Stayed Too Long

58 minutes ago, Beguiled said:

A cult is created when a person pushes lies onto others for personal power and prestige.

A religion is created once the cult leader dies.

That puts TWI in the realm of a religion.

:D

(It's probably an oldie but most definitely is a goodie.)

1 hour ago, Bolshevik said:

I'm not sure how the "real world" is less insane than stories.  

According to evolution, we are relatives to all the food we eat.  We eat our family every day.

I must be quite evolved. I stopped eating my family quite a while ago. Lucky for them, huh?

  Evolution is driven by the elimination of failed lives.  There is no purpose but to pass on genes by any means. That's disturbing and nuts.

When you realize the gods and their stories come from the collective minds of many generations, what exactly are you calling ludicrous and not believable?

When Adam and Eve ate the fruit,  enlightenment brought them shame.  That's a short story with many layers.  That's talented writing for ancient people.  Don't think that truth has changed today.

Whether the verse has plan or purpose, to me, is neither here nor there. 

God had the ability to make a perfect world when he introduced Adam, because we are told that is what is going go happen at the end of time, so he knew how to do it. Why force a son to suffer and be crucified just to remedy a situation that happened years before the son was even born? 

I am really not attempting to find a way to justify, or not justify, Adam or Jesus. My purpose is to point out the whole story is so ludicrous it is not believable. 


 

22 hours ago, T-Bone said:

This is a response to the opening post  (when quoted here it will be in bold blue font)- the premise is based on one’s interpretation of the Bible. An inference from a specific point of view. Two people might have the same facts, but with different points of view, they may each come to a different solution to the problem…That being said and considering myself all in to explore this idea – I should first mention if there is any legitimate concern that this father should be reported to Child Protective Services, one should do so ASAP.

In the U.S. "every state has its own CPS department. While there may be procedural and legislative differences, each one has the same goal: investigating reports of abuse, neglect and exploitation. If they find evidence of these crimes, they have a statutory duty to intervene and take all necessary measures to help the victims and prosecute those who are responsible. " From:  When should you call child protective services
For the sake of brevity, I’m not going to get into comparing similar CPS systems in other countries – see   Wiki – child protective services

If CPS has information that a child may be in danger, they have the authority to go to court to ask for a court order—like a search warrant—requiring that the person allows them access. CPS must give the person notice if they intend to do this, and that person has a right to go to that court hearing. In an emergency, CPS can also return with the police without a court order.

If the accused person is confident that there’s nothing to be seen in their home that raises red flags, they may want to allow entry, since denying entry may make the CPS official see them as uncooperative. 

Defense attorneys may argue these are trumped-up charges based on false information or misinterpretation of the facts, or if it went further like going to court, it could also be deemed a frivolous lawsuit – which is a lawsuit that has no legal merit. 

Some things mentioned in the opening statement reflect bias and speculation. For instance, concerning the first son - as stated in the opening post: “this same father, set up another son to fail. With the full knowledge his son would not successfully complete the task, he put his son through it anyway”  Objection! There has been no evidence given to indicate the father had evil intentions or that he made absolutely certain something bad would happen – i.e., a project that was doomed to fail.

While the father may not have had evil intentions, he did have foreknowedge of the outcome:

Isiah  46:10

 Only I Can tell you the future before it happens. Everything I plan will come to pass, for I do whatever I wish.

According to Isiah Adam failing was a part of the father’s plan.

Furthermore, the accusation states the son did not successfully complete “the task” but fails to specify what the task was. The record DOES SHOW the son and his companion were given mandates of dominion and procreation – tasks which successfully continue to this day. There is nothing to indicate the son and his mate were coerced or acted under compulsion. There is no indication of abuse, neglect, or exploitation by the father. But rather it appears the son and companion acted on their own volition as they carried out their various tasks.

"This failure would not only affect this son, but all future sons throughout eternity. Because of this son’s failure, the second son had to die to overcome it." This statement alludes to the incident in Genesis 3, and is in error over the duration of the negative consequences – for the actions of the second son provide an option to nullify the consequences of the first son’s mistake. Furthermore, if the second son HAD TO DIE to overcome all that – it implies there was a necessity, an obligation or reciprocal justice measure-for-measure that already existed. Implicit in that obligation is the idea of a moral universe.

We find such compensatory ideas in many cultures - for example, in  Exodus 21     an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth – or in this case, a life for a life. Justice, in its broadest sense, is the principle that people receive that which they deserve, with the interpretation of what constitutes "deserving" coming from numerous fields, with many differing viewpoints and perspectives, including the concepts of moral correctness based on ethics, rationality, law, religion, equity and fairness. 

