Killing In The Name Of Atheism

[Akheia]

He's admitted 4 before on other threads, BAA. He's one of those fundies who doesn't see anything wrong with being deliberately cruel toward others and likes "jerking on chains." News flash: people who do that to dogs are considered evil and abusive. That doesn't change just because the target is a person and not an innocent chain-up dog. But there are a good number of Christians I've met who'll admit to enjoying "jerking on chains" as if it's this awesome fun hobby they have and aren't they just jolly fun and awesome people and aren't they just superior evolved beings for "making people think". Talk about a cognitive dissonance.

 

I'd also reckon he's #5, I'm afraid. AM trusts his good intentions, but I was married to a guy just like him for too long to be so charitable. If his spelling were worse, I'd already have PM'd the mods to ask about him--that's how close he is in spirit and temperament.

[Guest end3]

BAA,

 

You asked a question. I answered. To clarify, I believe the earth is more than 6000 years old. Also, I believe that death will be abolished at some point. I was understanding you to say that these ideas came from different camps. And why can't these two ideas be "mixed".

 

This happens to you often BAA, that you get no satisfaction in that someone doesn't answer to your idea of completeness or detail. I am not exclusive in this regard.

[Antlerman]

To clarify, I believe the earth is more than 6000 years old.

You're a radical and believe Bishop Usher was off in his Bible analysis and the actual age of the earth is 6200 years old? I think the real question is do you believe the earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old?

 

BTW, how in the world can physical death end and life continue? For death to end, life must halt creating more life. So you're saying you believe everything will just halt? No more birth, no more death? That sounds like life in a black hole.

[Akheia]

End, the two ideas cannot be mixed because they are categorically separate ideas. You're cherry-picking one bit from YEC you like (death will be abolished) and one bit from the other camp you like (the age of the Earth). If the age of the Earth is purely metaphorical in YEC, then why is the abolition of death NOT metaphorical? How do you decide which one's literal and which one's just a myth?

[Guest end3]

To clarify, I believe the earth is more than 6000 years old.

You're a radical and believe Bishop Usher was off in his Bible analysis and the actual age of the earth is 6200 years old? I think the real question is do you believe the earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old?

 

BTW, how in the world can physical death end and life continue? For death to end, life must halt creating more life. So you're saying you believe everything will just halt? No more birth, no more death? That sounds like life in a black hole.

 

Just what my mind makes of all this.......I have explained before that I believe Christianity is essentially making choices to promote life. Sin is basically our inability to do so, lacking wisdom or by intention. I see Heaven as that realm where there is complete wisdom and no intentional harm. How does this happen, good question. How about "God didit"....lol.

 

btw, I wrote another post I would like you to look at about a page back regarding technology. thx.

[Guest end3]

End, the two ideas cannot be mixed because they are categorically separate ideas. You're cherry-picking one bit from YEC you like (death will be abolished) and one bit from the other camp you like (the age of the Earth). If the age of the Earth is purely metaphorical in YEC, then why is the abolition of death NOT metaphorical? How do you decide which one's literal and which one's just a myth?

 

Pretty straight forward A. I believe something will happen supernaturally. If you want it to fit both ways, contortions will be necessary. Kind of like the thread in the lion's den.....from a natural system with natural laws comes love which doesn't follow natural laws that I know of. So how do YOU reconcile this?

[Antlerman]

To clarify, I believe the earth is more than 6000 years old.

You're a radical and believe Bishop Usher was off in his Bible analysis and the actual age of the earth is 6200 years old? I think the real question is do you believe the earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old?

 

BTW, how in the world can physical death end and life continue? For death to end, life must halt creating more life. So you're saying you believe everything will just halt? No more birth, no more death? That sounds like life in a black hole.

 

Just what my mind makes of all this.......I have explained before that I believe Christianity is essentially making choices to promote life. Sin is basically our inability to do so, lacking wisdom or by intention.

But what is meant by life? Didn't Jesus say, "I have come that you may have life and more abundantly"? A more abundant life is a more fulfilled life, not that you are going to escape physics and the natural body. Are you saying the message of Jesus is that if everyone converts to the right beliefs they will all float in the air and not need to eat and walk and talk, or die? That seems rather juvenile, magical, and below the point of something realistic, like living life "more abundantly".

 

Why is it Christians prefer magic over the harder work of living life?

