Arrrrgggghhhh!!

[Thumper]

Lynn has just informed me that I WILL watch tv with her tonight (9:00 pm, I think?). Subject? Diane Sawyer's interview with Bruce Jenner about him becoming a female! I think I'll start drinking again ... like right now! Someone please shoot me! :banghead

[Captain]

Instant man card revocation

[Buckrub]

Instant human revocation. No human should be interested in that, not ABC news, not you, not her, nobody.

Seriously.

Have her committed.

[Thumper]

All I know is, it's gonna cost her dearly ... and THAT will more than cover the price of admission! IfyoulnowwhatImeanandIthinkthatyoudo! :D

[No-till Boss]

I feel sorry that you have to watch that thump, but that is some sick shit that shouldn't be on TV ever.....

[Thumper]

Heck. I just informed her that I'd be breaking into my trusty ol' Pfizer bottle and gulping down a little blue pill about half way through the interview, so she'd better be ready for some payback. It's then she informed me it's a TWO HOUR interview. Sheeeesh! I think she's gonna have to owe me a little something more for extra credit! I refuse to be the loser on this deal! :D

[LJ3]

Too late

[quercus alba]

there is probably something out there that would interest me less but nothing comes to mind at the moment. Well maybe a state of the union address. Just thinking about it makes me want to crank up Bad Company and do a drive by tazing

[LJ3]

I don't know if you've noticed or not. But you ARE correctly Titled to do so :)

[quercus alba]

I realize I'm only a junior noticer but I picked up on that fast quick and in a hurry. nothing like 1200 volts to get your attention although sometimes you have to double dip if the feller is big........or so I hear. Actually probably a better title for Cap, I spect he has a little experience with one

[DeputyDog]

If he does, it wasn't a good experience. If I remember correctly, he has a dislike for Tasers.

[quercus alba]

I have a friend who is a policeman and he said he'd take a taser anyday over pepper spray. guess it just depends on how you prefer your pain

[Thumper]

Never been tased ... but we had to endure tear gas as part of our training in the military. NOT a pleasant experience ... and I sure wouldn't ever want to experience it again! :(

[DeputyDog]

I'm a Taser instructor, and I'd definitely take getting tased over pepper spray anytime. I'm also smart enough not to want to get tased more than once, the one time was enough!

[BarryBobPosthole]

So did Bruce Jenner or that pill give you a boner? Sounds like a handy excuse to me.

BKB

[Thumper]

Ummm, Sunny ... assuming there is a God, he IS what God created. Duh. The question you need to ask is "Why". Oh, I forgot, we shouldn't question God. He has a plan, etc. etc. etc.

I did watch the show and it was actually a bit interesting. He's been "this way" since childhood, but has always managed to hide it. He enjoyed dressing up in his sister's clothes as a child and has done it all his life. I'll bet the Paparazzi are kicking themselves in the ass because he talked about how he'd go to his hotel room when traveling, change into women's clothes, leave the hotel "as a woman" and would spend all day around town without anyone recognizing him. Heck, he even went through hormone therapy back in the 80's, but discontinued it after hooking up with Kris Kardashian because he was growing boobs ... in fact, he had breast reduction surgery at that time. He also went through the suicidal thing and even looked into "reassignment surgey" in Denmark just before meeting Kris. What suprised me was the fact his friends and family never out'ed him. His close friends have always known, yet nobody ever ratted him out. I think that right there shows his character as somebody could have made an overnight fortune by passing on the secret ... but NOBODY ever did.

He's coming out now because he's in his mid-60's, is tired of living the lie and just wants to be himself for a change ... or herself! ;)

Oh, BTW ... he's not gay. I won't go into all that because I seriously doubt anyone here would understand the difference ... or even care to ... but it was an interesting story none the less. No clue how all this is going to play out, but more power to him.

[Buckrub]

You're crazy for watching that.

THAT is not validly debatable! :)

[No-till Boss]

Look for a new TV series on how to be a tranny ......

[Thumper]

Oh, I have no doubt at all some goofy "reality show" will spin off of all this. I have no clue what it would entail presactly and seriously doubt I'll ever find out. I'm sure Lynn will watch it though. She's glued to the set when the Kardashians comes on ... I always have to find something else to do or watch the other tv.

[Captain]

So did Bruce Jenner or that pill give you a boner? Sounds like a handy excuse to me. BKB

Just the fact that Thumper can mention Jenner and boner in the same thread is disturbing.....

[DeputyDog]

Well, this thread kind of answers Bucky's question in the other post. Sunny commented on her belief that this was against what God intended for people, and she gets jumped on for having stated her religious belief.

[Thumper]

Well, this thread kind of answers Bucky's question in the other post. Sunny commented on her belief that this was against what God intended for people, and she gets jumped on for having stated her religious belief.

And it also backs up his statement that things don't get discussed.

I can't quote Sunny here or I'll be facing the Devil myownfineself, so you'll simply have to read her statement again if you care to. I don't really see where she got "jumped on". I simply asked a question. Why? Didn't God create Jenner in the first place? Obviously, God fucked up (or did He?) and Jenner is trying to correct the "defect" to the best of his ability. If you have a child born with a cleft lip and/or palate, would it be a sin to have it surgically corrected? How about a heart defect? Just "live with it"? Mental illness? Treat it or let it go? Is it a sin to wear glasses (corrective lens') if our eyesight isn't what it should be? The questions are endless. I don't get how the Bible thumpers of the world feel they have the right to pick and choose and act as if they know what God had in mind for everything and everyone He created. I suppose this is just one of the reasons I have such a problem with religion in the first place ... the total and constant hypocrisy. It reminds me of questions I'd ask in Sunday school as a little (curious) kid. How did Noah get all those animals on that little ark? How did so few people feed and care for all those animals? Where did all the food come from? What did they do with all the poop? I was just an innocent little kid with questions and was deemed a trouble-maker for asking those questions and not just blindly accepting what I was told as fact.

