Nice makes me puke.
Nice is so tolerant.
Nice is so inoffensive.
Nice smiles and offers no point of view.
Nice is never controversial.
Nice ‘agrees to disagree’ and calls it ‘effective conversation’.
Nice ‘doesn’t want to argue’.
Nice ‘isn’t trying to start a fight’.
Blech.
Some Christians tell me that Jesus was nice.
Where did they get that idea?
Nice guys don’t get crucified.
Nice guys don’t get crucified.
Nice guys don’t upset anyone.
Nice guys don’t rock the boat.
Nice guys are sensitive.
They’ll smile and hold the elevator for everyone…friend or fiend.
Nice guys get upset sometimes but they’re too nice to say anything.
“Live and let live!”
“I’m not perfect so I can’t criticize!”
God deliver me from niceness!
I don’t want to be nice.
I want to be wise.
351 Responses
I have no personal faith in this discussion. I was simply responding to Matt finally stating what he thought was the purpose of Christianity.
Hilarious!
You disagree?
Fair enough. Then let’s see how much understanding of your religion you have…
Offer a critical rebuttal.
A rebuttal to your claim that you have no personal faith!
I’m laughing out loud, you poor, simple atheist.
I think you are just being rather silly Branyan simply because you have no critical response.
Your faith is absolute and will eschew all critical challenges.
You dare not open the door to critical challenge, as this path leads to deconversion.
Thus you simply resort to asinine replies and embarrass yourself.
What are you afraid of?
I’m not afraid. I’m paralyzed with laughter watching you repeat the same foolish loop!
I’ve even TOLD YOU what you’re doing and you just keep doing it!
Hilarious!
Oh, yes you are afraid, Branyan.
Very much so…
You didn’t become a Christian because of reason.
You were broken. Or at least led to beleive you were some sort of awful sinner in dire need of salvation.
And now you are simply demonstrating the ignorance of your position.
Explain why you follow the basic tenets of your religion as laid out by the Catholic Church, which established the purpose of Christianity, ergo your worldview.
Seriously, I want to see some critical thought at work from you. If only for once.
Hahahahahahaaaaa!
There it is again! Exactly as I said!
You asked me to display critical thought. There it is!
And you still refuse to acknowledge it. Just keep telling yourself I’m afraid. You can’t see what’s going on.
Hilarious!
Your wisdom made foolish.
Of course you are afraid.
This is what religious indoctrination does to people.
And you know exactly what is ”going on” and this is why you simply continue to avoid acknowledging the truth.
The initial conversation was about the purpose of atheism which Matt stated there was none. And he is absolutely correct.
You don’t even recognise that the Purpose of Christianity that you follow was laid out for political reasons and you fell for it hook line and sinker.
You still do!
If your were able to exercise critical thought you would realise.
But that little smidgen of doubt, that tiny little itch, you will refuse to scratch …
And this is what keeps you willfully ignorant and why you refuse to test the waters … because you are afraid.
There’s your personal faith again!
Ha hahaha!
You sad, simple atheist.
Tell me again how I’m afraid while you keep doing exactly what I said you would do.
Your wisdom is foolish.
You don’t realise how oxymoronic your last sentence is?
Now that is funny!
You concede. Good move.
There’s your fear again, Branyan.
That is what you believe by faith.
Game over.
By evidence, John. By evidence.
It is nothing to be ashamed about.
Now you realise how you have been misled, simply stand up and reject it.
I reject your misleading arguments.
With @Arkedummy – it always spirals downward to male anatomy.
Matt’s balls. My rectum. He can’t help it. Ever the creepy one.
“Atheism has no purpose, has no morality, and according to you , a morality free option.” – Arkedummy
Having “no morality” makes it a “morality free option.”
Anything goes in your world.
Ya Big Dummy.
~CQW
@Senor Dioshit
Then you best take it up with Amanda as she was the one that made the distinction not me.
Here’s her response
There’s nothing to “take up.” CQW understands what I was saying. You don’t. As usual.
I agreed that atheism has no morality.
You then had to twist it to try to make yourself look less foolish.
You didn’t succeed.
And it didn’t work for Senor Dipshit either. I wouldn’t bother trying to save face for Dipshit, he’s really not that clever to worry about.
Now that you have had a chance to read the thread and discovered the real purpose of Christianity – the religious one based on politics – are you feeling more inclined to recognise you have been manipulated by the Church and its doctrine?
I haven’t twisted anything. I’m trying to help you see what HONEST Atheists have said for decades. (But you’re either unable or unwilling to understand.)
Atheist William Provine: “No inherent moral or ethical laws exist, nor are there any absolute guiding principles for human society. The universe cares nothing for us and we have no ultimate meaning in life…”
But that is a different topic.
We were discussing the purpose of atheism.
We have all agreed that atheism has no purpose.
Are you perfectly clear about this now?
This is the topic.
It then branched on to the purpose of Christianity. I have shown you what (at least ) the main purpose of Christianity is. Political.
So for now, I think we should, stay on topic, Amanda.
We can discuss morals and ethics another time.
So, now that you are aware of the true purpose of Christianity are you prepared to to acknowledge that you have been manipulated?
I have not branched to the purpose of Christianity. I’m not talking about Christianity until you say, “May I have another sandwich, please?” Remember?
In the meantime, I’m still dealing with the fact that you and Tildeb have to use faith, in order to be moral people, because your morality doesn’t come from Atheism.
Your comment makes no sense.
Let’s recap.
Atheism has no purpose.
Atheism has no morality.
Christianity has purpose.
That purpose is primarily political.
This is historical fact.
So now you are aware, are you prepared to at least consider that you have been manipulated -possibly for most of your life to date?
HAHAHAHAHA!
I wish Tildeb would start talking to us again. I’m tired of talking to a mentally ill man.
Bye, Ark.
(And, by the way, YOU are the one manipulated. You believe that nature has mindlessly manipulated you, just as this Atheists says. Shared illusion of the human race. HILARIOUS anyone would actually think that!)
“In an important sense, ethics as we understand it is an illusion fobbed off on us by our genes to get us to co-operate… Ethical codes work because they drive us to go against our selfish day to day impulses in favour of long-term group survival and harmony… Furthermore, the way our biology forces our ends is by making us think that there is an objective, higher code to which we are all subject… ethics is a shared illusion of the human race.” –Michael Ruse
And what has this got to do with the fact that the primary purpose of Christianity is political?
Nothing.
I’m not talking about that with you.
Only an insane man would keep asking when I’ve already explained I’M NOT TALKING ABOUT CHRISTIANITY until you ask me for a sandwich.
But why do you truly struggle to recognise that the entire purpose of your religion is political?
The Roman Church was able to achieve covertly what the Roman Empire failed to do overtly.
And you are simply an extension of this.
Are you s blind you cannot see?
“May I have another sandwich, please?”
Fun game, Matt: See if you can find the new blog/article that Ark has been obsessing about lately. Obviously, he doesn’t feel very comfortable with his information about “Jesus of Nowhere” anymore. And his understanding of the Exodus debate is laughable, so that has kind of fallen out of vogue. Today, he is rambling about “political power” of Christianity. Is it Bart Ehrman who blogged about that recently? Michael Shermer, maybe? Some Atheist must have written about this recently, so that Ark could sleep a little better tonight…
CQW, your say about atheism, “Having “no morality” makes it a “morality free option.” An option that you think accompanies a lack of belief in gods or a god. Well, how does a lack of belief in gods or a god (the definition of atheism) relate in any way to morality? You have imported this association and then simply assume then link is actually the case.
It’s not the case. I suspect you simply don’t care your assumption is without any truth value. You’re not trying to respect what’s true, after all.
Well, atheism is as morally free as you lacking any belief about the god Itztli which, according to you, makes this lack of belief a morality free option you have deliberately chosen in order to avoid moral responsibility for any actions you take. After all, you seem to think one can’t be moral or have purpose or find meaning in life if one lacks belief in a god… in this case let’s select Itztli (so many gods, donchaknow). According to you, you’re doomed to be immoral, purposeless, and live a life without meaning all derived from your lacking any belief in this god.
It makes no sense. Can you really be this dense, this poor a thinker, to believe immorality somehow accompanies your lack of belief in Itztli? Or do keep such poor thinking reserved only for your religious apologetics because it seems pious?
No. We think you CAN be moral and have purpose and meaning…you just can’t define it without accidentally making it sound like “God.”
Also, plenty of honest, consistent Atheists admit to this. (But you’re too dense and too much of a poor thinker, to understand.)
Atheist activist Dan Barker: “There is no purpose to life, and we should not want there to be a purpose to life because if there was that would cheapen life.”
Atheist William Provine: “Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and clear … There are no gods, no purposes, no goal-directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death. When I die, I am absolutely certain that I am going to be dead. That’s the end for me. There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning to life, and no free will for humans, either.”
Don’t answer me, coward. And don’t read these quotes either… (I have more, and I wouldn’t want you to struggle sleeping tonight.)
Atheists are A-moral.
By definition, they have to be…
Atheist John Steinrucken: “Those who doubt the effect of religion on morality should seriously ask the question: Just what are the immutable moral laws of secularism? Be prepared to answer, if you are honest, that such laws simply do not exist!”
Thank you. At long last we have established – according to you – the purpose of Christianity .
However, I would beg to disagree somewhat.
Let’s look shall we?
For the sake of this discussion, we can exclude the Jewish version of Christianity,( the Ebionites for example) okay?