[Guest end3]

To clarify, I believe the earth is more than 6000 years old.

You're a radical and believe Bishop Usher was off in his Bible analysis and the actual age of the earth is 6200 years old I think the real question is do you believe the earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old?

 

BTW, how in the world can physical death end and life continue? For death to end, life must halt creating more life. So you're saying you believe everything will just halt? No more birth, no more death? That sounds like life in a black hole.

 

Just what my mind makes of all this.......I have explained before that I believe Christianity is essentially making choices to promote life. Sin is basically our inability to do so, lacking wisdom or by intention.

But what is meant by life? Didn't Jesus say, "I have come that you may have life and more abundantly"? A more abundant life is a more fulfilled life, not that you are going to escape physics and the natural body. Are you saying the message of Jesus is that if everyone converts to the right beliefs they will all float in the air and not need to eat and walk and talk, or die? That seems rather juvenile, magical, and below the point of something realistic, like living life "more abundantly".

 

Why is it Christians prefer magic over the harder work of living life?

 

Let's suppose for argument's sake that no other realm "heaven" exists. It is certainly evident that "sin" exists, or that we are unable to coexist to a level that produces little harm. There are varied "methods" of existance to bring confidence and peace, etc. to our individual lives. For example, as I have stated, religious religion, religious education, religious rationalization. Regardless, the shorcoming, i.e. "sin" is twofold. One, we lack the ability to communicate or transcend into the other persons confidence/peace from our own level, and two, we lack necessary grace when option one fails.

 

You have said it many times, that communication is key. I believe this, yet we still fall short.

 

Who wants to argue these points. I not going to cow down and accept that I am wrong on these Biblical concepts.

 

I told you years ago that I thought we could have brief times of "heaven", those that I now see as adequate communication or self existance within a natural setting. But I don't believe that constant 'heaven' is a possibliity due to the presence of 'sin'.

 

I can invision Oneness with nature as nature doesn't require much response. Nature is always gracefilled. But humanity requires more than some make believe Oneness, it requires active paticipation and wisdom and some moral standard and much more.

 

The fact that I hope and have faith in making these objective is some kind of detriment? Is hope supernatural, you can't answer that.

 

I rest my case.

 

Make it good people, you are wasting time trying to develop some method for your individual happiness. A waste of time.

[Antlerman]

Let's suppose for argument's sake that no other realm "heaven" exists. It is certainly evident that "sin" exists, or that we are unable to coexist to a level that produces little harm.

You are defining sin as 'produces little harm'? I thought the definition of sin is 'falling short of the mark', which one would say is the Nature of God. To fall short of God, is 'sin', not some bishop's ideas about how a society should look and behave according to his projected sexual phobias.

 

Is a snake eating a mouse a sin? Is a lion killing an antelope sin? No. In fact, is is the working order of things. Surely you're not so naive as to believe God created lions with flat teeth and they were originally herbivores? Why do humans have incisors? If you believe God guided evolution, than killing and consuming other life forms is God's will. It is not sin. "Harm" is you, from your ego-perspective, attributing what you call good and evil to the world. Now, talk about making yourself God!

 

Death is part of life. It is not sin.

 

Sin, if you wish to be more appropriate is when you are self-centered when you should be sufficiently enough matured that you are able to participate in a community of others showing mutual respect and tolerance: Not sending them to hell because they don't believe your religious dogma! Religion, in that case is a sin to unity, or a sin against God.

 

Again, death is not sin. It is Life. And once again, why is it that Christians prefer the magical world of the non-life world of floating humans who never physically die? You do realize that heaven is here, and now, for anyone who wishes to realize it? That heaven however is not a myth world of the undead. That's just a child's silliness about the world.

