Angels & Demons
discussion
Would you rather live in a world without science...or in a world without religion?
Maria wrote: "I guess I'll stop posting here since everyone seems to just ignore me. How do you join the club of people who's posts get responded to?"Take it from me, being noticed isn't all it's cracked up to be.
This thread goes all over the place. It's like the weather in New Hampshire, if you wait five minutes, the topic and focus will change.
Everyone gets a turn in the spotlight and to be ignored.
Rachel wrote: "I think arguing with idiots is useless, I will never be able to have see my point of view so it useless to continue having a discussion on this topic, I won't quit believing just because they prov..."Isn't religion made up of people?
Isn't religion the man-made structure that supports belief?
Isn't religion just personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
Read Angels & Demons ages ago but remember clearly the message of 'circumstantial guidance'....what one believes and how that is perceived by a younger 'other' depends upon the experiences in life imprinted onto that personality and just how they individually interpret them...same applied in the 'Lost Symbol'...one was a traumatised orphan taken into the church family by a priest and tuther a child of an extremely wealthy and powerful family that had existed for generations....the basis behind both is our human need to belong and be connected to a group and hence a belief....circumstances and personality can transform that very belief into something totally different to it's source.Given the choice between religion and science I would prefer religions became defunct as a means of identity/connection and our moral and spiritual realities were integrated into a branch of science....scientific thinking applied to human spirituality rather than group mandates and separations into 'us and them'...
Good to read the various opinions here..X
Shannon wrote: "Maria wrote: "Shannon - we are really more alike than not - seriously - truce?"I'm not going to lash out at you and will discuss factual information when it interests me or asked a direct questi..."
Alrighty then.
Wow... this thread moves so fast. It's difficult to keep up with it!
Everyone has a different point of view....isn't the question meant to be discussed...rather than argued?Cheers!
Shannon wrote: "Mary wrote: "And could you give us examples of what you've read to so we know what you are talking about? "Yes.
I've already given you an example of what I'm talking about."
Shannon
You did? I thought you said for me to find it myself?
You threw out an accusation that you have noticed many (later changed to some) non-believers using specific wordings to mock believers. You said you wondered if it was part of a larger, organized atheist conspiracy to mock believers.You then connected these repeated phrases to one specific website, which now is conveniently unavailable.
I asked what it is that non-believers say that you feel is part of this big "atheist meanie" conspiracy.
You said for me to go look it up. Find it among 10000 past posts.
Once again I ask, how can I look up the specific phrases, when you are the only one who claims to know what they are?
I truly had an interest in seeing what you were talking about,in seeing if there was some coordinated language that atheists use. But I'll admit, now it is just rather interesting to watch you dodge the issue.
I won't discuss this issue again. But you must be careful when saying many/some/all people do something, especially when you won't give any specific example as proof. And remember this as a time that you refused to answer a repeatedly asked question.
Travis wrote: "Maria wrote: "I guess I'll stop posting here since everyone seems to just ignore me. How do you join the club of people who's posts get responded to?"Take it from me, being noticed isn't all it's..."
My husband is from New Hampshire. We have been there in all 4 seasons. I love how green it is...here in coastal California we don't see much green!
Bea wrote: "Everyone has a different point of view....isn't the question meant to be discussed...rather than argued?Cheers!"
Absolutely!!
Mary wrote: "Shannon You did? I thought you said for me to find it myself?"
Mary ....
First, you'd, perhaps, have to have been part of this thread for awhile, ... like the past 8 months to a year ... to get a full picture. You'd see posts of a different nature. Posts I'm discussing. Further, would you truly believe, if I gave you a list of phrases, etc..., that those things were actually said? Would you understand the context? Would you need to know that? Etc...
Second, you'd have to be able to read the information that was on the American Atheist site. That's no longer there; it's been cleansed. I suppose you could register with them. At that point you'd see more. Or, you could go back to late summer/early autumn to see some of that discussed. Would you need to read through thousands and thousands of posts to check late summer. No. I'd click on "216" and click on several away from that when they pop up, etc... until you hit August. I'd say that would take about two to three minutes. Tops. Then, you'd start reading. They'd be there. That way, you could see for yourself.
As I mentioned, I don't trust my memory ... especially after confusing you with Shanna ... and am not going to attempt to recreate that for you. Nor do I intend to spend the time doing the backtracking and cutting and pasting for you.
