.georgeleonard.com/yahweh.html

    Contradictions IN scripture, no. Not yet Scripture contradictions with reality. Sure.

    But I’ll look, sure.

  15. Not yet. But i’ll inquire about it and look, sure. Sorry about the typo.

  16. Ah treefan, your time is UP (apologies, Morse, this is simply enormous, bigger than anything before or since):

    Here goes. The originals, which I’ve stitched together and slightly modified, are in this thread from March[ http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/03/miseducation_by_the_creationis.php ], comments 325, 329 and 340 (though you should read the rest of the thread anyway… :^) ).

    ============================================================

    First of all, there are insane amounts of contradictions in the Bible, but most of them can simply be brushed aside by believers. For example, this contradiction won’t make anyone lose sleep, except maybe people who try very hard to be literalists: (emphasis added)

    -2 Samuel 6:6
    –And when they came to Nachon’s threshingfloor, Uzzah put forth his hand to the ark of God, and took hold of it; for the oxen shook it. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzzah, and God smote him.

    -1 Chronicles 13:9
    –And when they came unto the threshingfloor of Childon, Uzza put forth his hand to hold the ark, for the oxen stumbled. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzza, and he smote him.

    People who don’t believe they are literalists can simply brush this difference aside as meaningless in the grand scheme of things, as in “the Bible teaches the way to go to heaven, not the way the heavens go”. And besides, in this case it’s very easy to make up a completely untestable story on how Nachon and Childon might actually be the same, and so on.

    Or take this:

    -Exodus 34:1
    –And the LORD said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest.

    -Exodus 34:27-28
    –And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel. And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

    Well, whether God writes the second set of 10 commandments himself or dictates them to Moses, what difference does that really make?

    But even on important things, even on the most important issue of all — eternal bliss vs eternal damnation –, the Bible contradicts itself, and that not just once, and not even just between different books. To live with these contradictions you have to get very far from a literalist, so far that it probably becomes indistinguishable from picking & choosing.

    Almost all readers will be familiar with the idea of salvation by faith alone. Let’s ignore the Old Testament, which obviously never says faith in Jesus is required for anything. The New Testament says salvation is by faith alone 10 times, but apart from this it also proclaims…

    Righteousness as a necessary condition:

    -Matthew 5:20
    –Except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

    So perhaps salvation by faith, but not by faith alone.

    Words as necessary and sufficient:

    -Matthew 12:37
    –For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.

    Note that Matthew (if not Jesus himself, whose words Matthew claims to record) contradicts himself here: first righteousness exceeding that of the scribes and Pharisees is necessary, then words alone suffice.

    This quote might be construed as explaining which words are the right ones:

    -Acts 2:21
    –Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

    Endurance all the way to the end of the world as necessary and sufficient condition:

    -Matthew 10:22
    –And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.

    -Matthew 24:13
    –But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

    -Mark 13:13
    –And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

    Matthew contradicting himself again. And just wait for Mark…

    Not judging as a sufficient and forgiving as a necessary condition:

    -Matthew 7:1-2
    –Judge not, and ye shall not be judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

    -Luke 6:37-38
    –Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven: Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

    OK, maybe that’s not about salvation, but about life on Earth… so maybe I can spare Matthew yet another accusation of contradiction…

    Works as necessary and sufficient:

    -Matthew 16:27
    –For the Son of Man will come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He will reward each according to his works.

    -Matthew 19:17
    –If you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.

    -Matthew 25:21-46
    –Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

    Matthew contradicting himself some more, for real this time.

    (Luke does not contradict himself, if we kindly ignore 6:37-38, though perhaps that’s because he touches the question only once:

    -Luke 10:26-28
    –He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.

    Love may or may not be a work, though it sure isn’t faith.)

    Then let’s skip the Gospel of John (see below) and turn straight to Paul. The Letter to the Romans preaches salvation by faith alone no less than four times, and contains two additional verses (3:20, 4:2) that tell us that whatever is necessary or sufficient for salvation, it isn’t works — but it nevertheless contradicts itself by containing this passage:

    -Romans 2:5-13
    –But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; Who will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: For there is no respect of persons with God. For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

    The Second Letter to the Corinthians is entirely on the side of salvation by works alone:

    -2 Corinthians 5:10
    –For we must all appear before the jugment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.

    -2 Corinthians 11:13-15
    –For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

    Same for the Letter to the Philippians:

    -Philippians 2:12
    –Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

    And for the First Letter to Timothy, although only a single work alone is sufficient here — for women:

    -1 Timothy 2:14-15
    –And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing.

    Peter agrees on salvation by works alone:

    -1 Peter 1:17
    –[…] the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man’s work […]

    And so does the Revelation to John:

    -Revelation 2:23
    –I will give unto every one of you according to your works.

    -Revelation 20:12-13
    –And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

    -Revelation 22:14
    –Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life.

    Pretty unambiguous. (Well. Revelation 14:12 does mention explicitly that the saints have faith: “Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” But perhaps the faith wasn’t necessary and is just a nice addition — who knows… Doesn’t really sound like it was optional, though. But then, Revelation 14:3-5 mentions that the saints are virgin males: “And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.” Is that necessary after all? Or is it just a very, very strange coincidence — people are saved for whatever other reasons, and then it later turns out they all happen to be virgin males? ~:-| Either way, it contradicts salvation by childbirth — 1 Timothy 2:14-15, see above. It does, however, fit nicely with predestination, see below. Har, har.)

    Lack of bad works as necessary:

    -1 Corinthians 6:9-10
    –Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

    Keep in mind that having done good works and not having done bad works is not the same; it’s possible to do both or neither.

    Faith and works as necessary conditions each and as sufficient together, though it’s only implied, not made explicit, that faith is necessary:

    -Matthew 7:21
    –Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

    Note how almost explicitly this contradicts Acts 2:21, see above. Oops: “the name of the Lord” (Acts) isn’t “Lord” (Matthew). I guess that resolves the apparent contradiction, then.

