All Activity

"She's making sure she is not dreaming. See the lights of a neighbor's house. Now she's starting to rise. Take a minute to concentrate And she opens up her eyes." "Moving into the universe And she's drifting this way and that. Not touching the ground at all And she's up above the yard." "no doubt about it She isn't sure about what she's done. No time to think about what to tell them. No time to think about what she's done"

Sorry, it is not.

One of the things atheists constantly need to contend with is the constant invocation of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy. In short, this is a technique in which a member of a group denounces another member of the same group for a real or perceived difference that the atheist is somehow supposed to account for prior to making any criticism. "I understand you don't like Christianity because A, but you need to realize REAL Christians reject A." Meanwhile most don't. You do. But only because you know A is indefensible even though you wish it weren't. "You know. most Christians don't believe the Bible is inerrant." They don't? Ok, so when we complain about errors in the Bible, we're not undermining your... "Shut up about errors in the Bible. That doesn't prove anything!" Sure it does. It proves the book has errors and you can't rely on it as history, for example. "No True Christian considers the Bible an account of history." Fantastic. So we agree Exodus and the Great Flood, among other stories, never happened. "How do YOU know they never happened?" But you JUST SAID we can't trust the Bible as history. "PROVE IT'S WRONG!" There is no record of the 10 plagues or the firstborn of everyone in Egypt dying. "No True Christian believes that's history." It is IMPOSSIBLE to have a rational discussion with people who "debate" like this. It's one excuse after another and we're just standing by watching you twist yourself into a pretzel and begging you to see reason by asking "DO YOU HEAR YOURSELF?!?!" There are some people who follow a version of Christianity so unique to themselves that it's impossible for anyone to discuss it with them rationally. "My Christianity holds that Genesis didn't really happen but it talks about these stories to impart spiritual truths that, when you look really closely at them, make us better people." Except they don't. Lesson: If God tells you to kill your kid, the morally correct answer is "NO YOU BLOOMING SOCIOPATH! I WILL NOT KILL MY SON! AND IF THAT'S YOUR IDEA OF A TEST, I'D BETTER HAVE PASSED BY SAYING NO, YOU SICK THUCK!" But no, Abraham is the HERO of this story. Unless he were alive today. Someone kills their kid today and says God told them to do it, you KNOW he's psychotic, no questions asked. But it happens in the desert 5,000 years ago and you're supposed to say "What Incredible Faith!" NO! Why do we accept conduct from the characters of the Bible that we would never accept today, even those who claimed back then they were acting on God's instructions? "Ok, here's what I need you to do. You see those people over there? Kill them all. All of them. Even the kids. Kill every last one of them. Leave none alive." William Lane Craig looks at that instruction and feels sorry for the poor person who has to do all that killing. The trauma! How about having a little compassion for the women and children being killed? Nope. Not an ounce. The real victims are the killers. They were just following God's instruction. Poor things. And WE don't get to say this is morally indefensible because if we do, get this, WE are arrogant! You know...

FYI, I will be computer-free over the weekend. I'm sure you'll all struggle along without me. George

Oops. I got it confused with another thread (name the actor or role). Thanks George. I'll put something else up.

Is this Floyd, WordWolf?

No worries. See what I did there? On another front, I wanted to thank Modgellan for stepping in yesterday. We don't always see eye to eye, and I tried to make it clear that I would accept his review even if I didn't agree with it. One thing he only touched on that I think needs to be said out loud. And I'm putting on the modhat even though I take it very personally. DWBH said a LOT of hateful things about me after he left GSC, and I am not really at liberty to respond because he's no longer on this site to defend himself. I will tell you that he went on a vicious and hostile social media campaign to slander my personal and professional reputation. I do not accept the blame for his disappearance from GSC, and while I don't expect one, I believe I am entitled to an apology for this cheap, petty and ignorant allegation. OldSkool can come here and defend himself whenever he wants. But I expect him and everyone else to be honest about it. He was always perfectly free to espouse his point of view. That was never the problem. The problem was he had zero tolerance for anyone espousing the opposite point of view. GSC has dozens of threads where Christianity is presumed, the scripture is respected as an authority, and unbelievers have [at best] limited reign to interject. That wasn't good enough for OS. He had to say Christianity is no longer welcome at GSC, which is demonstrably untrue. Then he got mad at me for calling that lie a lie. Too bad. OS was not banned. He left because he wanted to, never recanting the lie that served as his motive. I do not accept the blame for his disappearance from GSC, and while I don't expect one, I believe I am entitled to an apology for this cheap, petty and ignorant allegation. Finally, poor skyrider. I believe in our years on GSC, we maybe crossed swords a few times. I want to say I challenged an anecdote of his, but I truly don't recall if it was skyrider, Socrates or socks. Whoever it was, it was years ago and never stopped any of them from posting. Maybe they avoided ME. Hard to tell seeing as I don't/didn't interact with any of them often enough to notice. Sorry, but it's true. They say their thing and nine times out of eight I don't get involved. I'm not saying never, but it's rare. In his very last post, May 25, 2023, he praised GSC for shining the light on TWI. He also quoted scripture. It's in the Time To Come Home thread in About the Way. Here's something skyrider wrote in Feb. 2023: THAT is what skyrider thought of GSC. Five months after his final post, Skyrider died. DIED. He didn't "quit posting because Raf made him feel unwelcome." He DIED. And you have the cold-hearted AUDACITY to blame MY conduct as a moderator for the decision of a man to stop posting here after his DEATH?!?! I do not accept the blame for his disappearance from GSC, and while I don't expect one, I believe I am entitled to an apology for this cheap, petty and ignorant absolutely contemptible allegation. The phrase gets used too often to be effective, but if ever there was a time it was appropriate: YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF. Off my soap box. Apologies for digressing from the thread topic.

