Excuses, excuses

[A Vestigial Mote]

OK. But look at it this way. You’ve obviously got some picture/caricature of “God” in mind.

Only what people have told me. Honestly. That's it. What else do you think I would have to go by? Actual "experience?" There is no such thing, as far as I am aware.

Don’t you realize that, despite what the fundies say, “God” is a fluid concept?

Which is, honestly, an admission that it is rather fuzzy, and doesn't conform to any actual point of knowledge. When someone says there are 4 apples on the table, we can count them and there they are. Admitting that God is nothing like this puts him in the realm of psychological, emotional, "feeling", qualia, etc. All of the fuzzy, "not-quite-sure" realms of "knowledge." That is, quite honestly, the only place He rests comfortably, and have you ever stopped to wonder why that is?

What if we perceive “God” as existence, itself?

Then you like to play semantic games.

Or as humanity as a community?

I'll believe you when you say "humanity as a community exists." Label it "God", however, and you've lost me. The term "God" is then useless if it is just a stand-in for TERMS THAT ALREADY EXIST. You don't need to call the community of humanity "God" - call it "the community of humanity." We already have words for these things... you're muddying the waters when you use the term "God."

Or as the “force of love?”

Again, there are already less-ambiguous words that describe that better. No need to use the word "God."

Do you not realize just how esoteric and mystical the biblical texts are? Are you really going to just take the fundies’ word for it? Srrsly??

Esoteric... yes, which is one of their biggest problems. If it was meant to be a corner-stone for "spiritual" development of the masses... it isn't that. And what does "mystical" mean? And with the use of the word "mystical" to describe these texts, I think you hit on a big reason that people tend to turn to them and use them and like them. People are obsessed with knowing "the secrets", with having some tap into the "realm" of spirituality. It's all bunk. You can dress it up with all the flowery language you want, but it doesn't really mean anything. It doesn't have to mean anything to anyone. And again this gets up back to the idea that it can really mean just about anything to anyone as part of that. This is really what you mean when you say it is "fluid." I am sure of it.

When we speak of God, we include our fellow people, because all are one within the life that we call “God.”

Hopefully this "we" you speak of is you and other Christians like you. Because it certainly doesn't include me. I don't speak of God and "include our fellow people." This I most certainly DO NOT DO.

You asked me the question. All I can do is answer from my own perspective. Remember: spirituality is all about perspective. If you want to play in the spiritual sandbox, them’s the rules. That’s what “works for me,” although I honestly don’t think about it a whole lot. I’ve got enough to do to manage the damage in this world, let alone think about my immortal soul. I actually just try to do my best and trust in life.

I don't want to "play in the sandbox." In fact, I adamantly state that there is no sandbox.

You said you agreed with my first statement. Loving others is loving God. At least that’s what makes sense to me, based on material like the Beattitudes.

I'm not particularly fond of the beatitudes. It's basically a list of suggestions for how to live your life without a backbone, and that "something" at "some time" will reward you for it.

It leaves us, O Best Beloved, in a grand position to listen to each other and maybe learn something new.

Unfortunately I don't feel you have anything to offer me. I've perused your precious texts and found them wanting in so many ways that I cannot conscionably support them in even the faintest sense.

But, you know, humanity is a rather deep well. Respectfully, I think you’re skipping rocks off the surface. (Granted, that’s what many of these folks show you: surface only.). There’s so much more to human spirituality than Joel Osteen.

I don't think there is much of anything to "spirituality", if I am being honest. It's just a bunch of "as you like it" dog and pony show antics that some people let themselves get whipped up into a fervor over. This is all I've ever seen when I witness "spiritual" people doing "spiritual" things. It'd be comedic, if the people weren't entirely serious about it.

Great! So long as you do that while showing love and respect, you’re doing what the big boys do.

The "big boys" can kiss my...

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Ok. I counter that with Hiroshima/Nagasaki, the Holocaust, Sandy Hook, Aurora, Boston, 9/11, “the Wall,” Donald Trump, disco and leisure suits. Show me where the “gigantic strides are?”

Yes! Those cultures were barbaric, compared to our current standards. But we show the same barbarity in our own ways. Why not include an honest picture of humanity? The Bible is replete with “How It Ought To Be,” but it also shows us “Where We Are Now.” When you look in the mirror, do you want to see what you want to see, or do you want to see what you really look like?