Finally, you'd likely need to read some of the key books by some of the key Atheists who have written over the last few years. Or, I'd need to find all of those quotes for you. I'm not going to do that.
That's the research I've done and am doing. By doing that, you'd see everything come together as I have ... I think. Or, you could just start with some of the main books that are out there. If you did that, I imagine you'd see what I'm saying pretty quickly. That and that alone would likely cover it. The other things wouldn't likely even be needed. You might not know for sure that those things were repeated here. However, I imagine you'll have heard them before within Atheist circles.
Or ... someone who has been here as long as I have and has read "Atheist" literature could come forward and say, "You know, I hate to admit this, but ... she sort of has a point."
You could also go to Shanna's post from tonight. Post 11126. She had an interesting point, and I concurred that she might be right on that point.
I don't see this as my refusing to answer a question. I see this as my refusing to conduct hours of research for you; hours of research that I've already done for myself and would have to recreate.
I researched for you once before when you asked. I remember.
At this point, if you're truly interested, my suggestion would be for you to do some reading of your own. Start with Harris. You'd see what I'm talking about quite readily.
That's all I have for you.
Mary ....
First, you'd, perhaps, have to have been part of this thread for awhile, ... like the past 8 months to a year ... to get a full picture. You'd see posts of a different nature. Posts I'm discussing. Further, would you truly believe, if I gave you a list of phrases, etc..., that those things were actually said? Would you understand the context? Would you need to know that? Etc...
Second, you'd have to be able to read the information that was on the American Atheist site. That's no longer there; it's been cleansed. I suppose you could register with them. At that point you'd see more. Or, you could go back to late summer/early autumn to see some of that discussed. Would you need to read through thousands and thousands of posts to check late summer. No. I'd click on "216" and click on several away from that when they pop up, etc... until you hit August. I'd say that would take about two to three minutes. Tops. Then, you'd start reading. They'd be there. That way, you could see for yourself.
As I mentioned, I don't trust my memory ... especially after confusing you with Shanna ... and am not going to attempt to recreate that for you. Nor do I intend to spend the time doing the backtracking and cutting and pasting for you.
Finally, you'd likely need to read some of the key books by some of the key Atheists who have written over the last few years. Or, I'd need to find all of those quotes for you. I'm not going to do that.
That's the research I've done and am doing. By doing that, you'd see everything come together as I have ... I think. Or, you could just start with some of the main books that are out there. If you did that, I imagine you'd see what I'm saying pretty quickly. That and that alone would likely cover it. The other things wouldn't likely even be needed. You might not know for sure that those things were repeated here. However, I imagine you'll have heard them before within Atheist circles.
Or ... someone who has been here as long as I have and has read "Atheist" literature could come forward and say, "You know, I hate to admit this, but ... she sort of has a point."
You could also go to Shanna's post from tonight. Post 11126. She had an interesting point, and I concurred that she might be right on that point.
I don't see this as my refusing to answer a question. I see this as my refusing to conduct hours of research for you; hours of research that I've already done for myself and would have to recreate.
I researched for you once before when you asked. I remember.
At this point, if you're truly interested, my suggestion would be for you to do some reading of your own. Start with Harris. You'd see what I'm talking about quite readily.
That's all I have for you.
Hahahaha iI get it Shannon. You just spent the 3 minutes you say it would have taken to look it up, telling me how you don't have time.I can only assume this was a made up issue you threw out there.
Thanks anyway.
Mary wrote: "Travis wrote: "Maria wrote: "I guess I'll stop posting here since everyone seems to just ignore me. How do you join the club of people who's posts get responded to?"Take it from me, being noticed..."
Yeah, every winter I swear I'm moving, but I kind of love it here.
Still hate shoveling snow.
Thank you Bea,It seems like and all or nothing kind of thing, I enjoy going to church and I would choose religion over science. Most of everything we go through is from our perspective, most of the time we don't see it from a different perspective... Even science takes a certain amount of faith and not everything can be proven. I don't want people talk down to me just because I a person of faith and I also owe no one an explanation as to why I have a certain belief , I should be able to voice a different opinion and still be respected as a human.
<3
Shannon, you have not been here that long - it just seems that way.
Hi Rachel - still no reply - that speaks volumes.
Speaks volumes in a positive way?
