Tuesday, 17 January, 2006

1. By robin. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @12:30pm:

   ...it's not right. The Christian theology on this, (the non literalist viewpoint, which does see A & E as symbolic,) states that all of Man tends to "sin", which is what they call Original Sin. Original Sin is not what Adam (or Eve) did. It's what every human is born with, the tendency to sin. So because the Jews made animal sacrifices to atone for sins, (which was a step in the right direction away from human sacrifice, which the Jews forbid but which a lot of other societies did do) Jesus became the one, final, perfect sacrifice for all sin. The real sins of all the real humans.
   
   This is according to mainstream Christian theology, such as Anglican, not the fundie nutjobs. I can't speak for them.
   
   I'm not arguing for Christianity, I'm just saying that I've personally never heard theology put forth the way Dawkins seems to interpret it.
2. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @12:40pm:

   So God creates humans with a tendency to sin, and Jesus died so that those sins can be forgiven. But the sins aren't forgiven unless you buy into the story. OK, now I understand. Perfectly logical.
3. By TheOzz. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @12:40pm:

   Hmmm? "fundie nutjobs" I resemble that remark according to the results of my recent self examination by the Quizfarm.com.
4. By robin. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @12:48pm:

   I'm not saying, J Walk, that it makes sense or that you have to believe it. I'm just saying that the way that the guy originally quoted it was not what Christianity espouses. You can disagree, just disagree with they are actually saying. ;-)
5. By robin. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @12:51pm:

   oh...and your paraphrasing is not exactly accurate either, but it's probably no less inaccurate than my own. Since even the most eminently qualified theological writer (which I am clearly not) couldn't find a way to accurately and succintly put the entire 2000 years of theological reason into 1000 words, I beg you to cut me some slack!
6. By Hellbound Alleee. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @01:10pm:

   Jesus became the one, final, perfect sacrifice
   
   To quote Julia Sweeney: "Jesus had a really bad weekend for our sins."
   
   
   Still a sacrifice. Still a sacrificial religion. Nobody can "die for sins." What does it mean to kill a human being for the inborn traits of other human beings? It means we create a problem and then make a solution to that problem that didn't exist in the first place.
   
   But what would I know. I'm just a crusader that attacks everything that moves--or in this case, that doesn't exist. Makes me a Don Quixote, I guess.
7. By Mean Jean. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @01:13pm:

   I, for one, think that "original sin" is about the stupidist concept ever foisted on the human race.
8. By robin. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @01:21pm:

   well...I don't want to get into to a point by point thing here, but technically, no, the theology of The Church isn't saying that either. The way I said it might have mislead into that misunderstanding. Lo siento.
   
   Let me try again. Man was made, he was given the gift of freedom, of self determination, his your choices. Man chooses to sin (and that's one point surely we can all agree on - we are often a mean, ###### lot) and instead of making all mankind pay for the consequences of sin, Jesus paid for all of us for all our sins. It was a freebie.
   
   *DISCLAIMER!!* the author in no way intends to state that this is fact or that any person in any way is intended to agree that the above statement is inarguabley true. The author is merely stating that this is, to the best of the Author's ability to state, the position of The Church.
   Call your local Anglican priest w/further questions. heh.
9. By robin. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @01:23pm:

   uhm...I'm a horrible typist...excuse the typos.
10. By robin. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @01:26pm:

    Still a sacrificial religion.
    
    You are correct there. It *is* a sacrificial religion. First it was human sacrifice, then animals, then Jesus.
11. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @01:48pm:

    Now I now understand the ultimate sacrifice God made: Killing his only son to save humans from eternal damnation (even though he didn't really die). I guess that mean's God's not all-powerful, then. Surely an all-powerful God could have thought of a simple way to do it. And it would have been a lot more convincing if Jesus would have stayed dead.
12. By fancypants. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @01:59pm:

    Thank you, J-Walk. According to Catholic theology, Jesus did die. He was fully human and died as we all do. As for the all-powerful God, he created us with a free will. Had he ordained us to be a certain way, we wouldn't have free will.
    Funny thing, it was the fact that none of this made clear sense to me that brought me back to it. If these simpletons wanted a mythology, they would have created one that provided answers, not posed more questions. Its lack of logic and reason seemed compelling. Why create a religion that didn't answer the questions?
13. By Daniel. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @02:12pm:

    One view I heard that humans are toys that god made, and so he is like a toy maker, and can do anything he wants with his 'toys'.
    