[Akheia]

End, seriously, do you even *know* what's in your own religion's instruction book? I'm asking sincerely, since you don't actually appear to have the faintest idea. What you take as "evidence" that sin exists is only evidence if you have no idea what evidence is (hint: real evidence doesn't change if you believe in it or not). I can disprove your "evidence" just by looking at someone like my husband, who is way less sinful in his entire life as a heathen than you are just on this forum if you take this nebulous "sin" to mean "doing as little harm as possible." Not that the Bible actually defines it that way, though you seem blissfully ignorant of that fact. Your precious crazypants god killed *MILLIONS* of people in the Old Testament, and his magical son promised not peace but "a sword." What exactly are you proposing he's intending to do with this sword that isn't "doing harm"? Are you seriously saying that harm is okay if it's Yahweh/Jesus doing it? Or have you decided to make sure all your kids' babysitters come to the house equipped with one to help them amuse your little ones? Sin has absolutely nothing to do with harm. Plenty of harmful things aren't sinful (as AM's pointed out), and plenty of sinful things don't cause harm to anybody, like masturbation, homosexuality, and simple disbelief in a Bronze Age storm-god who has apparently created an eternal (presumably harmful) HELL to punish these harmless sins. But don't worry! If you just have "HOPE" in this imaginary deity, you can escape his Hell!

 

Hope. What the fuck are you even going on about? Hope?!? What sort of "hope" is that?

 

"Hope" isn't supernatural at all. It is a product of millions of years of evolutionary conditioning. You say "you can't explain that" and I bet you're kind of scared someone actually might. And yes. We can. Your "hope" is just this big imaginary Daddy in the Sky who can save you from allllllll the scary things out there. I'd rather put stock in real things than this "hope." "Hope" doesn't get me anywhere, much less away from death. If it's not accompanied by evidence, it's not much of a hope at all. It's more of a wild grasp at straws, like a conspiracy theorist flailing around.

 

Why is death so scary to you that you have to make up this magical thinking to escape it? Death's part of the whole cycle, man. Christianity exploits your fear of it and promises you that if you're just a good little boy and do what you're told, you'll magically escape the fate that awaits us all. It's so sad that you've fallen for such a transparent lie.

 

Rest your case? Child, are you down to stamping your little foot and pushing out your little lower lip now? Because the case is not rested at all. If anything, you've shown why primitive humans were desperate for any explanation at all, even ludicrous ones, that might help explain the scary questions, but that's not proof of a deity, and that's not at all proof that anything you've mentioned is supernatural in origin.

[Guest end3]

You are defining sin as 'produces little harm'? I thought the definition of sin is 'falling short of the mark', which one would say is the Nature of God. To fall short of God, is 'sin', not some bishop's ideas about how a society should look and behave according to his projected sexual phobias.

I believe I said we are unable to live without doing harm, i.e. sin.

 

 

Is a snake eating a mouse a sin? Is a lion killing an antelope sin? No. In fact, is is the working order of things. Surely you're not so naive as to believe God created lions with flat teeth and they were originally herbivores? Why do humans have incisors? If you believe God guided evolution, than killing and consuming other life forms is God's will. It is not sin. "Harm" is you, from your ego-perspective, attributing what you call good and evil to the world. Now, talk about making yourself God!

 

Death is part of life. It is not sin.

I don't kill and eat other people.

 

Sin, if you wish to be more appropriate is when you are self-centered when you should be sufficiently enough matured that you are able to participate in a community of others showing mutual respect and tolerance: Not sending them to hell because they don't believe your religious dogma! Religion, in that case is a sin to unity, or a sin against God.

The key word is religion, right? Did not I just say we all cope religiously? Did Christ not preach grace?

 

Again, death is not sin. It is Life. And once again, why is it that Christians prefer the magical world of the non-life world of floating humans who never physically die? You do realize that heaven is here, and now, for anyone who wishes to realize it? That heaven however is not a myth world of the undead. That's just a child's silliness about the world.

 

It's all perspective. You tout that things have to be realistic. You have many times. I struggle, I suffer, many struggle, many suffer , actually all suffer, all struggle with the reality of our inability to unify.

 

Don't flower it. Give me something real.....not childish silliness as you say.

[Guest end3]

End, seriously, do you even *know* what's in your own religion's instruction book? I'm asking sincerely, since you don't actually appear to have the faintest idea. What you take as "evidence" that sin exists is only evidence if you have no idea what evidence is (hint: real evidence doesn't change if you believe in it or not). I can disprove your "evidence" just by looking at someone like my husband, who is way less sinful in his entire life as a heathen than you are just on this forum if you take this nebulous "sin" to mean "doing as little harm as possible." Not that the Bible actually defines it that way, though you seem blissfully ignorant of that fact. Your precious crazypants god killed *MILLIONS* of people in the Old Testament, and his magical son promised not peace but "a sword." What exactly are you proposing he's intending to do with this sword that isn't "doing harm"? Are you seriously saying that harm is okay if it's Yahweh/Jesus doing it? Or have you decided to make sure all your kids' babysitters come to the house equipped with one to help them amuse your little ones? Sin has absolutely nothing to do with harm. Plenty of harmful things aren't sinful (as AM's pointed out), and plenty of sinful things don't cause harm to anybody, like masturbation, homosexuality, and simple disbelief in a Bronze Age storm-god who has apparently created an eternal (presumably harmful) HELL to punish these harmless sins. But don't worry! If you just have "HOPE" in this imaginary deity, you can escape his Hell!