Therefore, if we (initially) accept that ”Christianity” was supposedly built upon the teachings of the character Jesus of Nazareth, and not the later, manipulated concoction of Paul from the ”letters/epistles” delivered by Marcion, which the Catholic Church appeared to have hijacked and re-purposed via such notables as Constantine and Eusebius, then it would be reasonable to state that the true, definitive purpose of Christianity is/was to prepare for the Apocalypse which, based on the understanding of these teachings, was due to arrive within the lifetime of the Apostles.
Er …. it didn’t did it?
And the rest, as they say, is history.
But thanks for your input Matthew. At least you had the balls to step up to the plate and offer an answer.
Ark
This will make Matt laugh.
Guaranteed.
You mean I can do something you can’t?
Well, well.
Based on your apparent extensive knowledge of early Christianity, I would be interested to hear whether you base your faith on Pauline Christianity or the teachings of the character Jesus of Nazareth?
And why do you beleive the Ebionites , for example, were wrong in their interpretation?
No. I make Matt laugh but I do it intentionally.
He will laugh at you because he told you in advance that you weren’t ready for his answer to your question and right on cue, you proved him right. And you’re oblivious to the futility of your worldview.
All Matt did was espouse something based on a personal view of the purpose of Christianity.
There are others of course, and it is important to recognise that faith – that thing that makes you believe a scruffy little eschatological Jewish rabbi walked on water and came back from the dead – is the personal kind. And then there is the religion. This version, which set out the tenets and the dogma and decrees, is political, and this is the one that states the Purpose of Christianity
Matt is a fundamentalist, and ace+pts the dogma as interpreted and preached by those who run his -and presumably your’s too – church.
The futility of my worldview is not the question here.
The question on the table was about the purpose of atheism.
Once more – Atheism has no purpose.
And we have seen that Christianity has several.
Also hilarious is that you don’t see your personal faith behind your interpretation of Matt’s.
Oh, and if you have a particular version of what you beleive is the purpose of Christianity I’d be interested to read it.
The purpose of Christianity is to make foolish the wise.
An interesting perspective.
One could do a similar comparison with Islam after it gained control of a large art of the Arab world and much secular learning practically ground to a halt.
So yes, it most certainly did make foolish the wise by reducing critical thought to enforced belief in supernatural and magic.
There are definite parallels with Christianity. There still are if we take into consideration Creationism and idiotic organisations like Ken Ham’s Answers in Genesis, and the ICR and several other young earth churches that corrupt children.
Haha!
You can’t handle the answers to your questions.
Really?
It was a fairly accurate comparison.
Your ignorance of the history of your own religion and its tenets and doctrines does make you come across as foolish, which rather vindicates your comment.
Shouldn’t you rather reserve playing the comedian for when you are on a paying gig?
There’s your faith again!
And still you insist you have none.
Your wisdom made foolish.
Interesting quote? Is it one of yours?
And which atheist said you had no purpose for living?
Oh, and as you are a Christian what is the purpose of Christianity?
Your line: “May I have another sandwich please?”
Oh, well, you always bail when you can’t manage to squirm you little way out of facing the truth, don’t you Mandy?
Go buy a hammer or something…
You misspelled, “I want a sandwich.”
Ah well… you don’t know how to spell honesty, so we’ll call it even, shall we?
Why are you still here? All I have are sandwiches. I can only assume you want one!
It’s funny watching you being disingenuous and dishonest.
So, yes, you want more of my sandwiches. Got it.
Well there’s little chance of getting honesty … sarmie it is … cheese and tomato?
You know the deal…
Say the magic words!
“May I have a sandwich please?”
You know the deal… only if you promise to be honest and tell the truth.
Still here and still eating, but not asking first.
Naughty.
“May I have a sandwich please?”
So, no honesty. Sorry , Mandy … you lose … again.
It has been a busy day at the Sandwich Shop, and no sign that you’re done eating!
Yum, yum, yum.
Commenting again means you want more: ready, go!
Actually, I was merely responding to Matthews comment.
However, you being the ego-grabbing little brat want to hog the limelight and Troll Daddy’s blog and as soon as you realised you had burnt your backside you immediately resort to petulance and dishonesty.
If you aren’t interested n telling me what is the purpose of Christianity then you either don’t know or there isn’t any.
And therefore there is no reason for me to continue yo engage with you.
Your choice?
Hahaha! Hungry fella!
But you get nothing until you ask properly: “May I have a sandwich please?”
It would be foolhardy of me to bother asking anything of one as indoctrinated and dishonest as you are; something you demonstrate relentlessly.
Come on …add you little mantra …
“May I have another sandwich please?”
Ark, I’ll finally answer your question, although you are not ready for it. I do want to let you know that Christians do have a purpose. A purpose that all Christians have is this:
“So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God.” 1 Corinthians 10:31
As I said though, you are not ready to discuss such things, for you are just now discovering what atheism doesn’t have to offer you. You have a long way to go before you examine a purpose that Christians have.
I’ll be at work and finishing school work tomorrow, so therefore, I won’t be responding.
“We have much to say about this, but it is hard to make it clear to you because you no longer try to understand. In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.”
Hebrews 5:11-14
Sorry, Matthew, you have completely misunderstood.
I did not ask whether Christians believe they have a purpose but rather, what is the purpose of Christianity?
I hope I have made this clear enough?
Thanks.
I always forget how early you comment. So I have time for one comment before I go to work today.
First, the purpose of Christianity is to get creation back into a mutually loving relationship with its Creator.
Secondly, if you are not interested in what Christians believe, don’t ask Christians for answers- for they’ll believe the answers that they give you.
Have I made that clear enough?
Have a great day, Ark! I’m finished in this comment section, so if you ask a question, don’t expect an answer from me.
God bless!
I sat and had a bit of a think …. and while this may be leveled at one such as me as a pejorative, for a change, I agree with you wholeheartedly.
Atheism has absolutely no purpose whatsoever. None, nix, nada, zilch.
Atheism, makes no demands, it makes no promises.
It offers nothing (that I am aware of) to any individual who claims they are atheist.
It makes no demands, no tithes, has no dress code, no formal restrictions.
It does not judge, nor condemn.
It does not offer rewards or praise.
It has absolutely no purpose at all.
So, what is the purpose of Christianity, Matthew?
Ah, so Atheism offers the chance to do whatever you want, without judgement. Atheism gives you freedom. And it gives you purposelessness.
I don’t think you thought long enough. 🙂
No. I simply stated that atheism has no purpose..
What is the purpose of Christianity?
Sorry I should have read more carefully.
Let me try again…
Yes, of course. You can do whatever you like, atheism has absolutely no bearing on one’s general behaviour.
Freedom as in what sense?
An atheist prisoner in goal has almost no freedom.
A dirt poor homeless atheist has limited freedom.
Neither of your statements makes any sense.
I don’t think you thought long enough.
Every negative statement can be phrased as a positive one, too.
Atheism OFFERS moral freedom. Anything goes.
You can imagine whatever you like I suppose.
I am just agreeing with Matthew that Atheism has no purpose. That’s all.
I’ve linked you to plenty of Atheist scientists and philosophers who also “imagine” what I just said.
Anything goes.
There’s no morality with Atheism.
Absolutely correct. Atheism has no morality.
No–Atheism OFFERS a morality-free option.
Really? Well, if you say so. Care to explain?
I have many times. As I just said.
But, if you want more, you have to say, “May I have another sandwich please?”
Okay.
I don’t see it.
Atheism has no purpose, has no morality, and according to you , a morality free option.
Anyway, this was about atheism having no purpose, which I wholeheartedly agree. Matthew was spot on with this assessment.
He’ll be glad to hear it.
And, while he’s busy at work, maybe you can try to figure out how this relates to increased rates of homicide and suicide. When Atheism has no morality and no purpose, and religious people are mocked…
A real mystery!
Let’s see if you can think through it.
Matthew stated atheism has no purpose.
I agree 100% .
If you have other issues that’s your problem – and you are free to whine about it as much as you like!
Having no purpose is the same as BEING purposeless. Another way to say it: There is no purpose in being an Atheist.
Matthew stated that atheism has no purpose. This is true.
And yes, you are correct, atheism is purposeless.
I agree unequivocally.
Your final sentence is false.
I don’t think you thought enough.
Lol!
Back at you.
Want another go?
What would you tell someone who feels as though their life has no purpose?
What has this got to do with atheism having no purpose?
You’re not asking for information from me without the magic words: “may I have another sandwich please?”
I understand if you need to take a minute to ask Tildeb…
Haha!
I meant, do you want another go?
“It doesn’t matter anyway. I have no purpose for living.”.
Atheist: “Yep. True.”
https://youtu.be/rMz7JBRbmNo
The Battle of Wits
Matthew.
I am an atheist. You stated atheism offers none. By extension therefore,you must, consider my life lacks (genuine) purpose.
I should have clarified: I consider the question of purpose in the manner which I am fairly sure you are trying to lead this conversation irrelevant.
As you do not agree with what I do consider to be purpose and have no interest in what I find purposeful you should therefore, at least have the integrity to define what you consider to be a life of purpose.
If you refuse to so this I would suggest you have an ulterior motive and are being somewhat deceitful.
Ark–instead of asking all the questions, why don’t you try answering one, before the sun comes up?
TELL MATT WHAT YOUR PURPOSE IS, if you have one. Stop with the circling. It’s after 1:30 in the morning in your neck of the woods. Just prove that Atheism offers purpose by telling him what your purpose is.
