winsor

With all due respect to God and the use of His Name, it really is a shame you all missed the Messiah. Because through Him God is available in a much different way than how He was through the Jewish people. ... According to the pagans who killed his followers and hijacked his movement. Consider the source. Also, the criteria for the Mosiach are quite specific, and Jesus did not even come close - though the attempt was very clumsily made in retrospect to claim the mantle. Do your homework.

You never know, YEHWEH said to put Him first so there must be others out there. Choose well. Dude, the tetragrammaton (yod heh vav heh) is not pronounced, ever. In practice, one says "Adonai." HaShem (the name) is pronounced only by Kohainim in the Temple, in isolation, under very specific circumstances. An attempt to sound knowledgeable has done nothing but display consummate ignorance, as usual. It's like having a whuffo show up at a DZ and pontificate on the nuances of skydiving. BSBD, Winsor

Impressive! Good that you are so easily amused. Doesn't take much to keep me entertained. You're doing a fine job. Enough, little fella. Go play with your invisible friend.

Impressive! Good that you are so easily amused.

I do feel as though I've accomplished something today. I believe I have found the one perfect person still on the planet. It is a privilege. I must admit now, none of my discussions with regard to the need for righteousness and accountability pertain to you. You obviously are righteous in and of yourself and are not in need of help (certainly not from Jesus Christ). His sacrifice and intercession are not for you. Whatever.

True. I do not deny my presupposition and admit that it influences the way I view the world. Many here, however, refuse to admit theirs. There is, unfortunately, the tendency to assume universality of thought process, which is all too often not the case. There are concepts that are common in one society, but for which there is no means to express in another. Thus, when people say "everyone does this" or "it's human nature," it raises flags, since it says more about the person making the claim than about the intended subject. To assume that everyone has the same propensity for blind faith is unrealistic and inaccurate. Minds work differently - some better than others. Some move about as freely as hummingbirds, some are as barnacles. For one to try to speak for the other is pointless. To refuse to admit to failings to which one is not subject is hardly an invalid stance. BSBD, Winsor

Correlation does not imply causality. The shaman that goes out every single morning and performs the ritual to raise the sun has an important social function. The suggestion that there is a causal relationship between the two is easily refuted. Neither you nor I drink nor take drugs, since Reagan was president on my part. Does that prove or disprove the existence of Zeus, Baal or the Loch Ness Monster in and of itself? Not a chance. I think it is great that you are enjoying life. Mazel Tov. I think your rationalizations are complete tripe, but it is still good for you to have a fine quality of life. Some of the happiest people I know are case studies of how ignorance is bliss - and I am a bit envious. My son has never known anything but love, care, attention and kindness, and he is the sweetest kid I have ever met. Ah, if I didn't know now what I didn't know then... BSBD, Winsor

That was impressive. Absolutely none of the replies above had any substance to them at all. How do you do it winsor? Aw, come on little fella, you don't give yourself enough credit. When it comes to going on and on without saying anything of merit, you are the master. I have to assume it is intentional, and I am impressed. If, OTOH, what you post is serious, then I may as well respond to negative meaning with none. It is not reasonable that you should expect me to clarify that which is glaringly apparent to the casual observer - assuming you really can not figure it out on your own. I have known too many people who were actually pretty bright and delighted in getting a rise out of people by carefully crafted nonsense, and I prefer to give you credit as being among their number. Good show!

Winsor, are you really denying that you also begin with presuppositions which then influence how you interpret scientific results? Dude, that is dishonest. Everyone has to begin somewhere. At some point, you must presuppose what you cannot prove in order to progress in this line of thought/study. We just begin with different presuppositions. Mine begins with God as the Prime Mover. All other scientific study is then filtered through that worldview. Your worldview does not account for a beginning, apparently, so there is a big gap. Nevertheless, your worldview progresses with that assumption (unless you again presuppose that everything just always was (just as lacking, in my opinion)) All that follows must be interpreted as such...by something, again, which you cannot prove. I'd still consider it admirable if you'd just admit your presupposition/assumptions, however. I mean, we all know where you stand but it would be nice to see a little honesty. Added: The ironic thing is, you must borrow even the ability to reason from God to then reason against Him. Sad. Gee, you're not just sad, you're sorry.

I have no problem with Science and belief in God. The two mesh perfectly. The Bible is the Word of God relating to spiritual phenomena, Science is the expression of God in physical form. It is up to us to make sense out of what He has given us. Beyond wrong. Belief is anathema to science. Science is all about skepticism. Check your assumptions, challenge to fail, peer review and all that. Belief is about suspension of doubt and adherence to some synthetic "truth" - regardless of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. If you think science and belief are compatible, you know less than nothing about science. BSBD, Winsor