Rachel - respond to 11109 - I dare you.
I would but I might have to get out of bed and quit using the mobile app I will look at it tomorrow
Fair enough - see you tomorrow - all in the spirit of discussion - no harm intended.
ok so I got out of bed
As long as I won't be fried for my beliefs, and it really depends on what kind of religious organization you came from, I think different church teach different things even on the same scripture and anything will seem one way when taken out of context...it like says beyonce is demon possessed because she choose to wear a rams head around her neck and yes I have actually seen the video where it states that! I resent the implication that I haven't thought about my faith just because I choose to be involved in "organized religion" I get frustrated with the church just because people still think sitting in a pew = following god
I am Methodist right now, I have been episcopal, assemblies of God, but I like Methodist it is a balance between the two. But I also believe that at different times in your life you need different kind of churches. Like a new christian you need baptist, and when you need the hell fire and brimstone you need assemblies of God. I am always in thought over my faith, I have certain aspects that I struggle with. But ultimately God is my center, he has never left me or forsaken me, there were times when I really wanted to walk away but I always came back to the fact the God rejoices in me, his thought about me outnumber the sands on all beaches, I know I need his love it is like no other Just because organized religion fail you doesn't mean God has. I just hope that in my spirit of openness that we would all choose compassion toward on an other no matter what or how we believe, I pass no judgement on anyone and I would hope it would be a two way street.Let us not dehumanize or label each other
when I see you as an atheist and you see me only as a christian, we can be quite nasty, but when I see you as Maria sitting on a deck reading a book and you see me as Rachel a mother of at least 3 children ,you can see some of my troubles and I can see yours
sleep well, much <3
Shannon wrote: "Shanna wrote: "Chicken or egg? Do those words and phrases belong to the American Atheists or are they common to all atheism and just memorialized in writing on their site? As for "tactics" is mocki..."So we're down to some people are shits, doesn't matter what they do or do not believe. I'm pretty sure this isn't a surprise.....
Maria wrote: "I guess I'll stop posting here since everyone seems to just ignore me. How do you join the club of people who's posts get responded to?"Sorry, have to say I'm not ignoring you, but I don't have anything to add to what you've said......If there is a club I'm not aware of it :)
Ronald wrote: "Science & religion coincide with each other considering that where science doesn't have all the answers, religion steps in! Religion is based on faith whereas science is the facts. Prior to the eme..."God of the gaps.
Rachel wrote: "Thank you Bea,It seems like and all or nothing kind of thing, I enjoy going to church and I would choose religion over science. Most of everything we go through is from our perspective, most of th..."
If your science requires faith, you're doing it wrong. Science requires testable, repeatable evidence.
You can voice an opinion, you are welcome to that opinion, you are not welcome to try and exclude it from questioning.
And by saying you would prefer to choose religion over science, would that include rejecting all medical interventions and relying on prayer alone?
Rachel wrote: "I am Methodist right now, I have been episcopal, assemblies of God, but I like Methodist it is a balance between the two. But I also believe that at different times in your life you need different..."So religion is kinda like shopping? What was it in the religions you have at one time believed in and then moved from that made you move? Are you choosing a religion that best matches your own outlook on life?
cerebus wrote: "So we're down to some people are shits, doesn't matter what they do or do not believe. I'm pretty sure this isn't a surprise..... "
Some things are quite surprising; some aren't.
Some things are quite surprising; some aren't.
Maria wrote: "Shannon, you have not been here that long - it just seems that way."
How long...? I think I started reading and posting the summer before last ... maybe the fall before last. Close to two years. But, you're right. Time can be a tricky thing.
How long...? I think I started reading and posting the summer before last ... maybe the fall before last. Close to two years. But, you're right. Time can be a tricky thing.
cerebus wrote: "Rachel wrote: "Thank you Bea,It seems like and all or nothing kind of thing, I enjoy going to church and I would choose religion over science. Most of everything we go through is from our perspect..."
You can voice an opinion, you are welcome to that opinion, you are not welcome to try and exclude it from questioning.
Well really I can voice an opinion and I don't have to respond to you,because you really mean nothing to me and I don't owe you anything beside you being high and might and thinking you have all the answers. There is a saying "Don't through you pearls before swine"
If your science requires faith, you're doing it wrong. Science requires testable, repeatable evidence.