    Apologists who believe in salvation by faith alone often claim that James 2:17 (“Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.”) means that works are a symptom of faith, a rather inevitable consequence (the exact opposite, interestingly, of John 3:19-21 and 5:24, see below); but let’s read the context, which does not support the silent assumption that faith automatically lives and is never alone — instead, it basically restates Matthew 7:21 (see above) in more words:

    -James 2:14-19
    –What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

    Got that? James openly mocks the idea of salvation by faith alone: the devils believe and are not saved, so that alone can’t be it. And James isn’t even done yet:

    -James 2:20-26
    –But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

    This needs no comment.

    (Which shall not stop me from commenting anyway upon the fact that James contradicts Paul here, who answers James’s question “Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?” quite literally by “hell, no”:

    -Romans 4:2-5
    –For if Abraham were justified by works he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

    BTW, Paul also ascribes more wordly blessings upon Abraham as being due to faith alone:

    -Romans 4:13
    –For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

    I’d call for a celebrity deathmatch if Paul hadn’t already contradicted himself in that very same letter, see above.)

    Faith and baptism as necessary each and sufficient together:

    -Mark 16:16
    –He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.

    Mark contradicting himself (see above).

    Mercy and what seems to be baptism as necessary each and sufficient together, though one might speculate on causal connections between the two:

    -Titus 3:5
    –Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.

    Words and faith as necessary each and sufficient together:

    The Letter to the Romans already contradicts itself — here’s a third opinion in the same letter:

    -Romans 10:9
    –If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

    Mind you: it’s not enough if you believe, you also have to say it.

    Predestination as necessary and sufficient:

    Calvin, too, had a Biblical basis for his abhorrent doctrine:

    -Matthew 22:14
    –For many are called, but few are chosen.

    -Romans 8:30
    –Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

    Yep, Matthew and Romans yet again.

    Poverty as necessary:

    -Matthew 19:23-24
    –Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

    Matthew, unsurprisingly.

    The utter mess that is the Gospel of John:

    To be fair, I haven’t counted if John contradicts himself more often than Matthew or the Letter to the Romans, but be that as it may, John contradicts himself all the time:

    -John 3:3-7
    –Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

    -John 3:16-18
    –For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

    -John 3:19-21
    –And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

    -John 3:36
    –He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

    -John 5:24
    –But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

    -John 5:29
    –And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

    -John 6:37
    –All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

    Salvation by being born again (which Southern Baptists seem to believe means “telling everyone who wants to hear it, and then some, that you are born again”, but that seems to be ignoring 3:4 and 3:5), faith alone, faith which is a symptom of works, faith alone, faith which is a symptom of works, works alone, and what seems to be a combination of predestination and faith (perhaps faith due to predestination, or the other way around, who knows), in this order. Neat. Note especially the switch from 3:18 to 3:19.

    Verily, verily, I say unto you: There is no Biblical literalist, no, not one.

    ============================================================
    Well, what do you have to say for yourself?

  17. Thank you David, without having completely read through your comment, “What do I have to say for myself?”

    Thank God I have a brain and can read a complete work or works and comprehend it. Many of the verses I read near the top are explainable (heck the explanation was included for some of them although I haven’t researched yet to see if I agree), but really, the picking apart and Atheist favorite complaint of “quote mining” is interesting. I am baffled that educated people can post this stuff and truly not understand it. It’s like looking at a list of something a child put together out of ignorance or I guess choice to misinterpret. I’m sorry, but it is very obvious that whoever wrote this was deeply looking for any word that could be misconstrued. Any person willing to think can see the intent and meaning behind what is written in the Bible. Are you suggesting that you are unable to read something literally AND use common sense at the same time? Maybe the whole literal thing is the problem. I mean, are you suggesting that saying that a zebra is BLACK and WHITE is a contradiction? Unfortunately, you probably won’t try to look up a Christian apologetics response to any of the well thought out nonsense listed above. It becomes more and more obvious how the Bible’s proclamation of:

    1 Corinthians 1:21: For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22 For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; 23 but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness…

    1 Corinthians 1:27: but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong…

    Well, this one is probably hard to read and comprehend based on the post above. Actually, why weren’t these verses listed above as contradictions?

    Oh, and since I ran across an explanation for the James 2:20 vs. Romans 4:2 ‘contradiction’ here ya go!
    http://pastors.christianpost.com/article/faith-and-works-in-james-2-14-26/item263.htm
    I’m sure it won’t help you out, but I’ll hold out hope.

  18. Without having accounted for every single contradiction, the Bible is still a Fail.

    You can’t comprehend the Bible and yet insist that there are no contradictions. Literalism is just a joke comparatively.

    It comes down to denominational fractures, the splitting up of the following into many contradictory subsets. Can you account for all of the misconceptions, interpretations, and outright lies that have strewn the landscape of theology without coming to the conclusion that it is all a complete fantasy?

    And this is only in the Accepted works, the Canon. Imagine if all the writings were together, well the book would be religious suicide. The only reason it isn’t now is because people have put up blinders to the parts of the book that don’t help them with their cause.

    By the way point 5 of his essay is wrong. The fruits of the spirit are natural products of Christian faith. God works in you, and he necessarily produces outward righteousness in people’s faith. My Zondervan Study Bible says so. Therefore 7 and 8 are wrong- his conclusion is rent asunder.

    To wit:
    +2:18 “You have faith; i have deeds.” The false claim that there are “faith” Christians and “deeds” Christians, i.e., that faith and deeds can exist separate from one another. “Show me your faith without deeds.” Irony; James denies the possibility of this.+

    Shorter: Christians are as they do. Faith is a necessary precursor to works, and works are a necessary consequent. Luther was following a red herring.

    Does this make sense when you consider highly moral atheists, or when you consider atrocious behavior of Christians? No; ah, but there were verses that David picked up that dealt with this, and as such, contradicted this line of reasoning altogether. Exegesis: Breathtakingly easy to disassemble.

