Brettster808: If God con indeed perform these types of medical miracles how come amputees never have their prayers answered?

Their Faith was too weak.

This guy prayed for a new tail and in just a few weeks God answered his prayer!



(He told me so himself! What, the skinks don't talk to you?)

Deucednuisance: (He told me so himself! What, the skinks don't talk to you?)

I don't speak Spanish.

/oooooo skinks
//my bad

Anti_illuminati: I wouldn't consider myself an Athesist, however after a horrendous car-crash just months after being born again - and obviously surviving - I was put on a pedestal at my church on how God's grace, love and protection saved my life. They said nothing of the dead two-year old in the van that t-boned me, other than it was God's will. I walked out on the congregation that day, and have yet to return. 8 years an counting.

That's a pretty powerful story.

MayorYana: I live for the day when priests are told by small children, that they are delusional old men.

There is comfort in tradition and ritual. Religion as a cultural aspect often provides a steadying influence in chaotic times. Catholicism is more traditional and culture than it is religion, I have less problem with priests than I do with guys like Benny Hinn and Peter Popoff, two conmen who continue to run their scams in spite of repeated exposure. Jim Bakker's back on the air, Jimmy Swaggart never really left it. Between them and the other TV preachers they've spawned hundreds of churches full of deluded people who don't know they're just cash cows led to the milking with empty promises.

after that massive tyrade I figured some religious types would be throwing fire at me, but apparently not, I'm going to call this a victory and return to frothing at the mouth....


AGGHHHH RELIGIOUS TYPES AAGGHHH

grizzlyjohnson

I have no problem with ritual and tradition, but why does it have to be based on bullshiat?

RetiredTroll: Morton_toes: RetiredTroll: I may be good, very good, in fact farking fantastic at what I do, but it is beyond even my own powers to make Christians look smart. hey, I'm not making fun of you guys, I think all drugs, including religion, should be legal.

So, you are good, in fact fan-farking-tastic at everything but reading and comprehension.

/at least you've got that going for you.

First thing I thought of:

(Carl & gopher pic.)

Hee hee, that's where it's from.
Although we are in vehement agreement here, I think we can both peacefully agree that Carl is a funny M'r F'r.

/which is nice...

grizzlyjohnson: Because parts of it are demonstrably true according to historical records. For instance, the gospels and the book of acts describe quite a bit of verifiable information about Palestine under the Romans in 0 AD.

So "All Quiet on the Western Front" is a historical account of WWI?

Good to know.

Came for Voltaire references. Leaving only mildly satisfied.

/God already knows what you wanted and has decided you didn't deserve it.
//God's the one who gave you the cancer
///I

Thorndyke Barnhard: danielsangeo: I'm in 100% total agreement. Hence my example about "stepping on a crack".

/guess I'm not on the ball today with this conversating thing...

Heh, it's all good. At least we're getting the ideas out there, you know, in the internet cultural ether.

Well, some folks think it's a good idea, others prefer to get their hanes in a twist that we would even dare discuss these issues in an open forum.

Morton_toes: RetiredTroll: Morton_toes: RetiredTroll: I may be good, very good, in fact farking fantastic at what I do, but it is beyond even my own powers to make Christians look smart. hey, I'm not making fun of you guys, I think all drugs, including religion, should be legal.

So, you are good, in fact fan-farking-tastic at everything but reading and comprehension.

/at least you've got that going for you.

First thing I thought of:

(Carl & gopher pic.)

Hee hee, that's where it's from.
Although we are in vehement agreement here, I think we can both peacefully agree that Carl is a funny M'r F'r.

/which is nice...




"This is a hybrid. This is a cross, ah, of Bluegrass, Kentucky Bluegrass, Featherbed Bent, and Northern California Sensemilia. The amazing stuff about this is, that you can play 36 holes on it in the afternoon, take it home and just get stoned to the bejeezus-belt that night on this stuff. "

I don't pray, I just think about something I have little power over and hope that circumstance doesn't fark me in the ass.

RetiredTroll:
/at least you've got that going for you.

First thing I thought of:

(Carl & gopher pic.)

Hee hee, that's where it's from.
Although we are in vehement agreement here, I think we can both peacefully agree that Carl is a funny M'r F'r.

