Honesty needed

I guess I'm one of the Kooks then.....

quote:

Originally posted by Southern_Guy:
I guess I'm one of the Kooks then.....

Hi Southern Guy,

This is just our old atheist Friend, DeepFAT, trying to make a comeback. And, he is still spewing the same old Darwin/Dawkins/Hitchens theology of Evolution. He is determined to prove that he came from an ape, monkey, or chimp. So, why should we disagree with him -- very likely, HE DID!

But, then, so did HIV and AIDS!

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Southern Guy, at least you admit to being a kook. I can respect that.

Bill Gray, you're obviously insane. Nuts. See a doctor.

good post, billy joe.

hope you've got on a good helmet. that's a hard wall...

Those of us that have read this all know that Billy Bob is the kook in this post and give no weight to his dishonest posting. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see. (Only God can open your spiritual eyes.) Billy Bob, it really isn't necessary for you to feel a need to help us.

quote:

Originally posted by Billy Joe Bob Gene:
Southern Guy, at least you admit to being a kook. I can respect that.

Bill Gray, you're obviously insane. Nuts. See a doctor.

Hi Deep,

I know! Those are the exact same words, the exact same reply -- you gave me in your last incarnation. Then, finally, you were honest enough to admit the truth.

We hold out hope for you this time.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

The blog you referred to was talking about the campaign ad against Bradley Bryne who was accused of believing in evolution. One comforting fact is that Bryne received the most votes! So hopefully at least some of Alabamians are educated!

??!!!?? A politician "accused of believing in evolution?!?".........??!?

f@%*& face academy...... sausage assassin........ sister-boinkin'.......!....bass-ackwards..........



I broke my desk just now.

Great post Billy Joe Bob Gene!

quote:

Originally posted by Shoals Resident:
Those of us that have read this all know that Billy Bob is the kook in this post and give no weight to his dishonest posting. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see. (Only God can open your spiritual eyes.) Billy Bob, it really isn't necessary for you to feel a need to help us.

But it is. If you think the universe is 6000 years old, you need help.

Seriously, you do.

But here's where you might have missed the point of my post. I don't really think you believe all that stuff. You just say it to keep other pseudo-Creationists happy. It cannot be believed.

Adam and Eve and their pet dinosaur? No person with a functioning mind can believe that.

What's at issue is honesty, here. SR, you know that's not how the universe and the world came into existence. For your sake, and the sakes of others (mostly gullible children), search deep within yourself for the truth and say it. Go ahead, we'll be here for it.

Boy, Deep,

In three years, you have not changed at all -- still parroting words you read in your Darwin/Dawkins/Hitchens bible and preaching the theology of their atheistic religion.

Don't you get tired of robotically parroting your gods?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Sorry, but I have to open my Yapper here as well.

and again, i have to ask you please to not lump us all together

I do believe that God is real, and i do believe he created the universe.
I do NOT believe that he created it in 6, 24 hour days, and i do NOT believe he did it just a touch over 6000 years ago.

There is a lot in that book i think it pure Hokum, but i blame that on the weakness and foilbles and desires of Man.

And i don't see a problem with it. i don't think believeing in both Creation and Evoloution is a contradiction.

Consider:

And God snapped his fingers and said " let there be light' and there was a Big Bang, and there was light and God said "whoa.. cool. that's good, that'll do. alright, lets get to work"

and the energy released from the Bang slowly cooled and collected and slowed and formed stars and planets and so on, and God picked a few of them out and Plonked down a set of organic materials on the chosen planets and sat back and waited.

and the angels said 'dude.. what's that lil pile of goop?"
and God Said "give it a minute, you'll see."
and a few million years later, here we are.

now, the bits we don't understand i've portrayed as magic. but God set the rules of physics and so he wouldn't cheat and ignore them. he used physics, or some other something like it that we can't even concieve at this time.
since we don't have any idea at this time how it was achieved, Magic works just as well to explain it as anything else

I'm not saying this is what happened, it's merely a rapidly slapped together example of how creation and evoloution can work together..