    Another view is, taking all religions symbolically, they all pretty much point to the same things, just expressed differently. That seems to point out that either all religions are trying to say something fundamental, or that humans for some reason tend towards this type of religious thinking. Either way, it's silly to argue about the details when the symbolism from all religions seems to be the same. Why not concentrate on trying to figure out what it all means from that point of view? I think people just really don't want to figure it out, otherwise they would.
14. By Mike Power. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @02:37pm:

    Sorry Robin but you are utterly wrong here. Original sin (sometimes referred to as 'the fall') is exactly the sin of Adam and Eve which has been passed on to all their descendants. Christians vary in their interpretation but most accept 'that humans inherit Adamic guilt and are in a state of sin from the moment of conception'. Jesus did not die to rid man of original sin but rather to atone for the sinful nature of men born sinfull. It's all BS anyway. God Bless!
15. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @03:07pm:

    robin, it wasn't very long ago I tried to point out some very basic concept from protestant Christianity as I understood it - some very simple theological point that I thought was clearly and cleanly accepted as part of the Christian religion.
    
    The first response was from John and other atheists - instant knee-jerk reaction against the concept I'd described - and aimed at me, as though I represented the idea, when all I was really attempting was to describe what I understood it to be.
    
    The next thing that happened was that either William Bassett or Danny Kaye or fancypants or one of the other "fundies" here said I was in error; the others agreed with my description.
    
    All I can say is God help you, girl - you just jumped into the snakepit.
16. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @03:17pm:

    robin tries to describe a simple theological concept.
    
    JWB - sarcastic slam!
    
    robin tries to explain, reword it ...
    
    Hellbound Alleee - slam!
    
    robin: "Let me try again" - even a disclaimer -
    
    JWB - slam!
    
    fancypants - gives some Catholic theology on a side point only -
    
    Daniel - it's silly to argue about the details
    
    Mike Power - tells Robin she's "utterly wrong"
17. By Pancho. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @03:19pm:

    hssss!!!!
18. By fancypants. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @03:27pm:

    Mary, I am not a fundie. I'm not interested in correcting anyone. I don't know much of Protestant theology, so I don't try to represent it.
    And I also think J-Walk, even if he is being sarcastic is asking pertinent questions. Thank you, J-Walk.
19. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @03:51pm:

    What's up with Richard? From Hogan's Heros to Family Feud was one thing, but now this?
20. By Fundy-to-the-Core. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @04:08pm:

    "And it would have been a lot more convincing if Jesus would have stayed dead."
    John, God certainly doesn't need to convince anybody of anything, especially you. He gave us some direction in the Bible, you don't have to believe it, but it doesn't change the fundamental fact: you are on your way to hell John. It's sad but very true. There's probably no changing your closed mind at this point... well, that is, here on earth anyway. Your mind will someday be changed like it or not, but by then it will be too late because you'll be in hell forever. So sad.
21. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @04:10pm:

    Dawkins ... Dawson ... hmmm, maybe a l is on to something? (or on something...)
    
    
22. By Mark. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @04:14pm:

    People, people. Can't we all get back to living the short lives we have here on Earth and agrue about this in the after-life? However it turns out someone will get to say "Told you so!".
23. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @04:19pm:

    Alright, we've got a fundamentalist! Please stick around Fundy-to-the-Core. The religious discussions needs someone like you for comic relief.
24. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @04:21pm:

    Here's The Richard Dawson Experience. Very nicely done, I might add.
25. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @04:25pm:

    fancypants, I'm not trying to label you with any term that offends you - I'm trying to find a word to identify you as belonging to a religious group of Christians who belief in the literal interpretation of the scriptures as being "fundamental" to the Christian religion.
    
    This is according to Merriam-Webster:
    
    a: a movement in 20th century Protestantism emphasizing the literally interpreted Bible as fundamental to Christian life and teaching b : the beliefs of this movement c : adherence to such beliefs
    2 : a movement or attitude stressing strict and literal adherence to a set of basic principles
    
    The word "Christian" is entirely too broad a brush with which to paint all Christians - Mormons, Baptists and Catholics are different, but they all consider themselves Christians. The second M-W definition would appear to apply to strict Catholics, if they don't want to be part of a "Protestantism" movement.
26. By wally the duck. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @04:26pm:

    Mark, I'm pretty sure nobody will get to say "I told you so".
27. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @04:32pm:

    Ah, Richard Dawson - I've had a crush on him for 30 years.
28. By Fundy-to-the-Core. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @04:33pm:

    I just read all of the comments that you people wrote on this topic and have come to the following conclusion: almost all of you people are on your way to hell, not just John. Here's a warning: Turn or burn!
29. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @04:38pm:

    All I remember is "kiss all the girls and make the producers cry".
30. By Sheldon. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @05:32pm:

    If there is a hell, I will have to go there, because, like the US president, I will never accept a god that tortures people, and yeah, it will be sad if that happens. In the mean time, I'm watching The Simpsons!
31. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @05:56pm:

    If heaven is filled with self-righteous gullible people like Fundy-to-the-Core, I'll be happy to settle for the alternative.
32. By Fundy-to-the-Core. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @06:28pm:

    I'm not self-righteous, I'm Biblically-righteous -- the only kind of righteousness that matters. And you may say that you'll be happy with the alternative now, but shows just how truly ignorant you are about hell. Hell is the worst place imaginable -- burning that never ends. Trust me, nobody wants to go there ever. To even joke about going there is inane. The Bible says that the road to destruction is broad, but the road to heaven is narrow. God doesn't send anyone to hell, people choose to go there by not accepting Him when He's clearly shown Himself to all of us. Hopefully you'll change your mind about wanting to go to hell someday.
33. By Lorence. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @06:43pm:

    FTTC,
    I don't think J-walk wants to go to hell. My take is that there's no reasaon to want to go to someplace you don't believe even exists, kind of like Atlantis, Brigadoon, Valhalla or Helgardh. I'm not concerned about heaven, hell or any where else no one can prove exists. I'm not concerned about any alleged "afterlife" either. I also don't think I'm damned (or J-walk either for that matter) because of these beliefs. I believe in being a good person for the sake of being a good person and doing the right thing because its the right thing to do, not out of fear of revenge from some supposed imaginary magic flying sky pixie. I'm far more afraid of the NSA and our current government than anything else.
34. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @06:53pm:

    The comic relief is welcome. Thanks F-t-t-C!
35. By Fundy-to-the-Core. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @06:55pm:

    If I didn't believe in electricity, I'd still get a shock if I stuck my finger into and electrical receptacle. Just because you decide not to believe something doesn't negate it. Gee, I mean I can disbelieve I'm going to die all I want, but sooner or later, it will happen. You can decide not to believe in hell, but that's a sure-fire way of getting there. And if there is no heaven and hell, why bother as you say "being a good person". Every man for himself, it doesn't matter anyway if you're heading for annihilation -- maximize your own pleasure and live as long as possible -- who cares about others unless it benefits you. Thank God there is more to life than that, but you've got to let go of your pride -- the "real" original sin committed by Satan -- and accept Jesus who's thrown you the only lifeline.
36. By Fundy-to-the-Core. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @06:58pm:

    You may say you're laughing John, but something tells me it's a nervous laugh. When you're done laughing, why don't you look up John 3:16, 1 John 1:9, and Romans 3:23?
37. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @07:02pm:

    So, basically, you believe in the bible because you're afraid not to. It's all driven by fear. That's the basis of all religion, and you've fallen for it big time.
    
    There are thousands of religions in the world. Are you sure you chose the right one? People who believe in the Koran are just as adamant about it as you. Are you absolutely positive that you chose the right book?
38. By KeithUK. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @07:18pm:

    Dawkins to Adrian Hawkes, teacher at the Phoenix Academy ("Faith" School - yes, this madness has made it over here, too):
    
    Hawkes: If there is no God and there is no law-giver, why does it matter what I do? Why is rape wrong? Why is paedophilia wrong? Why are any of these things wrong, if there is no law-giver?
    
    Dawkins: You've just said a very revealing thing. Are you telling me that the only reason why you don't steal and rape and murder is that you're frightened of God?
    
    Hawkes: I think that all people, if they think that they can get away with something, and it is that there is no consequences, we actually tend to do that. I think that is the reality: look at the world in which we live. That is the reality.
    
    Barking mad.
    
    Funny, I'm an atheist yet I've never stolen, murdered, raped, abused someone or started a war, although I have no invisible cloud-being to be afraid of. When are these people going to grow up and take some responsibility for their own actions?
39. By exp_err. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @07:42pm:

    Fundy, so you're saying basically, that we should only do good if it is in our own selfish interest to do so? (i.e. if it gets us to heaven and saves us from hell)? That there is no morality, or no point in being moral unless it benefits us in some way?
40. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @07:47pm:

    FTTC, tell me - who will be in Heaven with you? Catholics? Seventh-Day Adventists? Mormons? Universalists? Lutherans? Baptists? Presbyterians? Methodists? Quakers?
    
    How about Jews?
    
    Will Pat Robertson be there?
    
    I'll bet you won't give direct answers to these questions.
41. By M.T.L.B.W.U.. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @08:24pm:

    FTTC,You forgot to mention FOREVER IS A LONG TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!
42. By M.T.L.B.W.U.. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @08:52pm:

    FTTC,You're the only person on here that makes any sense. You have my vote.
43. By Birdie. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @09:27pm:

    IMHO, "Fundie to the Core" IS John Walkenbach--(go back and read that stuff! LOL)
    
    Pure snarky J-walk!
44. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @10:05pm:

    I find the Original Sin not original at all.
45. By TheOzz. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @10:28pm:

    Mark
    
    No one will get to say "Told you so!" if we all end up worm food or a spec of pond scum after this life is over.
    
    If God wins then someone WILL get to say "Told you so!"
    