Your post is typical. You (and Sunny) have it in your heads you know for a fact what God wanted ... and anyone who doesn't agree with YOUR thinking will go to Hell.

Did any of you even watch the show? Did you hear the man speak? Do you even have a clue what he's been through? What he thinks? What he feels? Does it even matter?

[Captain]

Anything "He's been through" as you say is what HE put himself through...

[Thumper]

Typical response.

[LJ3]

This IS typical of what Bucky was talking about in his other thread. Nobody here is going to change Sunny's opinion. Nobody's gonna change Jimmy's, either. But this site is just a microcosm of the bigger picture.

20 years ago I would have called Bruce a freak and judged him harshly. Now, I don't think I or anyone else is in any justifiable place to judge him. Let him be who he is and leave him the hell alone. Why do we try so hard to slap our moral template on people? Maybe we're all just tired of being told we're doing it wrong?

Maybe there IS a religion of tolerance and acceptance. For me, it doesn't go that far though. I just think we should let people be whoever they are and focus on being happy, compassionate and living our own lives.

Crap, am I Buddhist?

The Dali Lama walks in to a pizza joint and says "Make me one with everything."

[Thumper]

LJ for President! ;)

[Thumper]

Sunny ... my point is, if He made him into a man ... evidently he screwed up somewhere along the line. Or is that even possible? If God gave Jenner a pecker ... why didn't He give him a brain to match?

[Thumper]

Ummm, Sunny ... I don't want to quote you ... but go back and read your second sentence. Does that truly make any real sense to you?

[Buckrub]

My problem is that Thump (and his agree-ers) gets to state all that he said above, and if I, or Sunny, give OUR opinion of why we think he's wrong, or what we think about it, we're villified as not being tolerant and for not just 'letting folks alone'. My belief is not valid, and his is.

More, I promised him I would never again get into a direct discussion with him about religion.......as it upset him so much for me to give my opinion of things as I saw them. He assumed I was calling him names. At the end, I tried to 'turn the other cheek' finally, and let him have the last word and not reply. I sense that since then there's an unnecessary tension, and I attribute it mostly to all that. I could be wrong.

But of course it isn't kosher these days to be tolerant of those who believe there is a standard of right and wrong. Len asked "why can't we leave him alone". Well, we ARE! NO one is calling him up and suggesting he change. I AM 'letting him live'. We're simply discussing our views of life, as it applies to this. I believe, and many others do also, that there is black and white standard that states that this kind of behavior is wrong. I didn't make those rules. If I had, I'd have made them differently! Jim thinks he can ask a ton of questions that HE can't answer, and that doing so proves that there are NO answers. That's incorrect, but we don't get to discuss it in depth with him........and truthfully not anyone else like him. Our views are dismissed. THAT is the issue I have........not that anyone has a differing view..........but that their view is relevant and mine is worthless.

And that's all I have to say on this matter.

[LJ3]

I hear ya Bucky. I don't judge you for your opinion. Maybe that's the word that everyone needs to pay more attention to.

These are all OPINIONS. Not facts, not truths, not absolutes, not rules, not judgments, not condemnations, they're opinions. We present them as if they are something else but in the end they are not.

I have noticed that the louder someone screams for tolerance, the more likely that they are not tolerant at all. That used to really piss me off. Now it just amuses me.

[Thumper]

Bucky, I call bullshit. (and why are you talking as if I'm not here?)


Jim thinks he can ask a ton of questions that HE can't answer, and that doing so proves that there are NO answers. That's incorrect, but we don't get to discuss it in depth with him........and truthfully not anyone else like him. Our views are dismissed. THAT is the issue I have........not that anyone has a differing view..........but that their view is relevant and mine is worthless.

The point I always try to make is that you and others quote all that's in the Bible as absolute fact, when in fact, NOBODY knows. Religious beliefs are just that ... "beliefs". All based on "heresay" actually. I have no problem with people of faith ... where I draw the line is when their faith is perceived as the ONLY faith that's valid. There are different religions all over the world. What makes "us" so arrogant that we are the only ones who are correct?

And the "name calling" you refer to is the fact you many times (even though you have a convenient lack of memory and always deny it) refer to me as an Athiest. When I say I prefer the term Agnostic, you inform me there is absolutely no difference. I'm still looking for answers ... I just have trouble accepting the one's I'm given. Isn't that my right?

[Thumper]

And I'll quote the unnamed blonde lady ... the most important statement made so far.


This is my OPINON and how I was raised.

Ma'am, I was raised the same way. Dad was a deacon in the church, my grandfather and 4 of my dad's brother's were preachers ... three had their own churches. BUT ... I grew up and formed my own OPINIONS and nobody can guarantee me they're wrong ... just as I can never guarantee they are right. BTW ... I appreciate the prayers. Are they the reason I'm still alive today? Nobody KNOWS ... I don't ... and you don't either. That does not mean I don't appreciate the thoughts sent my way.

[LJ3]

Hey look! We're arguing! :)

[Thumper]

Who's arguing? I thought it was a G/H "discussion". ;)

[Captain]

Typical response.

The truth can only come out one way Thumper.