    Also 1 Corinthians 1:27 makes no sense when you consider how the Jews have got the piss beat out of them by christians all throughout European history, and in the Bible, and well- they Never actually conquered Canaan in the first place, when you think about it…

    But we still aren’t saying anything about how Greek/Roman pantheons were modeled after in the making of the Yeshua character- who in and of himself, is probably an amalgamation as well of several at that time. We aren’t saying the same of the origins of the Old Testament, nor did I go into the history FAIL that is the OT- though i posted a link near the bottom of the Godless Bible Study thread. And we aren’t even addressing logical contradictions that are inherent from the Very beginning of the Bible- just inter-scripture. From there, it just gets substantially worse.

    So, treefan, your work, and that of any professed christian, is cut out for them as to why they think that the Bible has anything to offer but fantastic stories. Quite.

  19. I hope you guys do know that I appreciate the willingness to discuss these things. In the end, I wish I DID have time to delve into every argument there is, but, time is finite with respect to me. If I could sum up my experience and what I would conclude with regards to your experiences it would be this: For some reason God gave me an experience in my life that changed me. I didn’t ask for it like many do, it just happened and after that everything made sense. I completely understand your arguments because I used to make them. I would be so bold as to say that I was very good at arguing for there not being any god… If I would conclude with anything different than what I’m about to say, I would be a hypocrite. All I suggest is that anyone who feels there is no god out there, I hope they would challenge themselves to be open to the possibility, seek with an open mind and ask, “God if you are out there, make me understand you if you are there. I so fervently feel you do not exist and if I am wrong I want to know.” You may get an answer or a revelation at some point in time, who knows…? I got an answer and I didn’t even ask.
    I’m not saying any of this to egg anyone on or to inspire a bunch of negative feedback, just felt like saying it.
    Off to play games with the 5 year old! Have a great Christmas break everyone.

  20. “I didn’t ask for it like many do, it just happened and after that everything made sense.”

    I’m sorry, but that pretty much sums up cult conversion stories. And even now you cannot invalidate those arguments. You never could. You simply look past them to the mirage in the desert. But we do share something in common.

    I asked God before, when i was much more sincere about asking this question- much more earnest in my desire to have faith and a relationship with God, but God answered with silence.

    That is the indictment against God. He has no consequences, therefore, does not exist. However, insanity and delusion have consequences, as we all are made aware- Hitler, Stalin, many other fanaticists and cult leaders who were harbingers of incredible ideology have definitely made an impact on our earth- not for the better. Saying that faith will cut it is just silly.

    Mother Teresa had no faith- she felt no presence of God as i also did not- so in that sense, she and i are equals. But she strove on through the perceived hopelessness of a Godless world, and maybe one of the most benevolent people in the history of the world.

    Dr. King addressed his peers in the pulpits in their complacency of injustice, and indicted them from a Birmingham jail cell. He was acting out against popular sentiment, making a call out to stop bigotry so long endorsed in the most fervently religious part of this country. And still is.

    Faith without works is indeed a corpse of religion, but works without faith are often the most galvanizing, transcendent actions that can be taken in this world because it is the acceptance of humanity, regardless of it’s foibles.

    Good can exist without Absolute Good, but Evil certainly exists in spite of it.

    Merry Christmas treefan.

  21. A cult experience? I was by myself. Not quite following you there, but I respect your opinion none the less.
    I may be reading into your statements a bit, so please correct me, but you honestly were seeking God, and he didn’t answer when you wanted him to, therefore he isn’t there? I don’t think God would bow to his creation thinking they are superior…revelation occurs with those who have a truly humble heart.
    Just an honest observation (if it fits).
    Rick, have a Merry Christmas too.

  22. Before i begin, thanks once again for ignoring the greatest portion of my statement (in the case of your post on the 19th, an utter void of constructive dialogue) and only considering the parts you have the nerve to respond to. But no matter.

    “I may be reading into your statements a bit, so please correct me, but you honestly were seeking God, and he didn’t answer when you wanted him to, therefore he isn’t there? I don’t think God would bow to his creation thinking they are superior…revelation occurs with those who have a truly humble heart.”

    Ah, so God Doesn’t answer prayer. And he isn’t omnibenevolent.

    There are so many scriptures that refute what you just said, it’s astonishing. The whole premis of alot of the Bible is negotiation and interaction with God- virtually all of the J text speaks of the personable, concerned, even argumentative God (Moses and the burning bush, Lot begging for Sodom and Gomorrah, ect). Don’t retreat back to the forms of God invented by Priests as a fallback (Elohim- the Lord on high. A savage spirit to be placated by sacrifices and strict obediance to theocracy). It is dishonesty incarnate.

    And it certainly does not help with the illusion of God as immutable and unchanging if his attributes and characteristics are different after each theological exchange.

    But considering how you never had a proper answer for any of the objections you or i had to make towards God, you have been rather impressive.

    This has nothing to do with “bowing to his Creation.”
    Do you “bow” to your children when they call your name? Who has the authority over who had more humility than whom? And isn’t my reaction to any stimulas dictated in full by my nature as a human being? Man is, by his very nature, at war with God. That is what it means to be born into Original Sin. The Only Way is for God to outstretch His hand, and if He does not, how can I be faulted?

    Therefore, God Must come to Man, not the reverse. In fact, this is precisely the statement that was supposedly set by Jesus coming down to earth to fix the bridge between Man and God. You are directly contradicting this sentiment.

    Or does God arbitrarily choose his following? Are we selected, is there no freedom? That would inevitably be the case in that line of questioning. And it is a disgusting doctrine- though it lies secretly at the heart of everything you just said.

    But what about me then? Was that a false seed of salvation my heart? Was it Satan’s plot to destroy my faith that he sent me to search for God, knowing full well He would not- or couldn’t somehow as you seem to indicate- answer?

    But you know full well you must remain silent, having no answers whatsoever to these statements. How could you, if God never gave the information to rightiousness- but a constant reminder of negative examples? we are fully unable to combat evil- and God knows this beyond a shadow of a doubt. And yet again, we are faulted by the Curse he set upon the human race.