Feldmarschall Erwin Rommel ignored the dictate to separate jewish POWs for "special treatment," despite being a devout Nazi. Somehow, that still leaves me shy of a warm, fuzzy feeling regarding the bulk of the movement (Godwin, I know...). Similarly, I know upstanding individuals of a variety of groups that have earned very negative reputations; like the individuals though I might, I still disapprove of the groups in general. Prejudice is bad, but postjudice is a reality. BSBD, Winsor i understand the point your making but Rommel was not a Nazi as far as i've ever read. He was a German Wehrmacht Field Marshal. Was not even known to be a large advocate of national socialism. Am i wrong? I'd like to stress i get your point. Just making a historical comment. Not a Nazi or Rommel lover. I studied military science in college and was not taught that Rommel was as you described. a Nazi or devout national socialist. Erwin Rommel owed a great deal of his success to the Nazi Party and his personal relationship to Adolph Hitler. He was lionized by Josef Goebbels, and later by the Allies when they defeated him (it always looks better if your opponent is viewed as the Varsity, whether you win or lose - but particularly if you win). Though brilliant in many regards, he tended to gloss over critical details. For one thing, he put a Major in charge of logistics for a Corps, and the resulting lack of materiel was an Achilles' heel to his efforts in North Africa. He was viewed by the High Command as being a Nazi syncophant, since rising to his level of command without a "von" in one's name was rather unlikely until the bully boys from Bayern took over. Thus, though he was Wehrmacht rather than Schutzstaffel, his adherence to the NSDAP was a matter of record. BSBD, Winsor

I don't trust Romney as far as I could throw him. Huntsman seems like a much better choice. I agree that Obama is most threatened by a "generic Republican," but up against the cretins who are actually running he is in much better shape. I again state there would be a market for Palin/Bachmann maracas, appropriate in that when either shakes their head it rattles. Gingrich? Is he still around? Ron Paul appeals only to those who have three-digit IQs and know what he's talking about. He scares morons, so he does not have a chance (morons LOVE Obama). Obama is a study in mediocrity from the standpoint of executive ability (typical of modern politics, but even Solon stood out in his day so maybe it has always been thus), but he is still possessed of no uncertain political genius so I would not put any serious money against him at this point. My biggest objection to the incumbent is that he is typical of Harvard Law School graduates - very bright, very arrogant, and completely unaware of where the limitations of his skillset lie. Being trained to argue away problems, there appears to be no limit to the power of denial (what the hell, it has worked so far). In any event, there is a good chance that the opposition party will field a candidate so bad that holding one's nose and pulling the lever is not an option, and we will get four more years of whatever it is we have now. Hope? Change? Give me a break. BSBD, Winsor

Feldmarschall Erwin Rommel ignored the dictate to separate jewish POWs for "special treatment," despite being a devout Nazi. Somehow, that still leaves me shy of a warm, fuzzy feeling regarding the bulk of the movement (Godwin, I know...). Similarly, I know upstanding individuals of a variety of groups that have earned very negative reputations; like the individuals though I might, I still disapprove of the groups in general. Prejudice is bad, but postjudice is a reality. BSBD, Winsor

I would say "If you have to ask, then you aren't who you claim to be"

Hate to cast any shadows on the wisdom of the Rabbinical sages concerning Biblical interpretation, but you all missed the Messiah the first time around. Hopefully you won't the second time. ... Gee, I guess I have to defer to your vast knowledge of the subject .

Which means approximately nothing. Check how many hits you get for the following words; UFO, Angles, Jesus. Does that actually tell you anything? So you are claiming many people on the left haven't referred to Reagan as an idiot? Or made claims that alzheimers didn't affect his Presidecy? You make the most ridiculous arguments sometimes. It is called "deflection."

The origins of the Hebrew Scriptures have almost nothing to do with the significance attached to them in retrospect - by Europeans in particular. The Hebrews are an Asian culture. I know very few rabbis who would fail to raise an eyebrow at an exceedingly literal interpretation of these works. Asked whether the year 5771 is accurate in the sense that Adam was created knowing how to count, what day it was, the significance of time and so forth resulted in exaggerated eye-rolling, and the response that the importance was from the standpoint of tradition, rather than chronology. Bereshit (Genesis) was a Cliff's Notes version of lore assimilated in Mesopotamia (largely Sumerian) during the Babylonian Exile, as recorded by Ezra the Scribe. Prior to Ezra committing to written form the "first four" books, Torah consisted solely of Devarim (Deuteronomy). Just because you are a tad skeptical about Zeus, Athena, Poseidon et al. does not mean that the Iliad and Odyssey are without value because mythology makes up a large part of the narrative. Similarly, the significance of Torah is not strictly a function of the existance of a deity. Much of the Tanakh is the result of embellishment at the very least (Esther is a prime example), but the writings are typical of styles in use by various cultures in the Bronze into Iron Ages. As Shonfield makes clear in The Passover Plot, attempting to ascribe literal interpretation to works from another culture is difficult at best. Beware the Holy Typo. BSBD, Winsor

You might like the Unitarian Universalists. They're a pretty open-minded religious(?) community, which seems to have a focus on living in harmony with each other and our environment. Atheists, agnostics, and believers are all welcome. I mean that seems great and all, but it just sounds like you'd have to over-compromise and put up with all types of peoples' crap with an insicere shit eating grin on your face all the time... I'd much rather live in harmony and still call eachother out on our bullshit...like Jesus, like family