“This is not a good track record of a loving father; one son setup to fail, and the second setup to be murdered.”  I object again! As stated before, there has been no evidence offered to indicate the father had evil intentions.  Considering the father’s past achievements and performance recorded in the Bible – I’d say he has an excellent track record of giving his offspring complete freedom to choose and shape their own destiny – something you’d expect from a loving parent desiring to see their children flourish. Also, to say the father setup the second son to be murdered suggests the father had malice aforethought and organized an unlawful premeditated killing of a human being. 

In US Criminal law, means, motive, and opportunity is a popular cultural summation of the three aspects of a crime that must be established before guilt can be determined in a criminal proceeding. Respectively, they refer to: the ability of the defendant to commit the crime, the reason the defendant felt the need to commit the crime, and whether or not the defendant had the chance to commit the crime. According to the Gospel accounts it was CERTAIN RELIGIOUS LEADERS who had A NUMBER OF REASONS to hate Jesus. THEY had Him arrested, THEY tried Him, and THEY brought Him before Pilate for a sentence of death.

"What would you say about a father who allowed his son to suffer unimaginably and be finally murdered? And at any time, this father could have intervened and put a halt to all this pain. This father stood by and allowed his son to go through a mock trial, allowed false witnesses to testify against him, watched as he was whipped, and thorns put upon his head, and finally murdered."  I have no words to express the incredible love offered by the heavenly Father and His Son Jesus Christ.  John 3:16    reveals the Father’s true intentions: For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.       

A couple of passages show Jesus Christ volunteered for this “impossible mission” - and that His sacrificial death was not the end – for the resurrection would follow - No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.   John 10:17 

For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.   Mark 10:45

 

Closing argument: Jesus Christ gave His life as a ransom – a price to be paid to redeem a slave or prisoner. This redemption did not involve payment to Satan – but to satisfy God’s justice – as I mentioned previously, speaking of a moral universe. Jesus Christ subjected Himself to the divine punishment against sin on our behalf. 

Helping the aforementioned two sons is a moot point. What could we do to help the first son? And surely, it is we who are in need of help from the second son. But do current and future sons need to be protected from the heavenly Father? Is He an irresponsible parent? Has He shown a lack of concern for the consequences of His actions or for that matter, the actions of others? He gave mankind freedom and responsibility and created safety measures to protect and preserve justice for all – i.e., a moral universe. Based solely on the evidence of Scripture where are the passages that indicate the heavenly Father is guilty of abuse, neglect, and exploitation?

It is the opinion of this Grease Spotter that the premise of the opening statement was based on a misinterpretation of the Bible mixed with bias and speculation. If this premise should go to a hypothetical court, I would warn the jury to consider all of the evidence and not base their decision on a foregone conclusion.
 

14 hours ago, Rocky said:

IMO, it's a story, not literal/factual truth/reality.
We certainly agree on this point.  It has become unimaginable to be that any father could even conceive of such a demented idea.

But you raise intriguing questions about the culture(s) in which this story originated and survived up to the present time.

Some present day Christian fundamentalists have apparently lamented what they see as a trend toward atheism. Perhaps they could benefit from exercising the brains God gave them rather than subject more than six billion humans to mindless fearmongering. Just sayin'.

if we are talking about the demented god mentioned above, I don’t believe many people would want any brains he might be giving out. One can only imagine what family life would be like, knowing your father was going to have you crucified in the hear future. Help CFS!

1 hour ago, Bolshevik said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dying-and-rising_deity

What does dying and rising have to do with the god of the bible being a completely irresponsible father, specifically to, Adam and Jesus? And then passing this sin nature to the rest of his chosen children? 
 

Same garbage spewed Yesterday, regurgitated Today.

1 hour ago, Rocky said:

IMO, it's a story, not literal/factual truth/reality.

The events I am describing come from the bible. If you have another source you are referring to other than the bible,  please share it with us. 

I am not sure of your belief in the bible, but if you do, what passages do you consider factual, and which are not literal/factual truth/reality? What is your method for determining fact from story?

You say some modern day Christian fundamentalists lamented what they see as a trend toward atheism. Who are these folks and could you expound on how it relates to the subject A Loving Father?
 

And how do these people subject more than 6 billion humans to mindless fear mongering?

What would you say about a father who allowed his son to suffer unimaginablly and be finally murdered? And at any time, this father could have intervened and put a halt to all this pain. This father stood by and allowed his son to go through a mock trial, allowed false witnesses to testify against him, watched as he was whipped, and thorns put upon his head, and finally murdered.

And why did this son have to endure all this pain and death? Because previously, this same father, set up another son to fail. With the full knowledge his son would not successfully complete the task, he put his son through it anyway. This failure would not only affect this son, but all future sons throughout eternity. Because of this son’s failure, the second son had to die to overcome it. 
 

This is not a good track record of a loving father; one son setup to fail, and the second setup to be murdered. 