    
    FTTC: You are welcome to guest blog over at The Land of Ozz anytime.
    
    Mary: I will answer that question directly. I believe that all of those groups listed will have people in heaven who have accepted Christ as their personal Savior. There will definitely be Jews in heaven. As for Pat Robertson, I believe that he will be there too.
    
    This from one of those "fundie nutjobs".
    
    ;-)
46. By Thrash Cardiom. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @10:45pm:

    <b>Re: Original Sin<b>: My mother was an ordained Methodist minister. One of her beliefs was that people are born innocent but fall into sin. One of her friends believed that people are born in sin. One day their beliefs clashed mightly and it ended with my mother's friend quoting the bible, "Your words are as vomit and I spit you out of my mouth", or something similar. They never spoke again.
    
    Christians are weird.
47. By JB. Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @11:10pm:

    You guys are all just wasting your time. The TRUTH is here:
    http://www.venganza.org/
    
    Pastafarian blessings be upon you.
    
    Ramen
48. By . Comment posted 17-Jan-2006 @11:55pm:

    "As for Pat Robertson, I believe that he will be there too." - TheOzz.
    
    
    
    Living in this world with that braying jackass is bad enough.
49. By Curtis. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @12:29am:

    The Ozz -- I was all set to kinda give you a hard time over some stuff you said, but then I took the time to look at your blog and saw that you and your family have some serious stuff to deal with. My son (12 years old) also has a disability and I just want to wish you and your wife well and say it looks like both your boys got the right daddy.
50. By Fundy-to-the-core. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @12:51am:

    "I'll bet you won't give direct answers to these questions."
    Mary, Mary, Mary, with a challenge like that of course I will answer each of these questions:
    Catholics? -- Most are going to hell
    Seventh-Day Adventists? -- Even more are going to hell
    Mormons? -- All Mormons are going to hell. No exceptions.
    Universalists? -- Hell
    Lutherans? -- To hell with them
    Baptists? Heaven
    Presbyterians? Most are going to heaven
    Methodists? About half of these guys are going to hell, half are going to heaven, and the other half are destined for purgatory.
    Quakers? Heaven
    
    How about Jews? Naw they're all going to hell.
    
    Will Pat Robertson be there? Yep, he makes it.
    
    You forgot to ask about you Mary. You're definitely going where the goblins go.
51. By Fundy-to-the-core. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @01:11am:

    "So, basically, you believe in the bible because you're afraid not to."
    No John, I believe the Bible because it's the only book that is demonstrably true. All the other religions are about man reaching out to find God. Christianity is the only one where God reaches out to man, not because we deserve it, but because He loves us. Christianity is not about fear as you have suggested. The Bible says that His perfect love casts out fear. No one need fear hell because it is so avoidable and Jesus has taken the penalty for the sin if we repent of it. In no other religion has the leader died for the sins of the adherents. You are getting Christianity mixed up with other religions. Other religions say, "believe or die", whereas Christianity says, "believe and live".
52. By . Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @02:28am:

    Oh, oh, oh - who WAS it just recently who was always addressing me as Mary, Mary, Mary ????
    
    Aaaaarrrghhh - Why don't you have the guts to use the same name you've posted under before?
    
    Purgatory? Is there a Protestant religion that believes in Purgatory?
    
    I'll bet the Quakers are really excited about being the only other ones in Heaven besides Baptists, Pat Robertson and a few stragglers from the Catholic, Methodist and Presbyterian churches. Wish there was a webcam just inside the Pearly Gates.
    
    The best QuickTime of all would be watching your jaw drop when you find yourself surrounded by all sorts of people - all colors, all languages, some even wearing peculiar clothing - Muslims??!! Impossible! Pagans??!! Nah! J's Witnesses??!! Oh, No!
    
    HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA!
53. By . Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @02:30am:

    Well, Ozz, I'll tell you what - If Robertson is there, I hope he's bunking in YOUR barracks and not mine!
54. By Dave (TDC). Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @03:05am:

    Curious, if you can only get into heaven by accepting Christ and the concept of heaven has been around for a very long time, it must have been very lonely there until around 33AD.
55. By Dave (TDC). Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @03:09am:

    "I believe the Bible because it's the only book that is demonstrably true."
    
    That is a combination of stupidity and humour that is hard to beat.
    
    OK I'm calling your bluff, demonstrate the proof of the bible, and for an encore perhaps you can demonstrate that every other book ever written is false.
56. By Blue. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @05:07am:

    Ok, Toad, I was wrong about Michael Jackson. A stupid Christian post still wins hands down in the flame stakes.
57. By Bobo. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @05:32am:

    "God is dead." Nietzsche.
    
    "Nietzsche is dead." God.
    