I suppose I just refuse to see humanity through such a dirty lens. Sure we're a mess - but we're working on it. You've even said as much yourself here.

They killed babies. We do too.

I'm quite sure you're referring to abortion here. So, tell me which you think would be more traumatic for a person to go through:

A. Deciding to abort their own pregnancy and end their own child's life, fully aware of what they were doing
B. Watching someone take their already born baby and bash its skull out on a rock against their will​

Which one?

And we always seem to justify it somehow. That’s the ugly reality of the human condition that we must face up to!

Yes, because the alternative sucks just as bad in some cases. Babies born to mothers who do not want them with the community at-large then looking forward to the time when those unloved kids very possibly take it out on the world. Or how about babies born because of rape? We have to face up to those things as well, and we make a choice as to which we're more willing to tolerate, given the irresponsibility we know to come from our fellow man.

But... loving our neighbors, showing kindness, practicing mercy, being honest, showing generosity and hospitality — these are things that also show who we are — and they’re things to which we aspire, as well. We gotta work through the crap to get to the good stuff. And we don’t do that by ignoring the crap. It’s included in the biblical record in order to make us deal with it.

The only "good" reason to record something like that is to try and make sure that it never happens again. And yet that's not even what those words in The Bible are about - they're about frustration, anger and revenge - and hoping that your enemy suffers greatly. What a great message for the ages.

 

[sojourner]

Nah, never mind, you've fully demonstrated that
you, as a typical creo, are entirely incapable of admitting
to the tiniest error.

No sane person would attempt larger issues with
someone who cant even handle a small and irrelevant
one.

I’m not aware of the appellation “creo.”

But I’m glad you’ve given up this little trip through fantasyland. Typical, though, that when you’ve got nothing you blame the other and then run away.

Thanks for wasting everyone’s time. We have some lovely parting gifts for you, though, including the home version of our game: “Find Your Butt With Both Hands.”

 

[sojourner]

Only what people have told me. Honestly. That's it. What else do you think I would have to go by? Actual "experience?" There is no such thing, as far as I am aware

We all have to start somewhere. “Aware” is the operative term here. I’m becoming more and more convinced that you’re not, judging by your tone. I’m trying my best to be civil, but you’re being provocative and I think you’re doing it on purpose.

Which is, honestly, an admission that it is rather fuzzy, and doesn't conform to any actual point of knowledge

There are plenty of things that are currently beyond the scope of our perception and comprehension. But we still put forth our best guess.

That is, quite honestly, the only place He rests comfortably, and have you ever stopped to wonder why that is?

See above.

Then you like to play semantic games

Whatever. You’re obviously closed minded to anything beyond the end of your nose.

I'll believe you when you say "humanity as a community exists." Label it "God", however, and you've lost me. The term "God" is then useless if it is just a stand-in for TERMS THAT ALREADY EXIST. You don't need to call the community of humanity "God" - call it "the community of humanity." We already have words for these things... you're muddying the waters when you use the term "God."

See above.

Esoteric... yes, which is one of their biggest problems. If it was meant to be a corner-stone for "spiritual" development of the masses... it isn't that

See above.

And what does "mystical" mean? And with the use of the word "mystical" to describe these texts, I think you hit on a big reason that people tend to turn to them and use them and like them. People are obsessed with knowing "the secrets", with having some tap into the "realm" of spirituality. It's all bunk. You can dress it up with all the flowery language you want, but it doesn't really mean anything

See above.

And again this gets up back to the idea that it can really mean just about anything to anyone as part of that. This is really what you mean when you say it is "fluid." I am sure of it

I don’t think you’re sure of anything but the color of your own crap.

I don't want to "play in the sandbox." In fact, I adamantly state that there is no sandbox

Good. Then stop crapping in ours.

I'm not particularly fond of the beatitudes. It's basically a list of suggestions for how to live your life without a backbone, and that "something" at "some time" will reward you for it

It shows.

Unfortunately I don't feel you have anything to offer me. I've perused your precious texts and found them wanting in so many ways that I cannot conscionably support them in even the faintest sense

Fine.

I don't think there is much of anything to "spirituality", if I am being honest

I don’t think you’re being honest.

The "big boys" can kiss my...

Have a non-distressing day.

 

[sojourner]

I suppose I just refuse to see humanity through such a dirty lens. Sure we're a mess - but we're working on it. You've even said as much yourself here

‘K

I'm quite sure you're referring to abortion here

I’m not, actually. Interesting, though, that you run straight to that...