Other questions i can't answer. where did god come from. it's preposterous to think he was just always there. if he was always around, what was he doing BEFORE he created us? to assume the first thing he did was make us implys that god sole purpose was to make US, that he was merely a tool to bring about our existance. i reject that as much as i reject the idea he has no begining and no end.

in genesis, when he said " let US make man in OUR image"... who else was he including in that? i dunno, but i sure would like to find out.
why was it necessary for god to create Man twice? Genesis 1:26 and Genesis 2:7, two seperate instances of the creation of man. one while he was building the rest of the earth, one after he'd rested from building the earth.
i'm awfully curious why it's mentioned twice, at two distinctly different times.
i can't answer things like that.
and things like that are a large part of why i think a large part of that book really is a fairytale like Puppy believes.

but oddly enough, all of that doesn't make me thing God isn't real, it just makes me think the people who wrote the book were daft.

Nagel,

I like you. We disagree on everything, but still, I like you.

Where to begin?

I appreciate you don't believe in a 6000 year old Universe. You are not insane. This is a good place to start.

quote:

And God snapped his fingers and said " let there be light' and there was a Big Bang, and there was light and God said "whoa.. cool. that's good, that'll do. alright, lets get to work"

What god? The god who existed before time, space, matter, and energy? It's a preposterous assumption, my friend.

It's an argument from ignorance. We simply go back to a point beyond which we have no explanation and say "God did it!". That point has been pushed farther and farther back for centuries, and recent developments preclude the necessity of god in the formation of the universe altogether.

It's a weak and discredited argument. You are not allowed to define the unknown as god. If you insist, you must show your evidence, of which there is none. As if knowing the intimate, subtle mind of god was not enough for we mortal humans, we now assume he transcends space/time/matter/information?

It's too much to assume on no evidence.

I appreciate that you try to reconcile science and religion, and I'll hope you forgive me if I say it's irreconcilable. They work on entirely different principles. Science goes where the evidence leads, religion starts with absurd conclusions and tries to shoehorn ridiculous "evidence" into a preconceived matrix.

The time for religion as being an answer for cosmic and biological beginnings is, and has been, over. It's just done. Religion has been shown as a fraud, albeit with a significant memetic momentum.

What's unforgivable in these days is ostensibly intelligent people pretending religion is the answer to origins. They're obviously and demonstrably liars.

With regard to our individual futures, life after death, religion may posit its ideas, but if those ideas are as valid as religion's ideas about origins, we are within our rights to be skeptical of them as well. We're **** near obligated to be skeptical, all things considered.

I'm enjoying our conversation. You haven't hit me over the head with a 10-lb. King James Bible yet. I imagine you won't.

quote:

Originally posted by Billy Joe Bob Gene:
Nagel,

I like you. We disagree on everything, but still, I like you.

Where to begin?

I appreciate you don't believe in a 6000 year old Universe. You are not insane. This is a good place to start.

i think so as well

quote:

And God snapped his fingers and said " let there be light' and there was a Big Bang, and there was light and God said "whoa.. cool. that's good, that'll do. alright, lets get to work"

quote:

What god? The god who existed before time, space, matter, and energy? It's a preposterous assumption, my friend.

that's right where our conversation is going to break down, i'm afraid. see, it's something called Faith - which is a belief in something that you have no solid evidence of.
(but you know that.) I have a huge reason for my faith, one that will A- do you no good and B- not interest you in the slightest.
however, i agree with you on one part - the idea that god is was and ever shall be is pretty preposterous to me as well, but i do believe that he's there and that he did create it all.

quote:

It's an argument from ignorance. We simply go back to a point beyond which we have no explanation and say "God did it!". That point has been pushed farther and farther back for centuries, and recent developments preclude the necessity of god in the formation of the universe altogether.

well, generally instead of saying God did it! i tend to stick to the line 'I Don't Know'. But, to answer your words directly, a believer saying ' God did it!' is the other side of the same coin where the evoloutionist say "it just happened!"

Both are arguments of ignorance, because the real answer, from both parties should be " i don't know".

one side of the coin says 'god did it, it's 6000 years old,' and yet they can't explain why there are 500 million year old rocks lying around.

the other side says ' it just happened' and don't even pretend to explain how anything came to be there to bang bigly.

to me, saying 'Nothing was there, and then it exploded in to nothing, and then it made everything' is just as ludacris the typical creationist line seems to you.

quote:

It's a weak and discredited argument. You are not allowed to define the unknown as god. If you insist, you must show your evidence, of which there is none. As if knowing the intimate, subtle mind of god was not enough for we mortal humans, we now assume he transcends space/time/matter/information?