 

Hope. What the fuck are you even going on about? Hope?!? What sort of "hope" is that?

 

"Hope" isn't supernatural at all. It is a product of millions of years of evolutionary conditioning. You say "you can't explain that" and I bet you're kind of scared someone actually might. And yes. We can. Your "hope" is just this big imaginary Daddy in the Sky who can save you from allllllll the scary things out there. I'd rather put stock in real things than this "hope." "Hope" doesn't get me anywhere, much less away from death. If it's not accompanied by evidence, it's not much of a hope at all. It's more of a wild grasp at straws, like a conspiracy theorist flailing around.

 

Why is death so scary to you that you have to make up this magical thinking to escape it? Death's part of the whole cycle, man. Christianity exploits your fear of it and promises you that if you're just a good little boy and do what you're told, you'll magically escape the fate that awaits us all. It's so sad that you've fallen for such a transparent lie.

 

Rest your case? Child, are you down to stamping your little foot and pushing out your little lower lip now? Because the case is not rested at all. If anything, you've shown why primitive humans were desperate for any explanation at all, even ludicrous ones, that might help explain the scary questions, but that's not proof of a deity, and that's not at all proof that anything you've mentioned is supernatural in origin.

 

Your moral rulebook is relative to what A? Your ok and not ok instructions. A's big book of facts? Send me a copy or publish so that I might start a new religious endeavor.

[Antlerman]

You are defining sin as 'produces little harm'? I thought the definition of sin is 'falling short of the mark', which one would say is the Nature of God. To fall short of God, is 'sin', not some bishop's ideas about how a society should look and behave according to his projected sexual phobias.

I believe I said we are unable to live without doing harm, i.e. sin.

Doing harm from whose perspective? That's the key question you need to answer. Taking away a blanket from a child and making him cry can be seen as harming the child, from the child's point of view.

 

Is a snake eating a mouse a sin? Is a lion killing an antelope sin? No. In fact, is is the working order of things. Surely you're not so naive as to believe God created lions with flat teeth and they were originally herbivores? Why do humans have incisors? If you believe God guided evolution, than killing and consuming other life forms is God's will. It is not sin. "Harm" is you, from your ego-perspective, attributing what you call good and evil to the world. Now, talk about making yourself God!

 

Death is part of life. It is not sin.

I don't kill and eat other people.

Neither do lions eat other lions. We're geared towards the survival of the species as well as our own selves. You certainly do kill other animals however, even it that's indirectly by paying a hit man to kill a cow for your "what's for dinner tonight?" question answered by a slab of beef on your plate. What's your point?

 

Sin, if you wish to be more appropriate is when you are self-centered when you should be sufficiently enough matured that you are able to participate in a community of others showing mutual respect and tolerance: Not sending them to hell because they don't believe your religious dogma! Religion, in that case is a sin to unity, or a sin against God.

The key word is religion, right? Did not I just say we all cope religiously? Did Christ not preach grace?

We don't cope religiously. People cope in all manner of ways. Did Jesus teach grace? Yes. Do Christians display that? No. Are they following Jesus then? No? If not, are they even really Christians, and not rather Churchians?

 

Religion is sin when it leads to hating your brother. End of story.

 

Again, death is not sin. It is Life. And once again, why is it that Christians prefer the magical world of the non-life world of floating humans who never physically die? You do realize that heaven is here, and now, for anyone who wishes to realize it? That heaven however is not a myth world of the undead. That's just a child's silliness about the world.

 

It's all perspective. You tout that things have to be realistic. You have many times. I struggle, I suffer, many struggle, many suffer , actually all suffer, all struggle with the reality of our inability to unify.

 

Don't flower it. Give me something real.....not childish silliness as you say.