Ah, my questions were going to the bottom-figured out the reason.
Go down, Tildeb, answer my question. Was Ark wrong in assuming the extension?
“As you do not agree with what I do consider to be purpose and have no interest in what I find purposeful you should therefore, at least have the integrity to define what you consider to be a life of purpose.”
You never offered what you considered purpose- therefore I can neither agree nor disagree with what you offered.
Sweet Cheeks is right, if you offer what your purpose is, then I’ll examine if it is genuine. Otherwise, you are proving my point in saying that atheism offers no meaningful purpose.
@Arkedummy
I was wrong – you’ve had more than a couple of dozen sandwiches in this thread. You’ve had over five dozen.
About the same amount of teeth (give or take) have been found for Tildeb’s (aka Great Grape Ape) and your great ancient ape ancestor G. Blacki. Plus a couple partial jaw bones. Don’t stop believin’ – Hold on to that feelin’.
Free Pistorious!
Ya Big Dummy!
Have a good morning.
~CQW
Why do you think a lack of something means it is a keen observation that it should possess something?
Of course atheism doesn’t offer anything. It’s a null set. It is a lack of belief in a theistic version of some agency of Oogity Boogity! Why do you think a lack of belief should offer anything else?
Atheism is the belief that there is no theistic version of some agency of Oogity Boogity. Why do you think this is equivalent to a null set?
Replace the term ‘atheism’ in your sentence and you will see why it’s irrational: “Non belief is a belief…” Stop right there. No. It’s not. It’s a LACK. You’re focusing on the wrong part of the a-theism term. The LACK is the essential part and not the following part about theism, which identifies what is lacking.
Atheism isn’t just ‘non belief’, Dear Leader. Atheism is ‘non belief in God’.
You agree with this. You’re just being stubborn.
(Pssst… if Theism isn’t important, then why don’t you just call yourselves “A’s”?)
lol.
Actually, I could totally get on board with that.
Here’s Tildeb. He’s an A—-
EXACTLY! Just saying “I LACK BELIEF” is silly.
“You lack belief in WHAT?”
“God/Gods”
“Oh, so–at least until further evidence is provided–you believe there is no God.”
“NOOOOO! That’s WRONG!”
“Geez. What an A—-“
I finally get what he’s been trying to say! Honestly, I didn’t understand what his hang-up was until this conversation.
He’s claiming ‘non belief’ then assuming the ‘in God’ part but refusing to acknowledge it.
That’s where the ‘non belief is a belief’ nonsense came from…I get it now.
It’s really dumb.
I’ve tried explaining this to you before. The popular example around the internet is “Health isn’t a kind of disease. It’s a LACK of disease!!!” or “Baldness isn’t a hairstyle. It’s a LACK of hair!”
But, belief is different. Belief statements always can be phrased in the positive OR negative, because there are only two options–always.
“I believe I am healthy” can be said “I DISBELIEVE that I’m sick.” or “I believe the man is bald” can also be phrased “I don’t believe that man has hair.”
You’re right. Dumb.
(Not that you’re suddenly going to acknowledge you’re wrong, but–once again–the dictionary disagrees with you. Atheism is a DOCTRINE of belief there is no deity. There’s a whole lot of stuff that comes with that…)
Link: https://branyancomedy.wordpress.com/2016/11/30/everyone-isnt-welcome-in-church/comment-page-1/#comment-9042
Did you see the request for “JZ’s IP Address Theory”?
I don’t have the links handy but I figured they’re at your fingertips since this is one of your favorite JZ flame-outs.
Yeah. I just sent the links. My kids are up laaaaate tonight, giggling. 🙂
Woah, Ark, even Tildeb thinks you have no purpose as an atheist! It’ll be a sad start to your morning tomorrow.
And haven’t you been astounded by the amount of typing Tildeb and Ark do to communicate this void of belief?
Wrong order, MC. It’s not Ark that has no purpose because of atheism;, atheism has no attached purpose that is supposed to serve Ark. That’s YOUR assumption that you think it should. It is an empty term meaning a lack of belief in gods or a god. That’s the whole thing.
(Except it’s not an empty term. Atheism is “Doctrine” that there is no God…. but, otherwise, yeah–totally.)
I mean, all of Tildeb’s logic comes from theists- it at least gives him something to stand on… until he rips the rug from underneath himself by denying their conclusion.
Insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result. A theistic method will give you a theistic conclusion.
Yeah. You’d think that.
But Galileo and Newton didn’t have Tildeb’s perfect grasp of reality.
But I am astounded at how many pages are written from a void.
The amount written by me is in direct proportion to the confusion and misrepresentation offered. Reduce the latter, reduce the former. It’s quite simple a relationship, Matthew. And I notice you continue to assert without any evidence that the works that stand on their own merit I have incorporated are really examples of the benefit of theism for an atheist. This is a ludicrous claim you continue to make… not to be honest or have a real dialogue but to paint atheism with your intentional deceit and pretend it is a property of atheism. Is that a means to gain wisdom or simply a way to not be nice for the sake of vilifying those with whom you cannot challenge on merit?
I’m sure Matthew didn’t miss the fact that you avoided his question. So I’m just weighing in to let you know nobody else who’s reading missed that fact, either.
But in all of that typing, Tildeb just said that atheism has nothing to offer. Atheism offers no purpose. Therefore Ark, Tildeb, JZ, and others have no purpose as atheists.
Yet they find a reason to show up here when they can.
“Matthew.
I am an atheist. You stated atheism offers none. By extension therefore,you must, consider my life lacks (genuine) purpose.”-Ark
So was Ark wrong in assuming that extension, Tildeb?
Ah, my questions were going to the bottom-figured out the reason.
Go down, Tildeb, answer my question. Was Ark wrong in assuming the extension?
(Repeating this until it’s answered).
Human beings do not have a overriding all consuming single purpose, but they create purpose in their life.
Such as becoming a musician or writer.
Or maybe care for animals or children.
What purpose does Christianity offer that cannot be found in any other religion or, in fact, no religion at all?
“Atheism has no attached purpose that is supposed to serve Ark”- Tildeb
Ark, Tildeb already proved my point. Atheism offers no purpose. Right now, it doesn’t matter if the purpose Christianity offers is unique, it’s the fact that it actually offers one. That is one of the reasons why Christianity and every other religion is better than atheism.
Plus, if you truly believed humans create their own purpose- then every person would have asked these questions to themselves:
“What is the purpose of my life? Does that purpose matter? Is that purpose worth doing? Am I truly living with purpose?”
You already mentioned that those are not questions that you ever entertain. Therefore, you haven’t even begun to desire a purpose. So if you truly believe that humans create their own purpose, then you are way behind every other human.
Try keeping up with the rest of us, Ark.
I truly believe I am living with purpose. Would you like a list of all the things I find purpose in?
Why do you seem to believe that I am not?
Because anyone who finds purpose staying up and trolling online until the wee hours of EVERY morning is lying.
Nobody wants to watch TV and insult strangers all day.
That’s not “purpose.” And, if you think that’s real happiness, your meds are stronger than I thought.
Lol… you are have no idea of my life.
None whatsoever.
And knowing I support Liverpool doesn’t count! 🙂
They drew with Chelsea 1-1 by the way.It was frustrating. I just thought you’d want to know.
And I have told you before. I have no need to,lie, I am not a Christian!
However, you on the other hand, are a pseudo-Christian fundamentalist, mother of two kids and a wife and yet you spend all your time defending superstition and indoctrination with non believers?Why are you not playing with your kids?
Why are you Trolling daddy’s blog?
Why don’t you go knock on people’s doors or do volunteer counselling work for an oganisation like suicide’s anonymous.
Give your life some real purpose and stop lying to yourself about being a devout Christian.
See what I mean?
All day. Every day. Going to where the Christians are, to insult them.
Sounds great. 😉
Why do you consider your approach, which is disingenuous, acerbic and demeaning, reasonable and yet you think the likes of John, Tildeb and myself are insulting?
You and your father personify why so many Christians are considered quite vile.
I never said I wasn’t insulting. 🙂
You personify why many Atheists are considered quite vile.
Really? In that case what would you consider a nice atheist?
Also:
One…two…three…
Yeah, three. I’m indoctrinating THREE kids. If you want to find a way under my skin, at least get the number of kids I’m “not playing with” correct.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153327879450267&set=a.421054445266.199717.508180266&type=3&theater
3 kids? Good for you and even more reason why you should be spending time with them….
Are you unable to play with them?
When my kids were small I spent oodles of time with them.
Even helped at their school.
So, why are you, a young woman Trolling daddy’s blog day after day trying to defend your ”faith”
Trust me, it doesn’t take much time OR effort to “converse” with you, Arkenwald.
Usually I’ve got a babe at the breast and am listening to The Older One read WHILE batting down your nonsense. #Supermom
Good grief, you can multi-task!
Never cease to amaze me.
So dreaming up the next riposte or insult or stupid name or laughable biblical nonsense is what keeps you hanging on tenterhooks and glued to your laptop?
And you think this is purpose?
Breast-feeding and blogging at the same time? Sheesh! WTF as t«you ”kids” say, right?
As for listening to your kid read … nah, your’re not listening to a damn thing, believe me.
I taught my kids to read … and write.
I read them practically every night.
I KNOW what listening to a child read really is and if you are doing what you say you are then trust me, you ain’t listening at all .
Stop pretending Amanda. You make a lousy Christian.
LOL!
Even lousy Christians have all of eternity to get it right… even lousy Christians have more hope and purpose than Naturalist/Atheists.