    
    Whatever you say, just make sure you'll be the last one laughing!
58. By GlugGlugGlug. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @06:27am:

    We can derive a lifestyle from any work of fiction, or tales.
59. By Danny Kaye. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @07:01am:

    Great Job, Birdie! And great job J-walk!
    Let's see:
    No email address,
    Comments that play right into the hands of Jwalk's sarcastic wit,
    Snide, smarmy, and no-room-for-other-opinions comments,
    
    As soon as I read the first comment from FTTC I had a feeling it was just another character invented to bring liveliness to this thread.
    
    I could be wrong, but this would be way too coincidental after last Friday's Open Mic.
60. By wally the duck. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @07:05am:

    Personally, Fundie, I'm going to the North Pole. I've seen glimpses of Santa's workshop on TV and I like it. Plus, Santa has a proven track record that is far better than the one Jesus has laid down. With Santa you get actual stuff and as any kid will tell you, he is as reliable as clockwork. The moral philosophy is virtually identical: be good and you get a reward; if not, coal for you.
    He seems kinder and more approachable, too. Plus, he would NEVER do what God did to poor New Orleans.
61. By TheOzz. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @07:16am:

    wally the duck,
    Santa doesn't exist. I already went to the North Pole looking for him. I even took an airplane out looking for him when I could not find him in his workshop.
62. By Mean Jean. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @07:25am:

    Fundie you cannot imagine my relief when I read your list of who's going to be in heaven! Dang! You got it covered, man. Just make sure you lock the gate and keep them there.
    
    I'm with Wally.
63. By Nick. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @07:58am:

    It ain't on the BBC, it's on Channel 4.
64. By fancypants. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @08:08am:

    Mary, I hope you can see by fttc, that Catholics are very far from being fundamentalists. We do not believe in a literal interpetation of the bible, as we got burned by that whole galileo thing...lol.
    Catholics believe that the Church is guided by what we call The Holy Spirit (I am fully aware of how hokey that sounds). The bible is a great guide, but we don't think of it as a science book or some Great Book Of Knowledge. It contains spiritual truths, not necessarily scientific or historical truths.
65. By . Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @08:30am:

    As soon as I read the first comment from FTTC I had a feeling it was just another character invented to bring liveliness to this thread.
    
    Nice theory, but it's not true. Give me some credit, Danny Kaye, if I were going to create a fake character I would have done a better job than that.
    
    I will tell you this. Comments attributed to Fundy-to-the-Core came from two IP address (both in California). One of those IP addresses also belongs to another commenter who recently came on board.
66. By Mean Jean. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @08:32am:

    The plot thickens....
67. By Seth Manapio. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @08:52am:

    Fundy,
    
    You give us a very authoritative description of hell. Can you give me any rational reason at all to believe that you know what happens to me after I die? Or are you just pretending to know?
68. By Danny Kaye. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @08:55am:

    The two IP addresses part doesn't seem to wierd. I post from all over the place. I would venture a guess that you have no fewer than 5 IP address for me.
    
    I'm curious, though, Jwalk. What would you have done differently than what FTTC has already done. Surely you can see why Birdie and I thought what we did.
    
    (I know...don't call you shirley)
    
    And FTTC: did you not realize that bloggers can match commenters to IP addresses? Stop trying to be duplicitous. That is hypocritical. The comments you've made are not doing anything except pushing people away from faith in Christ. Use your words carefully, follow Eph. 4:29, and throw in a bit of Phil. 2:5-11.
69. By Mark. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @09:04am:

    Wally & Ozz: Sorry to mislead you on where I was coming from with my humor. I know that if there is no afterlife that those who believe there is no afterlife will not be able to say "Told you so!", but they won't care. It seems to me that people who believe there is no afterlife are grounded pretty firmly in the here-and-now. They have lots of self confidence, are usually dependable, and considerate of others.
    
    I'll say it again, let's all argue about this later 'cause life is so much more fun if we live for it now.
70. By Fundy-to-the-Core. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @09:41am:

    "Must have been very lonely there until around 33AD"
    That's easy. Jesus died for all of mankind both living and dead. Since you step out of the continuum of time when you get to heaven, everyone "arrives" at the same time.
    
    "Demonstrate the proof of the bible"
    I've seen it in action in mine and other's lives. It takes faith, not blind-faith, but expectant faith.
    
    "For an encore perhaps you can demonstrate that every other book ever written is false". I never said that per se, but anything that contradicts scripture is false.
    BTW Dave, your on your way to hell too. Any other takers?
71. By TheOzz. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @09:54am:

    Mark, I can think I have two good reasons for me to argue this point now. I plan to add more reasons later. You see, I don't want my children getting pulled into this self serving, if it feels good do it, "here-and-now" attitude. All have a choice not to believe what I believe. The choice not to believe what I believe does not give anyone the right to force their beliefs on me or my children even though some do take that liberty. Some things like the pond scum "theory" is backed by a force that is outwardly opposed to what I believe. Example: Science Must Destroy Religion I am not trying to destroy science with my beliefs. I love science. I love the scientists. I hope they come to find what I have found in Christ. If they don't, that is their choice.
    
