None Dare Call It What It Is...

[TyroneSlothrop]

I am a Heathen you hear and I am right

 

[alang1216]

The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.
Shakespeare

Pop quiz: How many books of scripture did the devil write?
Answer: Every one but yours.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.
Shakespeare

Pop quiz: How many books of scripture did the devil write?
Answer: Every one but yours.

The only puzzle is how you were trained to give up the ability to think.

This may be a clue:

In October 1919, Lenin paid a secret visit to the laboratory of the great physiologist I. P. Pavlov, a Russian physiologist known chiefly for the concept of the conditioned reflex.

In his classic experiment, he found that a hungry dog can be trained to associate the sound of a bell with food and will salivate at the sound even in the absence of food. Lenin wanted to find out if his work on the conditional reflexes of the brain might help the Bolsheviks control European behaviour.

“I want the masses of Russia to follow a Communistic pattern of thinking and reacting,” Lenin explained. Pavlov was astounded. It seemed that Lenin wanted him to do for humans what he had already done for dogs.

“Do you mean that you would like to standardise the population of Russia? Make them all behave in the same way?” he asked. “Exactly” replied Lenin. “Man can be corrected. Man can be made what we want him to be.”… '
Orlando Figes, "A People's Tragedy," p.732-733



Do the bells keep you awake at night?

 

[Uncensored2008]

1. Evil, that is.

In fact, in secular society, very few even dare use the term; it's archaic, it's abstruse....it's.....religious.


But it exists.


“The world turns and the world changes,
But one thing does not change.
In all of my years, one thing does not change,
However you disguise it, this thing does not change:
The perpetual struggle of Good and Evil.” T. S. Eliot



2. "In enlightened political conversation, the word 'evil' had been disreputable for a long time-..... The word “evil,” in many minds, |smacks of an atavistic, superstitious, and even medieval simplism, of a fundamentalist mindset that might be inclined to in witches or to reject the teachings of evoluiton in the public schools.

The secular, educated, cosmopolitan instinct...tends to shun the word 'evil' and, as an optimist and creature of the Enlightenment, approaches the world's horrors as individual problems that can be solved...."
Lance Morrow, "Evil: An Investigation,"p.12-13


"Evil has made a successful career over many centuries by persuading people that it does not exist."




3. Did I mention that the fear of being labeled as 'religious' has caused some fearful folks to make some sort of humor out of the term.

"The sixties' rebellion against authority introduced the idea of Satan as rock star..

...Many people do not believe evil exists..... The trouble comes in trying to understand evil. When people become frustrated in their effort to do so, they are inclined to say that because they do not understand evil, it does not exist- a....fallacy based on the thought that what I do not understand cannot be real."
Op.Cit., p. 3-4




But it is here, it does exist....and it plays a mighty role in the course of human activity.

Happens over and over, because people don't read up and learn history, so it repeats itself.

Nothing to see here, move along, move along...Right liberals?

That needs to be updated:

 

[alang1216]

The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.
Shakespeare

Pop quiz: How many books of scripture did the devil write?
Answer: Every one but yours.

The only puzzle is how you were trained to give up the ability to think.

This may be a clue:

In October 1919, Lenin paid a secret visit to the laboratory of the great physiologist I. P. Pavlov, a Russian physiologist known chiefly for the concept of the conditioned reflex.

In his classic experiment, he found that a hungry dog can be trained to associate the sound of a bell with food and will salivate at the sound even in the absence of food. Lenin wanted to find out if his work on the conditional reflexes of the brain might help the Bolsheviks control European behaviour.

“I want the masses of Russia to follow a Communistic pattern of thinking and reacting,” Lenin explained. Pavlov was astounded. It seemed that Lenin wanted him to do for humans what he had already done for dogs.

“Do you mean that you would like to standardise the population of Russia? Make them all behave in the same way?” he asked. “Exactly” replied Lenin. “Man can be corrected. Man can be made what we want him to be.”… '
Orlando Figes, "A People's Tragedy," p.732-733



Do the bells keep you awake at night?