This father should be reported to Children Protective Services immediately. It is too late to help these two sons, but current and future sons need to be protected from such an irresponsible parent.

It is quite difficult to following the logic of Quiet Colors and what your point is.

13 hours ago, Quiet Colors said:

*Drambuie

*Also, WHY is it so obvious that their average age of readership or male readership (he didn’t specify so I’d assume cumulative) is 26? I was trying to remember who it was at HQ who told me in passing that in romantic relationships the male usually rises to the maturity level ohhhhh haha wait what so women are like the male swing dancer in the naked  department? wayyyyy stronger than men, men are just like little flexible wisps of a thing that you just twirl around, throw up in the air, swing em under the armpit, do a turn together? was he talking about SX????? How many syllables in X?

Did you figure out who is responsible for your observation? Please expound on exactly what your observation is?

15 hours ago, Quiet Colors said:

My opinion on Lonnie is God’s?!! Why yes, I agree in Part.

Can you please expand on your opinion?  It seems you are saying God has an opinion on Lonnie, and that is also your opinion? How do you know what God’s opinion of Lonnie is?

8 hours ago, Mark Sanguinetti said:

Just to remind Stayed To Long on this web site there is also a forum that is more in harmony with his current mindset.  

Atheism, nontheism, skepticism: Questioning Faith

Thank you. I wll be more precise in the future where I post.

12 hours ago, T-Bone said:

need clarification on this too

why do you think religion is the one thing that allows you to believe  anything or anyway you want and get the same results ? what results?

that seems too general...I think everyone is free to believe anything they want - but that doesn't make it so.

 

 

Let’s take the subject of going to heaven. All religions believe they will get the same results..i.e. going go heaven. However, the way  they get someone to heaven varies from group to group. Each group inserts their own beliefs, which can vary wildly, but in the end, all will end up passing through the gates to eternity. 

I used this example in a previous post:

“Mormans have to jump through hoops with Moroni, and wear wierd diapers to bed.

Not sure what the Jewish folks have to do. Guess they are still waiting for Jesus to come the first time.

The Baptists believe once saved always saved.

Muslims pray all hours of the day. And let’s not forget all those virgins for the warriors who die for Alluh.”

How can all these differing beliefs accomplush the same thing?  Getting their believers to heaven. 

58 minutes ago, T-Bone said:

This is your philosophy of life - is it not?

Does your belief system allow for making sacrifices to help someone else?

If you are tempted by an attractive woman to cheat on your wife - but you resist cuz you know it would hurt her - does that make you a hypocrite of your own philosophy?

would you still feel good if you got really drunk and while driving home - you hit and killed a 12- year-old crossing the street? If you answer yes - you would still feel good then you wouldn't be a hypocrite, would you?

 

just curious - you said you don't believe in God or the Bible - what do you believe about good and evil?  If a guy gets an AR-15 and takes out a bunch of people in Las Vegas because it feels good to him - is that okay? That was an event that actually happened.  2017 Las Vegas mass shooting   .This is a two-parter question: if your answer is that it's okay - then WHY was it okay for him to kill all those people? If it's not okay for him to do that - they WHY  was it not okay for him to kill all those people? I'm not trying to start an argument with you - just wanting to understand your belief system.

I used a rather extreme example, Drink, Sex, dope, whatever, to illustrate  my point. I do none of those in my life as it would be very detrimental to me and those around me. It was to point out there is seemingly nothing in life too extreme that would cause one not to go to heaven, if at the last moment, they were sorry for doing it. The point being you can prove anything from the bible if you want to. A verse here, a chapter there, this religion, that religion, any will somehow get you whatever you want.

How I believe in good and evil. Medical studies and life experiences show that excess drink and dope use is harmful to your health. I did partake in booze in my younger days, even though my religion at the time, said not to, so religion was no deterrent, but waking up with a hangover was. I saw how drugs screwed up my friends lives so it was natural to avoid them. My friends and I were raised in Catholic schools, which was absolutely no hindrance for some to steal, curse, drink, have premarital sex, yada, yada, yada.  
I have no desire to grab a weapon and kill people. I was raised in a religious family after the age of 9, but prior to that age, religion did not play a part in my life. It seems to me by the age of 9 I was aware not to lie, steal, or kill, etc. My parents taught me rules in life.
 

24 minutes ago, T-Bone said:

Maybe it’s just me but your opening question assumes a certain motive. It might be better as a survey question to determine if wanting to be with the Lord is the primary motive for living a life the Bible requires – and then have folks elaborate on their answer. 

Wasn’t sure about this thread until you said who it’s addressed to. Also, I would like some clarification on your second statement: “I believe it points out the hypocrisy, in my opinion, of the requirements needed to live a bible based life to enter heaven; and in contrast, a person who does not live this lifestyle, being allowed to enter heaven at the last minute, simply by a, “I’m sorry.” “

Are you saying the Bible promotes hypocrisy?