    Why would God do any of this? He wouldn’t. At best, you have the wrong God. At worst, God is an illusion. The silence is a consistant condemnation to all who profess to hear his voice and see his handiwork.

    My patience with you has evaporated. Print a copy of those scriptural contradictions, and these sources as well ( http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/otarch.html and http://www.georgeleonard.com/yahweh.html ). Mull over the knowledge, spread the information, ask for guidance and and come back with a fully complete statement. I’m tired of doing this on your terms. And if you leave this as is, i will have to claim victory once again. Don’t dissapoint me. Please.

    You represent God you know. And if He is truly with you, he will make himself evident by the quality of your next series of statements.
    Unless, that is, history repeats itself, and it is God’s plan to LOSE.

    Don’t leap out with faith- the air is not as saturated with the presence of God as you might have previously thought.

  23. I’m just wondering what made you go to Atheism. I know it says because you had liberal ideas, but I was wondering what made you go to that exact idea of Atheism? I used to be a Christian for a couple of years and then turned agnostic. Were you ever afraid of not having something to trust and believe in? Other than that there is nothing to believe in about spirituality? I’m only asking because it’s weird, after believing in something for a while, I guess it’s hard to drop it cold turkey. Did you think it was hard to?

  24. Rick, am I wrong in saying that no matter what I say, if it isn’t in agreement with your beliefs, I have failed? You talk of losing patience, not answering your questions, but you and everyone else I have ever talked with only answers the questions they want to address. If morsec had approved your comment before today, I would have had time to respond. Please don’t lose patience, and respect that I’m sure I won’t be able to completely respond to everything you request. If I miss one ‘tittle’ will you beat me up about that as well. Knowing this in advance will help.

  25. treefan, don’t trivialize the important points- indeed, the central ideas, behind my posts:

    Christians’ ignorance of thier own belief system

    Lack of historicity (sp?) of the Bible

    The breathtaking amount of contradictions within scripture (though again, kudos to David M. over at pharyngula)

    The refutation of your refutation was ignored

    The “personal relationship” aspect to god (yes, literally a “god” {ashtar/ Yehweh}, not to be confused with Elohim- a different personification of the entity in question) was proven false.

    The non/existance of God has no consequences

    And many, many more points in the Dec. 22 post

    And you call this trivia? Doing so and complaining that you “don’t have time” is utterly corrupt, as far as intellectual dicsourse is concerned. You could have simply waited until you had more time to comment- though i might also consider that you are as SIWOTI infected as i am 😛 – and then been sure to come back to my points.

    Ask Zacharias about agreeable dissagreeemnt, or look at the exchange we had on the GBS thread, or the “What Sacrifice” thread. Then there is Twin Skies over at Pharyngula; and even John Shore (it is true, there is no point in holding a grudge).

    I don’t care if you disagree with me, and you ought as a freethinking person in a highly individualistic society (with free speech to boot!), but copping out to the “this doesn’t look like it’s going anywhere” line of thought only stunts your capacity to become a truly cosmapolitan (sp?) member of society.

    What questions of yours did i ignore? Were they important as well? Enumerate.

  26. Rick,
    1. I’m glad you have hours upon end to post comments.
    2. I don’t, lucky to have 1 hour a day.
    3. If you can’t deal with that, I’m sorry.

    Re: what you didn’t answer
    If I recall correctly, you gave me a link to look at that had many, many articles to review, inwhich that evening I had the time to review around 100+, and I commented back regarding many of them. I wish I could recall specifically, but the articles were listed by 22.1 or 149.2 or something like that… You responded to around 3 of them. I don’t recall what post this is under, but it was one of the first one’s I ever commented on here. Honestly, I just figured you didn’t have time to recheck everything I wrote about, I guess I was wrong?!?
    You and David M listed many “contradictions” above, and after reviewing several, a few I could readily refute, one I gave you a link regarding, many I didn’t see the contradiction off hand, and the rest I have not researched.
    At the time I asked for this challenge, I did have a bit more time to research, but now I have about 1 hour a day to research, respond to comments on my own blog and write anything. If anything, I responded to as many of yours as you responded to mine….but of course that’s not fair.

    If you need answers before I can provided them, I’m very sure there are already responses to every contradiction listed somewhere on the web.

    In all honesty, Rick, you have the answers you desire already. There isn’t a thing I could tell you, show you or send you that will change that. Maybe I am incorrect. If you think of it honestly, is there anything I could write that would change any of your views? If the answer is NO, then why are you continuing in the asking of these questions or enticing me to keep writing? Are you bored? Maybe not. If the answer is, YES, then why do you belittle everything I say and simply strive for badgering and arguing…If that is the way you prefer to communicate, I have much better outlets to debate with or talk with. If you want dialogue hang in there I’m still around…

  27. “1. I’m glad you have hours upon end to post comments.”

    I don’t either. Not anymore at least. Maybe a couple.

    “Re: what you didn’t answer
    If I recall correctly, you gave me a link to look at that had many, many articles to review, inwhich that evening I had the time to review around 100+, and I commented back regarding many of them.”

    Ah, the List of Creationist Claims over at Talkorigins.org. I recall a couple of responses, but it is entirely possible i didn’t get around to properly refuting your refutations there. I am sorry. I wil do so whenever i get the chance to find them and do the task justice.

    “You and David M listed many “contradictions” above, and after reviewing several, a few I could readily refute…”

    O RLY? Where? You wrote another set of verses (which don’t in fact contradict), and offered up the one single paper on a pair of contradictory passages- which i refuted already.

    You said this though, “I mean, are you suggesting that saying that a zebra is BLACK and WHITE is a contradiction?”

    Which, yes, is a contradiction. Something is either black or white. Not both. Unless you condition the argument by saying “White with black stripes” you do in fact have a contradiction, or at least, an innacurate description. In the case of Biblical text, there is no conditioning for verses that are at ends with one another.