You really are obsessed with Lenin, Obama, Bill, and Hillary. Having trouble looking at the world as it is right now? You're not alone there.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.
Shakespeare

Pop quiz: How many books of scripture did the devil write?
Answer: Every one but yours.

The only puzzle is how you were trained to give up the ability to think.

This may be a clue:

In October 1919, Lenin paid a secret visit to the laboratory of the great physiologist I. P. Pavlov, a Russian physiologist known chiefly for the concept of the conditioned reflex.

In his classic experiment, he found that a hungry dog can be trained to associate the sound of a bell with food and will salivate at the sound even in the absence of food. Lenin wanted to find out if his work on the conditional reflexes of the brain might help the Bolsheviks control European behaviour.

“I want the masses of Russia to follow a Communistic pattern of thinking and reacting,” Lenin explained. Pavlov was astounded. It seemed that Lenin wanted him to do for humans what he had already done for dogs.

“Do you mean that you would like to standardise the population of Russia? Make them all behave in the same way?” he asked. “Exactly” replied Lenin. “Man can be corrected. Man can be made what we want him to be.”… '
Orlando Figes, "A People's Tragedy," p.732-733



Do the bells keep you awake at night?

You
You really are obsessed with Lenin, Obama, Bill, and Hillary. Having trouble looking at the world as it is right now? You're not alone there.

I'm 'obsessed' with learning.

You should try it some time.

 

[BS Filter]

Actually I do know what a parable is, it is a message hidden in a story. So maybe you could help me interpret Luke 19:27? The next verse has Jesus going to Jerusalem to be recognized as king (Luke 19:38). Seems to me that Jesus is that man of noble birth (Luke 19:12): "A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king". I stand by my interpretation unless you have a better one.

Yes, I have a better one. Those who do not want Jesus to reign over their lives will end up in eternal separation from God.

The beauty of God and religion is that we will never know who is right (at least in this life).

I disagree. I know in my soul and spirit that the Scriptures are true. I'm betting my eternity on it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Actually I do know what a parable is, it is a message hidden in a story. So maybe you could help me interpret Luke 19:27? The next verse has Jesus going to Jerusalem to be recognized as king (Luke 19:38). Seems to me that Jesus is that man of noble birth (Luke 19:12): "A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king". I stand by my interpretation unless you have a better one.

Yes, I have a better one. Those who do not want Jesus to reign over their lives will end up in eternal separation from God.

The beauty of God and religion is that we will never know who is right (at least in this life).

I disagree. I know in my soul and spirit that the Scriptures are true. I'm betting my eternity on it.

Famed mathematician Pascal made the same bet....

"Pascal's Wager is an argument in philosophy presented by the seventeenth-century French philosopher, mathematician and physicist Blaise Pascal (1623–62).[1] It posits that humans bet with their lives that God either exists or does not.

Pascal argues that a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss (some pleasures, luxury, etc.), whereas they stand to receive infinite gains (as represented by eternity in Heaven) and avoid infinite losses (eternity in Hell).[2]"
Pascal's Wager - Wikipedia


But, that dolt has this going for him: "God takes care of fools and babies.”

 

[alang1216]

Actually I do know what a parable is, it is a message hidden in a story. So maybe you could help me interpret Luke 19:27? The next verse has Jesus going to Jerusalem to be recognized as king (Luke 19:38). Seems to me that Jesus is that man of noble birth (Luke 19:12): "A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king". I stand by my interpretation unless you have a better one.

Yes, I have a better one. Those who do not want Jesus to reign over their lives will end up in eternal separation from God.

The beauty of God and religion is that we will never know who is right (at least in this life).

I disagree. I know in my soul and spirit that the Scriptures are true. I'm betting my eternity on it.

For your sake I hope you're right. My soul and spirit tells me different.