Without a doubt I am saying the bible promotes hypocrisy. Plus I doubt believe in the bible or God.
Catholics find salvation through confessing their sins to a man in a black suit.

Mormans have to jump through hoops with Moroni, and wear wierd diapers to bed.

Not sure what the Jewish folks have to do. Guess they are still waiting for Jesus to come the first time.

The Baptists believe once saved always saved.

Muslims pray all hours of the day. And let’s not forget all those virgins for the warriors who die for Alluh.

There are literally thousands of organizations who intrepret the same book (the bible) thousands of different  ways. I’m sure at least one believes you can live a life of hell, and slide into heaven at the last minute.
And don’t forget all the other religions who don’t know what the bible is.

Religion is the one thing that allows us to believe anything or anyway we want,  to get the same results. 

6 minutes ago, Bolshevik said:

You forgot dogs and cats.

How a power outlet looks like a face.

We project.  That's how we work.  This can be mimicked to the point we can't tell.

Look at Victor Paul Wierwille.

Over and out. Good night John Boy.

23 minutes ago, cman said:

No, I'm not choosing any religion, but thanks for the offer, although I haven't asked the question.

I don't believe the bible was meant to be a standard of living. It's more like a historical document, with plenty of learning in it.

Your belief viewing the bible as a historical document is one version. I personally do not look at it as a standard of living either, but many do. 

The subject of the thread is addressed to those who do feel the bible is a book to live their lives by. I believe it points out the hypocrisy, in my opinion, of the requirements needed to live a bible based life to enter heaven; and in contrast, a person who does not live this lifestyle, being allowed to enter heaven at the last minute, simply by a, “I’m sorry.”

51 minutes ago, Bolshevik said:

This like, Elon Musk stuff, so that's why I think you're playing devil's advocate.

This is the world.  We atomizing.

Our world is a projection, why wouldn't robots take the place of human interaction?

Now you throw out another perspective to try and fit your narrative of humans not needing other humans, “Our world is a projection…”  

Let’s use FB as an example. People hiding behind a keyboard can “project” what ever they want. Many arrive at an inaccurate conclusion of the message that was sent, and rant on and on, destroying any type of understanding between the two.
Post something about Covid on FB,, and thru AI, your post can be competely deleted if it doesn’t fit the AI’s version. To many, the belief of AI is completely wrong, but it cannot be debated. It is used to stop any debate and only frustrates the losing party. 
Again, all human interaction is a destroyed by AI. Those in power determine what is right. 

8 minutes ago, Bolshevik said:

Your questions are confusing.

We have, as a culture, said that human interaction is wrong.  We have been supplanting it.  Types of AI have been filling these voids.  There is a need for public safety to do so.

The questions don’t  seem confusing at all, but your quote, “..human interaction is wrong…”  is confusing. No culture I am aware of believes this. 
I think you are digging a hole you will not be able to climb out of.

7 hours ago, cman said:

I'm not sure what "live a life that the bible requires" actually is, or that it's a thing to do.

There are thousands of religions out there waiting for you to stop in so they can tell you. Choose your poison carefully.

11 hours ago, waysider said:

Would we be required to shout "Hallelujah!"? I'm not much of a shouter. Would an announcement on Twitter be Okay?

Technically, I do believe a Twitter announcement would work nowadays. It has been revealed St Peter recently equiped the Pearly Gates with wifi and data, so, we can sin on, but always carry your iphone with you. You just  never know when your number will be up.

Why should anyone live a life that the bible requires so we can go be with the Lord? There are just too many temptations out there for me to miss out on. We should live life however we choose; drink, sex, dope, whatever makes us feel good, and then a few hours before we die proclaim, “Hallelujah, I found the Lord. Thank you Jesus. I repent of all my sins. Now send me to be with the lord.” 

 

On 4/14/2022 at 1:11 PM, Bolshevik said:

What do people need that machines can't do?  Or is not being developed?

Just because I can have a meal prepared by a manufacturing company and shipped to me, doesn’t mean I don’t need to break bread with people at times. The frozen parcel does not eliminate the need to be around others at times. 
People can elect to live in a house by themselves and be a hermit, but most folks choose to live near others, and visit with them.
 

1 hour ago, Rocky said:

Well... there WERE allegations of laws being broken. Martindale WAS subject to litigation. IOW, there are records on GSC of at least two such situations in which "those affected" DID follow up. The business (non-profit organization) of TWI settled. That IS essentially, by default, or at least by implication, conviction with civil liability. Therefore, your claim seems hallow. You can search this website for details and names.

Thank you Rocky. I should have looked into it more thoroughly.