It's too much to assume on no evidence.

I have evidence, and it works for me, but it isn't something i can show you, and even if i could it would not be evidence for you. i am sorry, but such is the nature of faith.
but, I am afraid that trying to explain Faith to someone who doesn't have it would be a little like trying to explain what the color yellow sounds like.

I do not define the unknown as God. i define the unknown as something i don't know.
God, i define as the guy who started it all. i do not know what was there before God. i don't know where he came from or why. i don't know why he did it. i have a few guesses, but they aren't really based on anything so are not relevent. i don't know what will be here after he's move on. i don't pretend to. i'm not sure that i even want to know

quote:

I appreciate that you try to reconcile science and religion, and I'll hope you forgive me if I say it's irreconcilable. They work on entirely different principles. Science goes where the evidence leads, religion starts with absurd conclusions and tries to shoehorn ridiculous "evidence" into a preconceived matrix.

i never said religion. religion is... well, pretty useless to me. religion is churches and making sure you dress up nice on sunday morning and telling other people they are going to hell because they don't go to the same building that you do when you dress up nice on sunday mornings, and shooting dirty looks at people who don't dress up as nice on sunday mornings as you think they should.

i agree, science and religion are incompatable.
to me, religion and faith are also incompatable.
my belief is very simple on this exact topic, the start of " It All." i don't know any of the before, or any of the after, or any of the how's or why's.
God was there, he made a Big Bang, and thus the universe began expanding and evolving into what we have today.
it isn't irreconcilable to me, but i forgive you for believe it is
oddly enough, it will also be irreconcilable for Bill Grey, and that amuses me just a little. i'm not sure why, but it does.

quote:

The time for religion as being an answer for cosmic and biological beginnings is, and has been, over. It's just done. Religion has been shown as a fraud, albeit with a significant memetic momentum.

i agree. for different reasons, but i agree nevertheless.

quote:

With regard to our individual futures, life after death, religion may posit its ideas, but if those ideas are as valid as religion's ideas about origins, we are within our rights to be skeptical of them as well. We're **** near obligated to be skeptical, all things considered.

Oh good lord, ABSOFLAPPINLOUTLY we should be skeptical. about everything anyone tells us, EVER. whether it's physics, metaphysics, faith, or these days even if its about the weather. I've taught my children from an early age - Question Everything. Just because an adult or authority figure tells you something is true doesn't mean that it is. find out for yourself. and if it's a politician, assume they are lying until you find out otherwise.
yes, i included myself in that statement, but did tell them that for the most part, fact-checking Dad would need to wait until they are older, and for now just accept that when i say drinking antifreeze will make you sick it will, so don't drink it.

but interestingly enough, religion offers very little information.. what i'd consider information anyway, on the afterlife. they mostly spend time telling people what they may not do before they die.
there are a couple of brief mentions.. pearly gates, streets of gold, little hints here and there and a few vague lines that could mean pretty much anything.

quote:

I'm enjoying our conversation. You haven't hit me over the head with a 10-lb. King James Bible yet. I imagine you won't.

As am i, and no, i won't. it would be rude, and counterproductive. also i wouldn't know where to get one. i guess if i wrapped mine in 9.5 lbs of reynolds wrap.
make it a little difficult to read. be a nice paperweight tho

quote:

Originally posted by thenagel:
Sorry, but I have to open my Yapper here as well.

and again, i have to ask you please to not lump us all together

I do believe that God is real, and i do believe he created the universe.
I do NOT believe that he created it in 6, 24 hour days, and i do NOT believe he did it just a touch over 6000 years ago.

There is a lot in that book i think it pure Hokum, but i blame that on the weakness and foilbles and desires of Man.

And i don't see a problem with it. i don't think believeing in both Creation and Evoloution is a contradiction.