 

[alang1216]

Actually I do know what a parable is, it is a message hidden in a story. So maybe you could help me interpret Luke 19:27? The next verse has Jesus going to Jerusalem to be recognized as king (Luke 19:38). Seems to me that Jesus is that man of noble birth (Luke 19:12): "A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king". I stand by my interpretation unless you have a better one.

Yes, I have a better one. Those who do not want Jesus to reign over their lives will end up in eternal separation from God.

The beauty of God and religion is that we will never know who is right (at least in this life).

I disagree. I know in my soul and spirit that the Scriptures are true. I'm betting my eternity on it.

Famed mathematician Pascal made the same bet....

"Pascal's Wager is an argument in philosophy presented by the seventeenth-century French philosopher, mathematician and physicist Blaise Pascal (1623–62).[1] It posits that humans bet with their lives that God either exists or does not.

Pascal argues that a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss (some pleasures, luxury, etc.), whereas they stand to receive infinite gains (as represented by eternity in Heaven) and avoid infinite losses (eternity in Hell).[2]"
Pascal's Wager - Wikipedia


But, that dolt has this going for him: "God takes care of fools and babies.”

Pascal's Wager is a well known logical fallacy:

"The main problem with Pascal's wager is that it suffers from the fallacy of bifurcation. It only calculates with two options when there are, in fact, at least four alternatives: the Christian God and afterlife, some other god and afterlife, atheism with afterlife, and atheism without afterlife... Because Pascal's wager fails to tell us which god is likely to be the right one, you have a great probability that you picked the wrong religion and go to some other religion's version of hell. This is referred to as the "avoiding the wrong hell problem"... Believing in the wrong god has one additional problem. Most religions assure you that blasphemers will be more severely punished than un-believers. Once again, if we calculate with the rest of the possible gods, the chance of you being wrong is P=1-1/n so you both run a bigger risk than the atheist of being punished and risk the greater punishment."​

 

[PoliticalChic]

Actually I do know what a parable is, it is a message hidden in a story. So maybe you could help me interpret Luke 19:27? The next verse has Jesus going to Jerusalem to be recognized as king (Luke 19:38). Seems to me that Jesus is that man of noble birth (Luke 19:12): "A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king". I stand by my interpretation unless you have a better one.

Yes, I have a better one. Those who do not want Jesus to reign over their lives will end up in eternal separation from God.

The beauty of God and religion is that we will never know who is right (at least in this life).

I disagree. I know in my soul and spirit that the Scriptures are true. I'm betting my eternity on it.

Famed mathematician Pascal made the same bet....

"Pascal's Wager is an argument in philosophy presented by the seventeenth-century French philosopher, mathematician and physicist Blaise Pascal (1623–62).[1] It posits that humans bet with their lives that God either exists or does not.

Pascal argues that a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss (some pleasures, luxury, etc.), whereas they stand to receive infinite gains (as represented by eternity in Heaven) and avoid infinite losses (eternity in Hell).[2]"
Pascal's Wager - Wikipedia


But, that dolt has this going for him: "God takes care of fools and babies.”

Pascal's Wager is a well known logical fallacy:

"The main problem with Pascal's wager is that it suffers from the fallacy of bifurcation. It only calculates with two options when there are, in fact, at least four alternatives: the Christian God and afterlife, some other god and afterlife, atheism with afterlife, and atheism without afterlife... Because Pascal's wager fails to tell us which god is likely to be the right one, you have a great probability that you picked the wrong religion and go to some other religion's version of hell. This is referred to as the "avoiding the wrong hell problem"... Believing in the wrong god has one additional problem. Most religions assure you that blasphemers will be more severely punished than un-believers. Once again, if we calculate with the rest of the possible gods, the chance of you being wrong is P=1-1/n so you both run a bigger risk than the atheist of being punished and risk the greater punishment."​

Isn't it great the way I force you to research things you never knew about before I educated you?