You know there is a new Disney musical drama film being released in December about the life of Mufasa. I don't know if it will make those of us who were traumatized by his treacherous murder when he was pushed from the cliff and then trampled to death by the stampeding wildebeest as his adorable son who had just been saved from said stampede by his brave father watched him fall...feel any better, but it's worth a try, I guess. And thanks for changing the name!

It is done.

Modcat5 killed Simba's father!!? But why??? On the other hand, considered them said.

No, and no. But "answers" aren't always there for me either. Hi oldiesman, thank you for your answer. The action I was referring in my question though is whether it is okay with God for believers to choose which scriptures to believe and which to discard. Phil 2:12 does not speak to this. It speaks about how obedience is required when working out ones salvation because God will be working in them, at the same time, to be willing to do his good pleasure. Phil 2:12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. 13For it is God which works in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure. (The phrase "fear and trembling" is used in two more verses and obedience is mentioned in them as well. They are 2 Cor 7: 15 and Eph 6:5.) Agree, and agree. The first one, I don't know if it's ok with God to believe one "translation" over another; I think it's one of those mysteries but I do believe that God will be judging that from what he sees in our hearts. The second post, agree, eternal life comes with conditions. Thx for the correction.

You're supposed to say the magic words: "Modcat5 killed Mufasa." Then we can change it.

...possible son or daughter. So effing true and so effing bad.

After starting the thread, I wanted to change the title to "letting go" instead of "losing" but wasn't sure if that was possible. I never used to have a problem with Matthew 22:37-39 - what could be wrong where love is concerned. However, the part I used to overlook or ignore before, now stands out - is it love when you are commanded to do so with there being negative consequences when you don't?

I agree, a lot of the phrases used to promote wayism were not main line Christianity "inherently accurate" was never used in the Lutheran or Southern Baptist teachings

I used the word fundamentalist because it means believing the bible is the literal word of God and that it is inherently accurate. This was how vp wanted us to view the bible, but you're right in that he felt free to change it whenever it suited his fancy. I think because of the former, many were gullible to accept the latter.

The first gift from God (and the one all future gifts are dependent on) is salvation, but since there is a requirement attached (that you must make Jesus your Lord), it is not a free gift. If that requirement is not met, there is no salvation and one remains condemned to death/hell. The way God set everything up from the very beginning in Genesis 2 was conditional on obedience and the result of the first sign of non-compliance was death. What parent would set up such a system with their child?

Hi oldiesman, thank you for your answer. The action I was referring in my question though is whether it is okay with God for believers to choose which scriptures to believe and which to discard. Phil 2:12 does not speak to this. It speaks about how obedience is required when working out ones salvation because God will be working in them, at the same time, to be willing to do his good pleasure. Phil 2:12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. 13For it is God which works in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure. (The phrase "fear and trembling" is used in two more verses and obedience is mentioned in them as well. They are 2 Cor 7: 15 and Eph 6:5.)

What we need.. heh. At the end of the fiftieth page, a brief summary.. What the hell are we talking about here.. heh Don't you know? Nope. Looks pretty interesting though.. God Bless you dear Friends..

Just saying.. take the abortion issue. The Fundamentalists regard it as a work of the Devil.. TWI- Disagree. It has its uses- especially if a possible son of a man of God is to be illegitimately born. Well.. that was the Old TWI religion. What does the organization think now? That is just... the tip of the proverbial iceberg.

A lot to quote but- I really don't agree that TWI was ANYTHING "fundamental" in the Christian arena. By no means.. Other than a claim of being such. We'd have to go into the abortion issue here.. and politically it is probably forbidden. Plus another half dozen issues.. TWI fundamental.. I don't think so.

The hard part of this- after 14 pages one must spend probably 14 hours reading and researching to contribute what is the word.. meaningfully. I prefer short cuts. Read the first page, the second.. skim through the next to last and last page.. If I could really retire, I would do better here. OK. So.. One does not really lose one's religion. I think that we are supposed to actually improve it. My opinion. So far- I have seen no improvement over Matthew 22:37ff. Just a lot of justification why not to do it- yep.. got our reasons and all. We don't have much time to straighten ourselves out here.. life is but a vapor.

My favorite reference to legitimate Cosmology.. heh

I'm asking sincerely if there were times you struggled with an answer you believed you received after saying this prayer. Have there ever been feelings of guilt, doubt, confusion or fear as a result of listening for answers?

No argument. It's readily apparent that one must desire to accept all that responsibility presumably for a greater purpose. Here is a catholic prayer to the Holy Ghost: 'oh Holy Ghost, beloved of my soul, I adore thee. Enlighten me, guide me, strengthen me, console me. Tell me what I should do. Give me your orders. I promise to submit myself to all that you desire of me, and accept all that you permit to happen to me. Let me only know thy will.'