I was referring more to the big bang and evolution. Last time I checked they are both theories and not fact.
you would prefer to choose religion over science, would that include rejecting all medical interventions and relying on prayer alone?
Actually in my world view, God actually gives brains to his creation so in a word all medicine and technology and "science" is from God who made us to be creative and wonder about things, He could have made us robot who preformed with out a free will, but he wanted to be love by his creation, just like we want to be loved by our children...
You can go ahead and twist this in you usual fashion :)
cerebus wrote: "Rachel wrote: "I am Methodist right now, I have been episcopal, assemblies of God, but I like Methodist it is a balance between the two. But I also believe that at different times in your life you..."actually I think people grow and change in their faith, so they need a church that provides different teaching or focus. Not shopping like you can return it...lol
I move from episcopal, more or less because it was too liturgical,to assemblies of God (early 20's) because it was flashy and speaking in tongues but realized that they focus on the flashy and they treated those who don't speak in tongues and second class citizens (at least that was my experience)and I am now Methodist because I missed the liturgy (being older) but I also still wanted a place where raising your hands (in the spirit) is ok, the methodist also really believe in helping those who need it, and I love helping others.
Not say it is perfect, because everyone flawed and to many flawed people in one area is a disaster, but hopefully we can see each other with eyes of grace.
Rachel wrote: ""Don't through you pearls before swine""
I'm a believer, Rachel, and I do get your frustration.
Phrases like "religion shopping" and "cherry picking" have serious negative connotations. (Though, he didn't just use the latter. It's been used often in the past.)
Clearly, if Cerebus wanted to simply understand what prompted you to leave one for the other, he could have just asked that ... without the judgment at the beginning.
Whether his intention at the outset was to provoke you or not, only he knows. Either he intended to be judgmental and provoking or it was an accident.
However, ....
Pearls before swine?
Yeah.... It's said in the Bible. The question? Is he truly an example of "swine" simply because he's judgmental?
Further, the instruction was not to tell people they were swine and then walk away. Not even close. I don't recall the Bible quoting Jesus as having called anyone swine or using that sort of tone with a person.
I'm a believer, Rachel, and I do get your frustration.
Phrases like "religion shopping" and "cherry picking" have serious negative connotations. (Though, he didn't just use the latter. It's been used often in the past.)
Clearly, if Cerebus wanted to simply understand what prompted you to leave one for the other, he could have just asked that ... without the judgment at the beginning.
Whether his intention at the outset was to provoke you or not, only he knows. Either he intended to be judgmental and provoking or it was an accident.
However, ....
Pearls before swine?
Yeah.... It's said in the Bible. The question? Is he truly an example of "swine" simply because he's judgmental?
Further, the instruction was not to tell people they were swine and then walk away. Not even close. I don't recall the Bible quoting Jesus as having called anyone swine or using that sort of tone with a person.
I don't think I have all the answers, that's religion.Saying evolution is just a theory is a common mistake made by those who think theory means guess. Theory has a very specific meaning in science, and when it comes to evolution, it is one of the best supported theories in science. It is as close to a fact as you will get in science. There are things still to be learned about the actual mechanics of evolution, but that it occurs is in no doubt. You do realise there is also a theory of gravity don't you? Do believers cast doubt on that also? No, not because the science is more or less solid than evolution, but because it does not conflict with the bible.
As for you and Shannon finding what I say rude, that is unfortunately your problem and stems from the fact that you are obviously more used to people being deferential to your beliefs. I am not making fun of either of you, I just don't think your religious beliefs deserve special consideration. If you think I am rude, day to day life must be a series of unpleasant experiences for you.
And I don't see how comparing religion hopping to shopping is 'judgemental', I don't know about you but I shop all the time, and when it's a big ticket item, I do plenty of research beforehand. Is religion like that? The point I was getting at is that it seems like the different denominations cater to different mind sets....similar in many ways to your political outlook. But as a non-believer I find that problematic since religion is supposed to be the one truth, and to have the different options seems counterintuitive....it implies an optionality and a fallibility that seems anathema to there being one truth. This is particularly relevant if someone moves from one religion to the other.....to me it would imply an acceptance that there was something deficient about the previous choice, and would suggest that there is a chance you will similarly find something deficient in the new religion eventually. So how do you decide which bits are deficient and which bits are sufficient? And as soon as it is you making that choice, how do you know you are making the correct choice, is it not possible you have misinterpreted god's will?