/which is nice...

"This is a hybrid. This is a cross, ah, of Bluegrass, Kentucky Bluegrass, Featherbed Bent, and Northern California Sensemilia. The amazing stuff about this is, that you can play 36 holes on it in the afternoon, take it home and just get stoned to the bejeezus-belt that night on this stuff. "

Ty: (cough cough)
Carl: Cannonball it!

MayorYana: grizzlyjohnson

I have no problem with ritual and tradition, but why does it have to be based on bullshiat?

What else are you going to base it on? If there's some practical reason for it then it's not ritual or tradition any more.

Lionel Mandrake: abb3w: liberalish: Reach out and touch faith.

She called the cops; now what should I do?

Reach for Hope?

Jump for Joy?

grizzlyjohnson


I really am going to like you:p

AtikuX: I'm not religious but I don't see why praying wouldn't work.

Except that it doesn't.

Prayer accomplishes two things:
- placebo effect
- hope and peace of mind

Except that it doesn't.

In fact, it makes thing worse: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12082681/

Deucednuisance: Lionel Mandrake: abb3w: liberalish: Reach out and touch faith.

She called the cops; now what should I do?

Reach for Hope?

Jump for Joy?

strive for Chastity?

Morton_toes: Well, some folks think it's a good idea, others prefer to get their hanes in a twist that we would even dare discuss these issues in an open forum.

That reminds me of the old dinner table discussion taboos: most commonly, people would include politics and religion among these. But ironically these are probably two of the most deserving of discussion, in fact not discussing them is entirely irresponsible.

The only reason offered for making such issues taboo is protection of the egos of petential disagree-ers. But isn't childish and emotionally retarded to have your identity so wraped up into matters of opinion that you consider any genuine criticism of the ideas to be equal to personal insult and intentional offense?

Morton_toes: Deucednuisance: Lionel Mandrake: abb3w: liberalish: Reach out and touch faith.

She called the cops; now what should I do?

Reach for Hope?

Jump for Joy?

strive for Chastity?

Assume the position?

Thorndyke Barnhard 2008-08-19 02:06:15 PM
Morton_toes: Deucednuisance: Lionel Mandrake: abb3w: liberalish: Reach out and touch faith.

She called the cops; now what should I do?

Reach for Hope?

Jump for Joy?

strive for Chastity?

Assume the position?

Grind for Grace?

Morton_toes: Deucednuisance: Lionel Mandrake: abb3w: liberalish: Reach out and touch faith.

She called the cops; now what should I do?

Reach for Hope?

Jump for Joy?

strive for Chastity?

Ok sorry to mess that up...how about:

Beg for Charity?

"Dr. Harold G. Koenig
director of the Center for Spirituality, Theology and Health"

Dr Harold G. Koenig
director of the center for being paid for nothing and being a douche

1. If the person lives, then God saved his life.
2. If the person dies, then it wasn't God's will for him to live or Satan made sure the guy died.
3. He died because you, the person who wanted him to live, are somehow accepting of homosexual lifestyles (or some such BS).


But, what does it mean when a homosexual or other very evil person somehow lives as if by a miracle?

MayorYana: grizzlyjohnson


I really am going to like you:p

:)

Thorndyke Barnhard: Morton_toes: Well, some folks think it's a good idea, others prefer to get their hanes in a twist that we would even dare discuss these issues in an open forum.

That reminds me of the old dinner table discussion taboos: most commonly, people would include politics and religion among these. But ironically these are probably two of the most deserving of discussion, in fact not discussing them is entirely irresponsible.

The only reason offered for making such issues taboo is protection of the egos of petential disagree-ers. But isn't childish and emotionally retarded to have your identity so wraped up into matters of opinion that you consider any genuine criticism of the ideas to be equal to personal insult and intentional offense?

I do understand some of the standoffishness of some folks regarding the discussion of matters of faith.

I get that my beliefs categorically refute the entire basis of their belief system, which tends to make people a bit edgy about discussing something as deeply personal as religious faith. Because, in effect, I am saying that they are delusional to believe that there is a higher power.