Consider:

And God snapped his fingers and said " let there be light' and there was a Big Bang, and there was light and God said "whoa.. cool. that's good, that'll do. alright, lets get to work"

and the energy released from the Bang slowly cooled and collected and slowed and formed stars and planets and so on, and God picked a few of them out and Plonked down a set of organic materials on the chosen planets and sat back and waited.

and the angels said 'dude.. what's that lil pile of goop?"
and God Said "give it a minute, you'll see."
and a few million years later, here we are.

now, the bits we don't understand i've portrayed as magic. but God set the rules of physics and so he wouldn't cheat and ignore them. he used physics, or some other something like it that we can't even concieve at this time.
since we don't have any idea at this time how it was achieved, Magic works just as well to explain it as anything else

I'm not saying this is what happened, it's merely a rapidly slapped together example of how creation and evoloution can work together..

Other questions i can't answer. where did god come from. it's preposterous to think he was just always there. if he was always around, what was he doing BEFORE he created us? to assume the first thing he did was make us implys that god sole purpose was to make US, that he was merely a tool to bring about our existance. i reject that as much as i reject the idea he has no begining and no end.

in genesis, when he said " let US make man in OUR image"... who else was he including in that? i dunno, but i sure would like to find out.
why was it necessary for god to create Man twice? Genesis 1:26 and Genesis 2:7, two seperate instances of the creation of man. one while he was building the rest of the earth, one after he'd rested from building the earth.
i'm awfully curious why it's mentioned twice, at two distinctly different times.
i can't answer things like that.
and things like that are a large part of why i think a large part of that book really is a fairytale like Puppy believes.

but oddly enough, all of that doesn't make me thing God isn't real, it just makes me think the people who wrote the book were daft.

You will come to regret this post. Bill is feverishly working on a very detailed answer that explains why you are eternally ****ed, doomed to hell, and just not a real christian.

Welcome friend, we feel your upcoming pain.

i know. it's making my head hurt just thinking about it.
Nagel, we'll be here for you...

LOL.. thanks, but i'm not really worried about Bill.
It could be pretty entertaining.
it could also cause him to to pretend i don't exist again.
Guess we'll just see which way it goes.

Ok Bobby, I have to play devils advocate here (and no Bill that doesn't mean I speak for the devil)

I am more and more starting to believe that there are a lot of people that NEED to have god in their life. Hear me out. Lets say there is some guy who is a complete alcoholic, his life is in ruins, he has lost everything. He goes to AA and they tell him all about the higher power that he can turn to and find the strength to stop drinking. He so desperately wants to stop and feels so helpless that he actually starts to believe that god can cure him of this sickness. It works. He stops drinking. When he feels the need to drink he prays and he makes it through another day of sobriety. Or the woman that looses a child and she so wants to believe that one day she will see that child again she believes that if she prays every day and goes to church she will be rewarded with the eternal afterlife with her lost child. This may be the only thing that keeps her going.

Then you have the ones that truly need to believe that there is something after this life. They just have to feel secure in this knowledge. Call it fear of death or maybe just fear of the unknown, either way they just can't mentally handle the concept of "this is all there is."

I have started to think that religion and the belief in god is so needed by some human beings that we will never see a time when belief in a god is no longer a necessary crutch.

What if its not dishonesty at all? What if it is just human nature? What if some people are just not ready to live life without the need for something "bigger than themselves" watching over and protecting them with a promise of happy ever after when this cruel life ends?

Maybe I am just getting mushy in my old age, but I can't help but feel sorry for some people that believe in god. Not in a true pitying way more of a understanding of human weakness.

Sadly, I can't do that. I can't just throw logic and reason out and pretend I believe something so fanciful and full of contradictions. I can't ignore the obvious facts all around me.

But what about those that really need it? What will replace that kind of need? Is there anything that humans can do to overcome this obviously flawed part of our psyche.