    It is entirely up to theologians and church leaders to envision that there is in fact, a zebra, as opposed to a black swan that is also white. If you understand where i am coming from, metaphorically.

    “If you need answers before I can provided them, I’m very sure there are already responses to every contradiction listed somewhere on the web.”

    Except that I am con, and you are pro. I look for evidence for my side, and you look for evidence on your side.

    And you are also very sure that Jesus was a single human being that was the son of a pefect, unchanging god that dwelt physically in one temple built in the middle of the desert by conquering nomads that originated out of Egypt sometime in the late Bronze Age. Again, the onus is on you to anty up some credible sources.

    Print a copy of those scriptural contradictions, and these sources as well ( http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/otarch.html and http://www.georgeleonard.com/yahweh.html ). Mull over the knowledge, spread the information, ask for guidance from your pastor/church leader or look into it on your own time, and and come back with a fully complete statement. I don’t mind waiting for a while to see the fruits of your labors, but the constant exagerations and quibbling aren’t helpful to your cause, which is apparently prosletysing. I thought this was discussion? what difference does it make to you whether i believe or not if this is merely a discussion? And i’m more interested in your views and answers than you think.

    “If you think of it honestly, is there anything I could write that would change any of your views?”

    That is an unknown unknown… There are certainly questions that have yet to be answered as far as theology and metaphysics are concerned here, but as to what exactly i would find convincing, it is very hard to tell… I mean, there are ways to disprove evolutionary theory (i have stated them on Nance’s blog), but i’m not sure if that would be enough. There ought to be some way of conxvincing me; after all, i’ve been wrong before.

  28. morsecode, it’s good seeing your comments around the blogosphere. Even though I represent “the opposition,” I really appreciate your thoughts in the face of all the wack-job right wingers that think their ideas are literally God’s gift to the world.

    Keep it up, man.

  29. Bravo Jason! I salute your willingness to see things from a different perspectives- godless heathens, no less ;p , as something worthy of notation.

    I have an optimistic outlook though jason, that pluralist, centrist, cosmopalitan individuals such as yourself are on the rise!

  30. Hey Rick,
    Just a quick comment, I noticed you asked me “what difference does it make to you whether i believe or not if this is merely a discussion?”
    It means a lot to me. I honestly care for (or try very hard to care for) everyone who I meet. I care for what I believe is their eternal salvation. Evangelizing is part of me, so that will come out naturally.
    I hope you understand.
    Talk to you soon,
    Jeff

  31. Woah! What’s with all the debating on your friggin’ About page?

    I just dropped by to say thanks for visiting my blog and commenting.

    Peace.

  32. I’m just that popular, London.

    Thanks for stopping by.

  33. “I’m just that popular, London…”
    …And i’m just that much of an asshole lol.

    “Evangelizing is part of me, so that will come out naturally.
    I hope you understand.
    Talk to you soon,
    Jeff”

    Actually i do. Penn Gelette (sp?) did an excellent video about prosletyzing. Nance put it on her blog. I understand you want to save me, but you fail to understand that not only can’t you, it’s unnecessary and i don’t want it. You think you are saving me from the Fires of Gehenna, but upon inspection, such a place was only an allegory to begin with.

    I was saved remember, so any attempt on your part would have to be mighty indeed to make a difference in this fallen christian. And i say this once again, to state that faith has never helped me, and it helps no one. If i had weaker faith in fact, i would still be a christian.

  34. Rick,
    I understand you don’t want it and I know I can’t save you. God does that through the Holy Spirit. All I can do is be open to the direction of this Holy Spirit.

    Your “fallen-ness” is no different than mine, we just perceive our current conditions differently.

    Peace!

  35. you reeeally don’t get it treefan *sigh* And yes, there is indeed a difference. I inspected God and he failed to pass the test. You haven’t inspected the concept of God very thouroughly at all.

    It’s more than perception, it’s a lack of one. You believe what you are told to believe becasue you want to believe it. Not becasue of what any evidence has to say about the matter. I’m sorry, i’m not buying a word of it. And apparrently neither does god because i’m still an atheist.

    Fancy that.

  36. Interesting how my first thought was “*sigh* you really don’t get it Rick.”
    Hence, why I can confidently say , “Your “fallen-ness” is no different than mine, we just perceive our current conditions differently.””

    Your last statement sounds like God has to force you to not be an Atheist for you to believe. That won’t happen.

  37. “Your last statement sounds like God has to force you to not be an Atheist for you to believe. That won’t happen.”

    That is what happens. If it didn’t , then Chirst’s death was unnessecary. Back it up with scripture.

    Also recall the whole determinsim problem that comes from omniscience and omnipotence combined…

    And i wouldn’t have been an athiest in the first place if god didn’t have the anatomy of a Ken doll. No evidence. for Gd, it really is put up or shut up. you can;t deny that He came to you, so your whole premise is flawed.

    But all the same treefan, you are a really nice guy. And i can’t say that this wasn’t fun. That, however, doesn’t change you are hopelessly wrong here.

  38. Rick,
    Somehow, backing it up with scripture that you believe is erroneous, flawed and contradictory doesn’t seem like a good use of time. But here’s a quick one.

    One of the easiest scriptures to understand and take to heart is from Psalm 19 “The heavens proclaim the glory of God. The skies display his craftsmanship. Day after day they continue to speak; night after night they make him known. They speak without a sound or word; their voice is never heard.” It simply infers that Creation itself is a big “hint” as to the existence of God. It is your choice, or free-will of choice, that allows you to view Creation as something that wasn’t created. (If that is what you believe.) Nothing is forced. This reminds me of an interesting discussion I had with an Indian Hindu who viewed any type of evangelism, even just discussing things, as violence.

    God can be omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent and still allow free-will. It can be argued that just because you know something doesn’t mean you controlled every aspect of how it came to be (meaning the future). You seem to be skirting the free-will/predestination topic. I have a fun answer for that one if you are interested.