I have all kinds of rational arguments at my disposal to toss out there, most of them cannot be logically refuted from the standpoint of the believer. My assertions neccessarily place the believer in a defensive position, because there is no other ground for them to occupy.

Thorndyke Barnhard: Morton_toes: Well, some folks think it's a good idea, others prefer to get their hanes in a twist that we would even dare discuss these issues in an open forum.

That reminds me of the old dinner table discussion taboos: most commonly, people would include politics and religion among these. But ironically these are probably two of the most deserving of discussion, in fact not discussing them is entirely irresponsible.

The only reason offered for making such issues taboo is protection of the egos of petential disagree-ers. But isn't childish and emotionally retarded to have your identity so wraped up into matters of opinion that you consider any genuine criticism of the ideas to be equal to personal insult and intentional offense?

I think it's more a case of most people's religious and political views being such a cobbled together house of cards that it can't survive much scrutiny. You can't really defend extremism in any form. People backed in a corner react violently. I think the convention is more meant to prevent fistfights.

swarms909: 1. If the person lives, then God saved his life.
2. If the person dies, then it wasn't God's will for him to live or Satan made sure the guy died.
3. He died because you, the person who wanted him to live, are somehow accepting of homosexual lifestyles (or some such BS).


But, what does it mean when a homosexual or other very evil person somehow lives as if by a miracle?

As a very evil person, I resent your conflation of my lifestyle with sexual perversion.

Thorndyke Barnhard: Morton_toes: Deucednuisance: Lionel Mandrake: abb3w: liberalish: Reach out and touch faith.

She called the cops; now what should I do?

Reach for Hope?

Jump for Joy?

strive for Chastity?

Ok sorry to mess that up...how about:

Beg for Charity?

Kiss the Skye?

The Icelander: grizzlyjohnson: Because parts of it are demonstrably true according to historical records. For instance, the gospels and the book of acts describe quite a bit of verifiable information about Palestine under the Romans in 0 AD.

So "All Quiet on the Western Front" is a historical account of WWI?

Good to know.

What? Reread the previous posts. I was answering the question "why isn't it all metaphorical?" The answer is that parts are true, therefore can't be metaphorical. I didn't say the whole thing was true. There were two Herods, they were kings of Judea under rome. Pontius Pilate was the Prefect of Judea. There was a census as described in Luke. Since I'm guessing All Quiet on the Western Front probably has a great deal more verfiable historical information than the bible I'm not sure where you're going with that statement.

pickle65: grizzlyjohnson: pickle65: Not all Christians are obnoxious

That's a generalization too. Generalizations are not true.

No its not. It's saying some are obnoxious, some aren't. Making a blanket statement like "All christians are idiots and obnoxious and they hate everyone else" like what I usually read on these forums, is a generalization.

You have been voted off Irony Island.

Deucednuisance: Thorndyke Barnhard: Morton_toes: Deucednuisance: Lionel Mandrake: abb3w: liberalish: Reach out and touch faith.

She called the cops; now what should I do?

Reach for Hope?

Jump for Joy?

strive for Chastity?

Ok sorry to mess that up...how about:

Beg for Charity?

'Scuse me - while I Kiss the Skye?

FTFM

Morton_toes: My assertions neccessarily place the believer in a defensive position, because there is no other ground for them to occupy.

How about adjusting their beliefs to better conform to reality rather than denying the necessity for such a connection?

See this is the danger of religion, it makes it legitimate and normal to disavow reason and reality in the interest of protecting your ego.

I believe in things only insofar as a I have evidence to believe them. Anything and everything I "believe" is subject to the same rational bases. If I am proven incorrect I adjust my beliefs accordingly. Everybody does this throughout their education in most other matters, they just choose not to when it comes to religion.

grizzlyjohnson: pickle65: grizzlyjohnson: pickle65: Not all Christians are obnoxious

That's a generalization too. Generalizations are not true.

No its not. It's saying some are obnoxious, some aren't. Making a blanket statement like "All christians are idiots and obnoxious and they hate everyone else" like what I usually read on these forums, is a generalization.

You have been voted off Irony Island.

By the way, I requested that pickle65 back up that claim that anyone has ever made that blanket statement, and has yet to respond.