Really? Then define your purpose? Tell me what you hope for? Besides hoping your youngest kid doesn’t get sick all over you while you are listening … intently to your other kid read and you are typing …
You must have discovered it after your epiphany following your little incident, right?. Can you spare a few lines between breastfeeding and listening to your kid reading?
No.
I’m not doing YOUR homework from Matt.
I am not asking you to do MY homework. And surely you are not expecting me to define your purpose?
That is your job, surely?
So, what do you believe is your purpose, Amanda, over and above trying to be a good mum and all that entails?
My purpose is to make you uncomfortable, so that YOU will ask those questions and realize that Love is either a person, or it’s nothing.
Ah…and Troll daddy’s blog, neglect your kids and hubby and generally behave like a very nasty, spiteful person while you are doing this.
Don’t take that as an insult, by the way, consider it a character description … something you might work on? Ask Mike. He’ll very likely agree with me on this point.
I would have thought you would have found a brand new sense of life etc after realising that shooting yourself was not the answer to anything. Yet here you are, believing you have some possibly inspired ”mission” to make my life uncomfortable.
Seems very …. odd?
Have you discussed this ”mission” with Daddy or Husband or even your pastor?
Are they in agreement that this
is a healthy pursuit while breastfeeding and listening to your kids read?
I think you are probably telling fibs Amanda.
I certainly doubt your husband would consider this the right thing for the mother of his kids to be doing.
Unless he is unaware of course?
All for the glory of God! Thanks for playing your part, too.
Ah yes… make-beleive,devout delusional and a hypocrite.
Christian? You? Nah …. not really. You just like the sound of it and Trolling on daddy’s blog gives you an excuse … for something.
Purpose? Hmmm I think you still have a few quite serious issues to sort out before you are even ready to do anything for the ”glory of your god”.
T’ra …
Projection. 🙂
Does T’ra mean you’re REALLY leaving now? Or will you be back for more sandwiches tomorrow?
Projection! Hilarious.
Telling fibs is a sin, Amanda.
You’re not really a Christian.
I’ve known a lot of Christians.
You are simply a bit of a fraud who is play acting.
I wonder if you would be able to stay away from Trolling Daddy’s blog?
Hmmm … I doubt it.
I bet you can’t wait to get all your mummy chores done, can you?
Who’s looking after your children now, Amanda?
The maid?
Come on, come out the closet. Someone who can tell the whoppers you do will always make a lousy Christian.
So… “yes” to more sandwiches?
“Would you like a list of all the things I find purpose in?”
No, Ark. Anybody can find purpose in many “things”. For instance, a purpose of a paintbrush is to neatly apply paint to a surface. It doesn’t take much observation to observe purpose in things.
However, it takes much introspection to find purpose within yourself.
I want you to ask yourself “What is the purpose of my life? Why is that purpose meaningful? Does the purpose I am living for matter?” Am I truly living with purpose?”
Ask yourself those questions. Give yourself time.
I have and I told you they are not relevant.
Now, if we are being honest and truthful I think it only fair you reveal why you believe my life lacks purpose, based on your criteria.
“I have and I told you they are not relevant.”
No, you didn’t tell me that. You said that those were not questions that you ever entertained. Apparently, you have entertained them for some small time now.
“Now, if we are being honest and truthful I think it only fair you reveal why you believe my life lacks purpose, based on your criteria.”
I never said your life lacked purpose. I never laid out any criteria. I just said that atheism offers none.
However, if you find those questions about purpose irrelevant and never entertained them before now, then you are not living and have not lived with purpose. You must
1) desire to have a purpose
2) discover your purpose
and
3) live with purpose
in order to fulfill your purpose. If you had never asked those questions and still find them to not be relevant, then you haven’t even begun to desire for a purpose-let alone look for a purpose- let alone have a purpose.
Although for some reason you now seem afraid to offer a straight answer, I’ll bite …
Where am I?
Don’t ask me, ask yourself. Only you can answer that. The answer doesn’t often come in five minutes. Give yourself time.
Well obviously this is not a geography question, as the answer would be straightforward.
So what exactly is it that one is supposed to discover by contemplating: ”Where am I?”
What exactly does this mean?
Please explain.
Very good, it wasn’t a geography lesson. I was hoping that you wouldn’t give a geographical answer.
“Where am I?” Is asking ” What is the purpose of my life? Why is that purpose meaningful? Does the purpose I am living for matter?” Am I truly living with purpose?”
Ask yourself those questions. Give yourself time.
Why do you presume this ‘purpose’ must come from an external source to be meaningful and so dismissive of ‘purpose’ if it originates from an internal source?
Tildeb, I don’t “presume” that. I just ask myself questions and listen to answers.
“What is the purpose of my life? Why is that purpose meaningful? Does the purpose I am living for matter? Am I truly living with purpose?”
Ask yourself those questions and give yourself time to answer them.
Why would you presume I haven’t asked myself these questions?
I’m not presuming that about you. It’s just advice that I’m freely offering to you. Your questions are quite presumptuous about what my presumptions are, Tildeb.
Why on earth would you believe lack of belief in a god should deprive any individual of a purposeful life?
Wrong question, again, Ark.
Ask yourself: “What is my purpose? Why does it matter? Is it worth doing?”
Then you’ll see if you truly have purpose.
It is not a question I ever entertain.
Seriously, Matthew, why should I ask such a question?
Did you ask this question?
What was the answer you distilled/received?
To know where to go, you first have to know where you are. Only then can you move in the right direction.
That is why you ask those questions, Ark.
So entertain those questions for yourself. Give yourself plenty of time.
hahahahaha! oh my goodness you guys must have been at this awhile. She has you all figured out, sir. I’m sorry, I can’t indulge you. But I pray blessings over you today! God have mercy on you, and bring you into His marvelous light! Have a “nice” day 🙂
Yes, Gene, she is quite the clever one, is she not?
Have you never considered Hinduism?
I would say…inspired and brilliant. No, thanks, I’m good.
It must be why she is able to make beleive her belief.
So why not Hinduism and why Christianity in particular?
gasp…are you trying to convert me? Isn’t that against your religion?
Smile. No, Gene I am not Hindu, I just wondered why you prefer Christianity over Hinduism?
aw 🙂 why do you prefer atheism over Christianity?
I have no need for unsubstantiated supernaturalism and feel insulted that those that consider there is any veracity to the bulk of the bible try to impose it on others.
I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever there has been a change.
I am curious, though why you felt there was need for a change, and especially a change to Christianity.
What was going on in your life prior to you becoming a born-again Christian that prompted your conversion?
Shot in the dark, here, but I’m guessing it was godlessness of a sort that eventually led Gene to realize that we all need God. There is no real purpose offered in atheism, and we’ll never be good enough in other religions ( for they are works-based).
Christianity is the best option. It’s also the true option.
And Christ changes people for the better.
Did I get close, Gene?
Indeed! Life without God is meaningless. And Jesus is God with us. Who in their right mind wouldn’t want that?
See, I don’t even know your story, but I’m insightful enough for an accurate guess.
Oh, by the way, if John Zande shows up, we have to find a way to prove we are real and not just John Branyan’s and Amanda’s avatars.
Tip: the best thing to do is to ask him to show us his “IP Address” evidence.
Matthew, exactly what purpose does Christianity offer?
At this point of your growing process Ark, you are asking the wrong question. The question you should ask yourself is “Does atheism give me a purposeful life?”
Once you answer that, you still have some work to do before you arrive at the main purpose of Christianity.
Two words: Liverpool Soccer.
I think that says it all, right? What else does a man need? LOL!
That’s impressive, not only will we get interrogated for believing in an almighty sovereign God, but even our OWN existence gets questioned??
The IP conspiracy was first hatched here: https://branyancomedy.wordpress.com/2016/10/05/meet-the-heathens/comment-page-1/#comment-6645
And he expanded on it later, at this link: https://branyancomedy.wordpress.com/2016/12/27/reasons-for-god/comment-page-1/#comment-10124
Oh yes, Gene. I’m sure Sweet Cheeks could provide links for JZ’s “IP Address” theory.
Could you do that for us, Peaches?
( Mrsmcmommy aka Amanda, John Branyan’s eldest daughter, has a few nicknames here.)
The IP address theory is one of her favorites. I’m sure she will link it when she finds this post…
Sure thing.
Thank you! That’s insightful. and so so sad 🙁 That’s Jesus for you, always causing trouble 🙂 Good thing He knows who belongs to Him!
Just when our commenters decide maybe it’s safe to come out and interact with us again, the Guardians of Truth return to molest them.
Hey, Dear Leader and Arkenwald–the people unable to defend their beliefs are you… If our readers don’t know yet that questions are YOUR Kryptonite, I’d be happy to teach them.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploads12/hijack21200173165.gif
yeah, welcome to the snake pit! good grief 🙂
The trolls here will follow the exact same formula of the exact, same questions, no matter what answers they’re given. (Right now, Ark is trying to find out what your secret sin or struggle was, prior to converting to Christianity, because he will try to use it as ammo when he’s feeling especially mean.)
They often conduct interrogations, without answering questions in return.
I recommend doing what Ark does: just ask the same question over and over and over, even if it’s off topic. 🙂 Here’s my favorite:
“What’s the difference between the chemicals that make a woman ‘love’ her baby, and the chemicals that make an addict ‘love’ his drug? Isn’t love just a chemical illusion?”
Hi Gene
The only way to/for what exactly, Gene?