I don't think we have seen all that much "excesses of the masses" over the last 30 years... real value of their dollars... has gone down... the excesses have all been upward to the 2% in a flood The masses who don't pay income tax (now 47% of households many of which have at least two working people) vote for political parties which favor big government with 38% of the tab picked up by the top 1%, 21% picked up by the next 4%, and 11% by the next 5% for 70% of income tax revenues from 10% of the population. The top 2% are going to come to regret just how well they are doing.... http://www.vanityfair.com/society/features/2011/05/top-one-percent-201105 Thanks for the link, Jeanne. The problem with many well-considered analyses is the systemic inability to distinguish between pathology and symptom. The propensity for legal personnel to hold elective office is reflective of the process by which we have authored the demise of our way of life. Though we rail at the fact that candidates either lie outright or are blissfully unaware that what they say is entirely untrue (or simply meaningless), we immeditely cull from the field those whose assessment of the realities we face is accurate on the whole (nobody bats 1000). We bitch about the top 1%, yet we fail to note how credulous we have been about every bubble that came along. When Albania quit being Communist, the population pumped all its money into Ponzi schemes (I'm not making this up). When a Ponzi scheme would fail, these same people would borrow further to "invest" in the next Ponzi scheme. Though we like to make fun of Albanians (and it's hard not to), we are no better. Bernie Madoff asked why everyone was mad at him, when the US Government was a Ponzi scheme - and he would know. Thus, the inequities between the Uber-rich and the unwashed masses, in addition to being offensive, distasteful and immoral, are symptomatic of the fundamental mechanisms at work whereby our doom is ensured. Any good magician will tell you that the key is to keep your audience successfully distracted and you can do obvious things unnoticed. We have been focused so intently upon compelling distractions that the basis for our way of life has slipped away from us, and there is no going back. The days of unlimited cheap energy are over, and our overall survival is dependent upon unlimited cheap energy. Thus, the people at the top are akin to the social elite at the end of the Roman Empire, where their way of life was an obscenity,but the society from which it sprang was inexorably headed for collapse. In any event, you can judge whether an issue is pivotal to our survival if it is viewed as a political third rail - think Ron Paul (and he has only part of the equation). Alan Dean Foster, in his "Last Starfighter," had a dialogue on the bridge of the evil alien ship that sums it up. "What do we do now?" "We die." BSBD, Winsor

I applaud his sentiments, but in practice he was not very good at arithmetic. The bottom line is that we're hosed, and there is not a lot we can do but brace for impact. It was fun while it lasted. BSBD, Winsor

Wow, talk about a case in point for cognitive dissonance. No, that is anything but a yes. That is what one says to a rabid psychotic in the hope of placating him or her, and has precious little to do with accuracy. It was an example of fallacy - illogical by definition - and the attempt to apply meaning to it is telling. Irony score: 10 Entertainment Score: 10+, you swallowed the hook bait and sinker on that one!! ... Gee, so all the superstitious nonsense is simply a setup to convince me that any lack of comprehension is plausible. I sure fell for that ploy.

If God were to reveal his Shekinah Glory to non believers, wouldn't they still think he's a "fucking dick," or will they shit their pants and drop to their knees and repent in a pool of piss? That is the question... I never thought God was a "fucking dick" even when I believed in him. Those are someone elses words, so its not appropriate for you to toss them at me in response to a serious post. I dont think he is a dick now either, nor do I think Santa Claus is a dick because its alleged that he gave some people coal in their stockings for not measuring up to his expectations. Still, I'd rather get a lump of coal than an eternity in hell, so all in all if I was going to believe in fairy tales I think I'd go with Santa I think if God is what you say he is and revealed himself to anyone, believer and non-believer alike, they might just shit their pants. FWIW, the hell stuff showed up when pagans got involved. There is no suggestion of an afterlife in Torah, and the fallen angel who plays such a big part of the Magic Jewish Zombie mythos is largely absent in the Hebrew Scriptures. The fact that our family lore from the Bronze Age (plus what we took on during the Babylonian Exile) has been coopted in mutant form is not our fault. Our stories were twisted to begin with, but the Europeans took them and sprained them. BSBD, Winsor

And reality wouldn't have changed except for the fact that they know God exists...Wouldn't they still think his acts to be appalling? Fallacy: Argumentum ad Baculum (appeal to force) "Agree with me or you are TOAST! You wouldn't LIKE me when I am ANGRY! Now, am I right?" "Uh, yeah, sure. Whatever you say." Is that a yes? Wow, talk about a case in point for cognitive dissonance. No, that is anything but a yes. That is what one says to a rabid psychotic in the hope of placating him or her, and has precious little to do with accuracy. It was an example of fallacy - illogical by definition - and the attempt to apply meaning to it is telling. Irony score: 10

And reality wouldn't have changed except for the fact that they know God exists...Wouldn't they still think his acts to be appalling? Fallacy: Argumentum ad Baculum (appeal to force) "Agree with me or you are TOAST! You wouldn't LIKE me when I am ANGRY! Now, am I right?" "Uh, yeah, sure. Whatever you say."

Wait a minute... Are you suggesting there is a difference?