You don't wish me to call it childishness? You wish something real? Then, not to sound rude, but "grow up". That's how you stop being a child. Paul said this himself, "When I became an adult I put away childish things". It is about a practical existence in the here and now, that is 'life more abundant'. And if apprehending that requires you to 'put away childish things', that that is your priority, not continuing to be loyal to same bike gang you rode with when you were only five years old. They may still be five, but are you? I'm not. Being five is fine when you're five. It's not when you're 50.

 

You are right, it is about perspective.

[Akheia]

Your moral rulebook is relative to what A? Your ok and not ok instructions. A's big book of facts? Send me a copy or publish so that I might start a new religious endeavor.

 

End, why are you trying to move the goalposts? Demanding I come up with a "moral rulebook" still doesn't answer a single one of my questions OR prove a single thing you said to be logical or true -- or even consistent with your own holy book. You're trying to put your rightful burden onto me, and I do not accept it. Nice try!

 

You're trying to squirm again and avoid the harm questions, champ, and it ain't working. AM's right. Your outlook is very childish. And your fake religion needs you to be childish, because if you grew up and really questioned its tenets, really demanded evidence that any of its claims, even a single one of its claims, were true, you'd quickly discover the truth. AND WE CAN'T HAVE THAT.

 

You do realize, I hope, that your feeble attempt to avoid these questions is glaringly obvious. Why don't you go re-read my post and actually take some time to think about the answers? We'll wait. I know reading for comprehension isn't a Christian's strong suit.

[Ouroboros]

I don't kill and eat other people.

You kill and eat other lifeforms though. You can't even survive without life ending for something else. Our world, this biological construct, is based on life through death.

 

Sin is not just "killing other humans" but a concept that is a lot wider. When I grew up, it was a sin in our house to drink alcohol, smoke, curse, watch naked women (not just porn, but any explicit movie, was a no-no), and many other things like lying, stealing, gossiping...

 

How would any of those example of immoral or sinful acts be explained in your worldview? Why are they sins?

[Ouroboros]

Your moral rulebook is relative to what A? Your ok and not ok instructions. A's big book of facts? Send me a copy or publish so that I might start a new religious endeavor.

That's the thing. All moral codes are learned. You learn them from your parents. Your parents share them with other people. It's a community constructed idea that changes slowly with time.

 

Even Christians have different views on what is moral or not, even using the Bible. Because each and every person interprets the Bible according to what they believe, not the reversed. You don't read the Bible and change your view. You adjust the interpretation of the Bible to fit your view. And your view comes from life experience and upbringing.

[Guest end3]

We don't cope religiously. People cope in all manner of ways. Did Jesus teach grace? Yes. Do Christians display that? No. Are they following Jesus then? No? If not, are they even really Christians, and not rather Churchians?

 

Yes we do. Some gather facts, some go to church, some remain quiet, some rebel, some do drugs, some do sex. We religiously do these things to cope. And there is no religious practice nor vault full of facts that can displace grace. We "sin" when we are unable to exact grace (insert life here) for others.

 

 

 

Religion is sin when it leads to hating your brother. End of story.

What you are trying to tell me I am understanding is that with enough practice, I should be able to realistically exact grace and be at total peace with myself. NO, that's not realistic.....never was. But, you make it a crime for me to hope for that state. And in the same sense, you might as well make it a crime for all of us in ANY MANNER trying to cope with reality. How is meditation any different in than MY religious practice? It's just another method to cope with the same reality.

 

For example you practice oneness but you still sin against me because you don't fulfill my needs through total grace, savy? Yet you want me to subscribe to your method while trashing mine?

 

You don't wish me to call it childishness? You wish something real? Then, not to sound rude, but "grow up". That's how you stop being a child. Paul said this himself, "When I became an adult I put away childish things". It is about a practical existence in the here and now, that is 'life more abundant'. And if apprehending that requires you to 'put away childish things', that that is your priority, not continuing to be loyal to same bike gang you rode with when you were only five years old. They may still be five, but are you? I'm not. Being five is fine when you're five. It's not when you're 50.

 

You are right, it is about perspective.

 

 

So what's grown up in your book, picking what one thinks is the best fit and moving forward, making the best decisions with the best info and experience they gather? You don't think I'm not doing the work to move from a to b? Really?

[Guest end3]

Your moral rulebook is relative to what A? Your ok and not ok instructions. A's big book of facts? Send me a copy or publish so that I might start a new religious endeavor.