Yes, because the alternative sucks just as bad in some cases. Babies born to mothers who do not want them with the community at-large then looking forward to the time when those unloved kids very possibly take it out on the world. Or how about babies born because of rape? We have to face up to those things as well, and we make a choice as to which we're more willing to tolerate, given the irresponsibility we know to come from our fellow man

I’m fully on board the women’s rights and legal/safe abortion train. Save the diatribe for a better time.

The only "good" reason to record something like that is to try and make sure that it never happens again. And yet that's not even what those words in The Bible are about - they're about frustration, anger and revenge - and hoping that your enemy suffers greatly. What a great message for the ages

But it does show us that side of us. The message is just that — to show us ourselves. But I don’t think you care.

 

[sojourner]

I will go with "since it is nonexistent".

We’re all very happy for you.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

We all have to start somewhere. “Aware” is the operative term here. I’m becoming more and more convinced that you’re not, judging by your tone.

Not what? Aware? Aware of what? Be specific man! Unfortunately, I feel that I know why you are not being specific, and it is because there is nothing to be aware of, and you are aware of that.

I’m trying my best to be civil, but you’re being provocative and I think you’re doing it on purpose.

I readily admit as much. Something about heat and kitchens goes here I think...

There are plenty of things that are currently beyond the scope of our perception and comprehension. But we still put forth our best guess.

If you're referencing scientific hypotheses, those are a far cry from picking any old "detail" you want to out of your butt about "God." Not even in the same ball-park, but this is a common theistic tactic. Point to other unknowns for which there is a "guess" and state that "we all do it." But it just isn't the same. There's observation about the universe and world as it is presented, and then there is all the made up stuff from religion and myth. Two completely different categories. Nothing about your myths are explained or present in "the world as it is presented." You have to just tack on a bunch of pretend in order to get at most of the things you have been advocating for in our conversation.

Whatever. You’re obviously closed minded to anything beyond the end of your nose.

Hilarious! You want to call "existence" by the term "God" and just get away with it. Not going to happen. I see your "existence is God" and raise you an "existence is existence." Ha! I have a PAIR. You should just fold now.

I don’t think you’re sure of anything but the color of your own crap.

It was green once. I looked it up, and it turns out that eating black licorice can do that to you.

Good. Then stop crapping in ours.

Nice. You know, I would challenge you to even TRY to crap in mine. And that's the funny thing, your attempts to "crap in my sandbox" would be seen by me as this vague sort of illusory nuisance. Almost not even there. Do you see what I'm saying?

I don’t think you’re being honest.

Well, one of us knows. (Hint: that would be me, because you just expressed that you're not sure)

Have a non-distressing day.

You have no idea how little any of this "distressed" me. Oh man... it's funny to even think about it like that.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

But it does show us that side of us. The message is just that — to show us ourselves. But I don’t think you care.

Yeah, I don't think that's what it is. You can think that if you want to though. See how that works?

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

I’m not, actually. Interesting, though, that you run straight to that...

I just supposed, of course. See how annoying it is when someone just supposes something? Like people suppose the existence of God without anything substantial backing it up.

But I don't want to get side-tracked. I am genuinely curious now - what DID you mean when you were talking about our modern-day society "killing babies?" Are you talking about in wars? Terrorist attacks? School shootings? Something else?

 

[1213]

The bible's god kills at a whim. That's pretty evil. In Exodus 21? The bible's god explains how to trick someone into being a life-time slave. That's pretty evil.

You seem to have quite twisted way to read the Bible, or perhaps you have not even done that. I think you are wrong.

Elsewhere, the bible's god demands that all the people are brutally murdered, except for the virgin girl-babies. Those are to be taken as sex slaves instead.

God doesn’t order anyone to murder (=unlawful killing) and there is no order to have sex slaves. The idea of sex slaves comes from readers imagination that appears to be quite bad.

And that one time? When bible-god brutally drowns all the puppies, kittens, butterflies and other Beautiful Things, just because bible-god could. That's a whole lower level of evil.

Apparently, you are speaking of something else than what the Bible tells. According to the Bible, God killed evil corrupted beings.

But the worst of them all? Brutal murder of a scape goat, in a horrific display of brutality, just to create a loophole in "law" that bible-god created in the first place...!

Why is it impossible for bible-god to simply forgive? Why does it require BRUTAL MURDER first?