There are many on these forums that I have come to like a lot and enjoy discussing lifes issues. I in no way want to offend them and make you feel that I think I am smarter than you because you believe in god. I actually just think I'm different. Some how I just saw the whole religion/god thing differently and I am very glad I did.

quote:

Originally posted by Jankinonya:
There are many on these forums that I have come to like a lot and enjoy discussing lifes issues. I in no way want to offend them and make you feel that I think I am smarter than you because you believe in god. I actually just think I'm different.

i am not offended, and i didn't think you were trying to imply that at all.

i Celebrate our differences... how boring the world would be if we were all cookie-cutter carbon copies. You believe you are right, i believe i am right, and i see nothign wrong with that. it sparks possible dialogue that opens minds on both sides of the issues. i've learned a lot from puppy and sofa and some of the others.. david l i think his label was.. lots or really cool sciencey stuff that caused me to think about things.
i'd like to think that my words also cause people to think a little.
i'm not looking to change anyones mind, to convert anyone, but if i can make anyone say to themselves, 'well.. i don't agree.. but it DOES make sense phrased that way. it's worth thinking about.' then i'm tickled pink i like making people think
i don't want to change minds.. but it's nice to open closed ones, ya know?

Hi Nagel,

You tell us, "I do believe that God is real, and i do believe he created the universe."

But, you do not respect Him enough to show the importance of His name by capitalizing it -- do you?

Is that an intellectual belief you have -- or a spiritual belief? Satan also believes in God; Satan also believes in Jesus Christ. Yet, he is far from being a Christian believer. Satan's belief is intellectual; what is yours?

Then, you tell us, "I do NOT believe that he created it in 6, 24 hour days, and i do NOT believe he did it just a touch over 6000 years ago. There is a lot in that book i think it pure Hokum, but i blame that on the weakness and foibles and desires of Man. And i don't see a problem with it. i don't think believing in both Creation and Evolution is a contradiction."

And, there we have the perfect description of the Progressive, or Liberal, Theology follower. In other words, yes, God is real, He is God -- but, the book He authored is "pure Hokum." That is interesting when He tells us, "ALL Scripture is inspired by God. . ." (2 Timothy 3:16). He tells us that He authored the Bible -- and you tell us the Bible is "pure Hokum." I wonder who will win that argument?

He tells us that He created the heavens and the earth in six lunar days -- and you say, "I do not believe You!" I wonder who will win that argument?

Why do I say that it was six lunar days? For each of the days of Creations, Scripture tells us, "And there was evening and there was morning, a second (or third, or fourth, etc.) day." A day that has a morning and an evening -- is a lunar day.

If He were speaking of a long period instead of an actual day -- that morning/evening description would not be there. And, in the over 2000 times "day" -- or the Hebrew "yom" -- is used in the Bible -- over 90% of the time it refers to a lunar day. Add all of this up and what do we have -- Creation in six lunar days.

Liberal Theology says, "Yes, God, we want to worship You -- but, we want to make Your ways fit our new society ways. We believe we have a better system than You created. So, we are going to adapt, rewrite, Your Bible to fit our desires and needs."

Sorry, my Friend, it does not work that way. We adapt to God; He does not adapt to us and our desires.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

See. Predictable. Your ticket to Hell has been punched by Bill Gray.

Y'know, Jank... I've considered your idea (people needing something bigger than themselves to believe in)
I can understand that.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi Nagel,

You tell us, "I do believe that God is real, and i do believe he created the universe."

But, you do not respect Him enough to show the importance of His name by capitalizing it -- do you?

i'm a poor typist. get over it.
i'm pretty sure that God isn't as much of a whiney little girl as you make him out to be. i very much doubt that He is watching all of this thinking 'OH NO! that guy didn't use a capitol G!! he must hate me!'
i'm really convinced there are things of greater import on His mind than my typing habits.

For your sake, I do try to use caps as rules dictate, because appearently you have difficulty comprehending things that aren't in the exact format you are used to, but sometiems i miss. Let it go.

quote:

Is that an intellectual belief you have -- or a spiritual belief?

it's both.

quote:

And, there we have the perfect description of the Progressive, or Liberal, Theology follower. In other words, yes, God is real, He is God -- but, the book He authored is "pure Hokum." That is interesting when He tells us, "ALL Scripture is inspired by God. . ." (2 Timothy 3:16). He tells us that He authored the Bible -- and you tell us the Bible is "pure Hokum." I wonder who will win that argument?