    Proof of the Bible - Caden's Page - Doctors tried to convience us to get an abortion.
72. By . Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @09:56am:

    Boy, do we get serious when the subject is Religion, strike that, 'Believing'.
    Lighten up gang. Jesus always liked a good joke, and we're it.
    Both God and Nietzsche are in heaven and they are debating over whether we exist or not, and we don't.
73. By Dave (TDC). Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @10:00am:

    Well Fundy at least I'm intelligent enough to know the difference between "your" and "you're".
    If you can't even manage to work out that difference how is one supposed to take "what you know" with any credence whatsoever?
    
    “everyone "arrives" at the same time”
    
    So either nobody has arrived there yet, or generations unborn are already there. If it is the former then you can’t claim that anybody goes to heaven, if it is the latter then unborn people already have their futures mapped out so no free will.
74. By . Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @10:05am:

    Would you believe someone who stood in front of you and said "I have a message from God"? No, then why would you believe printed text reputatedly saying that some one a thousand to four thousand years ago said exactly that?
75. By Mark. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @10:09am:

    Ozz, living "here-and-now" is not necessarily the same as living a self-serving, all-for-me life. For me, living for today means accepting what I encounter each day and doing what I can to address it. Giving help when it's needed, being considerate of others, being a good person; these are things that make me feel I'm contributing to the community around me. I have no alterier motive in acting this way, I just find that I like myself better for being this way. I have enough in my daily life that brings stress and anger that I don't need "not feeling good about myself" added to the list.
    
    I love science, too. It amazes me what we have been able to find out about the world around us...and how much we still don't know.
    
    Thanks for your comments!
76. By Fundy-to-the-Core. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @10:12am:

    "If it is the former then you can’t claim that anybody goes to heaven, if it is the latter then unborn people already have their futures mapped out so no free will."
    ???? You're logic doesn't flow at all. You are still thinking in this world's time reference when you use phrases like "before" and "after". In heaven, there is the absence of time. There is no before and after. The Bible talks about a day being as 100 years, and 1000 years being as a day.
    Free-will, now that's a totally different subject. A strict 5-point Calvinist would say that you don't have free-will, your fate is sealed. That could be true. For example, you sound like you've made your mind up about Jesus, so your fate is probably sealed.
77. By TheOzz. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @10:13am:

    Jack, you assumed wrong. Personally, I would not discount anyone who said that they had a message from God.
    
    A large portion of the Bible is not inspired. Much of it is written accounts of personal observations.
78. By Thrash Cardiom. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @10:15am:

    FTTC About Half of the methodists are going to hell
    Another half are headed to heaven.
    A third half are going to purgatory?
    
    I think you should concentrate on maths for a while instead of The Bible.
79. By Fundy-to-the-Core. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @10:19am:

    Thrash,
    You obviously have no sense of humor at all. BTW -- to hell you go too.
80. By Seth Manapio. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @10:21am:

    Fundy: Again, you are speaking with great authority about what happens to the dead... what is the rational reason that I should believe you know what happens to dead people? I can't even find any non-biblical evidence, anywhere, that there was a historical Jesus.
81. By TheOzz. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @10:27am:

    Oh those Methodist. I got married in a Methodist Church. God's still mad about that. I thnik he at least sees that as an improvement over my first wedding which happened in a one of those little walk-in chapels in Palm Springs where I married a Catholic barmaid.
    :-)
82. By Fundy-to-the-Core. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @10:31am:

    Seth, you'd better read more. Try works of first century historians, like Josephus, Philo, and Eusebius. There's loads of references. And who said anything about being able to figure matters of faith out with limited human reasoning? Moses parted the Red Sea -- it took faith, not reason to do this. A "rational" person would've just given up and not believed that God could do it. Lucky for Moses and the Israelites that he had faith.
83. By fancypants. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @10:44am:

    fttc: Mary is correct in pointing out the fact that real fundies reject the notion of purgatory as it is not described in the bible. so why are you pretending to be a fundamentalist?
84. By Fundy-to-the-Core. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @10:49am:

    Fancypants, dude! (or dudette) Get a life! There is this thing in the english language called sarcasm that people use sometimes to be off the wall and make a point. Now, do you want to go to hell too?
85. By . Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @10:53am:

    Try works of first century historians, like Josephus, Philo, and Eusebius.
    
    If you actually read about these people, you'll find that none of them actually mentioned Jesus. The "mention" by Josphus is widely known to be a forgery. Bottom line? There is no real proof that Jesus actually existed. But if believing in mythology makes you happy, carry on.
86. By jp2558. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @11:14am:

    Fundy - ever hear "Judge not lest ye be judged?"
    