That's the thing. All moral codes are learned. You learn them from your parents. Your parents share them with other people. It's a community constructed idea that changes slowly with time.

 

Even Christians have different views on what is moral or not, even using the Bible. Because each and every person interprets the Bible according to what they believe, not the reversed. You don't read the Bible and change your view. You adjust the interpretation of the Bible to fit your view. And your view comes from life experience and upbringing.

 

Finally, someone rational. I assume what I read in the Bible is moral because I feel the Bible as a whole gives me the best fit .......and the older I get, the more smaller pieces fit together. So yes, I agree that we adulter the Bible, yet we also try to accept and learn lessons that we don't yet understand. Akehia makes it sound like whatever feels good, if we don't think it does harm, then do it. That is pathetically incorrect.

[bornagainathiest]

BAA,

 

You asked a question. I answered.

 

Yes, you did indeed respond... with absurdity and nonsense. The BS meter went off the scale!

 

To clarify, I believe the earth is more than 6000 years old. Also, I believe that death will be abolished at some point. I was understanding you to say that these ideas came from different camps. And why can't these two ideas be "mixed".

 

Don't ask me pal! I'm not a Christian, remember?

 

Instead, why don't you ask your Christian brethren on this site... http://www.christianforums.com/f143/ ...why these two can't be mixed?

I'm sure they'd be fascinated to know that you can do it!

 

Fyi End, the Origins Theology sub-forum runs to 128 pages of threads, all of them created by YEC's fighting with TE's over who's take is the true one. Nobody there mixes the two because they know full well they cannot be mixed.

 

Fy(further)i End, some of the regular posters there are Cosmologists, Geologists, Geneticists and Bible scholars. These guys would probably kill to know how you successfully mix YEC and TE without any scriptural or scientific contradictions.

 

Jesus said, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God." So, shouldn't you step right in there End and bring some peace to your warring Christian brethren? Shouldn't you show them the errors of their ways and teach them how you seamlessly mix Young Earth Creationism with Theistic Evolution? C'mon now! Don't hide your light under a bushel - follow Jesus' words and share your wisdom with your Christian brothers. I'll even be looking in to see you in action... so don't disappoint me, bro!

 

This happens to you often BAA, that you get no satisfaction in that someone doesn't answer to your idea of completeness or detail. I am not exclusive in this regard.

 

The fault lies with those I ask the questions of, not vice versa. If they can't or won't answer simple, politely-phrased questions about their beliefs, that's not my problem, it's theirs.

 

However End, there is one good thing that's come out of our recent dialog. My suspicions about you and your motives have been further confirmed. I can now modify my approach to you accordingly.

 

Thank you for that.

 

BAA.

[Guest end3]

However End, there is one good thing that's come out of our recent dialog. My suspicions about you and your motives have been further confirmed. I can now modify my approach to you accordingly.

 

Thank you for that.

 

BAA.

 

You got lost when I used the word supernatural? and btw, you're welcome

[Guest end3]

Let me ask each of you this. How does your life adequately provide for unity with me? And, how do you do that?

[bornagainathiest]

He's admitted 4 before on other threads, BAA. He's one of those fundies who doesn't see anything wrong with being deliberately cruel toward others and likes "jerking on chains." News flash: people who do that to dogs are considered evil and abusive. That doesn't change just because the target is a person and not an innocent chain-up dog. But there are a good number of Christians I've met who'll admit to enjoying "jerking on chains" as if it's this awesome fun hobby they have and aren't they just jolly fun and awesome people and aren't they just superior evolved beings for "making people think". Talk about a cognitive dissonance.

 

I'd also reckon he's #5, I'm afraid. AM trusts his good intentions, but I was married to a guy just like him for too long to be so charitable. If his spelling were worse, I'd already have PM'd the mods to ask about him--that's how close he is in spirit and temperament.

 

Hey Akheia!

 

Looks like you were right about #4! Maybe End's a better-educated clone of your ex?

 

Y'know, when this forum... http://infidelguy.com/forums.html ...was still up and running I was a highly active member and my handle there was BAA too.

When "cruel" Christians jerked people around for their twisted idea of fun, we atheists banded together and posted warnings against them. Stuff like, "Please do not respond to this so-called Christian, they are simply having 'fun' at your expense." Or... "Please treat this Christian as you would a troll, by not 'feeding' them." Every time they tried to get a rise out the serious members, their posts were smothered in these warnings. They soon stopped and 'grew up' (that's for you A-Man ) , they quit or they just got themselves banned.