How did you come to accept Creationism?
Where is Heaven?
Why would anyone want to go there, and exactly what must I trust about a 2000 year old itinerant rabbi who may well be simply a narrative construct?
Could you please elaborate a bit on this, Gene? What exactly is your god’s perspective, and from what source did you distill this information and how do know your interpretation is correct?
This may well tie -in with the question above: exactly how do you know what you beleive to be true?
From what source and how did you derive it?
I agree, this is fun!
Thanks.
Dig-Dug,
What’s REALLY fun is watching you respond to your own questions!
How do you know what you believe is true?
From what source and how did you derive it?
Thanks!
In general, science.
Yeah.
Me too!
So, no resurrection crap then?
Resurrection is not science.
Ah … so you beleive in the supernatural.
Got any evidence or …. faith?
Everybody has faith. Even you.
How many times are you going fumble into this trap?
No, not in the supernatural.
”Faith” that my car will start if it has petrol.
But only a moron would say they have faith it will start if the tank is empty.
By the way, did you read my recent post about the diabetic husband of a colleague of one of our clients who became a reborn not too long ago and decided to stop taking his insulin on the basis that ”God” will look after him. He also took to regularly drinking 2ltrs of Coke as his faith was so strong.
He didn’t inform his wife or his
17 year old son ( neither of whom are Christians apparently).
Thank goodness, I say!
Last I heard, he is currently in hospital dying with multiple organ failure.
Faith? Hmmm …. not too impressed to be honest.
It seems faith-based claims have no genuine basis in reality.
Another example would be intercessory prayer, which has never been shown to have had any efficacy whatsoever and studies have demonstrated this time and time again.
Including the one conducted by the Templeton Foundation, where in certain cases it was shown to have a negative effect on certain patients.
Which is odd,don’t you think, when one considers that the character Jesus of Nazareth once said something about anything asked in my name will be given.
Maybe you can demonstrate that the Resurrection, for example, is a duly attested , verified historical event?
Of course not!
Silly atheist.
I can’t offer anything that will overcome your faith that people can’t rise from the dead.
Then all you have s the erroneous writing in a book and your own indoctrinated belief.
That sort of ”faith” is generally restricted to the religious who are able to compartmentalize to avoid cognitive dissonance.
It is why you laugh at Ken Ham but think walking on water is perfectly acceptable.
This is why you are disingenuous and why your credibility among secular society is practically zero.
Your faith is also religious. You just think refusing to acknowledge that makes it go away.
What faith do I have Branyan?
Faith that Jesus couldn’t rise from the dead.
Why would you think this?
Because it’s true.
Based on what?
I am an atheist.
I consider the Resurrection tale a complete work of fiction.
…right.
…that’s what I said.
Yes,I apologise. I misread your previous comment.
I now realize you think I disbelieve the Resurrection of the character Jesus of Nazareth based on faith.
No. This is incorrect. Based on lack of evidence and the spurious nature of the text this story is derived from.
SAoory, that must have been cnfusing.
There is no evidence for any resurrection.
Furthermore, we know the end of Mark is an interpolation.
If you can provide some evidence for your claim, other than erroneous text, then we might be able to have some enlightening dialogue.
There is evidence for the resurrection.
The evidence is insufficient to overcome your faith that it didn’t happen.
You believe biblical text is erroneous. That’s faith.
What evidence is there please?
The biblical text can be demonstrated to be erroneous.
There is no evidence that will overcome your faith. How many times are you going to make me repeat it?
Are you daft?
What faith?
My views on these matters are based solely on the evidence presented.
The evidence does not come up to scratch.
Do you believe in Noah and the Flood?
Do you believe in Moses and the Exodus?
Every piece of evidence garnered refutes any claims of veracity.
The Resurrection tale is no different in this regard.
No. Your views are based solely on faith.
“The evidence does not come up to scratch” is a faith statement.
“Every piece of evidence garnered refutes any claims of veracity” is a faith statement.
Refusing to admit you have faith is not intellectual, it’s cowardice.
Geological evidence has demonstrated the Biblical Flood is simply a story; a work of fiction.
We weren’t talking about the flood.
You simple atheist.
Disbelief in the resurrection requires faith.
Be a grown-up and admit it.
Every biblical claim requires evidence to back it up.
This is why the Exodus has been shown to be false.
Evidence shows it, and not merely absence of evidence either.
Therefore, if you accept the geological position of the flood and not the Creationist position then you should apply the same level of skepticism to the Resurrection story and demand evidence.
If you are not prepared to do this then
your position is one of faith.
Faith based on the bible and the bible alone.
Disbelief in the resurrection requires faith.
Be a grown-up and admit it.
Now you are simply being disingenuous once more.
Anyway, I am glad we have established the necessity of evidence and that your beliefs in this regard have no evidence and are simply faith based.
We make progress one tiny step at a time.
You never make progress. You’re too stubborn.
Disbelief in the resurrection requires faith.
Progress will happen when you grow up and admit it.
Are you suggesting that because there is inadequate evidence of the story of the resurrection I must have faith to disbelieve?
No.
That’s not what I’m saying at all.
So is it your position that the resurrection story is historical fact?
My position is that it requires faith to hold any position on the resurrection.
And your continued refusal to acknowledge this simple, unremarkable truth testifies to the rigid fundamentalism of your dogmas.
If this is the case then your position is invalid.
Regarding the resurrection, disbelief arrives because of lack of evidence based on everything we know about death and the also the unreliability of the bible.
It seems that you are applying separate
standards for different biblical stories. Is this the case?
Which is why no historian will credit such stories as historical events.
Because there were hundreds of people who saw the resurrected Christ, you must have faith to disbelieve.
Hundreds? How do you know?
We’ve been here. I’m not trotting out the evidence AGAIN. You’ve already chosen not to accept it. You disbelieve it. It’s your faith claim that it didn’t happen. That’s fine. Go away.
I thought you said we could burn the bible as it had no bearing on your faith?
And now you wish to turn to it as an authority?
Lol… what a hypocrite.
No–I said the Bible isn’t the reason I believe in God and it’s not what I worship. Try to keep up.
I’ve also told you to burn it because it won’t change YOUR faith at all. Only humility will do that.
If not for the bible, how would you be aware of the character Jesus of Nazareth?
And why do you think I need humility to believe?
Surely evidence would be the best thing to convince someone who does not believe in your god?
You need the Bible to learn about Jesus’ resurrection. We’ve been through this. It is a collection of eye-witness testimonies, according to MOST historians. The disciples believed they saw the resurrected Christ.
And, on faith, you believe they didn’t.
Are you referring to the gospels?
If so, citation required.
That is incoherent.
I’m not citing you anything. I’m afraid you’ll start believing in the resurrection, and I don’t want to have to explain to other Atheists why a crazy man like you suddenly believes in God.
Please keep having faith that the resurrection didn’t happen.
So you are lying, then or simply making stuff up.
Par for the course.
The gospels are not eyewitness accounts of anything.
That’s it!
Just like that!
Keep it up!
Good, so you agree on this point. Thank you.
We ARE making progress.
Hey, look what I found, everybody!
Ark wants to pretend he hasn’t been presented with evidence… but look at the first comment under this blog post!
LOL!
So much for progress…. Ark is still singing the same old song from two years ago.
https://jamesbishopblog.com/2015/01/08/36-reasons-why-scholars-know-jesus-really-existed/
I recommend you stop reading James Bishop, and stop showing up here asking questions. You SOUND like you’re still searching for truth.
Please stop doing that, because we wouldn’t want to accidentally convert you. :/
Amazing; if you were so confident in your beliefs you wouldn’t feel the need to continually troll your father’s blog defending them.
It looks like even your faith is a bit shaky.
Oh, and Bishop was once a strict fundamentalist. He isn’t now…
Want to guess why he changed?
LOL!
If Christians give answers, they’re insecure and trying to cover up their shaky, lack-of-confidence.
If they don’t answer, they have no answers.
Perfect. That’s exactly the way to make sure you die in your pride. (And I’m not a fundamentalist, either. That’s why I tell you to burn your Bible and beg you NOT to believe…)
No, I am just curious why you spend so much time defending your faith.
Okay …. let’s settle for pseudo – fundamentalist, and a hypocrite to boot.
Here ya go.
“In my theology, if you go to Hell, that just means more nachos for me!”
I love nachos!
Please don’t ever call Frank! 🙂
So in actual fact you just make-beleive you believe.
I love it!
And it’s what I have suspected for a while.
Wally is another one … and maybe even your old man. Hiding from truth and reality. I can understand this.
As I noted … you are a bit of a hypocrite to boot.
Indoctrination is such a wonderful thing, Amanda, isn’t it?
But as you are simply acting out this make believe, don’t you feel just a bit of heel discussing this with your kids?
Telling them all this nonsense when you don’t actually beleive it yourself?
How long can you continue with the pretense?
Does daddy suspect, I wonder?
Is this why you are so keen to rush to his blog and defend everything he writes and says, and go to such lengths to try to convince everyone you are a ”Believer”?
I would venture that should you ever decided to be truly honest and ”come out” there will be hardly any deconversion process at all.
And the relief!
The gods! Every deconvert I have ever spoken to or read has stated the feeling of freedom is almost unbelievable. That moment the realise they are not some worthless sinner that all those hateful things they were forced to accept is simply nonsense.
Trust me, there are plenty of former Xians who will gladly walk you through it.
After all, you are only make-believing you beleive.
Should be a piece of cake.