....wonder why....

grizzlyjohnson: I think it's more a case of most people's religious and political views being such a cobbled together house of cards that it can't survive much scrutiny. You can't really defend extremism in any form. People backed in a corner react violently. I think the convention is more meant to prevent fistfights.

Accepting those taboos for the reason that some are childish enough to get stabby because they might be shown to be wrong, amounts to abdication to the immature.

Thorndyke Barnhard: Morton_toes: My assertions neccessarily place the believer in a defensive position, because there is no other ground for them to occupy.

How about adjusting their beliefs to better conform to reality rather than denying the necessity for such a connection?

See this is the danger of religion, it makes it legitimate and normal to disavow reason and reality in the interest of protecting your ego.

I believe in things only insofar as a I have evidence to believe them. Anything and everything I "believe" is subject to the same rational bases. If I am proven incorrect I adjust my beliefs accordingly. Everybody does this throughout their education in most other matters, they just choose not to when it comes to religion.

I believe that all goes back to the 'intellectual incuriosity' we were discussing earlier.

Left to their own devices, a lot of folks will just run on auto-pilot in matters regarding their personal faith. "It is what it is because that's just how it is." seems to be the default position for most of these people. The desire to belong and be part of a community of like minded individuals overpowers their innate desire to have a larger understanding of the world.

An animal, raised in captivity will be uncomfortable, for a time at least, when it is liberated from it's cage. Given the opportunity, it may run away for awhile, but it knows where to find food, sustenance & (perceived) safety.

grizzlyjohnson: What? Reread the previous posts. I was answering the question "why isn't it all metaphorical?" The answer is that parts are true, therefore can't be metaphorical. I didn't say the whole thing was true. There were two Herods, they were kings of Judea under rome. Pontius Pilate was the Prefect of Judea. There was a census as described in Luke. Since I'm guessing All Quiet on the Western Front probably has a great deal more verfiable historical information than the bible I'm not sure where you're going with that statement.

All Quiet on the Western Front is an entirely fictional story but is set in real, verifiable events. Why can't the New Testament be seen that way as well? Sure, the story is nice, but that doesn't make it true.

Thorndyke Barnhard: Accepting those taboos for the reason that some are childish enough to get stabby because they might be shown to be wrong, amounts to abdication to the immature.

Yes, that's what happens when we gather in anything other than small intimate groups of friends. See my post above: least common denominator.

Mnemia: TypoFlyspray: You mean like spending time here?

LOL. Yeah, Fark is a waste of time. But I reject the idea that reading Fark makes me believe fantastical stories that aren't true. I KNOW a large part of the stuff posted here is bullshiat, so if anything hanging around here makes me more skeptical of what I hear.

I hear that God is actually one of danlpoon's alts.

Kidding aside, you put your finger on the downside of religion, that strong enough believe can prompt people to action, and when the actions they take are irrational the results can be problematic. The conundrum is that strong belief is positively required to get the fullest use of one's mind. If the belief is in one's self, then we call it willpower, if it's in someone else, then you have loyalty, and with something else, it's faith.

The problem is that, unless one can have full faith in one's self, one abrogates the responisbility for one's actions, at least in one's own mind, substituting some other's will for one's own.

I think to some extent we all do this (or all but a lucky few who correctly find themselves worthy of belief on all level, and a much larger group that find the same incorrectly.)

So don't mistake me when I say that belief is a powerful thing. Religious belief is a subset of this, not the whole of it. Perhaps I leave myself open to criticism as an apologiest, but frankly, unless it's harming me and mine, I couldn't care less.

So 50% of the country believes in the medical efficacy of prayer. So what? So long as they don't believe that it's effective in a vacuum.

And, so long as I'm rambling, reminds me of a story: A guy is caught in a flood. The Water is up to his ankles and a jeep drives by. A guy says, "Hop in, and we'll get you to higher ground." The fellow says, "No thanks. God will save me." Later, he's sitting on his roof, watching the water flow by under the eaves and a motorboat comes up. The Guy in the boat says, "Hang tight buddy, we'll throw you an line and you can pull yourself to the boat and we'll take you to saftey." The Guy on the roof says, "No thanks. God will save me." Later, he's in the water, barely staying afloat, and a helicopter flies overhead and dangles a fellow down on a line to the guy in the water. The guy on the line says, "Hey buddy, grab my hand and I'll pull you out of here before you drown." The guy in the water says, "No thanks. God will save me."