Again, I recommend that you actually read the book. I don’t think there is any reason to believe God requires brutal murder.

 

[sojourner]

I am genuinely curious now

Stupendous. You’ll just have to wonder. You’ve been rude, boorish, smug, and a few other things. So I’m closing the door on trying to be open and honest with you.

See how that works?

 

[sojourner]

Yeah, I don't think that's what it is. You can think that if you want to though. See how that works?

Your lower lip has gotten in the way.

To borrow a phrase:
“Yawn — ignore — yawn”

 

[Audie]

You seem to have quite twisted way to read the Bible, or perhaps you have not even done that. I think you are wrong.



God doesn’t order anyone to murder (=unlawful killing) and there is no order to have sex slaves. The idea of sex slaves comes from readers imagination that appears to be quite bad.



Apparently, you are speaking of something else than what the Bible tells. According to the Bible, God killed evil corrupted beings.



Again, I recommend that you actually read the book. I don’t think there is any reason to believe God requires brutal murder.

All the little children of Egypt, and the "flood'
were evil. Right. "excuses excuses"

 

[sojourner]

Not what? Aware? Aware of what? Be specific man! Unfortunately, I feel that I know why you are not being specific, and it is because there is nothing to be aware of, and you are aware of that.
I readily admit as much. Something about heat and kitchens goes here I think...

If you're referencing scientific hypotheses, those are a far cry from picking any old "detail" you want to out of your butt about "God." Not even in the same ball-park, but this is a common theistic tactic. Point to other unknowns for which there is a "guess" and state that "we all do it." But it just isn't the same. There's observation about the universe and world as it is presented, and then there is all the made up stuff from religion and myth. Two completely different categories. Nothing about your myths are explained or present in "the world as it is presented." You have to just tack on a bunch of pretend in order to get at most of the things you have been advocating for in our conversation.

Hilarious! You want to call "existence" by the term "God" and just get away with it. Not going to happen. I see your "existence is God" and raise you an "existence is existence." Ha! I have a PAIR. You should just fold now.

It was green once. I looked it up, and it turns out that eating black licorice can do that to you.

Nice. You know, I would challenge you to even TRY to crap in mine. And that's the funny thing, your attempts to "crap in my sandbox" would be seen by me as this vague sort of illusory nuisance. Almost not even there. Do you see what I'm saying?

Well, one of us knows. (Hint: that would be me, because you just expressed that you're not sure)

You have no idea how little any of this "distressed" me. Oh man... it's funny to even think about it like that.

He whines about what’s in the Bible, acts all smug about being “morally superior” and claims for himself some high ground of integrity and awareness, and then he posts vapid, puerile trash like this.



So much for the “superior” atheist “position” on the Bible and spirituality.
Bitterness is a poor substitute for awareness.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Stupendous. You’ll just have to wonder. You’ve been rude, boorish, smug, and a few other things. So I’m closing the door on trying to be open and honest with you.

See how that works?

Why yes. Yes I do. Take care now.

 

[Audie]

Why yes. Yes I do. Take care now.

Everyone walks away from the smoldering dumpster.

Not a minute too soon.

 

[sojourner]

All the little children of Egypt, and the "flood'
were evil. Right. "excuses excuses"

You’re only proving your own silliness here. This is a straw man.

Shall I explain what a straw man is to you? Oh, wait! Was that a rhetorical question?

Perhaps O Wise One, you may actually grace us with a real argument on this point, instead of completely missing the mark of literary criticism.

 

[sojourner]

Everyone walks away from the smoldering dumpster.

Not a minute too soon.

Feeling lonely?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

You seem to have quite twisted way to read the Bible, or perhaps you have not even done that. I think you are wrong..

I read the actual words in a row, in the page. Apparently? You do not.

hmmmm...

God doesn’t order anyone to murder (=unlawful killing) and there is no order to have sex slaves. The idea of sex slaves comes from readers imagination that appears to be quite bad.
.

Proof that you've never actually read the actual bible for yourself, is the above...

Apparently, you are speaking of something else than what the Bible tells. According to the Bible, God killed evil corrupted beings..

How on earth are kittens, and puppies "evil, corrupted beings"?

I'd really like to know....

Again, I recommend that you actually read the book. I don’t think there is any reason to believe God requires brutal murder.

LOL! Show me ONE PLACE in the bible wherein it's god can manage a "forgive" WITHOUT something being brutally killed first.