[LJ3]

In every disagreement there are three sides. Person A opinion and perspective, person B opinion and perspective, and the truth. Life happens in between those things.

[Captain]

Mine is the third one. :D

[Thumper]

Well. I'm in "limbo" ... I guess that could mean "between".

Here's what it all boils down to. I have NO problem with people "of faith". None whatsoever ... until they tell me they base their faith on fact ... what they think, is the way it is, period! That ruffles my feathers a bit.

Here's the definition of faith:

Faith is defined as belief, confidence or trust in a person, object, religion, idea or view despite the absence of proof.

So, IMHO ... NOBODY can be right OR wrong.

[johnboy]

I always wondered why those who purport to believe in a religion and deity that spoke of love and tolerance and kindness seem to have the most problems with those who might not quite fit their perception of "right" and "wrong".

Personally, I feel sorry for Jenner. He seems to be a person that has struggled with an issue all his life and is now doing something about it. Does his personal decision affect me in any way? No, not in the slightest so I wish him luck in finding whatever he is missing in his life.

[Thumper]

Well said Johnboy.

[LJ3]

So, IMHO ... NOBODY can be right OR wrong.

And here we have, in it's native habitat, a creature who will never be able to be successfully engaged in Holy Matrimony. Genus - Jiminus Cluelessnutorum.

[Thumper]

And to think I was going to hire you to photograph the magic day. :(

[BarryBobPosthole]

I always wondered why those who purport to believe in a religion and deity that spoke of love and tolerance and kindness seem to have the most problems with those who might not quite fit their perception of "right" and "wrong".

Personally, I feel sorry for Jenner. He seems to be a person that has struggled with an issue all his life and is now doing something about it. Does his personal decision affect me in any way? No, not in the slightest so I wish him luck in finding whatever he is missing in his life.

This^^^^
BKB

[Captain]

And to think I was going to hire you to photograph the magic day. :(
Don't do it LJ it will break all your cameras and he will want to pay you with old razors.

[BarryBobPosthole]

Don't do it LJ it will break all your cameras and he will want to pay you with old razors.

On the other hand, he'll take great photos of you with your cats.

BKB

[LJ3]

Hey! Let's focus on Jimmy here! See what I did there? focus? (walks away disappointed)

[Buckrub]

Jim, I promise not to get in a debate with you again. But there are two points that you are confused on, and I need to publicly state something.

First, I never, ever called you some 'name' with malice. I did not ever mean to be malicious. If somehow you have some idea of the meaning of two words that's not akin to my idea of their meaning, and if I used one that offended you, I am sorry. I've said that often. Yet my definition of those words, and the one I find from dictionary.com says an Agnostic is "a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena".........while an Atheist is "a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods." I'm pretty sure that it's valid that you lack personal belief in the existence of God, because you've said that repeatedly.

When I called you an Atheist, I did so with honesty, thinking you'd have no problem with it.......since both people, either lacks (is missing) belief that God exists, or believes that no one can know if God exists. I saw no difference, still don't, and so if I called you some 'name' it was out of honest belief that I was using the right word, NOT to offend you.

Second, your comment above that you have no problem with people of faith, just so long as they don't try to tell you that their faith is based on fact, that rankles you. So YOUR mind claims that there cannot be a fact in this area, therefore you don't want anyone else to believe any differently.

Well gee, man! I believe that my faith CAN be proven by facts. So, I have a choice. I can rankle you by stating my sincere and rational belief, or I can let YOUR view of reality supersede mine just because you spoke it. And that rankles me! I will stop arguing the point if you want......but I will not accept any validity that your view of reality can only be true because your mind says it is so, while my view is dismissed by you because my mind cannot possible be right......only yours can.

THAT is the problem. You don't discuss these things........you get 'mad' when folks claim they know something that you don't know. That's pretty elitist and arrogant if you ask me.

I will ask you one serious question. You don't have to answer of course.

If you think you are an Agnostic simply waiting on proof that God exists, having found none yet, just exactly and specifically what proof would you accept that He does exist? I'd be curious what you say.

[Thumper]

Hey! Let's focus on Jimmy here! See what I did there? focus? (walks away disappointed)

Two little black girls were sitting on the wall of a fountain in the town square. A tourist walks up, calls the older of the two over and asks if he can take their pictures while they're sitting at the fountain. The little black girl tells him it would be fine and as the tourist removes his camera from it's case, she walks back over to sit next to her little sister.

The younger sister asks, "What he be doin'?"

The older sister says, "Don't move ... he gonna focus."

The younger sister looks at her all wide-eyed and asked, "BOFE US???" :D

[Thumper]

Bucky, one thing you've always been an expert at is placing words in people's mouths that they never said. When called on the carpet, you won't remember. We've been beating this horse for years and you always come up with the same bullshit. I have never, ever ... EVER said God does not exist (or better yet, A GOD ... not necessarily YOUR God). I have always, ALWAYS said (since LONG before I ever knew you or anyone here and my feelings have never changed ... so far) I just simply do not know ... and there's nobody on this earth that can say they DO know. They can "believe" (see my definition of "faith" above) ... but believing is not knowing, no matter how strong your belief is.

I've explained the difference to you a bazillion times, but you absolutely refuse (always have) to acknowledge a difference. I've always posted a dictionery definition of the two explaining the difference but it never matters. You're a smart and educated man ... but you let your faith place blinders on any open mindedness (is that a word?) others may possess. There are Atheists and there are Agnostics ... two different birds IF you're willing to accept one's personal feelings and beliefs. If you want to split hairs and get into Agnostic Atheists and/or Agnostic Theists, the water gets even muddier. It's not up to YOU to pick and choose what I believe ... I've told you (many times) what I believe. Take it or leave it.