He drowns.

And comes before the throne of God and says, "Lord, I was in this terrible flood, and had faith you would save me, and yet I drowned."

And the Lord saith (and it helps to hear this in an old Jewish guy voice), "What, you didn't get my Jeep, my Boat, or my Helicopter?"

omega-x: It just so happens that prayer is socially acceptable

it's not a matter of being acceptable. If you pray at home alone, or somewhere private with a bunch of people of like minded beliefs, you're not sitting out in the middle of a parking lot or somewhere holding a pray-out. Surprisingly, a lot of people don't want to be walking or driving somewhere and have to do a wide turn around the group.

Of all things, my favorite opinion on the subject comes from the episode on Firefly where Book first shows up.

Book: "Do you mind if I say grace?"

Captain Reynolds: "Only if you say it out loud"

The Icelander: All Quiet on the Western Front is an entirely fictional story but is set in real, verifiable events. Why can't the New Testament be seen that way as well?

It is, by many people, myself included. What are we arguing about again?

The Icelander: grizzlyjohnson: What? Reread the previous posts. I was answering the question "why isn't it all metaphorical?" The answer is that parts are true, therefore can't be metaphorical. I didn't say the whole thing was true. There were two Herods, they were kings of Judea under rome. Pontius Pilate was the Prefect of Judea. There was a census as described in Luke. Since I'm guessing All Quiet on the Western Front probably has a great deal more verfiable historical information than the bible I'm not sure where you're going with that statement.

All Quiet on the Western Front is an entirely fictional story but is set in real, verifiable events. Why can't the New Testament be seen that way as well? Sure, the story is nice, but that doesn't make it true.

I have to agree, except with "the story is nice" part. Other than the humble offerings of Jesus in the first 4 gospels, the rest is pretty dogmatic. (not saying the first four aren't, just story-wise).

grizzlyjohnson: It is, by many people, myself included. What are we arguing about again?

You got all upset when I said the whole bit could be taken as metaphor.

Morton_toes: I believe that all goes back to the 'intellectual incuriosity' we were discussing earlier.

Left to their own devices, a lot of folks will just run on auto-pilot in matters regarding their personal faith. "It is what it is because that's just how it is." seems to be the default position for most of these people. The desire to belong and be part of a community of like minded individuals overpowers their innate desire to have a larger understanding of the world.

An animal, raised in captivity will be uncomfortable, for a time at least, when it is liberated from it's cage. Given the opportunity, it may run away for awhile, but it knows where to find food, sustenance & (perceived) safety.

I can agree that that is likely the case for most people of faith, I just cannot accept that it ought to be that way, nor that it must be that way. And that is the reason I engage in these conversations. I consider it a matter of responsibility that I fight that laziness, in myself and in others.

Thorndyke Barnhard: I can agree that that is likely the case for most people of faith, I just cannot accept that it ought to be that way, nor that it must be that way. And that is the reason I engage in these conversations. I consider it a matter of responsibility that I fight that laziness, in myself and in others.

So, the question remains, how to engage the pious in an intellectually honest conversation about faith? The framework of the system their faith inhabits has no common pillars with logic.

In my experience, the Venn diagram of pragmatic religious discussion between believers and non, would have 2 circles with no intersection. Us and Them.

Morton_toes: So, the question remains, how to engage the pious in an intellectually honest conversation about faith? The framework of the system their faith inhabits has no common pillars with logic.

I say we don't. We can figure out what makes their religion tick, and we can figure out how to make them do what we want and think they're doing god's will. They'll live fulfilled, happy lives and we won't have to worry about one of those nutjobs getting ahold of a nuclear weapon.

The Icelander

I say we don't. We can figure out what makes their religion tick, and we can figure out how to make them do what we want and think they're doing god's will. They'll live fulfilled, happy lives and we won't have to worry about one of those nutjobs getting ahold of a nuclear weapon.

You have stumbled upon a secret that can offer you a career in politics.