Inspired by. i'll cover this again.
something i said INSPIRED a project for my daughters science class.
I INSPIRED her work. i didn't write it. she wrote it
God INSPIRED. he didn't write it. Men wrote it.

another side of it that makes my BS alarm go off is this:
The book is the ultimate authority and the word of god, because the book tells you it is the ultimate authority and the word of god.
That's a really good indication, for people with the ability to think, that its pure crap.
That's like a politician saying " i'm telling you the truth because i say i'm telling you the truth, so you know you can believe it"

quote:

Liberal Theology says, "Yes, God, we want to worship You -- but, we want to make Your ways fit our new society ways. We believe we have a better system than You created. So, we are going to adapt, rewrite, Your Bible to fit our desires and needs."

Never heard the term ' liberal theology' before you. didn't know what your definition of it was till now.
If that's it, then it's not me.
i don't want God to fit into ' my ways'. i don't want Him to adapt to me. i want to figure out what he wants and try and fit in to his plan, but i don't accept the majority of the book that you hold so dear as truth.

i believe, fully, that you are proudly following the lies of a bunch of long dead kings and priests who twisted God's words, and that it means you are spreading false gospel, through no fault of your own except for the fault of overwhemling gullibility and utter refusal to think for yourself.

now, if you really ARE spreading false gospel, that makes you a false prophet. if you are a false prophet, would your bible indicate that you are ****ed?
yes, it would.
fortunatly for you, i don't believe most of the bible, so i think you're going to be ok. you are lying to people about god's words, but you don't know your lying.

but i do wish you'd get this much into your head. you can't prove anything to me with bible quotes, because i think the bible is corrupt.

i can't prove to you, through science, that evoloution is real, because you think the books are wrong. same thing, different side.

quote:

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Thanks, you too.

(i snipped and ignored some of the other stuff as irrelevent. you used the book i say is false to prove that it's the truth. that's just silly.

so i snipped it.)

Great post thenagel. He won't understand or either he will spin what you said into something else, but for those that aren't wearing his blinders that made a lot of sense.

and since in my world I am GODDESS (just ask my husband) I will bless you and hope you have a great day. LOL

quote:

Never heard the term ' liberal theology' before you. didn't know what your definition of it was till now.

he considers liberal theology anything that is not Fundamentalist. But he can't really define liberal theology, it's just a term made to encompass anyone who disagrees with him.
I actually find it hysterical that he calls Catholics/Episcopals LIBERAL, when most of us know that those churches are the most dogmatic and conservative.....
now that is an oxymoron!

Yup. Ain't that the truth. Been there-Done that.

Hi Nagel,

You tell us, "The book is the ultimate authority and the word of god, because the book tells you it is the ultimate authority and the word of god."

No, god did not tell me anything. However, God does tell us in 2 Timothy 3:16-17, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work."

Of course, we know this is not true -- for YOU tell us it is not true. Who cares what God says; Nagel is the final authority on the Word of God.

Then, you declare, "That's a really good indication, for people with the ability to think, that its pure crap."

Way to go, Nagel. Now the Word of God is pure crap . I will say this, when you dig a hole for yourself -- you do dig it deep.

Finally, you tell all of us, "That's like a politician saying 'I'm telling you the truth because I say i'm telling you the truth, so you know you can believe it'"

So, now, along with God being the author of pure crap -- He is also a politician!

Not to worry. One day, when you stand before Him -- you can tell Him why He is just another politician -- and His Written Word of God is pure crap .

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

The Word According To Bill...

Yup. I guess ya punched yer ticket again, Nagel. YOU don't get to be in his club.

thenagel, here is a brief overview of bills beliefs:

science is atheism

every church in the world other than the one he attends are liberal

he is always right, you are always wrong

everything and everyone who isnt bill gray are either atheist or liberal or both

quote:

Originally posted by Jankinonya:
Great post thenagel. He won't understand or either he will spin what you said into something else, but for those that aren't wearing his blinders that made a lot of sense.

and since in my world I am GODDESS (just ask my husband) I will bless you and hope you have a great day. LOL

jank, i know you are a goddess!

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi Nagel,

You tell us, "The book is the ultimate authority and the word of god, because the book tells you it is the ultimate authority and the word of god."

No, god did not tell me anything. However, God does tell us in 2 Timothy 3:16-17, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work."

Of course, we know this is not true -- for YOU tell us it is not true. Who cares what God says; Nagel is the final authority on the Word of God.

Then, you declare, "That's a really good indication, for people with the ability to think, that its pure crap."