I dare ya!

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Why do so many people on this site share their opinion in anger?

What happened to simple discussions? Trying to see matters from another person's perspective.

You're not even trying to understand what I'm saying. You're barely even reading it before flaring up and yelling.

You are acting immature and childish.

So? That does not excuse the brutal murder of the ENTIRE PLANET. It only makes it WORSE.

It's not murder if it is completely lawful and justified.

Many scriptures record that ancient prophets knew of the coming of the Flood many centuries before it came and that they were instructed by the Lord to warn the people that if they did not mend their ways they would all drown.

The wicked people who lived on the Earth at the time were damning one another and all future generations of God's children.

You wouldn't stop one of your children from hurting another of your children? From killing another one of your children?

You keep forgetting that physical death is not the end of our existence. We are eternal creatures.

Our leaving this world is literally just like exiting one room and going into another. It's a transition.

Removing those people from mortality was the right thing to do.

So freaking WHAT? DOES THAT INCLUDE THE LITTLE BABIES WHO COULD NOT EVEN SPEAK?

Brutal MURDER.

It's not murder if it is lawful and justified.

The people were warned that they and their children would be removed if they did not amend their ways.

If someone who is hurting my child refuses to follow my warnings to stop or I shoot them - it's not my fault if they get shot.

Nope. Noah was a serious SCREW-UP. A drunken sot. A man SO BRUTAL, that his wife of 600 years only granted him FOUR SONS!

How did Noah screw up?

The Bible records Noah getting drunk only once. It is your opinion that anyone who gets drunk once is a "serious screw-up"?

Also, where does it say that Noah had only four sons?

The record claims that only four of his sons helped build the Ark and were saved from the Flood, but it does not claim that Noah had only the four children.

It is possible he had other children - even other wives - that refused to follow the Lord's instruction.

Not good enough.

According to who? You?

The Bible claims that Noah was "perfect in his generation".

It appears that God is more forgiving than you are.

Imagine? 100% correct-- PURE IMAGINATION YOU ARE DOING THERE-- AND NOT REMOTELY MORAL, EITHER. You are making MY case here!

No, it is not "pure imagination". It is a core belief of my religion.

I asked you to "imagine" it because I knew that you do not hold to that belief.

I believe with all my heart that we all lived with God before coming to Earth and that He had to remove the people in the days of the Flood in order to save the vast majority of HIs other children.

They had their time. They had their warnings. They had their chance. They blew it and were removed.

The ironic thing is that God removing them from mortality actually made it possible for them to potentially receive the Gospel and still be saved.

EXCEPT THE PARENT IS NOT MURDERING THE CHILD IN COLD BLOOD!

No one was destroyed in the Flood.

Everyone that has ever lived and died on the Earth still exists somewhere in the spirit world.

And they will continue to exist forever because they are children of God -eternal Beings.

Comparison? FAIL-- to 100%!

You're just unwilling to accept very basic principle of this life and eternity.

Your'e so busy being angry and outraged you're unable to see reason.

LMAO! Your horribly inept godling could think of NOTHING ELSE than to DESTROY THE WHOLE PLANET? BIRDS. TREES. ALL ANIMALS. ALL FLOWERS.

He obviously did not destroy the Earth considering that it is still here in all it's beauty.

Birds. Trees. All the animals. The flowers. All still here.

What would you have God do when He has to remove an entire generation of people around the entire planet?

I'm sure there were other methods He could have used, but the Flood was the least harmful to the Earth. The perfect solution.

Your god must REALLY HATE PUPPIES.

Obviously not since there are puppies today due to His command that they be preserved on the Ark.

LOL! Yeah-- your god is SO BRUTAL, SO INCOMPETENT, that it cannot muster up "forgive" WITHOUT A BRUTAL MURDER FIRST.

I'm sorry, but you're really not putting much thought into this.

Mankind had been living on Earth for over a thousand years before the Flood. Over a thousand years of teaching and forgiving.

The people rejected His teachings and made it impossible for new generations of God's children to live righteously.

The wicked needed to be removed and they will eventually receive forgiveness before the day of their Resurrection.

THE MORE BRUTAL THE TORTURE-MURDER? THE BETTER YOUR GOD LIKES IT.

That's one sick monster you got there-- it'd be a SHAME if it were actually REAL.

Your god? Worse than the equally fictional Voldemort. Seriously.

More examples of your immaturity and ignorance.