On the other hand you appear to be one of the little kids, hoping to gain the attention of your heroes.

I must compliment your choice of heroines.

 

[BS Filter]

Actually I do know what a parable is, it is a message hidden in a story. So maybe you could help me interpret Luke 19:27? The next verse has Jesus going to Jerusalem to be recognized as king (Luke 19:38). Seems to me that Jesus is that man of noble birth (Luke 19:12): "A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king". I stand by my interpretation unless you have a better one.

Yes, I have a better one. Those who do not want Jesus to reign over their lives will end up in eternal separation from God.

The beauty of God and religion is that we will never know who is right (at least in this life).

I disagree. I know in my soul and spirit that the Scriptures are true. I'm betting my eternity on it.

For your sake I hope you're right. My soul and spirit tells me different.

Then you need to repent and call on Jesus to save you.

 

[alang1216]

Then you need to repent and call on Jesus to save you.

Repent what? Not believing in Jesus? Oh, I believe in him, I believe he lived and died. What I don't believe is everything other people have said about him.

 

[alang1216]

Isn't it great the way I force you to research things you never knew about before I educated you?

On the other hand you appear to be one of the little kids, hoping to gain the attention of your heroes.

I must compliment your choice of heroines.

Sorry but my heroes abide by the 9th commandment and don't repeat things they know or should know to be false.

 

[ding]

Actually I do know what a parable is, it is a message hidden in a story. So maybe you could help me interpret Luke 19:27? The next verse has Jesus going to Jerusalem to be recognized as king (Luke 19:38). Seems to me that Jesus is that man of noble birth (Luke 19:12): "A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king". I stand by my interpretation unless you have a better one.

Yes, I have a better one. Those who do not want Jesus to reign over their lives will end up in eternal separation from God.

The beauty of God and religion is that we will never know who is right (at least in this life).

I disagree. I know in my soul and spirit that the Scriptures are true. I'm betting my eternity on it.

Famed mathematician Pascal made the same bet....

"Pascal's Wager is an argument in philosophy presented by the seventeenth-century French philosopher, mathematician and physicist Blaise Pascal (1623–62).[1] It posits that humans bet with their lives that God either exists or does not.

Pascal argues that a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss (some pleasures, luxury, etc.), whereas they stand to receive infinite gains (as represented by eternity in Heaven) and avoid infinite losses (eternity in Hell).[2]"
Pascal's Wager - Wikipedia


But, that dolt has this going for him: "God takes care of fools and babies.”

Pascal's Wager is a well known logical fallacy:

"The main problem with Pascal's wager is that it suffers from the fallacy of bifurcation. It only calculates with two options when there are, in fact, at least four alternatives: the Christian God and afterlife, some other god and afterlife, atheism with afterlife, and atheism without afterlife... Because Pascal's wager fails to tell us which god is likely to be the right one, you have a great probability that you picked the wrong religion and go to some other religion's version of hell. This is referred to as the "avoiding the wrong hell problem"... Believing in the wrong god has one additional problem. Most religions assure you that blasphemers will be more severely punished than un-believers. Once again, if we calculate with the rest of the possible gods, the chance of you being wrong is P=1-1/n so you both run a bigger risk than the atheist of being punished and risk the greater punishment."​

Talk about logical fallacies. Yeesh. You are invoking other Gods. Really?

There is only one Creator. He doesn't care what name you call Him by.

 

[ding]

Actually I do know what a parable is, it is a message hidden in a story. So maybe you could help me interpret Luke 19:27? The next verse has Jesus going to Jerusalem to be recognized as king (Luke 19:38). Seems to me that Jesus is that man of noble birth (Luke 19:12): "A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king". I stand by my interpretation unless you have a better one.

Yes, I have a better one. Those who do not want Jesus to reign over their lives will end up in eternal separation from God.

The beauty of God and religion is that we will never know who is right (at least in this life).