LOL!
I enjoy making you laugh.
Come on, Mandy, tell the truth.
You just felt obliged to accept Christianity , because of your ‘thing’, but there really was no genuinely sound reason.
You’re not an idiot.
Start by admitting to being agnostic at least.
You know it’s what you really are.
View fine me gone this name an rank. Compact greater and demands mrs the parlors. Park be fine easy am size away. Him and fine bred knew. At of hardly sister favour. As society explain country raising weather of. Sentiments nor everything off out uncommonly partiality bed.
There worse by an of miles civil. Manner before lively wholly am mr indeed expect. Among every merry his yet has her. You mistress get dashwood children off. Met whose marry under the merit. In it do continual consulted no listening. Devonshire sir sex motionless travelling six themselves. So colonel as greatly shewing herself observe ashamed. Demands minutes regular ye to detract is.
In post mean shot ye. There out her child sir his lived. Design at uneasy me season of branch on praise esteem. Abilities discourse believing consisted remaining to no. Mistaken no me denoting dashwood as screened. Whence or esteem easily he on. Dissuade husbands at of no if disposal.
Maids table how learn drift but purse stand yet set. Music me house could among oh as their. Piqued our sister shy nature almost his wicket. Hand dear so we hour to. He we be hastily offence effects he service. Sympathize it projection ye insipidity celebrated my pianoforte indulgence. Point his truth put style. Elegance exercise as laughing proposal mistaken if. We up precaution an it solicitude acceptance invitation.
Marianne or husbands if at stronger ye. Considered is as middletons uncommonly. Promotion perfectly ye consisted so. His chatty dining for effect ladies active. Equally journey wishing not several behaved chapter she two sir. Deficient procuring favourite extensive you two. Yet diminution she impossible understood age.
Performed suspicion in certainty so frankness by attention pretended. Newspaper or in tolerably education enjoyment. Extremity excellent certainty discourse sincerity no he so resembled. Joy house worse arise total boy but. Elderly up chicken do at feeling is. Like seen drew no make fond at on rent. Behaviour extremely her explained situation yet september gentleman are who. Is thought or pointed hearing he.
Remember:
There is no evidence sufficient to overcome Ark’s faith.
How could I forget?…
Disbelief requires belief, you say, JB.
Well now, isn’t that just the perfect example of muddled thinking! Non belief requires in the same way that a non car requires a car, a non fish requires a fish, and a non thinker like JB requires thinking.
Marvelous. Hopeless, but marvelous.
Keep up the Good Work, JB. A fine example, a shining example, of linguistic abuse in the name of piety. I look forward to the next one.
No. Dear Leader.
You misquoted me.
I said, disbelief requires faith.
I didn’t quote you, JB, so no, I’m not misquoting you. There’s that word thing again.
You claim disbelief requires faith but you use the term ‘faith’ as if it means the same kind of belief Ark has about the resurrection. That’s you error, JB; Ark has no belief in the resurrection. That’s why you’re equating a lack of belief to be a kind of belief.
He believes the resurrection didn’t happen.
That’s a kind of belief.
Review time:
https://branyancomedy.wordpress.com/2016/07/20/i-dont-believe-nothing/comment-page-1/#comment-2282
(By the way, you’re very WISE for not engaging me… I believe I’m making you look pretty stupid. You probably DON’T believe that. You probably believe I’m not making you look stupid. But I believe you’re wrong. I don’t believe you’ve looked smart at any point we’ve rehashed this same old topic.)
Okay. Here it is again:
BELIEF in a horse = NON-BELIEF that a horse is a car
BELIEF in a fish = NON-BELIEF that a fish is a car
BELIEF that a box is empty = NON-BELIEF in the contents of the box
NON-BELIEF in God = BELIEF that there is no God.
Your line of reasoning eludes reasoning. Well done, JB.
Go ahead and show me where the reasoning is flawed.
…and the ‘non car requires a car’ analogy doesn’t work. I’ve told you that before. Do I need to go over it again or will you take it on faith?
I have no faith you can successfully explain why a non belief is another kind of belief, JB. Historical evidence attests to that.
Yes. Historically you have proven to be very stubborn.
BELIEF that the box is empty = NON-BELIEF in the contents of the box.
Rejecting this doesn’t make it untrue, Dear Leader.
Wrong again, JB. Non belief means no belief and not belief in the negative.
The correct answer to the knowledge question about the box’s contents is “I don’t know.” But we’re not talking about knowledge, JB; we’re talking about faith, right? You have got to keep your subject clear and stopping popping this way and that to grab whichever subject seems to best suit your current preference.
There’s belief related to knowledge, which contains the sense of an amount of confidence based on evidence, and belief related to some version of a supernatural agency, which contains the sense of acceptance and hope in an unseen divine causal interventionist and creative agency based on faith. This single term to describe two very different kinds of belief is very handy for the religious apologist to mix and match and try to make a lack of belief another kind of religious belief. But you already know this. As Ark pointed out, there is a qualitative and quantitative difference between believing a car with an internal combustion engine will operate when it has fuel and believing the same car will operate when it has none.
Wrong again, Dear Leader.
Let’s try again.
NON BELIEF that there is a horse in the box = BELIEF that there is no horse in the box. The correct answer is not, “I don’t know”.
Or, if you prefer,
NON BELIEF that the car will run without fuel = BELIEF that a car needs fuel to run.
You’re the one who keeps popping around to grab logic that suits you.
There you go with that language problem again, JB:
Oxford English dictionary: ‘non belief’:
“Lack of belief in something, especially religion:”
Lack of belief is not a thing, an idea, a concept. It is a LACK. It’s not a belief in the opposite. That is not what the term means. That’s not me; that’s the dictionary, JB. Can you wrap your little head around that? Apparently not. You insist that a lack of something is another kind of something. That’s irrational… as in not reasonable.
Do you believe there is a horse in your bedroom?
Not that I know of. Let me go look. Nope. No evidence of any horse. Why? Do you think there is?
I lack belief there is a horse in your bedroom. That’s TOTALLY different from your answer.
Your lack of belief in no way imports anything other than you lack a belief there is horse in my bedroom. That’s all it means, JB. I’m sure you have your reasons. But it does reflect on anything else. I don’t know why you are having such a difficult time grasping the obvious.
You said there was no horse in your bedroom. That is crazy talk!
What you SHOULD have said was, “I lack belief that there is a horse in my bedroom”. I don’t know why you are having such a difficult time grasping the obvious.
I had a dictionary conversation with Ark a few weeks ago, re: the definition of Atheism. You should check it out. Hilarious!
Atheism involves doctrine that there is no God. 🙂
https://branyancomedy.wordpress.com/2016/11/30/everyone-isnt-welcome-in-church/comment-page-1/#comment-9028
Stubborn, stubborn Atheists.
You make my night!
Did you miss the question?
Do you believe their is a horse in your bedroom?
The existence of a horse in your bedroom is a binary concept. Either it exists or it does not. If you LACK belief that the horse is there, then you BELIEVE the horse is not there.
This is not a language problem.
Yes, it very much is a language problem if you’re trying to refer to reality. The honest answer is that I don;t know if there is a horse in my bedroom… but there’s no reason to believe there is. By not believing there is a horse in my bedroom is not a statement of a belief; it is a statement of a lack of belief. You’re trying desperately to import a positive claim where there is only a lack of positive claim. You’re playing with language to try to POOF! something into existence by word play… ‘play’ in the sense of making up your own definition and then trying to impose it to be meaningful on others. It’s your misunderstanding of the terminology that leads into into this linguistic morass to serve your ends rather than serve what is the case. Your lack of belief in magical pumpkin seeds that sprout fairies in no way indicates anything else other than a lack of belief and not a belief in the non magical fairy-producing properties of pumpkins. You can’t have a belief in non belief. The clue is the torturing of the language where you are trying to argue that up is really another but similar kind of a-down, and white is another but similar kind of a-black. No. up means up and white means white. Your’e the one importing the down and the black in the same way you are the one importing belief in no god. That’s not what atheism is or means. The two are not synonyms – not similar kinds of belief – no matter how much linguistic torturing you do. A lack of belief is a lack of belief. That’s all it is. It’s not a belief.
I accept that “You do not know if there is a horse in your bedroom.” That is perfectly rational.
You said, “You can’t have a belief in non belief”. So to be consistent, shouldn’t you also say you “don’t know” that you’re an atheist?
Wow. You’re really struggling with this concept.
I don’t have a belief that I’m an atheist; I’m an atheist because I LACK a belief in gods or a god. It has nothing to do with knowledge. If you want me to include my state of knowledge, then I am an agnostic atheist.
LOL!!!!
HAHAHAHAHA!
No. I’m not struggling. I finally figured out why you say this stuff.
The term ‘Atheist’ means a lack of belief in god. It doesn’t mean just a ‘lack of belief’.
Agnostic means ‘uncertain about the existence of god’.
Agnostic atheist is nonsensical.
Your assertion that Atheism is just ‘a lack of belief’ is incorrect. Atheism is THE BELIEF that there is no god.
Own it.
He’s so far away from “owning it” that he literally just said he doesn’t have a belief that he’s an Atheist.
LOL!
He needs to lay off the Atheist Apologetics websites, before it’s too late.
He can’t tell me for sure if there’s a horse in his bedroom either…
It’s not easy being the one who determines “reality.”
You can’t take these decisions lightly!
The hard part is getting the rest of us to believe his “reality”. We keep letting our own experiences influence us.