Way to go, Nagel. Now the Word of God is pure crap . I will say this, when you dig a hole for yourself -- you do dig it deep.

Finally, you tell all of us, "That's like a politician saying 'I'm telling you the truth because I say i'm telling you the truth, so you know you can believe it'"

So, now, along with God being the author of pure crap -- He is also a politician!

Not to worry. One day, when you stand before Him -- you can tell Him why He is just another politician -- and His Written Word of God is pure crap .

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

You're so funny bill.
through the whole thing you tell me it's the truth because it says it's the truth.

it's so amusing to me that you can't even understand how ridiculous that is.

quote:

Originally posted by thenagel:
You're so funny bill. Through the whole thing you tell me it's the truth because it says it's the truth. it's so amusing to me that you can't even understand how ridiculous that is.

Hi Nagel,

I wonder if I am the only one who noticed that you are trying to avoid talking about your statement: The Bible is Pure Crap!

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

quote:

Originally posted by Jankinonya:
Great post thenagel. He won't understand or either he will spin what you said into something else, but for those that aren't wearing his blinders that made a lot of sense.

and since in my world I am GODDESS (just ask my husband) I will bless you and hope you have a great day. LOL

nah, you're right. he didn't understand.
i think he CAN'T understand.

well, i gave it a shot. i figured it was wasted typing, but i had to try.

and btw - All wives are goddess to a good Husband.

quote:

Originally posted by vplee123:

quote:

Originally posted by thenagel:
Never heard the term ' liberal theology' before you. didn't know what your definition of it was till now.

he considers liberal theology anything that is not Fundamentalist. But he can't really define liberal theology, it's just a term made to encompass anyone who disagrees with him. I actually find it hysterical that he calls Catholics/Episcopals LIBERAL, when most of us know that those churches are the most dogmatic and conservative..... now that is an oxymoron!

Hi VP and Nagel,

It is my pleasure to help in your educational process. Below are excerpts from the Wikipedia article, "Liberal Christianity." This shows that Liberal Theology has been around for a few hundred years and includes Anglican, Episcopalian, Roman Catholic, Presbyterian, and other mainstream churches.

And, it was Liberal Theology, often called Progressive Theology, which was the catalyst which caused the set of books called "The Fundamentals" to be written and distributed. This was done by Conservative Christians to combat the detrimental effect Liberal Theology was having on America in the late 1800s and early 1900s. It is from this set of books "The Fundamentals," which I am proud to say I have the full set, that the name Fundamentalist was coined.

Every day we can learn something new is an exciting day. I pray that both of you have an exciting day today.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

LIBERAL CHRISTIANITY (Liberal Theology)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Christianity

Liberal Christianity, sometimes called Liberal Theology, is an umbrella term covering diverse, philosophically informed religious movements and ideas within Christianity from the late 18th century and onwards. The word "liberal" in Liberal Christianity does not refer to a progressive political agenda or set of beliefs, but rather to the manner of thought and belief associated with the philosophical and religious paradigms developed during the Age of Enlightenment.

The theology of Liberal Christianity was prominent in the Biblical criticism of the 19th and 20th centuries. The style of Scriptural hermeneutics within Liberal Theology is often characterized as non-propositional. This means that the Bible is not considered a collection of factual statements -- but instead documents the human authors' beliefs and feelings about God at the time of its writing -- within a historic/cultural context. Thus, Liberal Christian theologians do not claim to discover truth propositions -- but rather create religious models and concepts that reflect the class, gender, social, and political contexts from which they emerge. Liberal Christianity looks upon the Bible as a collection of narratives that explain, epitomize, or symbolize the essence and significance of Christian understanding.

Contemporary Liberal Christians may prefer to read Jesus' miracles as metaphorical narratives for understanding the power of God.

Liberal Christianity was most influential with mainline Protestant churches in the early 20th century, when proponents believed the changes it would bring would be the future of the Christian church. Other subsequent theological movements within the Protestant mainline (in the US) included political Liberation theology, philosophical forms of Postmodern Christianity such as Christian Existentialism, and conservative movements such as neo-evangelicalism and paleo-orthodoxy.