And which things you have said do you feel I have "twisted"?
cerebus wrote: "I am not making fun of either of you, I just don't think your religious beliefs deserve special consideration. If you think I am rude, day to day life must be a series of unpleasant experiences for you. "
Yet, when I said many non-believers question believers and the Bible with the express purpose of being disrespectful in order to wake them and many question based on logic and inconsistencies ...
You thought I was making fun of non-believers and said I needed to put away my tar brush, among other things.
Who believes they deserve special consideration?
Is that really what I'm asking for? Or, did I take note that opening with, sounds like religion shopping, could be provoking ... whether you intended it to be so or not? Further, you, for some reason, are ignoring the post I sent Rachel yesterday regarding learning from non-believers here that questioning religious beliefs, in and of itself, isn't disrespectful.
Would you like to explain why you leave out key pieces of evidence when making your assumptions and conclusions?
Yet, when I said many non-believers question believers and the Bible with the express purpose of being disrespectful in order to wake them and many question based on logic and inconsistencies ...
You thought I was making fun of non-believers and said I needed to put away my tar brush, among other things.
Who believes they deserve special consideration?
Is that really what I'm asking for? Or, did I take note that opening with, sounds like religion shopping, could be provoking ... whether you intended it to be so or not? Further, you, for some reason, are ignoring the post I sent Rachel yesterday regarding learning from non-believers here that questioning religious beliefs, in and of itself, isn't disrespectful.
Would you like to explain why you leave out key pieces of evidence when making your assumptions and conclusions?
cerebus wrote: "And I don't see how comparing religion hopping to shopping is 'judgemental', I don't know about you but I shop all the time, and when it's a big ticket item, I do plenty of research beforehand. Is ..."I was not raised in a religion, we did not go to church. We were welcome to go with friends if we wanted.
This idea of religion shopping always struck me as the opposite of what should be happening.
I assmed once you believed in god then others who believed in god were your family. But I've seen people leave churches because the choir director wouldn't let them sing enough solos, or because their church started having a "band", or one person feudin with another, or Christians of any denomination casting dispersion on other denominations, "Oh their Four Square people...eye roll". One of my friends from high school had her boyfriend's mom refuse to attend their wedding because she was Lutheran and he was Catholic.
Why does believing in god not change people?
From my experience, the way people behave within a church is no different than the way people who don't go to church behave. They have affairs, they get addicted to substances, they lie, they are jealous, petty, in fact they are very ungodlike. So I don't really see the point in religion.
Somehow the revelation that there is a god who loves you and is watching over you, does nothing to make people behave better toward each other.
By the way, ...
Is the line about religions not deserving special consideration from Dawkins?
If so, Mary, that's one of them.
I'm pretty sure that's from Dawkins, if I'm remembering correctly.
Is the line about religions not deserving special consideration from Dawkins?
If so, Mary, that's one of them.
I'm pretty sure that's from Dawkins, if I'm remembering correctly.
No, I didn't think you were making fun, I thought you were making sweeping generalisations. Nothing to do with special consideration, I have made no requests for special consideration. I disputed that the comparison with shopping was provoking, and I still do. I was not comparing religion to something stupid, or dangerous or immoral.As for leaving out "key pieces of evidence", if you can tell me what key pieces of evidence you are referring to, I will happily respond, I don't know which bits you are referring to. If it turns into another game of "I can't believe you missed it, look again", you're on your own.
Religion not deserving special consideration is not from Dawkins. He may have said it, but he is not unique, he did not originate the thought, and it is not part of some evil atheist manifesto as you seem to suspect. There are some ideas/thoughts that are more generic than any one person, this is one.
cerebus wrote: This is particularly relevant if someone moves from one religion to the other.....to me it would imply an acceptance that there was something deficient about the previous choice, and would suggest that there is a chance you will similarly find something deficient in the new religion eventually.I assume you are correct when you say that ‘it would imply an acceptance that there was something deficient about the previous choice’ ………. to you. But not to everyone.
I can see from your view point how you would assume that, but I can also see that from another’s view point there is absolutely nothing that is deficient. To a lot of people religion is more than just believing in a God, it is a way of finding a more spiritual life. And since there is no real definitive definition of spirituality, this has to be a personal thing. And sometimes a religious/cultural thing.