 

BAA.

[bornagainathiest]

Let me ask each of you this. How does your life adequately provide for unity with me? And, how do you do that?

 

"Please do not respond to this so-called Christian, they are simply having 'fun' at your expense."

[Guest end3]

Let me ask each of you this. How does your life adequately provide for unity with me? And, how do you do that?

 

"Please do not respond to this so-called Christian, they are simply having 'fun' at your expense."

 

I'm not having fun. I'm just tired of the moronic rationization in place of grace. Again, I ask you, how are any of you, with exception to a few providing unity with me? And how are you doing that?

[Antlerman]

We don't cope religiously. People cope in all manner of ways. Did Jesus teach grace? Yes. Do Christians display that? No. Are they following Jesus then? No? If not, are they even really Christians, and not rather Churchians?

 

Yes we do. Some gather facts, some go to church, some remain quiet, some rebel, some do drugs, some do sex. We religiously do these things to cope. And there is no religious practice nor vault full of facts that can displace grace. We "sin" when we are unable to exact grace (insert life here) for others.

I don't equate habits and methods with religion as such. Religion has the overlay of spirituality to it. Not all coping mechanisms have that. That's all I was saying.

 

Religion is sin when it leads to hating your brother. End of story.

What you are trying to tell me I am understanding is that with enough practice, I should be able to realistically exact grace and be at total peace with myself. NO, that's not realistic.....never was.

Yes, yes it is. And yes, yes you can. Didn't your Jesus claim this for himself, "I have overcome the world"? How come he gets to and no one else? Oh that's right. That's the myth of the church that says you can't. You need to keep coming back to church and tithe for them.

 

But, you make it a crime for me to hope for that state.

No. I point out the error that says you can't have that; that you have to wait until after you die and if you're good enough, Jesus will take you up to live with angels, and all that. I see that as denying the reality that is here, right now, and fully ours already if we simply "overcome" what keeps us from that. What do you suppose that really is?

 

Do you think its helpful the church tells you that you are a sinner, born to sin, and unable to overcome yourself in this flesh? I think that's a putrid sin to tell human being that. Way to keep people from actually realizing Peace. Nice one church.

 

How is meditation any different in than MY religious practice?

Meditation looks within. Religion looks to the outside. If you practice meditation within religion, than that's different. But do you? How many do you know in your church who do? Jesus meditated. Why don't they? That's right, he's different from humans. He's a god-person, right? We're just lowly sinners, born to sin, doomed to a life of begging for mercy from God. Whoa is us. Whoa...

 

How sad, how pessimistic.

 

It's just another method to cope with the same reality.

Meditation is not a coping mechanism. It is a path to growth and development. That's like saying growing up is a coping technique. Meditation means you face it head on, face to face, not hidden or balanced behind 'tricks' you do to keep afloat. On the contrary.

 

For example you practice oneness but you still sin against me because you don't fulfill my needs through total grace, savy?

No, I do not "practice oneness". You either experience it, or you don't. There is no 'practicing' it. You may practice mindfulness, keeping the mind from wandering off into the thick of inner dialogs and instead be aware of the moment, the now, the present. But that is not 'practicing oneness'. There is no such thing. Oneness is a state of awareness that simply opens to you.

 

And how, how on earth End do I possibly sin against you but not fulfilling your needs, that only you, you and you alone are responsible to realize for yourself? You have to, we all have to, walk our own path.

 

Yet you want me to subscribe to your method while trashing mine?

I'm not trashing your method. It may work perfectly fine for some people with where they are at. Are you sure it's working for you though? My sense sees otherwise, but I could be wrong. It's perfectly fine for you if you feel right at home with the rest of the flock. Do you?

 

So what's grown up in your book, picking what one thinks is the best fit and moving forward, making the best decisions with the best info and experience they gather? You don't think I'm not doing the work to move from a to b? Really?

What's grown up is to see beyond ourselves. I do think you're trying. All I'm doing is trying to provoke you to something more that you've already tasted and know. Perhaps I may be wrong and you're happy believing the myths as literal. I guess maybe I see you able to step beyond that though. Maybe not. In which case, if it works for you than continue.