    We disagree wholeheartedly in that, 1) You feel I am hopelessly wrong and 2) I feel you are not hopeless at all.

    Oh, I’ve been able to get through a couple of the “contradictions” so far. So, I am working on it! Slooooowwwwwlllllyyyyyyyy… Blessings.

  39. “Oh, I’ve been able to get through a couple of the “contradictions” so far. So, I am working on it! Slooooowwwwwlllllyyyyyyy.”

    I look forward to the results

    And if God used actual evidence that he existed and wanted to be friends, to adopt us as it were, then That would be what i’m talking about. Scripture is just heresay written down. there is no evidence behind it. It just assumes it. Why would a Bronze age tribe of Goatherds- Known to make astonishing boldfaced historical lies- be closer to a true understanding of the nature of the universe, and therefore God?

    “I have a fun answer for that one if you are interested.”- Go on…

    That Hindu is seriously flawed in is thinking, How does he evangelise his faith? How did his faith spread? It’s way too extreme of a position to really be of any merit.

  40. Rick – Here’s two comments I left on a different website regarding the “time and free-will/predestination” topic…ignore the names:
    ——————————-
    Ah, TIME, such a relative subject, yet one that often we lose track of. Okay, enough funny stuff.
    Time is equated to changes in our surroundings. Would time pass if we were locked in a white room where nothing changed? Of course! …Because we would change. We would get hungry, age, die.
    So, time is relative to our senses. Without senses would time pass? Logically, we would say yes, since we are constrained by a known continuum we call “time”. But, for an inactive computer, does time pass? No, it has no senses, no conscience. We would see time pass as the computer rusted and deteriorated, but it would not notice this change. A conscience is needed to comprehend the passage of time.
    So, what am I saying here?
    Was time created? The time we perceive was created, yes. I believe God created everything; hence He created everything that we use to track our apparent passage of time. Something undoubtedly created it for all you atheists who may read this, so where does that leave us?
    Does God exist in time? Yes…His time, our time, some time. If God has senses (and if we were created in His image I would surmise He does), if God has matter around Him (the descriptions of the Throne room indicate this), then yes, time passes for God. It just doesn’t have to be the same time that we adhere to.
    That’s my two cents on time. Free-will etc may come later if I have time!
    ——————————-
    Okay, now that my last comment is buried under lots of good discussion!

    Reformedsteve: Ketch discussed time a bit in the original post up top, so I ran with it. But, since you asked a tough question on how are time and free-will related. Me being me, I have an answer! Plus, it looks like we need to lighten up the conversation a bit here! Ready? We have free-will as long as we are alive! Time passes, we die, then no more free-will (at least not like we were used too).

    Now, on to free-will & predestination we go. Hmmmm. At my old church (UMC), we once had a very gifted pastor who did a class on Methodism, which in it also discussed Calvinism. From that class, it really appeared that both ‘beliefs’ had merit just as we are seeing in the comments here. Personally, I feel that it all does hinge on time. Why? Because predestination itself relies on having the knowledge that a certain created being will, in time, fail or not fail to believe. Free-will is the condition that we are in during this expanse of time. God knows everything, omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, so by his ‘timeframe’ it’s already happened. Hence, the idea (or fact) of predestination is formed. God knows, sees and created everything including the ‘time’ we reside in.

    So, to sum up that time filled, free-will laden, predestined paragraph God knew I would write….Predestination can be rightly argued if you believe God, who resides in his own time, knows everything past, present and future with regards to the time we reside in. Free-will is guaranteed within the time we reside in. In my view, the two topics (free-will and predestination) are comparing apples and oranges.

    That’s how I see it.

  41. time is malleable by physics. Need i remind you that it is AN Actual Entity- simply look up General Reletivity. Now Treefan that second comment has nothing to do with will becasue it assumes that choice=will. Not the case. It may be indistinguishable from it, but if our choices aren’t free, then our will isn’t free. even if we do what we want, we are pretdetermined to do what we want, ergo…

  42. Rickroll,

    Are you surprised that the religious guy you are debating is a bad debater? Picking and choosing which points to debate, and having almost Zero connection to reality or facts.

    It is really a waste fo time. I have debated them lots longer, and it is always and exercise in frustration.

    The saying that applies to the religious is: “You can not reason someone out of something they were not reasoned into.”

    Nice to find you. Take care.

  43. Very inspired, Jimmy. I was reasoned into my beliefs, it’s just that somehow you guys know that I was deluded. How silly of me to think you are deluded and not I. After all, I was an Atheist before I was a Christian, so what would I know…

  44. Tree says:

    ” I was reasoned into my beliefs”

    No you weren’t. Case closed. If your belief in god is reasonable then there is no purpose for “faith” Faith means that there is a leap in logic happening.. Case closed. When you figure out that you weren’t reasoned into taking a leap of logic, come back and we will talk about the rest of your silly delusions.

    But not until after you figure that out.

    And I am sure you were just as shitty debater as an atheist as you are as a believer in superstition.

  45. “After all, I was an Atheist before I was a Christian, so what would I know…”

    True, Tree. You were an atheist when you were born, as you had no belief in any gods until (at least) your parents indoctrinated you into it.

    I doubt you were ever an atheist due to looking at arguments or giving it thought. Correct me if I’m wrong, but you were probably just a ‘default atheist’.

  46. Looks like I struck a nerve with Jimmy.

    Morse…no I wasn’t indoctrinated by my parents. I thought they were nice, but that they were idiots and I couldn’t believe anyone actually believed all that religious stuff. I was into figuring things out on my own and there were too many ideas racing through my mind to make any sense of God early on, let alone religion. The sense I did have told me that I was on my own and there wasn’t a God that would allow suffering or condemnation like I was aware of.

    As life progressed I saw many more things that continued to impress upon me the same ole question. Why are we here etc.? So, by my late twenties (as I have shared before) I had progressed from a belief in “no god or higher power”, to “there had to be something out there”, then to the Christian beliefs that I have today.