I disagree. I know in my soul and spirit that the Scriptures are true. I'm betting my eternity on it.

Famed mathematician Pascal made the same bet....

"Pascal's Wager is an argument in philosophy presented by the seventeenth-century French philosopher, mathematician and physicist Blaise Pascal (1623–62).[1] It posits that humans bet with their lives that God either exists or does not.

Pascal argues that a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss (some pleasures, luxury, etc.), whereas they stand to receive infinite gains (as represented by eternity in Heaven) and avoid infinite losses (eternity in Hell).[2]"
Pascal's Wager - Wikipedia


But, that dolt has this going for him: "God takes care of fools and babies.”

Pascal's Wager is a well known logical fallacy:

"The main problem with Pascal's wager is that it suffers from the fallacy of bifurcation. It only calculates with two options when there are, in fact, at least four alternatives: the Christian God and afterlife, some other god and afterlife, atheism with afterlife, and atheism without afterlife... Because Pascal's wager fails to tell us which god is likely to be the right one, you have a great probability that you picked the wrong religion and go to some other religion's version of hell. This is referred to as the "avoiding the wrong hell problem"... Believing in the wrong god has one additional problem. Most religions assure you that blasphemers will be more severely punished than un-believers. Once again, if we calculate with the rest of the possible gods, the chance of you being wrong is P=1-1/n so you both run a bigger risk than the atheist of being punished and risk the greater punishment."​

A core doctrine of Spinozism is that the universe is essentially deterministic. All that happens or will happen could not have unfolded in any other way. Spinoza claimed that the third kind of knowledge, intuition, is the highest kind attainable. More specifically, he defined this as the ability for the human intellect to intuit knowledge based upon its accumulated understanding of the world around them.

So let's take YOUR logical fallacy to its logical conclusion. You die and meet your maker. Are you going to argue that it was His fault that you were unable to intuit God's existence when so many others have?

How exactly do you think that conversation will go? You don't need to wonder. See Job 40.

 

[alang1216]

Talk about logical fallacies. Yeesh. You are invoking other Gods. Really?

There is only one Creator. He doesn't care what name you call Him by.

If there is only one creator why are there so many conflicting versions of him. Did the one creator create Judaism, Christianity, and Islam? How about Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.?

How do you know there is only one creator? Because people you have faith in, people you never met, told you so. Can you cite any evidence there is only one creator and not a committee of creators?

 

[BS Filter]

Then you need to repent and call on Jesus to save you.

Repent what? Not believing in Jesus? Oh, I believe in him, I believe he lived and died. What I don't believe is everything other people have said about him.

Does that mean you don't believe the Bible?

 

[alang1216]

A core doctrine of Spinozism is that the universe is essentially deterministic. All that happens or will happen could not have unfolded in any other way. Spinoza claimed that the third kind of knowledge, intuition, is the highest kind attainable. More specifically, he defined this as the ability for the human intellect to intuit knowledge based upon its accumulated understanding of the world around them.

So let's take YOUR logical fallacy to its logical conclusion. You die and meet your maker. Are you going to argue that it was His fault that you were unable to intuit God's existence when so many others have?

How exactly do you think that conversation will go? You don't need to wonder. See Job 40.

I might ask him why, if he wanted me to believe in him, did he go to such lengths to hide his existence? Why did he allow so many religions to exist? Yes, he has a lot to answer for.

 

[BS Filter]

Talk about logical fallacies. Yeesh. You are invoking other Gods. Really?

There is only one Creator. He doesn't care what name you call Him by.

If there is only one creator why are there so many conflicting versions of him. Did the one creator create Judaism, Christianity, and Islam? How about Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.?

How do you know there is only one creator? Because people you have faith in, people you never met, told you so. Can you cite any evidence there is only one creator and not a committee of creators?

The One True Living God didn't "create" other religions. They are the inventions of man. The One True Living God even made a commandment to not follow other religions or gods.