One more time ... (as if it'll do any good).

Atheist vs. Agnostic

1) An atheist is anyone who doesn't happen to believe in any gods, no matter what their reasons or how they approach the question of whether any gods exist. This is a very simple concept, but it's also widely misunderstood. For that reason, there are a variety of ways to state this. Atheism is: the lack of belief in gods, the absence of belief in gods, disbelief in gods, not believing in gods.

2) An agnostic is anyone who doesn't claim to know for that any gods exist or not, no matter what their reasons or how they approach the question of whether any gods exist. This is also a simple concept, but it may be as widely misunderstood as atheism is. One major problem is that atheism and agnosticism both deal with questions about the existence of gods, but whereas atheism involves what a person does or does not believe, agnosticism involves what a person does or does not know. Belief and knowledge are related but nevertheless separate issues.

Accept that there is a difference ... or don't ... it's up to you. But quit putting words in my mouth that I've never said.

[Buckrub]

Stop getting your panties in a wad all the time, ok?

Those are YOUR definitions. That's how YOU use them. I get that, and when I figured that out, I never called you an Atheist again. Stop putting words in MY mouth that I did! I did not, not after that.

But the definitions I read do not make such a clear distinction as you do.......but yet again, I am forced to accept your definition and not the one I find. I'm sure you are 100% correct, and that I'm not, though.

But I made my points that I wanted to make, and I'm done. I harbor no ill will in any wa, I just want to make sure it's known what I did and what I said and what I believe. My view of life is just as valid as yours is..........and I will stand by that, no matter how much you tell me it rankles you for me to accept as fact the things that I believe. And I didn't call you anything, not lately, and I didn't put words in your mouth.

You can respond, but I'm officially done with this particular discussion with you.

[LJ3]

So, from the stands.. it looks like Bucky's going with the dictionary definition and Thump is defining the words on his own. I called the Webster company but they declined to repeated requests for comment.

Many of my disagreement with my better half center around defining words, or one of us using words in a context which doesn't necessarily include the actual defined meaning. It's a hard thing to resolve. It SHOULDN'T be, but it is.

[Thumper]

Bucky, you shore have a purty mouth ... but after knowing you for the past 18+ years ... I can see right through your smokescreen.
BTW, I didn't write those definitions ... but what difference does it make ... they will always be two different words that mean exactly the same thing to you. There is only black and white in your eye ... never any gray. Not everything in this world is as cut & dry as you seem to think it is.

Screw Funk & Wagnell ... How about this directly from the Catholic Church?

Question:

Is there a difference between atheists and agnostics, or are they just two names for the same thing?

Answer:

Many people confuse or equate the terms, but there is a definite difference between the two.

An atheist, on the one hand, believes that there is no God. Etymologically, the word means "not, or no God." In the atheist camp you can have a wide variety of reasons for their denial as well as differing levels of certainty. Some will deny emphatically that there is a God and claim to have "proof" of God's non-existence. Other's will simply say they do not believe there is a God though they could not prove God does not exist. The common denominator is that they do not believe in God.

Agnosticism is not a belief system as atheism is; rather, it is a theory of knowledge. Etymologically, it means, "not, or no knowledge." An agnostic is someone who believes human beings simply cannot know anything metaphysical or beyond the physical realm; therefore, they cannot know whether things like spirit, angels or God exist at all.

Contrary to popular belief all agnostics are not atheists. There are theistic agnostics--fideists, for example--who believe in God but do not believe that their understanding of God is knowable by natural means.

[Thumper]

LJ ... that is not MY definition ... it came from some site on religion ... don't even remember what it was ... something about "Religion Explained" or sumpin' like that. (Granted, I should have posted a link)

We can play the dictionary game all night long ... this is directly from the Cambridge Dictionary. (see, take your pick and choose the dictionary definition that fits your agenda)

agnostic
noun [C] US /æɡˈnɑs·tɪk/

› someone who believes that it is impossible to know whether or not God exists

And Bucky ... you just verified EXACTLY what I've always said about your "putting words in my mouth". Again, I have never, ever said God (a God or Your God) does not exist ... never! Yet you throw this out as if it's fact.


I'm pretty sure that it's valid that you lack personal belief in the existence of God, because you've said that repeatedly.

That is what gets my panties in a wad ... you only hear what you want to hear. I have always (since I was a young kid) said I simply do not know ... NOBODY knows. I, for all practical purposes, died 7 times while in the hospital. The docs were right there each time and assured me I "should" be ok because they'd zap me back to life, but they made it clear, there was always a chance I would not wake up. I remember like it was yesterday, thinking each time ... "Ok God .. now's your chance ... give me a sign ... a vision ... anything." I got nuttin'. Maybe He was busy at the time, but He could'a gained a fan.

[No-till Boss]

Sunshine what denomination do you abide by ?

[Thumper]

Sunny, Graham was born in Bucky's home town. I'd be afraid ... VERY afraid! ;)

[Thumper]

You know I'm just messin' with ya'. :D

[No-till Boss]

Since you guys like to eloquently discuss religion so much I have a question from last weeks sermon.

Okay the preacher said, all the thoughts in your head are judged accordingly.

So if I'm walking thru somewhere and I see a chick that I think has a nice rack.......is that a sin in your opinion ? I mean, it's controled and confined to my head is that still judge-able act ?

[Thumper]

You need to wash your eyes out with soap but I'd say you're still in deep doo doo! :D

You have heard that it was said, “Do not commit adultery.” But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

— Matthew 5:21-22, 27-28

[Arty]

Since you guys like to eloquently discuss religion so much I have a question from last weeks sermon. Okay the preacher said, all the thoughts in your head are judged accordingly. So if I'm walking thru somewhere and I see a chick that I think has a nice rack.......is that a sin in your opinion ? I mean, it's controled and confined to my head is that still judge-able act ?

No.

But... If you turn around and stare at that ass after she's passed you. That's a sin.

[LJ3]

But God made 'dat ass! I blame HIM! :)

[Thumper]

They need to hide that enticing ass. It's nuttin' but bait put there by the Debbil hisownself! Maybe the Muslims have the right idea! ;)

4728

[No-till Boss]

You need to wash your eyes out with soap but I'd say you're still in deep doo doo! :D

You have heard that it was said, “Do not commit adultery.” But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

— Matthew 5:21-22, 27-28

Yeah I guess I knew that, seems a little harsh tho.

[Thumper]

Way back when I had an apartment in L.A. ... I had a buddy who lived two doors down ... an ex-Marine. He played football in college and married the head cheerleader. I will admit ... I DEFINITELY coveted my neighbor's wife ... so I'm already toast! :hair

[Thumper]

Party-pooper! :(

[Captain]

You need to wash your eyes out with soap but I'd say you're still in deep doo doo! :D You have heard that it was said, “Do not commit adultery.” But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. — Matthew 5:21-22, 27-28

I'm toast!
Burnt toast at that....................,,,.,,.

[BarryBobPosthole]

Sunny, Christians are saved through grace since Jesus and there is no accounting of sins at the seat of judgement like everyone talks about. There is only one simple thing to do to earn salvation per Jesus' teachings.

He didn't say don't bake cakes for gays, he didn't say don't wear rubbers, he didn't say any of the stuff that we hear today being discussed in the 'freedom of religion' discussions going on. In fact he said the OPPOSITE of what we're hearing from so-called christians.
and sitting in judgement is one of the most unchristian acts of all.

I'm about sick of hearing about persecuted christians.

But its a free country. Carry on.

BKB

[Arty]

Sunny, Christians are saved through grace since Jesus and there is no accounting of sins at the seat of judgement like everyone talks about. There is only one simple thing to do to earn salvation per Jesus' teachings. He didn't say don't bake cakes for gays, he didn't say don't wear rubbers, he didn't say any of the stuff that we hear today being discussed in the 'freedom of religion' discussions going on. In fact he said the OPPOSITE of what we're hearing from so-called christians. and sitting in judgement is one of the most unchristian acts of all. I'm about sick of hearing about persecuted christians. But its a free country. Carry on. BKB


I think the problem most Christians have is being sick and tired of having to be tolerant and understanding of other people's beliefs .... And having their beliefs pooped on, even made fun of.
A typical example would be not being allowed to say "merry Christmas", but by God you better not dis Hanukkah or kwanza. You'll get skinned for that.
That's how I see it anyway. And I'm not saying it's right to judge, even in those situations. But I'm not sure Jesus would sit back and take it either.

That's my problem anyway. I'm a Christian. And if you wanna ban this or that then fine. But don't tell me a Christian is cra-cra for not making a lesbian couple a wedding cake, but the rival bakery down the street is completely OK to refuse service to the same two carpet munchers ... because they are Arab and it's against their religion.

And that's exactly what's going on in a lot of cases. Not every case. But a lot of them.

And I have no clue if Jesus would make a gay wedding cake. Actually, now that I think about it, he probably would. And I bet it would taste awesome.

[BarryBobPosthole]

Arty, being tolerant and recognizing someone else's freedom to live and believe what they want are two entirely different things. And those terms are mingled pretty liberally by those folks making your points.

BKB

[Buckrub]

Sunny, Christians are saved through grace since Jesus and there is no accounting of sins at the seat of judgement like everyone talks about. There is only one simple thing to do to earn salvation per Jesus' teachings.



Not sure the basis of either of those ideas........they are certainly contradicted clearly by the Bible........but carry one, it's a free country.

[BarryBobPosthole]

Well, its only the basis of the entire protestant religion.

BKB

[Thumper]

YIKES!!! I almost quoted Sunny! My bad.

Anyway, Happy Festivis for the rest of us! :D

[Buckrub]

So you say. I ain't a Protestant. And that is NOT biblical, period.

But whatever.

[Buckrub]

Sunny, Christians are saved through grace since Jesus and there is no accounting of sins at the seat of judgement like everyone talks about. There is only one simple thing to do to earn salvation per Jesus' teachings.

He didn't say don't bake cakes for gays, he didn't say don't wear rubbers, he didn't say any of the stuff that we hear today being discussed in the 'freedom of religion' discussions going on. In fact he said the OPPOSITE of what we're hearing from so-called christians.
and sitting in judgement is one of the most unchristian acts of all.

I'm about sick of hearing about persecuted christians.

But its a free country. Carry on.

BKB

That's what Posthole says. This is what the Bible says:

Hebrews 9:27New American Standard Bible (NASB)

27 And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment

Romans 14:12New American Standard Bible (NASB)

12 So then each one of us will give an account of himself to God.

Matthew 12:36New American Standard Bible (NASB)

36 But I tell you that every careless word that people speak, they shall give an accounting for it in the day of judgment.

John 5: 28 Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice,
29 and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.


John 16:8New American Standard Bible (NASB)

8 And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment;

Acts 24:25New American Standard Bible (NASB)

25 But as he was discussing righteousness, self-control and the judgment to come, Felix became frightened and said, “Go away for the present, and when I find time I will summon you.”

Romans 14:10New American Standard Bible (NASB)

10 But you, why do you judge your brother? Or you again, why do you regard your brother with contempt? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God.

and best:

2 Corinthians 5:10New American Standard Bible (NASB)

10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.

[No-till Boss]

Bucky if you're gonna make a adamant salvation statement, shouldn't it be only from the King James version ?

[BarryBobPosthole]

I guess John 3:16 is irrelevant then, eh?

Sorry, I wouldn't want to villify anybody.

BKB

[LJ3]

Oh Lordy... the bible verses are coming out :)

To Arty's point. I think there's some more subtle (maybe not subtle) things at play where Christians get mocked and chastised much more these days than they used to. My generation, in my part of the world, Christian beliefs ruled the day. The religious rules were applied daily and in every instance where discipline was administered in one form or another.

Fast forward to today and somewhere along the way the "authority" of Christianity got pulled back a little bit for whatever reason. People felt empowered to speak about it in ways that would have gotten them shooshed and punished when they were younger.

The old lady admonishing with a bible and a tsk tsk has far less power these days. The community priest is just a man, no more no less and has no say. Stuff like that. to me, Christianity has lost it's grip on the country and Christians don't like it one bit. Quite naturally they feel slighted, ignored and lost some control as people have marched to their own drummer if they feel the need to do so.

Just something I've noticed in my wiser years. Not saying it's all day every day, but there's some of that going on, in my opinion. And we've already discussed opinions :)

[Thumper]

As has been said many times before, I came from a very religious family. I was a good little boy and attended Sunday School and Church every Sunday (my grandfather was the preacher and even performed my baptism). Heck, we even did the Wednesday night supper thing. But, even as a kid, I was fascinated by science ... wanted to grow up to be a scientist. At a young age, religion simply started not to make sense to me. I had too many questions that could only be answered with, "Because the Good Book says so, that's why!" I would always look at ALL the information available to me and analyze it. (My SEAL buddy tells me I try to "brain-fuck" everything to death) Anyway, as a kid, my mind and devotion started drifting and before long, I became a "heathen". ;)

Anyway, I made straight A's in school and when I got to highschool, I took all advanced classes (well, as advanced as they could be in h/s). I had all the math and science courses available at the time up through Physics and Trigonometry/Calculus. I was chosen as one of only 10 top science students from the state to attend a summer seminar at a local university one summer. (Laser's were a new thing in the 60's, we played with them and I was fascinated by them) Obviously I didn't persue a higher education other than a year in college as an Engineering major, then did my thing during 'Nam ... but never went back to school. Contrary to popular belief here, I still (and always have had) an open mind regarding religion ... I'm always open to answers ... but they HAVE to make sense to me and not be just words that somebody says are true ... but they actually don't know themselves. KNOWING and BELIEVING (Fact and Faith) are two different things in my eye.

Why did I start this post with my love of science? Just the other day I ran across a study on analytical thinking and religion. I think it pretty well matches the religious road my life and way of thinking have gone. Maybe I now know why I never really accepted what was being fed to me as a kid. It's a long read and I don't expect many here to bother, but it IS very interesting ... to ME anyway ... and does answer some of the questions I've had for years, as to why I think the way I do.

I know many of us hate to follow links, and probably even hate reading looooong posts, but I'll post it here anyway just in case. To ME ... it explains a few things. (Note: I'm not insinuating I'm a freaking genius, I just have this sort of basic mindset) If nothing else, it's at least an interesting view.

(From the Scientific American)

Losing Your Religion: Analytic Thinking Can Undermine Belief

A series of new experiments shows that analytic thinking can override intuitive assumptions, including those that underlie religious belief
April 26, 2012 |By Marina Krakovsky

People who are intuitive thinkers are more likely to be religious, but getting them to think analytically even in subtle ways decreases the strength of their belief, according to a new study in Science.

The research, conducted by University of British Columbia psychologists Will Gervais and Ara Norenzayan, does not take sides in the debate between religion and atheism, but aims instead to illuminate one of the origins of belief and disbelief. "To understand religion in humans," Gervais says, "you need to accommodate for the fact that there are many millions of believers and nonbelievers."

One of their studies correlated measures of religious belief with people's scores on a popular test of analytic thinking. The test poses three deceptively simple math problems. One asks: "If it takes five machines five minutes to make five widgets, how long would it take 100 machines to make 100 widgets?" The first answer that comes to mind—100 minutes—turns out to be wrong. People who take the time to reason out the correct answer (five minutes) are, by definition, more analytical—and these analytical types tend to score lower on the researchers' tests of religious belief.

But the researchers went beyond this interesting link, running four experiments showing that analytic thinking actually causes disbelief. In one experiment, they randomly assigned participants to either the analytic or control condition. They then showed them photos of either Rodin's The Thinker or, in the control condition, of the ancient Greek sculpture Discobolus, which depicts an athlete poised to throw a discus. (The Thinker was used because it is such an iconic image of deep reflection that, in a separate test with different participants, seeing the statue improved how well subjects reasoned through logical syllogisms.) After seeing the images, participants took a test measuring their belief in God on a scale of 0 to 100. Their scores on the test varied widely, with a standard deviation of about 35 in the control group. But it is the difference in the averages that tells the real story: In the control group, the average score for belief in God was 61.55, or somewhat above the scale's midpoint. On the other hand, for the group who had just seen The Thinker, the resulting average was only 41.42. Such a gap is large enough to indicate a mild believer is responding as a mild nonbeliever—all from being visually reminded of the human capacity to think.

Another experiment used a different method to show a similar effect. It exploited the tendency, previously identified by psychologists, of people to override their intuition when faced with the demands of reading a text in a hard-to-read typeface. Gervais and Norenzayan did this by giving two groups a test of participants' belief in supernatural agents like God and angels, varying only the font in which the test was printed. People who took the belief test in the unclear font (a typewriterlike font set in italics) expressed less belief than those who took it in a more common, easy-to-read typeface. "It's such a subtle manipulation," Norenzayan says. "Yet something that seemingly trivial can lead to a change that people consider important in their religious belief system." On a belief scale of 3 to 21, participants in the analytic condition scored an average of almost two points lower than those in the control group.

Analytic thinking undermines belief because, as cognitive psychologists have shown, it can override intuition. And we know from past research that religious beliefs—such as the idea that objects and events don't simply exist but have a purpose—are rooted in intuition. "Analytic processing inhibits these intuitions, which in turn discourages religious belief," Norenzayan explains.

Harvard University psychologist Joshua Greene, who last year published a paper on the same subject with colleagues Amitai Shenhav and David Rand, praises this work for its rigorous methodology. "Any one of their experiments can be reinterpreted, but when you've got [multiple] different kinds of evidence pointing in the same direction, it's very impressive."

The study also gets high marks from University of California, Irvine, evolutionary biologist Francisco Ayala, the only former president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science to have once been ordained as a Catholic priest, and who continues to assert that science and religion are compatible. Ayala calls the studies ingenious, and is surprised only that the effects are not even stronger. "You would expect that the people who challenge the general assumptions of their culture—in this case, their culture's religious beliefs—are obviously the people who are more analytical," he says.

The researchers, for their part, point out that both reason and intuition have their place. "Our intuitions can be phenomenally useful," Gervais says, "and analytic thinking isn't some oracle of the truth."

Greene concurs, while also raising a provocative question implicit in the findings: "Obviously, there are millions of very smart and generally rational people who believe in God," he says. "Obviously, this study doesn't prove the nonexistence of God. But it poses a challenge to believers: If God exists, and if believing in God is perfectly rational, then why does increasing rational thinking tend to decrease belief in God?"

[Arty]

Oh Lordy... the bible verses are coming out :) To Arty's point. I think there's some more subtle (maybe not subtle) things at play where Christians get mocked and chastised much more these days than they used to. My generation, in my part of the world, Christian beliefs ruled the day. The religious rules were applied daily and in every instance where discipline was administered in one form or another. Fast forward to today and somewhere along the way the "authority" of Christianity got pulled back a little bit for whatever reason. People felt empowered to speak about it in ways that would have gotten them shooshed and punished when they were younger. The old lady admonishing with a bible and a tsk tsk has far less power these days. The community priest is just a man, no more no less and has no say. Stuff like that. to me, Christianity has lost it's grip on the country and Christians don't like it one bit. Quite naturally they feel slighted, ignored and lost some control as people have marched to their own drummer if they feel the need to do so. Just something I've noticed in my wiser years. Not saying it's all day every day, but there's some of that going on, in my opinion. And we've already discussed opinions :)

You kinda got it right.
My point was more towards why Christian beliefs are bashed, but eerbody' is scared to take a jab at Muslims, Hindu, etc etc.

Their all religious beliefs, why is Christianity "picked" on... While others aren't equally picked on?

The "they" I speak of is mostly talking heads, news media, both print and television.

[BarryBobPosthole]

Picked on by whom, Arty? I worked in business for 35 years. At no time has anyone ever told me not to say Merry Christmas. F course, I always thought telling Jewish people That was kind of crass, but hey if that's your badge of christianity, go for it. Have you ever been asked not to use that greeting? Its talked about today like its verboten. Well no it isn't. That's bullshit. The problem is, the people who choose to exercise their own rights to just say Happy
Holidays are the ones being villifies by so-called christians.

No, this persecution stuff is all a bunch of bullshit.

BKB

[johnboy]

OK, I've got a question for all you religious scholars: can I still consider myself a Christian if I believe in the teachings of Christ but do not believe in his divinity?

[Thumper]

OK, I've got a question for all you religious scholars: can I still consider myself a Christian if I believe in the teachings of Christ but do not believe in his divinity?

I get where you're coming from Johnboy. I've always wondered if I'm honest, lead a good life, am good to people, etc. etc. etc. ... IF there is a Hell, will I be sent there anydamnway? If so, why? Just because I didn't accept Christ into my life? Seems kinda harsh to me. Personally, I think I'll just rot and the worms will eat me ... but what the heck? It's still a valid question.

[Thumper]

Picked on by whom, Arty? I worked in business for 35 years. At no time has anyone ever told me not to say Merry Christmas. F course, I always thought telling Jewish people That was kind of crass, but hey if that's your badge of christianity, go for it. Have you ever been asked not to use that greeting? Its talked about today like its verboten. Well no it isn't. That's bullshit. The problem is, the people who choose to exercise their own rights to just say Happy
Holidays are the ones being villifies by so-called christians.

No, this persecution stuff is all a bunch of bullshit.

BKB

Same here P-hole ... I've told people Merry Christmas all my life ... NEVER once has anybody protested. I, like you, believe it's all media hype.

When I had my business, I sent Christmas cards to all my customers unless I knew they were Jewish, then I sent Hanukkah cards. I'm sure I screwed up a time or two not knowing, but to my knowledge, I never lost a customer ... and never had a complaint.

[LJ3]

How about Merry F'in Christmas? I've heard that more than once in my life :)

[Thumper]

That's reserved for close friends. :D

[Buckrub]

Bucky if you're gonna make a adamant salvation statement, shouldn't it be only from the King James version ?

John 3:16 is relevant, but not "in toto". There's more than one verse to the bible. Got to take all of them........all or none.

NTB, why would I want to speak like they did in 1611???? For what? Bible was written in Greek and Hebrew.........for me and you to read it, it has to be translated. I prefer to read more like I talk, not all the 'thou' and such.

[Buckrub]

Headed out the door. But thought of this, Posty.

John 3:16 is a part of our Law. But it isn't the only part, no more than the law that says you have to pay income tax is the sole law on taxation. There's other taxes. You have to take the whole of the law, all parts.

And that verse says how much God loved US. But how much do we love Him? Jesus himself said twice......in John 14:15 and again in John 15:14 that if you love Him, you will keep his commandments. That requires you to believe there are commandments, that you have to figure out what they are, and that you have to follow them.........

Later!

[BarryBobPosthole]

I see. So deathbed confessions are non-existent because at the seat of judgement you'd always come up short on the scale.

I always thought the blood of the lamb washed away all sins and belief was the only requirement. You tend to take a more old testament view I reckon. Probably cause you was a boy during those times yuh?

Have a great trip! Don't wreck that new hoopie!

BKB

[Thumper]

Nope, Bucky has always said he's a "New Testament guy" all the way. I keep wondering when the 3rd Edition is going to be released. ;)

[quercus alba]

The English Standard version is one of the most accurate translations not to be confused with a transliteration. The King James in the old english is virtually unreadable. The New International version is pretty accurately translated and very easy reading.

The thing is the new testament was written primarily in greek which does not translate into english very well. Greek is a pretty complex language and many times a good greek lexicon is needed to grasp the true meaning behind a word. Most people are not willing to go to that much trouble and just listen to the preacher which is not always a good thing.....see Creflo Dollar.

[No-till Boss]

John 3:16 is relevant, but not "in toto". There's more than one verse to the bible. Got to take all of them........all or none.

NTB, why would I want to speak like they did in 1611???? For what? Bible was written in Greek and Hebrew.........for me and you to read it, it has to be translated. I prefer to read more like I talk, not all the 'thou' and such.

I think it's very important if you're gonna quote religion you need do two things FIRST, state your denomination and tell what script you're read from. Otherwise it's just poetic rubble......

[Buckrub]

I think it's very important if you're gonna quote religion you need do two things FIRST, state your denomination and tell what script you're read from. Otherwise it's just poetic rubble......
Not sure I agree with any of that.

But.....

I don't belong to any "denomination", and I'm not a protestant.

And, for every verse I quoted I gave the translation.....the New American Standard or NASB.

[Big Skyz]

Dumbest thing people can argue about is religion. Politics are a close second.

[Buckrub]

Dumbest thing people can argue about is religion. Politics are a close second.

So, these two highly important topics should not be discussed?

What should, then?

[Buckrub]

Dumbest thing people can argue about is religion. Politics are a close second.

So, can I tell that to the guys knocking on my door? They disagree with you too.

[Big Skyz]

The key word in my sentence was "argue", not "discuss". Big difference and folks would be wise to learn the difference in regards to both subjects.

[quercus alba]

I was going to weigh in on this discussion but I changed my mind and deleted my post. Instead I'll quote a very wise man:

<i>"the people who are most anxious to share their religion with you are the most unwilling to have you share your religion with them."</i>

Dave Barry

[LJ3]

Talking to people about religion and why they believe what they believe is a subject that will fascinate me till I die... And hopefully after that too! :)

Arguing about it is dumb. I agree with BS.

I've read so many books about the subject I'm pretty sure I could teach a pretty good class on it. For reals!

[BarryBobPosthole]

I want to know how many times in 97 posts that Bucky was villified for his beliefs. I'm still trying to sort that one out.

BKB

[Captain]

Zero

[Thumper]

It's ALWAYS been zero. I've been accused of it in the past but have never, ever understood where the accusation came from. I think he has a vivid imagination. I'd never think of doing such a thing to ANYONE ... even Bucknut! ;)

[No-till Boss]

Not sure I agree with any of that.

But.....

I don't belong to any "denomination", and I'm not a protestant.

And, for every verse I quoted I gave the translation.....the New American Standard or NASB.

Nice bailout, I thought you claimed to be a Baptists ?

[No-till Boss]

I've read so many books about the subject I'm pretty sure I could teach a pretty good class on it. For reals!

If you haven't you need to read the Muscle and the Shovel. Best one I've ever read period .

[Buckrub]

If you haven't you need to read the Muscle and the Shovel. Best one I've ever read period .

Baptist is not the name I wear.

Wasn't villified. Was told I'm dumb, and unwise, to discuss my beliefs.

[Buckrub]

By the way, I do not agree that it's dumb to discuss the single most important subject in my life.

And I do not see any difference in arguing, and discussing with those who disagree with me. Same same. It does seem to me that folks get way more bent out of shape on this than I do.

However, I am typing this from hospital er.

[No-till Boss]

Baptist is not the name I wear.

Wasn't villified. Was told I'm dumb, and unwise, to discuss my beliefs.

I guess that explains why you're so vague and or gun-shy ....