    So, morse, yes, I gave it about 10-15 years of serious thought and study. (From around age 13-29). Hope that clarifies.

    Oh, and to add some clarity to all the debate bashing. In debate classes in HS one component of debate was controlling the debate and keeping it headed in the direction of your choice. Both debaters would do this, and in the end many questions went unanswered. Debate via commenting is quite different since the questions left hanging are forever published. There’s nothing wrong with that! But…if we are all honest with ourselves, even if we try, we typically still don’t answer all the questions presented.

    So, if the goal is to simply point out questions that are not answered, and ignore ones that are answered, does this mean that the questions that are answered shouldn’t have been asked in the first place?

    Jimmy, you may be surprised that since no one has the definitive answers to how everything was created or came to be, you too have put “faith” in something. So, by your standards, neither of us should be fit to debate. Thanks for that clarification.

  47. “As life progressed I saw many more things that continued to impress upon me the same ole question. Why are we here etc.?”

    Had you been a better atheist, you would have known that that question has no meaning.

  48. So, you are confirming your position that life has no purpose?

  49. Tree,

    Pretty much. Life has no ultimate purpose beyond the natural desire to reproduce.

    My personal life has a purpose. But that’s a purpose that I’ve given it.

  50. Morse, I don’t mean to pick at you, but didn’t you just give a reason for why we are here?

  51. Not at all. Reproduction isn’t the reason for us being here. It’s just what we do while we can and while we’re here.

  52. I saw your responses over on Suddenly Christian. Very thought provoking.

    You may want to check out the response I left to one of the other posters who commented on your postings.

    http://suddenlychristian.com/2009/01/09/youre-not-a-real-christian/

  53. Jim dore, don’t be snide. Zacharias, Twin-Skies, John shore…. All good people and can, if they so choose, debate well. Discussion is not impossible. you are making the situation into a “no-win-Middles-are-excluded” scenario with such remarks. Fruitless or not, we have a humanitarian obligation to try and reach across the fence and shake hands.

    Morse, everyone is born a nontheist. Not atheist, not Christian, Muslim. Nothing. Not even nothing. Athiest do give consideration to theism- at least, this is certainly true of anyone who is born anywhere western influence is strong.

    Acculteration however, is what it is treefan. Just becasue it wasn’t your parents doesn’t mean it wasn’t passed onto you from someone else. And it most assuredly was. For example, what proof is there of God- philosophical Or emperical?

    “But…if we are all honest with ourselves, even if we try, we typically still don’t answer all the questions presented.”- Try being honest then Tree. You have a long list of grievances on your plate. But, for the sake of the current conversation, i’ll let it lie.

    And have you read the “Nuclear Power” thread? It appears not, becasue there is avery nice little section dealing with the origin of the universe on it. Go there is you wish to enquire about Origins.

    And don’t be stupid and equate “reason” with “explanation.” How has NOTHING to do with Why in any situation. Leave it to a theist to make that very common fallacy.

    Life’s purpose? I think you are being too charitable Morse. Life has no observable purpose. Living things have the Goal of reproduction, and the innate quality of survivalism, but there is nothing wise that can be infered from that oh-so-basic observation. Nothing deeper seem to lie below that.

    We arrogantly assume our case to be different, but that is merely a survival mechanism as well, to protect our emergant psyche’s from Nihilism. However, our society no longer needs to be so goal oriented, and leisure gave way to reasoning and casting off the facade of supernatural persons who wish our existance to be a certain way- usually to the benefit of a certain set of individuals (priests, kings, ect.)

    OH, AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR FAILING TO ADDRESS A PROBLEM AND CHANGING THE SUBJECT. AGAIN! (note: the caps-lock is not, i repeat, Not, accidental here). I just blew your thesis about Free Will out of the water and Now you want to discuss origins and meaning- totally unrelated. I know, we all know that Jim Dore is the one who derailed the conversation, but you could have at least solved one problem before tackling another. We already know your multitasking skills aren’t up to scratch. so, for the sake of consistency, stick to the topic.

  54. Rick,
    I’ll just ignore everything here then until I get done with the December contradiction question that I got some great responses to. Talk to you in about a year most likely. Is that your preference? I guess I thought I was multitasking by continuing to have discussion here, but, Rick, you seem easily offended, very high on yourself and unable to get over people doing things on a different timetable than you allow or expect. I didn’t realize I was banned from entertaining new discussion while you await an answer that you desire. I didn’t realize I had to answer every “?” while no one else does (we’ve had this conversation) Great way to reach across the fence, friend.
    I have always realized that the burden of proof lies in my court. You have pointed out that I evangelize, and yes I agreed. I cannot prove God exists, no one can. I have faith (as Jimmy discussed), and that faith is based on my own life experiences. I cannot debate these things, since there is no way for someone to disprove that I had an experience nor is their anyway to prove that I did have an experience of a spiritual nature.
    I enjoy tackling tough questions, hence why I nonchalantly asked for a good website with some Bible contradictions. I was bored back in December and had a little time to burn. I was pleasantly surprised at the large response. It was more than I had guessed I would receive. This doesn’t change my original intent; to challenge myself.
    The belittling, constant nitpicking and high horse attitude is a big turnoff. Does your self proclaimed “protector” of Morse’s blog lead you into your “punishment” comments? It seems rather juvenile. I enjoy the short discussions with Morse and others, but Rick, you always Tsunami your way back in and seem to exert the control you love. Maybe I’m seeing it wrong, but this is a blog, comments are normally welcomed, if not, I will bid you all adieu. I could respond in kind to your slams, but I really don’t want to stoop to that level if at all possible. Does rereading what you write make you feel good about yourself? I’m fine with what I write except for a couple choice mistakes over the years.

  55. Hey, how did you do that bold letters thing 😉 that will come in handy for me.

    Admitted, i am a Control Freak. I am very angry and upset that the conversation Doesn’t have at least a modicum of consistency on your end, but i will let it slide. I let the Contradiction rebuttals slide. That is a very very long task, i will admit. But we were then discussing free will, but What Happened? Multitasking is not the same as dodging the issue.