However, the 1990s and 2000s saw a resurgence of non-doctrinal, scholarly work on Biblical exegesis and theology, exemplified by figures such as Marcus Borg, John Dominic Crossan, John Shelby Spong, and Scotty McLennan. Their appeal, like that of the earlier Modernism, also is primarily found in the mainline denominations.

Anglican and Protestant:

Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher (1768–1834), often called the "father of Liberal Theology," he claimed that religious experience was introspective, and that the truest understanding of God consisted of "a sense of absolute dependence".

William Ellery Channing (1780–1842), pioneering Liberal Theologian in the USA, who criticized the doctrine of the Trinity and the strength of Scriptural authority, in favor of more rationalistic and historical-critical beliefs.

Henry Ward Beecher (1813–1887), US preacher who left behind the Calvinist orthodoxy of his famous father, the Reverend Lyman Beecher, to popularize Liberal Christianity.

Adolf von Harnack, (1851–1930), German theologian and church historian, promoted the Social Gospel.

Charles Fillmore (1854–1948). Emerson-influenced Christian mystic and co-founder (with his wife, Myrtle Fillmore) of the Unity Church.

Roman Catholic:

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1881–1955), a French Jesuit, also trained as a paleontologist; works condemned by the Holy Office in 1962. The condemnation was formally reaffirmed in 1981 but many theologians still refer to his writings, including Pope Benedict XVI.

Hans Küng, (b. 1928) Swiss theologian. Had his licence to teach Catholic theology revoked in 1979 because of his rejection of the doctrine of the infallibility of the Church, but retained his faculties to say the Mass.

John Dominic Crossan, (b. 1934) ex-priest, New Testament scholar, co-founder of the Jesus Seminar.

Leonardo Boff, (b. 1938) Brazilian, ex-Franciscan, ex-priest, cofounder of Liberation Theology.

quote:

Originally posted by Road Puppy:
The Word According To Bill...

Yup. I guess ya punched yer ticket again, Nagel. YOU don't get to be in his club.

Awwww but i wanted to be a Duncekateer, Too!

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Gray:

quote:

Originally posted by thenagel:
You're so funny bill. Through the whole thing you tell me it's the truth because it says it's the truth. it's so amusing to me that you can't even understand how ridiculous that is.

Hi Nagel,

I wonder if I am the only one who noticed that you are trying to avoid talking about your statement: The Bible is Pure Crap!

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

I'm not trying to avoid talking about it.
you want to talk about it? let's talk about it!

prove to me, without useing the bible, that the bible is 100% truth.

first, lets start off with the fact that i didn't say it was pure crap.

what i said was:

quote
another side of it that makes my BS alarm go off is this:
The book is the ultimate authority and the word of god, because the book tells you it is the ultimate authority and the word of god.
That's a really good indication, for people with the ability to think, that its pure crap.
That's like a politician saying " i'm telling you the truth because i say i'm telling you the truth, so you know you can believe it"
/quote

Hmm.. whaddya know. It seems to be i did call it Pure Crap, huh?
wasn't my intention. I meant to say that Most of it was pure crap.
i think a few bits are saying what God intended for them to say, but that at least 75 % of it has been corrupted by corrupt men who wanted their rules to carry the weight of God's Word.

i've said that in places on this forum before, and i guess i thought i had said the same thing again. so i apologized for for implying that it was 100 % crap, when i meant that there MIGHT be as mush as 25% that isn't crap.

SO.. with that said.. you're turn.
without useing the bible, show me how it's not crap, in any percentage.

and while we're at it, i wonder if i'm the only person that noticed that you are avoiding talking about you re-defining the phrase 'inspired by' to mean 'written by'

Well by george sign me up for the club of stupidity because I believe in Creationism. And let me go on to FURTHER to say that Jesus is the one and ONLY way to Heaven.

John 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." Stated by Jesus himself. Not just a great Man but God Himself. Yes HE is the ONLY WAY. Now how is THAT for a little bit of honesty

Rolltidequeen is hereby officially entered into the books as a Creationist. More's the pity.

The U of A, of which she is apparently so fond, disagrees with her, and embraces science with a vengeance.

Perhaps she should change her screen name to LibertyUniversityQueen.

I might have a degree or two from there but my faith is with my Jesus not My Crimson Tide