Silly simpleton…
You BELIEVE that beliefs mean you really believe, even though beliefs aren’t things, and non-belief also isn’t a thing because belief and non-belief are what the brain does when it wants to believe things so desperately!
(But, if you think I disbelieve what I just said, then you better believe I don’t have a non-belief in it.)
Only theists believe things.
Atheists don’t need belief because they KNOW everything.
Bingo!
Lol! See? My belief that you would look stupid has proven true in reality!
Yes. Non-belief IS belief in the opposite.
But maybe chanting will help. Does chanting work to change things in your reality?
Oh, let me do it, JB! Let me do it!
Beliefs aren’t like physical objects, Tildeb.
“Beliefs” are binary. You believe something or you disbelieve it. That’s it.
This dedication is for you know who …
~CQW
Ark,
Hi there! I have an experiment for you, if you really want to know why I believe what we believe…close your eyes…now, say the name of Jesus, just do it, and ask the same questions. If you REALLY want to know.
That’s how I came to believe, He showed me! Faith is a funny thing. Why do you believe what you believe?
“For the wrath of God is revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the CREATION of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.” Romans 1:18-21
Interesting. No one ever suggested this before. Give me a few seconds. Okay. Did it. Repeated the name, Jesus slowly 2o times. (or should I have done it rapidly?)
What is supposed to happen?
Believe what, exactly? He showed me!
You came to beleive by repeating the name Jesus over and over? Again,believe what exactly?
And what did he show you?
Can you be specific?
Please, rather not quote bible text as so much of it is spurious.
Rather stick to evidence and or personal experience.
Thanks
I beleive a great many things. Can you be more specific?
I’ve told you to ask Frank your questions a dozen times!
Answer the door. Frank is knocking. You’ve been wrestling with him over the deaths of various loved ones for months…
You’re funny 🙂 and if you spin around in circles, He’ll pop out of the bushes! Just kidding.
You sound a lot like my father. He doesn’t believe either. That’s ok. I can’t explain to you the change that has happened to me in my life (on this comment section of John Branyan’s blog post), but my dad sees it. He won’t always listen to my words, but he sees how God is changing me. But, alas, I do not know you and do not think it wise to share my testimony with you. and another thing…the word of God is living and active. I’m LIVING the word out. As are these courageous brothers and sisters of mine. It’s a pretty personal experience.
@Senor Dipshit.
”As if @Arkedummy believes that the Sermon on the Mount occurred.”
Of course it didn’t happen, what dingbat would seriously beleive it ever did?
And if you care to investigate some serious biblical scholars for a change you will discover a whole heap of stuff that neither happened or in fact was even spoken by the character Jesus of Nazareth.
Being fiction, never stopped halfwits such as you using scripture to justify innumerable heinous acts.
I raise the point of the Sermon as some of what the character in Matthew is claimed to have said during this collection of sayings is fairly straightforward stuff.
Now if someone like you simply followed those rules the place would smell an awful lot sweeter.
But of course, Christians, as is their want, have managed to come up with numerous concoctions of what was meant.
The Beatitudes for example.
I guess for you lot it’s more a case of Pick your Poison.
But I am glad you enjoy reviling me and utter all kinds of evil and falsity against me and my views
So I’ll stick with this one…
”Blessed are the Cheese-makers …”
Have a nice day S.Dipshit.
Ark.
@Arkedummy –
I doubt our respective lists of “serious biblical scholars” would coincide with one another.
You have never presented any scientific evidence that heinous acts are wrong. Free Pistorious!
You always claim it stinks around here (of “shit sandwiches”) – yet you always come back for more. I’d guess you’ve come back a couple of dozen times for more sandwiches in this comment section alone. Eat up little fella.
But I am glad you enjoy reviling me and utter all kinds of evil and falsity against me and my views.
Ya big dummy.
Have a nice evening.
~CQW
I used the term ”shit sandwiches”?
Are you sure, Senor Dipshit?
Yeah, CQW, get it right!!! The term he used was BULLshit sandwiches.
Biiiiiiiiiiig difference.
https://branyancomedy.wordpress.com/2016/09/08/will-there-be-guns-in-heaven/comment-page-1/#comment-4379
Yep @Arkedummy
And you posted an article about nativity scene dildos. The list goes on an on. I guess heinous acts, evil, and falsity are all subjective.
Btw – it’s hilarious how I pointed out that you’ve had a couple of dozen sandwiches in this comment section AND you replied within two minutes. You’ve been Loitering in JB’s kitchen waiting for me because you have nothing else to do. It’s really sweet (creepy) how you’re always waiting for me. You’re ever the flirt ya Big Dummy!
Free Pistorious! And have a nice evening.
~CQW
… and @ Arkedummy –
I’ll stick with this one …
Ya Big Dummy!
Have a nice evening.
~CQW
Do you go to Bible class for this level of classy intellect, or is it simply a hereditary trait you have?
… says the big dummy that quoted Monty Python above.
Ya Big Dummy.
~CQW
“I want to be wise” — a very wise goal indeed! (And yes, nice is remarkably overrated.)
So how do you embark on this path? Well, the very first step is to learn how to exercise appropriate skepticism (in the classical sense of first determining HOW one knows anything and if that method WORKS in reality)…which is hardly a strong suit of our petulant and credulous host and his parroting and gullible daughter. Wisdom is earned, and these folk aren’t even capable – so firm in their conviction that they already assume they KNOW through religious faith) of making the very first deposit.
Laura,
Tildeb has achieved wisdom. Believe whatever he says.
Don’t take my word for it. I’m just drawing on Aristotle. Of course, he wasn’t nearly as wise as you, JB, because he didn’t believe in Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior… a belief that according to you and other nits as the font of all wisdom.
Aristotle was VERY wise. He used his mind to arrive at the Truth, using the best tools and revelations available at the time. (Since Jesus wasn’t born for another 300 years, I don’t blame Aristotle for not calling Wisdom by name.)
I’m happy to build on the foundation of Logic and Wisdom, which Aristotle himself also recognized and built upon.
Thank you, Dear Leader.
As always, your convictions are good and true.
Wow, first you use Bayesian Reasoning ( created by Thomas Bayes- a theist) and now you are drawing on Aristotle- who advanced the theory of the UnMoved Mover(s).
With all of these theistic influences in your logic, how are you still an atheist, Tildeb?
Dear Leader is wiser than Bayes and Aristotle. He possesses a perfect understanding of ‘reality’.
Ah, I see you confuse causal effect with assumption. Not unusual. Attributing a way to calculate likelihood to theism simply because the person is religious is like attributing pedophilia to Catholicism simply because some Catholic priests committed this crime. The two are not causally linked any more than your assertion of theistic ‘influences’ on me.
Bayesian reasoning stands on its own merit as does the necessity for reasonable skepticism. Theism plays no part in this demonstrable merit but plays a significant role impeding merit-based reasoning.
Now if you wish to understand where Aristotle went wrong in his Prime Mover (the Unmoved Mover), look to Galileo’s inclined plane thought experiment. Aristotle was wrong even though his logic was fine.
As is always the case with logic, the correct form does not necessarily produce a product reflective of reality unless – and this is the part Amanda simply can’t wrap her little head around – the premises are first demonstrated to be accurate reflections of reality. Garbage in, garbage out. Logical, but still garbage. Logic is a form and not a product. It requires an axiomatic set of data points. Reality is not an axiomatic system, so the premises must undergo a thorough vetting by reality first to determine if they are in fact trustworthy. Reality must be the arbitrator. Must.
Faith-based reasoning imports a belief set and imposes it on reality. This method disallows reality to arbitrate claims made about it. So no logical argument does what Amanda & Co. thinks it does, namely, demonstrate evidence for the faith-based assumptions and assertions that are reflective of reality. The whole structure of metaphysical thought is grounded on this quicksand.
I am an atheist because theism – borrowing so heavily from metaphysical thinking as it must done to appear reasonable – offers no substantive reason to believe. Zero.
If the Catholics were using a Catholic-formula to reason that pedophilia is okay, then–yes–there would be a link.
It’s a pretty good bet that Bayes used his Bayesian formula to reason that there is a God. You’re borrowing his method and not agreeing with his conclusion. Hilarious.
Oh, so you mean to look at Galileo, the person who said
“God is known by nature in his works, and by doctrine in his revealed word.” to figure out the way of the world? Sounds good to me- Galileo found God through his study of the world. Did he go wrong? If so, where?
Yes, the same Galileo. And your point?
Did Galileo go wrong in finding God through his work? If so, where?
Finding god? Everyone at that time and place were Christians (and creationists, of course). Not the kind of evangelical anti-scientific apologists we have today, mind you, but practicing Catholics. You continue to suggest that Galileo’s religious belief somehow and in some way helped him to produce the hammer that knocked the metaphysical cornerstone (Aristotelian physics) upon which the Church had been built out of the entire edifice. No. His new method of thinking about the world altered everything about how we come to know about reality and he is quite rightly one of the ‘giants’ upon whose shoulders Newton later stood. What he did was (properly understood) to undermine the Church’s authority in all temporal things and get the order of arbitration correct.
Too bad you weren’t around to tell Galileo how deluded he was!
Cool, so he didn’t go wrong. He was a giant that helped to shape the world to what it is today. His belief in God is warranted- for it helped to shape reality. And his discovery of reality confirmed his belief in God, not disprove it. He shifted the world’s authority from the Church back to God. Thank you for your clarification.