    I was addressing your comments at almost every turn, which is why there is a tsunami of responses from me- whenever i check in i like to have a very full and complete set of statements. I’m sorry, i just like to be that way. The “No one else does” is just flat out wrong. In fact, you are the sole person who Is doing this. Merely refer to my January 6 post and you will see what i am talking about.

    But i do not truly and wholly dislike that the topic changes as often as there are hours in the day…it means that there a conversational backdrop to the discussion. But there is a line, and you’ve crossed it.

    “I could respond in kind to your slams, but I really don’t want to stoop to that level if at all possible.”- this right after an ad hominem and a pop psychoanalysis? Sorry, i don’t gets it.

    Sorry if the tone offends, but if you are taking the conversation Personally, you aren’t taking it Seriously. And it is a poor way to evangelize by pointing out someone else’s flaws. Despite what you may think, i am receptive to a perspective i have never envisioned before. But you have to Provide one. Sorry if i’m “just not your style” of internet commentator.

    But i am my own person, and that’s just what this is- protecting my vested interests. But with all the battleing we’re doing, why not suggest a sidebar to this thread and actually do Morse a favor? Host it on your Blog and invite me over, if you are so concerned about it.

    You could even call it “Entertaining Satan” 😉

  56. Rick,
    I’d be more than happy to have you comment more on my site, or continue commenting over there. My blog isn’t private. Can’t comment further tonight.

    Real quick, to bold surround the words with appropriate html codes. Not sure if it’ll let me type it so you can see it!!
    Type “less than sign”strong”greater than sign”(then the text you want to be in bold)”less than sign”/strong”greater than sign”
    Be sure to get the / in there. Use “em” instead of “strong” for italics.

    If that is confusing, check this out:
    http://webdesign.about.com/cs/beginninghtml/a/aabg112198.htm

    Peace!

  57. Hi Rick,
    I’m trying to go through the long list of comments we created above in order to cover some of the questions I missed or forgot about. I’ll have a new “page” up on my blog where we can continue this if you like. I still don’t have much time, but it may be easier to keep track. Look for a Q&A tab or a Discussion tab at the top of my blog home page. FYI- the email in comments you left me doesn’t work.

    Blessings,
    Jeff

  58. Good, now that this is over with, how About this guy:
    http://emphaticasterisk.com/

    good stuff!

  59. I see from your comments that the entire time that I thought SuperDave was MY christian, he was apparently running around with all of these other atheist blogs. I feel so used. 🙂

  60. To Rickr0ll, et all:
    Link to Contradiction Review / Rebuttal PDF
    Here
    Thanks to Tom for helping out!
    Can also be viewed on the Discussion Zone tab of my site…tree63fan.wordpress.com

    Take care guys!

  61. hey I know alot of athiest say god doesnt exist because there is no proof of him, which I can understand, everyone must doubt what they are taught to create their own opinion about the world and life,

    but take a moment to consider fatima, search for it on wikipedia, if you are searching for truth, which I believe most athiest are, take a moment to consider the other side of the road,

    Fatima is a mircle over 70k people witnessed and has never been explained

    your friend,
    -matt

  62. Thanks for reading my article on huntingfortruth.wordpress.com.

    The above argument really didn’t change much did it. Maybe some day we’ll find a way to change our world for the better…it we all put that energy into our neighborhoods, imagine the good stuff that could happen.

  63. I’ve talked to atheists online for years, it is true they are without understanding of basic truths.

  64. Thanks for your comment on my blog… clearly I’m NOT very good at searching the internets 🙂

    PS. How do I subscribe to your blog via RSS? I can’t find a link

  65. I have absolutely no idea, haha.

  66. […] } The past few weeks, I’ve been reading a few blogs by atheists and skeptics and listening to others. I’ve been watching The Atheism tapes (2004) by Jonathon […]

  67. Hi Morse,
    I hope you’re doing well! Haven’t seen any new posts in a while.
    Peace my online friend.

  68. What the hell happened Morse? did we get attacked by a horde of spambots? all the stuff from like the last 6 moths is Gone O.O

  69. Life without God is not a life at all, but merely a very slow and agonizing death. What is a life with no hope for eternity? As someone who has grown up in the Christian “church” and having also given God the preverbial finger as well as involving my heart in satanism and atheism, I beleive I have grounds to say I have been to both extremes and without Jesus Christ at the center of your universe there is no hope or love, except for yourself. I am no Bible thumper. I am simply a man that strives to have a heart for God and love other people. All people. No exceptions. I’m not going to try to persuade anyone! You are the only one who can take care of business with God. I can pray for you though and love you! Even the hardest of hearts can be made new.

  70. “What is a life with no hope for eternity?”
    Eternity of any kind is just going to be torture of boredom

  71. This is a great blog. Why has it not been updated since last year?

  72. Beats the hell out of me lol.

  73. Yo Morse, are you OK? We miss you…

  74. Thanks for reading, “I Don’t Believe in God” on my blog.
    Quite the debate here on your “About!” Wow.

    \ 🙂 /

    • An extremely old and dead one though XD

      Not that things on the net ever disappear… but they do ironically enough. If a blog gets deleted, a site like YTMND goes down…. MegaUpload went down and all that data was erased from the net, permanently. if it weren’t for some backups.

  75. “What I say may not always be smart, or right (I’m wrong a surprising amount of the time), but it will be what I believe.”

    I like this! May I use this as a quote on my blog in relation to my goal on it?
    To explain the context, I used to blog what I believed, but what I’ve always really want to do is blog about every perspective under the sun. I don’t think many people will get it though, so you’re quote might help me tease it out.

    All good if you’re not cool with that – just checking!

    Oh, and I do like your blog and your well written perspectives over here. Lots to think about!

  76. […] something I read on the About page of another blog that I have permission to use here. I liked it and have the same philosophy on my own blog but with […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: