All Activity

"I Must Let the Show Go On"?? Leo Sayer. Three Dog Night Yeah, that's it. I'm sure. I'm going. "Ah, rock on George, one time for me". I feel fine. "Ah, rock on George, for Ringo one time". Whoo!"

I don't think this was as easy as you thought George. I don't think I would have gotten it unless you posted a picture with Tiger Woods holding all four major championship trophies. Good trivia.

Oh right, George of the Jungle, no, "Toy Story" "Lookin' good Billy-Ray"! "Feelin' good Lewis"!

James Cagney?

"Sanford and Son" "Book em' Danno!"

Jumpin' Jack Flash I'm sittin' in the railway station got a ticket for my destination

You have to be honest about what you're saying, here. You're describing a completely one sided intellectual affair. If that were the case the impossibility would be real. It's not one sided and it's not all intellectual. God had his mind on us before we put our minds on him. Further, none of us knew all the religions when we first believed. Someone might have considered the inflection point in dating human history is based on one major religion but in the end, it was set out there and we took it. Unapologetically, subjective experience is a big part of it.

These are some of the “godly” laws dictated by God: Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.—1 Peter 2:18 He that striketh his bondman or bondwoman with a rod, and they die under his hands, shall be guilty of the crime. But if the party remain alive a day or two, he shall not be subject to the punishment, because it is his money.—Exodus 21:20–21. But if what he charged her with be true, and virginity be not found in the damsel: They shall cast her out of the doors of her father’s house, and the men of the city shall stone her to death, and she shall die: because she hath done a wicked thing in Israel, to play the whore in her father’s house: and thou shalt take away the evil out of the midst of thee.—Deuteronomy 22:20–21 If a man have espoused a damsel that is a virgin, and some one find her in the city, and lie with her, Thou shalt bring them both out to the gate of that city, and they shall be stoned: the damsel, because she cried not out, being in the city: the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour’s wife. And thou shalt take away the evil from the midst of thee.—Deuteronomy 22:23–24[5] These are just a few of the laws an atheist society would probably not include in their laws.

If I was inclined to be involved in a group that believed in God I would have absolutely no problem joining TWI. How can anyone claim that TWI’s doctrines are not based on the bible? There are over 2,000 other groups who also claim their doctrines are based on the bible. How can anyone say their Christian group, out of the over 2,000 in the world, make the claim their group is right? Why on earth do you believe your group has the a wrap on the truth? Then throw in all the other religions of the world, how you say your groups belief’s are the correct ones? Somehow, apparently, you have been able to wade through thousands of religions, and pickout the correct ones. Please assist me in picking the winning lottery numbers!

WordWolf said..." As you probably know- now if not decades ago when asbestos was popular- the thing has been responsible for a lot of deaths all on its own! Breathing in asbestos fibers is incredibly harmful to one's lungs, and can lead to a problem with its own name- asbestosis. (Feel free to look it up.) You might say that all people have to say about asbestos is negative now, and they ignore the good it's done. I think most people would reply that asbestos may have done well- and I would say it's saved lives- but it's more important to point out the incredible dangers of exposure to this dangerous substance than to focus on some of the benefits and IGNORE the dangers that could suffocate you or kill you. " I would say both asbestos and twi can kill in the same 'way'....slowly, cruelly and sucking the oxygen out of you....

It's the beleefs. Every time. I don't know JoyfulSoul, but reading his last two or three posts brought forth a wellspring of compassion for him. Only from reading the words he wrote, I gather he suffers deeply because of his beleefs. And, sadly, he won't let go to be liberated, or as he says, delivered. My ex-step son (is that a thing?) has serious psychological disorders. He was clinically diagnosed in his teens, but because his mother and her wierwille-worshipping family are so vehemently opposed to a psychiatric diagnosis and treatment, his disease progressed and worsened. Today he is in prison. I was with him one night when he was having a psychic break. He babbled a bunch of nonsense about heaven and hell and the devil and Israel, etc. His own Corps grad uncle never got the green light or cookie or whatever to cast out the psychological disorders. Now the young man is spending the rest of his life in prison. Little children are more "spiritually mature" than all actors in this tragedy. They have yet to be conditioned to beleeve anything at all.

Is it human nature to expect a glove to fit every hand that arises? Words and their definitions are problematic, aren't they? Words like transcendent, numinous, sublime, even spiritual. They are pretty much all we got and religion can't claim exclusive rights to them. Transcendence has several meanings, only one of them religious. Numinous can mean awe-inspiring. Kant has a concept of the Sublime. Christopher Hitchens uses these words to make the point that you need to go beyond religion in order to fully appreciate reality, not just to understand it rationally but also to enjoy it, to be dazzled by its beauty and order, to exalt in its wonder. When Hitchens talks about "the transcendent and numinous," he's not referring to anything supernatural. He's also not advocating any type of worship or debasement. He's referring to an appreciation for the amazing insights and workings of the natural order as well as an appreciation for the greater aspects of the human experience. He's trying to make the case that religion doesn't own these words or concepts. He's also attempting to address the claim that science reduces everything to chemical impulses and nihilism. His position is that atheists are capable of having the exact same types of experiences as believers, and none of them require beleef in anything supernatural or anything unsupported by the evidence. He's saying that atheists are just as capable of feeling self-transcending love or connection to something greater than oneself or true awe. One doesn't need superstition to take part in any of these amazing human experiences. If you reject the notion that there exists a supernatural dimension, then all religious and spiritual experiences can be understood as purely, physical phenomena. Therefore, when someone experiences a moment of self-transcending love that feels all-encompassing or when someone goes into a desert and fasts for 40 days and 40 nights or when someone takes a pilgrimage to feel a connection to the divine or when someone learns about the natural order and feels an incredible connection to the universe or when someone experiences a piece of art that moves them deeply and inexplicably to feel as if they're part of something larger than themselves, all of these things can be understood as meaningful subjective experiences in a physical, natural universe with no supernatural or spiritual dimensions. It's difficult to illustrate how meaningful and impactful these experiences are without using language that is typically reserved for usage in explaining religious experiences. After all, people like Einstein and Spinoza weren't necessarily religious, but they definitely had beliefs that could be called spiritual. Not spiritual in the sense that it spoke of a spiritual dimension, but spiritual as in an incredible admiration for the workings of the natural order, the range of human experience, and the mysteries of the universe. One can reject the supernatural and absolutely still have a transcendent experience. Here are the Four Horseman talking about the transcendent and numinous. https://youtu.be/9DKhc1pcDFM?si=n2dsCndVCJviEYEn And here's Sam Harris on his use of the word spiritual. https://youtu.be/zLKNvBdUtZY?si=utS8kRZtcr7AX8Ka

So let it be with Caesar.

I think evolving is a good choice of words especially in progressing away from Christian/religious beliefs being imposed and enforced on others. The "others" here would not only be non-religious folks but also the people within a religious institution who are required to obey its expectations, rules and regulations in order to be accepted and avoid abusive consequences. GSC has been good, especially with posts from Rocky, Penworks and others, about the rights and ways one has to stand against the control of authoritarian leaders. The reality, though, is that all churches and "spiritual" institutions have expectations, rules and regulations. Most of all, Yahweh and Christ have mandates that must be followed in order to avoid the consequence of hell (however it is defined). This is why I think atheism (which is simply a non-belief in the existence of god/gods) is not a very bad, difficult or unpleasant thing.

Campbell begins the video by talking about being in Japan, a place that never heard of the Garden of Eden story. I felt some joy when I heard that because it's what I experience each time I wipe that account right out of the bible because of the depravity it saddles upon humans at the time of their birth. But he does talk throughout the video about the benefits of myths and traditions held by different cultures. Some teach the divine presence of the creator is in creation/nature itself including every human being which promotes treating both with respect. I personally see this as an improvement over the Jewish, Islamic and Christian god. Near the end, he speaks of deeply challenging rituals that traditionally have transitioned boys into responsible men and how the traditions of today are too watered down to build this sense of responsibility in our youth which is why our societies are in such a mess. I’ve only listened to the video once so if I have misrepresented Campbell’s views, please correct me. One quote I will share from within the first 5 minutes is the following: “I think what we’re looking for is a way of experiencing the world in which we are living that will open to us the Transcendent that informs it and at the same time, informs ourselves within it. That’s what people want – that’s what the soul asks for.” The definition of Transcendent being something that is “beyond or above the range of normal or merely physical human experience.” (Oxford Languages) This is where humanism differs because there is no divine or supernatural aspects to it. Can this not be enough for us to live in this world?

I'd be against enforcing such a society, but if one had evolved, would it necessarily have been much different? People behave the way the do, good or bad, because they choose to. My own observation is that if someone follows a religion that commands or expects "love thy neighbor" or some version of that, they will find a rationale to behave against those strictures if they feel strongly that their neighbor shouldn't be loved. On the other side, one who has religious beliefs can very easily choose to live a life indistinguishable from what a religion might teach.

I'm grateful about the good stuff, but I would NEVER come back.

"You hear that, Elizabeth? I'm coming to join you, Honey!" George

I've never heard of the ones in Formula 1, Darts, Curling, or Bridge. I have vague recollections of the ones in golf and tennis. I kind-of said "what do baseball and Denny's have in common?" and got there.

Totally. Your turn.

Family Ties? (Sounds like Alex Keaton) George

Hotel California "I was born in a crossfire hurricane And I howled at the morning drivin' rain." George

Billy Joel's "Piano Man." "Baby, there's an enormous crowd of people They're all after my blood I wish maybe they'd tear down the walls of this theater Let me out, let me out." George

Exactly. In baseball, a grand slam is a home run with the bases loaded. In golf, Formula 1 racing, tennis, darts, and curling, a grand slam is winning the major events. In bridge, a grand slam is to take all 13 tricks in a hand (but you have to bid it first, or it's just 13 tricks). In Denny's, a Grand Slam is a breakfast item. George