We all evolve through-out our lives and changes happen within us as well as on the outside and most of us go with these changes. Nothing is written is stone and like science; what we consider ok for now may change tomorrow.
cHriS, I can see your point, and it is something I have come to see, the difference between hard-and-fast, organised religion, and what people refer to as spirituality. I can't argue with spirituality, and have no desire to.....it's a nefarious concept, and is unique to the individual. And believe it or not, that is something I don't have a particular issue with....it's not for me, but knock yourself out as it were. The issues I do have tend to be with the established religions, were someone is taking their faith and belief from something external.....where they reject same-sex marriage because their holy text says so. At this stage my questions and comments have probably made it clear where I'm coming from....if a holy text says same sex marriage is wrong, so I am told we should not legalise it based on this, but at the same time they ignore another part of that holy text that says something that doesn't fit with their personal morality (e.g. slaves), then I wonder how someone says one bit is word of god and can't be disputed, but the other part isn't. When it comes to what I understand you mean by spirituality, it strikes me as a more internal thing, and something where the 'believer' has made their distinctions, so accepting one part (same-sex marriage bad) and rejecting another (slavery bad) s something they accept is their choice, not a dictated one. The end result is the same, but at least one has the honesty (as I see it) to say "this is my opinion", not "this is god's word". One to me is intellectually honest, accepting one's beliefs as your beliefs and defending them accordingly, as opposed to the other which is defending a position by saying "but I have been told to accept this". This is why a lot of my questions try to ascertain someone's position on biblical literalism. And believe it or not if you are saying your position comes from what we're now calling the 'spiritual' side, rather that the literal side, then I have little disagreement with you.....I don't agree with you, but on a level that is one that isn't worth arguing, and I don't mean "there's no point, I'm rig, you're wrong", but on a level where our approaches are simply different, and where you are not appealing to an external authority.I think that's more rambling than I intended, but hopefully it clarifies. If not, please say so and I will try again :)
You guys do realize you are arguing about religion, right? It's the same when arguing about politics. A useless expenditure of your energy. Stop. All it accomplishes is the making of enemies. And it is totally futile.
But people argue politics, so why not religion? It can actually change people's minds, either way, and even if not changing minds, can clarify positions.....in discussions with mainly US based believers, I have come across concepts of atheism which are just wrong, so why not discuss and clarify. That it sometimes descends to pointless arguments is just human nature......
Shannon wrote: "Rachel wrote: ""Don't through you pearls before swine""I'm a believer, Rachel, and I do get your frustration.
Phrases like "religion shopping" and "cherry picking" have serious negative connota..."
I didn't mean to call names that has never been my intention but
"implying that you should not put what is valuable in front of those who will reject the notion that it has value and furthermore that they will seek to diminish"
That is more like what I meant, some don't want to understand, some like to argue, some really have questions. I was supposing cerebus wanted to argue, But sometimes looking in from the outside it is rather hard to understand it all.
whose to say that God didn't create the big bang and gave us basics to human life. I believe he is bigger than our imagination, I don't know how everyone one else sees God(or if you see God at all) I see him as someone who creates and takes great delight in doing so.
I hate the fact that you seem to use the same examples same sex marriage and slaves,the whole same sex marriage I can see your point, I personally have really thought about it and I am still on the fence about it. Not because of what it says in "holy texts". The whole slave thing, they owned slave through out the bible, believe it or not the bible is an historical document and some use it as a history book today. Slaves were cultural what I mean but that during that time in history it was socially acceptable to own them and was encouraged to use them most of the time the slaves were from countries that were conquered so instead of killing all the people, they took them as slaves and some even concubines and some as wives.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
The Devil's Collection: A Cynic's Dictionary (other topics)
Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (other topics)
God Hates You, Hate Him Back: Making Sense of the Bible (other topics)
The New Money System: When Your Money Fails (other topics)
More...
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Stephen King (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
More...
Books mentioned in this topic
Vector Calculus (other topics)The Devil's Collection: A Cynic's Dictionary (other topics)
Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (other topics)
God Hates You, Hate Him Back: Making Sense of the Bible (other topics)
The New Money System: When Your Money Fails (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Ray Kurzweil (other topics)Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Stephen King (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
More...
I'm not going to lash out at you and will discuss factual information when it interests me or asked a direct question about the facts of a discussion versus personal judgments.