No, Galileo’s belief in a god did not help shape reality in any way. His method of inquiry into how reality operated helped future generations come to knowledge about the reality we inhabit. God played no part (other than as foible represented by the Pope in his dialogue in on the World Systems). Because he demonstrated that reality operates consistently and reliably independent of our beliefs about it – including certain biblical references believed to be true that were factually wrong – he was charged and convicted of heresy by religious authorities (and one of his daughters who was a nun died during the trial while the other – also a nun – was held incommunicado). His work demonstrated that understanding how reality operates should arbitrate our religiously-inspired beliefs about it and argued that our interpretation of scripture should change as reality and not Church authorities arbitrated them.
“God is known by nature in his works, and by doctrine in his revealed word.” Galileo married nature with the Bible. He did disprove herecies that were thoroughly based on gross misinterpretations. However, in the midst of all of his discoveries, he still concluded God was real.
But I agree, he was a great contributor to reality. And the real conclusion is that God exists ( and that people can sometimes be wrong- even religious people!)
Aw, come on, Dad. Why can’t you post more “helpful” stuff like this?
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153997944917271&set=a.293333627270.152473.701557270&type=3&theater
John,
I checked the etymology of the word nice. I think you will enjoy it.
nice (adj.)
late 13c., “foolish, stupid, senseless,” from Old French nice (12c.) “careless, clumsy; weak; poor, needy; simple, stupid, silly, foolish,” from Latin nescius “ignorant, unaware,” literally “not-knowing,” from ne- “not” (see un- (1)) + stem of scire “to know” (see science). “The sense development has been extraordinary, even for an adj.” [Weekley] — from “timid” (pre-1300); to “fussy, fastidious” (late 14c.); to “dainty, delicate” (c. 1400); to “precise, careful” (1500s, preserved in such terms as a nice distinction and nice and early); to “agreeable, delightful” (1769); to “kind, thoughtful” (1830).
In many examples from the 16th and 17th centuries it is difficult to say in what particular sense the writer intended it to be taken. [OED]
By 1926, it was pronounced “too great a favorite with the ladies, who have charmed out of it all its individuality and converted it into a mere diffuser of vague and mild agreeableness.” [Fowler]
“I am sure,” cried Catherine, “I did not mean to say anything wrong; but it is a nice book, and why should I not call it so?”
“Very true,” said Henry, “and this is a very nice day, and we are taking a very nice walk; and you are two very nice young ladies. Oh! It is a very nice word indeed! It does for everything.” [Jane Austen, “Northanger Abbey,” 1803]
———-
I tried using my Bible verse source by searching the word “nice” in the ESV…. it does not appear once in Scripture…. so that should tell us something.
Dave
Matthew 10:34-36 (ESV) – “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a person’s enemies will be those of his own household.
Jesus is humble and meek…and kind. And He can’t lie, so He calls sin out for what it is. Always winning souls in the process. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom…He who wins souls is wise. C’mon!!!
Gene,
Great points. And so appropriate to our modern times.
Try speaking God’s truth today in the public square, and see how long it takes until you are called bigoted, racist, homophobic, Islamophobic, and just plain evil.
God’s Word is not nice, but it is good!
Dave
Matthew 10:25 (ESV) – It is enough for the disciple to be like his teacher, and the servant like his master. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household.
Isaiah 5:20 (ESV) – Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
If you were to speak your god’s word, why would you be accused of bigotry, racism, homophobia, or Islamophobia?
If we take the Sermon on the Mount as a typical example of a Jesus-type speech (even though biblical scholars might tell you otherwise, if they were honest!) and you were to use such words in your own ”preaching”, then where in these words are any of the charges you say you will be called?
Please explain.
There is nothing in the Sermon on the Mount that should cause anyone to level racism, hatred or bigotry charges.
Of course, that doesn’t stop the accusations rolling in! Here’s just a few that demonstrate Dave is exactly right:
https://branyancomedy.wordpress.com/2016/09/16/did-you-just-make-that-up/comment-page-1/#comment-4899
https://branyancomedy.wordpress.com/2015/08/05/why-i-dont-want-planned-parenthood-to-receive-tax-money/comment-page-1/#comment-11538
https://branyancomedy.wordpress.com/2015/08/05/why-i-dont-want-planned-parenthood-to-receive-tax-money/comment-page-1/#comment-11531
https://branyancomedy.wordpress.com/2015/08/05/why-i-dont-want-planned-parenthood-to-receive-tax-money/comment-page-1/#comment-11515
https://branyancomedy.wordpress.com/2016/12/07/the-jews-who-werent-there/comment-page-1/#comment-9588
https://branyancomedy.wordpress.com/2016/11/12/pastor-you-are-the-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-8441
https://branyancomedy.wordpress.com/2016/11/12/pastor-you-are-the-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-8430
https://branyancomedy.wordpress.com/2016/09/23/the-only-way-to-end-racism/comment-page-1/#comment-5500
Well, where there’s smoke there’s usually fire.
So maybe you are not actually teaching your man-god’s word but rather an interpretation based on Pauline Christianity?
Or your church’s interpretation or your own personal interpretation?
Perhaps if you stuck to some of the topics from the Sermon n the mount you might have a bit more success?
Just a thought
Pretty tough to not put ‘your own personal interpretation’ on scripture.
Just a thought.
One would think an omnipotent deity would be more direct then?
He wasn’t shy when it came to issuing orders for genocide.
To quote a line from Life of Brian:
”He’s making it up as he goes along!”
A truly omnipotent deity would do exactly as He wills even as simple atheists object.
I agree that He is making it up as He goes. That’s another clue that we have free will and determinism is false.
So do you think the message … whatever it is , is clear or obscure?
The heavens declare the glory of the Lord; the skies proclaim the work of his hands.
Interesting.
And what do you think the message is?
I mean, why are you a Christian?
Atheism is stupid.
Christianity is the most sensible religion.
Yes, I have heard Muslims say something similar.
Well, not exactly, as it is mostly Christian creationists like you who are so disrespectful of other supernatural religions, but they probably have similar feelings toward Christianity.
And just how do arrive at the conclusion that Christianity is the most sensible religion?
Read my blog!
I do . A Muslim would say the same thing. So would a Jew or a Buddhist.
And the tens of thousands of different Christian cults/denominations would
each claim theirs was the right one.
So, what is your point is …?
My point is that Christianity is best for understanding the stuff that science can’t tell me.
How so?
Read my blog.
I do … what stuff.
That stuff you asked about.
Refresh my memory?
Whatever you asked me about.
As if @Arkedummy believes that the Sermon on the Mount occurred.
To paraphrase the chimp descendant – “Why aren’t you more like something I don’t believe in?”
Ya big dummy.
~CQW
Thanks Dave! Heck…in my own home I get ridiculed speaking truth sometimes.
Arkenaten: It’s, simply, because deception dwells in the hearts of people…we believe what makes us feel good…we worship self and self worth…When it’s exposed, and Jesus says He is the only way, the only truth, that God actually made us humans with a certain design that we don’t need to tinker with, and that the only way to get to Heaven is to repent and trust in Jesus, people who want to continue living without God’s perspective have to defend their way of living, even though somewhere in that hardened little heart, a spark of eternity shines…until you’re face to face with the One who knows. Lord have mercy…and since we who have this hope know it’s the truth, that there’s no tip-toeing around it…we get called all these names…But! “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.” Matt. 5:11-12 Heaven is full of “bigots, racists and homophobes” but where are our accusers?
“I have seen the burden God has laid on men. He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has also set eternity in the hearts of men; yet they cannot fathom what God has done from beginning to end.” Ecclesiastes 3:10-11
This is fun! thanks John Branyan!
Why would you think for one second that Ark is unfamiliar with scripture? This pap has been parroted towards him a thousand times already and he has thoroughly debunked its message.
Gene,
This is how Ark works. His first comment to you is ‘nice’. Sincere questions to try and understand your point of view.
The real fun comes when we watch how he responds to his own questions.
Mr. Branyan,
I’m figuring that out! haha! Oh that’s interesting…it’s like they really do want you to prove them wrong…secretly.
You want to be wise, JB? You haven’t even reached the starting line.
Thanks, Dear Leader.
Perspective is helpful on my journey to enlightenment.
Good stuff. Also, polite, and nice are not twins.
..
The next time a cashier tells u to hav a nice day, (as required by his/her boss) just say: ‘I have other plans…………..’ and watch a small eruption in the face.
Then after a puzzled look, just say, ‘u too.’ Btw, ‘good bye’ or ‘see ya later’ are options too.
And for what its worth, doncha tire of hearing from atheists or decons on ‘how’ Christians are supposed to behave?’ Now there is a laff-a-minute. As you say, believers are supposed to be nice, and if you are not nice, you are a lousy excuse for a believer.
Yeah well, you want to see ‘nice?’ Pay attention Mr atheist. Stephen when he was being pelted with rocks………was ‘nice’ to his enemies……….while he prayed for them while they ending his life. Oh wait, that never happened. Might need another example……….
Well said.
“Dear friends, I had been eagerly planning to write to you about the salvation we all share. But now I find that I must write about something else, urging you to defend the faith that God has entrusted once for all time to his holy people.”
I don’t know why the spam filter didn’t like this comment, Wally…?
That’s weird. No links or anything. Have I commented here before? I can’t recall. Mine puts first time commenters in moderation.
Maybe it’s a WordPress conspiracy!!!!
See, I come out of my bunker, and the first thing I run into is a plot. That’s why I don’t come out much.
That wasn’t very nice John.
Thanks