    Who put you in charge of speaking for the Big Guy?
87. By Danny Kaye. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @11:22am:

    J-walk.
    My understanding is that, of the two mentions of Jesus by Josephus, only the first is incredible. The second is widely accepted.
    Yeah, I could be wrong.
    
    Ok. Now 'fess up. Who is it that is pretending to be FTTC?
    I know of no Christians who would spew what is coming from his <strike>mouth</strike> fingers.
    
    Who is it? I won't tell. Really!
88. By TheOzz. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @11:22am:

    J-Walk,
    
    Were not Josephus and Philo Jews? What do you expect from a Jew on the subject of Jesus during that time, if the Biblical accounts are correct?
89. By Fundy-to-the-Core. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @12:02pm:

    "The comments you've made are not doing anything except pushing people away from faith in Christ"
    I doubt it. Most of these guys have zero respect for what you say Danny. All they ever do is slam you. It's probably better just to lay it all out on the line without the niceties and let them sweat it out(in fact the harshities I'm sure at least makes them smile on their marry way to hell).
90. By kc278. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @12:09pm:

    I have a confession to make -- I only read through the first half of the posts before concluding that, as unfailing happens, the more reasoned observations/opinions were becoming drowned out by dogma on the one hand and various attempts to explain why begging the question of faith is the logical fallacy that it unquestionably is.
    
    So anyway.... Though a "devout atheist" *chuckle*, I have deep respect for anyone (else) genuinely devoted to puzzling out the why's and wherefore's of human-being. If one religion or another gives you a framework from which to work, fine by me. By the same token, once the "my god can beat up your god/you're going to hell" horse manure starts getting shoveled out I know without question that I'm dealing with someone for whom whatever wisdom there may be informing a system of belief is infinitely less important than grim obeisance to the "letter of the (most often dubiously translated) law."
91. By TheOzz. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @12:14pm:

    kc278 has got to be the FTTC.
92. By Danny Kaye. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @12:27pm:

    You are right that many folks here have no respect for me. I can live with that.
    
    But the reason they have no respect for me is because of what I believe, not how I come across. Jesus was not crucified for how He came across. He never even came close to making the statments you are making. You do not "correctly handle the word of truth". Instead you sling the Sword like a child with no concern or thought about how you are representing the Lord.
    
    You must do what your heart tells you to do. I don't fault you for that. But I advise you to take a good look at the Jesus of the Bible who saved his "Lashings" for the hypocritical spiritual leaders of the day; not the non-believers.
    
    The Jesus I know is humble. The Jesus I know is gentle. The Jesus I know is loving. You may think what you are saying is from love. But it is the furthest thing from the Love of Jesus I have ever seen.
93. By Chris J.. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @02:07pm:

    Years ago when I was much less assertive. I was pigeon-holed by a religious man who spewed
    (literally sprayed me with his spittle) his bible quoting, religious rants at me for over an hour.
    I was too polite to excuse myself.
    Afterwards, I made a vow that will never happen to me again. I realized there was no point to disagreeing with someone who could quote bible passages endlessly when I could not. It's just not the kind of fiction I want to read.
    "He's" entitled to his opinion, but "he's" not entitled to shove it in my face.
    For some reason I read all of these comments and I have the same creepy feeling of having been trapped by a zealot.
    Does either side of this endless argument really think they are going to convert the other side?
94. By . Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @02:14pm:

    Does either side of this endless argument really think they are going to convert the other side?
    
    Of course not. I post this stuff just to get folks riled up and liven up this blog a bit. I (and several others) find it amusing, and these types of posts definitely get the most comments.
95. By Sheldon. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @02:15pm:

    "Does either side of this endless argument really think they are going to convert the other side?"
    
    Yes. By arguing with me and becoming angry I bring them over to the darkside.
    Bwa ha ha!
    (seriously though, it works.)
96. By . Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @02:30pm:

    FTTC: Do you seriously believe that your words have anyone here "sweating it out?"
    
    That's rich.
    
    I think you're Godfrey Daniel - his classic move when pinned down on one of his stupid comments was to claim that he was using sarcasm.
    
    ALMOST everyone is respected here, including Danny Kaye.
    
    fancypants, Catholics are considered "Christians" - right? Just not strictly Bible-based Christians? I'm sorry I called you a fundamentalist - I should have known. The Catholics have always had their own ways.
97. By Birdie. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @03:07pm:

    "Of course not. I post this stuff just to get folks riled up and liven up this blog a bit. I (and several others) find it amusing, and these types of posts definitely get the most comments."
    
    See? There's J-walk's rationale for posing as himself AND FttC. What a hoot..
    
    Yer doin' a heckuva job, John--it worked!
98. By fancypants. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @03:08pm:

    rock on, Mary. Catholics are Christians, but not fundamental Christians. Whew, so many distinctions. Fer instance, we accept science.
    J-Walk, please do a bio on Mary. She is fascinating.
99. By Seth Manapio. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @03:18pm:

    Fundy: In other words, no. You can't give me any rational reason to believe that you know what happens to me after I die. So why should I believe you?
100. By Fundy-to-the-Core. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @03:29pm:

     Seth,
     I don't need you to convince you of anything, I just stated a fact: You're on your way to hell. I told you about it, if you don't believe it and do nothing to change your direction (i.e. repenting and asking Jesus into your life) then it's your own tough luck when you get there. Happy roasting.
101. By Fundy-to-the-Core. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @03:48pm:

     Hey John, This is the 101th response to the posting. What's your record and what was it about? Also, can you tell me the longest period of time something was responded to (this one's been two days)?
102. By . Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @04:01pm:

     Mmmm, I was wrong - you're not Godfrey Daniel; he knew enough to write 101st instead of 101th.
     
     BTW, if you're trying to set a record for needling people into the longest thread, you have a very long way to go.
103. By . Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @04:17pm:

     I recently deleted a whole bunch of old comments, so I don't know what the all-time comment record is. Here are two entries that had more than 200 comments:
     
     Draft Lottery Numbers
     
     Creation Science Explained
104. By . Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @04:19pm:

     Good point, Mary. I know you're just having some fun with us, FTTC, but please don't make comments just for the sake of setting a record.
105. By Seth Manapio. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @04:47pm:

     Fundy: Wow... that sure is christian of you. Way to save souls!
106. By Seth Manapio. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @04:50pm:

     Actually, a nicer way to put this would be to explain that a "fact" has to be verifiable in some way. What you have given me is a supposition, which is something different. How do you know for a fact that there is a hell?
     
     I mean, your "four gospels" were all written at least 100 years after the supposed events didn't take place, so I'm a little sketchy on your use of the word "fact" in this circumstance, it doesn't seem like you have any way for me to verify your claims, or even a way for us to discuss them from common ground.
107. By Mean Jean. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @05:16pm:

     FTTC, I think if you are right and there is a god, you are SO in trouble. From what I've read of the bible, Jesus hates smart alecs. Jesus hates you, this I know.
108. By JB. Comment posted 18-Jan-2006 @09:28pm:

     “Jesus hates you”? You couldn’t be more right. Considering the number of babies tortured, women raped and people generally murdered in the most twisted and horrible ways, in his name, it is quite obvious that jesus would be a hateful, vindictive individual with the social inclinations of a murderous pedophile and it is most appropriate that an instrument of torture would be his symbol and his priests would dedicate their lives to running after altar boys. Since the birth of the concept of religion, much before that fantasy called “jesus” was ever concocted, the only thing that has come out of it is an hysterical, tantrum throwing, subnormal, screaming “your god is false, MINE IS THE ONLY TRUE GOD!” while swirling around in a desperate attempt to find a rock or club large enough to honor his “true god” by bashing in the brains of the other guy. The worst error ever committed by humans is religion. It is time enough we cure ourselves and abandon it.
109. By Dave (TDC). Comment posted 19-Jan-2006 @02:50am:

     "You're logic doesn't flow at all."
     
     I realize you deliberately used "You're" instead of "Your" as some form of supposedly clever joke (it failed, you are still an idiot), but just saying "my logic is flawed" is not a particularly strong argument without showing where and how the flaw is manifest.
     
     If you are going to invoke some imaginary realm where time is of no consequence then you can say anything you want no matter how preposterous as it is just in the imagination of the imaginer and as such not susceptible to natural laws. But that does not make it true.
110. By fancypants. Comment posted 19-Jan-2006 @08:11am:

     jb, why do people thinks it is God's responsibility to contain how human beings behave? The only thing to come out of religion is hysterical, tantrum...blah blah blah....of course you conveniently ignore the incredible charitable work, the massive medical attention, the unmeasurable educating of the poor that christian institutions have performed. Hardly a fair and balanced argument you make, jb. Tsk, tsk. But it's okay. We forgive you your transgression. But next time, please use reason and fact.
111. By Barry. Comment posted 19-Jan-2006 @09:29am:

     Getting back on track, Robin is right. Both Dawkins and Harris analyses are laughable because their premises and assumptions about religion are so far off base. Any logic applied to misguided concepts of religion would be meaningless. Rather than get barking mad, most Christians probably get a good laugh.
112. By . Comment posted 19-Jan-2006 @09:37am:

     Both Dawkins and Harris analyses are laughable because their premises and assumptions about religion are so far off base.
     
     It's easy to dismiss a topic because it doesn't agree with your "faith." How about if you provide a few specific examples of the off base premises and assumptions, Barry?

Original content © 2010, John Walkenbach