Iamon lyme: lol

Artful Dodger: It's funny because it's true. He truly is a master of subtlety. He managed to come across as supporting Obama, and at the same time reminded us of how Obama didn't really accomplish much in the past four years.

Before beginning his first term as president in the 80's both friends and enemies alike described Clinton as "machiavellian". And he proved them right with some slick slieght of hand maneuvers, like staying one step ahead of the law by using the presidency to avoid going to court over assault charges, shady business dealings in Arkansas, and who knows what else? Not to mention lying to a grand jury, which would have landed anyone else in jail for willful perjury. Being disbarred was not much of a slap on the wrist when you look at everything and everyone he was involved with. I don't see him as some grand old southern gentleman, and anyone who does either doesn't know anything about him, or doesn't care to know.

Iamon lyme: [ Before beginning his first term as president in the 80's... ]

Wo... I was off by a whole decade! I should have remembered when Bill Clinton was in office, because two of my kids were teenagers then. I had a heck of a time convincing them that they shouldn't try following his example... presidents have a lot of influence, especially over kids who often think the president can do no wrong.

Iamon lyme: dont inhale??? lol

Bwild: "dont inhale??? lol"

It was worse than that. Kids aren't stupid, they knew what the adults knew about Clinton... "If the president can 'bend' the truth and have sex with whoever and whatever, then why is it wrong for me?" They didn't literally say that to me, but you could see it in their faces and in their attitudes.

A lot of high school kids thought it was cool that the president was a skirt chaser. It was HIllarys job to cover for Bill and to say that she didn't believe the allegations. But when the Monica story broke, I guess it was too much for her, so she started in breaking a few things herself. lol

Iamon lyme: So you intend to have all the Tampa bay strip joints provide info on which Republicans (and/or their staff) let their hair down and attended lap dancing sessions?

The term hypocrite comes to mind Iamon lyme... and a certain phrase regarding casting stones.

(V): "...a certain phrase regarding casting stones."

That's cute. The atheist thinks all he has to do to get a Christian confused is to refer to scripture.

Casting stones is what you do nearly every time you post, but I'm sure you've worked it out how you are not a hypocrite. I have yet to meet an atheist who couldn't make a double standard their modus operandi.

Iamon lyme: I'm not an atheist. Neither am I a supporter of 'evangelical' type Christianity.

Is that hard for you to comprehend? Outside the USA it isn't.

(V): [ I'm not an atheist. ]

Prove it.

[ Neither am I a supporter of 'evangelical' type Christianity. ]

So?

[ Is that hard for you to comprehend? ]

"that", no... you, yes.

Outside the USA it isn't.

An example of overgeneralized thinking. Seeing as how the US has it's own la la landers and life long residents of Loonytownshipshiresburough, that last statement of yours isn't just meaningless... it's dead wrong.



"An atheist is a man who has no invisible means of support" [John Buchan, On Being a Real Person]

"By night an atheist half believes a God" [Edward Young, The Complaint: Night Thoughts]

"No one has ever died an atheist" [Plato Laws]

Iamon lyme: Jules isn't a Christian by any stretch. He spouts new age jumbo jumbo and denies basic tenets of the Christian faith. He's not an atheist but definitely has created god in his own image. A caricature really.

Artful Dodger: [ He's not an atheist but definitely has created god in his own image. A caricature really. ]

Unfortunately some Christians have done the same thing... they have created in their own minds a more palatable god for them to look up to. It's unfortunate because I'm sure God is not impressed with anyone who gives him lip service and then misrepresents who he is.

However, I'm sure V's god (whoever or whatever he/she/it is) meets with V's approval and lives up to his expectations.

Iamon lyme: He'll deny it. Watch for it. But he's definitely a heretic.

Artful Dodger: You are the new age mumbo jumbo..ist.

Which, this born again stuff is.

I mean.. who are you to tell someone how to believe or know God?

What gives you that right??

(V): [ ..who are you to tell someone how to believe or know God? ]

Who are you to tell me that I can't? Did God reveal this to you?

And by what authority are you able to suggest that I do not have that right? Is the ability to suppress that right something you have in the UK, because I don't believe we have anything like that in the US... not in my backyard. But there are people here who would love nothing more than to suppress and restrict any right associated with Christianity. Is that what your brand of religion advocates?

Iamon lyme: I thought that post was directed to me. But now I see it wasn't... so feel free to ignore it. ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ahhhhh Oh man, I just made myself laugh again.

By the way, has it occurred to you that when someone replies to your messages, they aren't necessarily talking to you?

Iamon lyme: Please... the "I'm a martyr act" just doesn't work. Everyone in the UK has the right to worship as they please. Within 5 miles of me there are at least 20 CHRISTIAN churches of various denominations. Our 'malls' have pastoral care stations, we have a Christian cafe, at least 6 Christian schools and colleges.

We do though have the right to take to court any church (of ANY religion) that is by UK law committing an offence... obey laws of land is in the Bible isn't it? You enjoy news of Muslim clerics promoting hate speech getting locked up or deported..

..Well, the same laws apply to Christian churches as well.

"And by what authority are you able to suggest that I do not have that right?"

The Bible says so... judging isn't it!! I thought the relationship between God and the person was a one on one thing... that stillness and peace one obtains from being.

"That's easy... just say something an atheist wouldn't say."

And who is the judge on what an atheist would or wouldn't say?

(V): "And by what authority are you able to suggest that I do not have that right?"

[ The Bible says so... judging isn't it!! ]

No, it isn't. Since when is saying what I believe judging? Judging you would be telling you what your ultimate fate will be. Only God knows that. If you are offended because God might judge you someday, then that is another matter... that is between you and God.


"That's easy... just say something an atheist wouldn't say."

[ And who is the judge on what an atheist would or wouldn't say? ]

If that is what you really think, then how are you able to judge anything said at this board? What gives you the right? You are arguing against your own modus aperandi.

Iamon lyme: Ultimate fate... Hmmmmm which version? Sheol, Hades, Gehenna or separation from God? If you say .. Hell .. then you've entered into the world of changing the Bible... so which?

.. Taking the name of God in vain is not something we are supposed to do either. Using God... "If you are offended because God might judge you someday"... Which one? The one within or the one without?

Jesus spoke about that.

"You are arguing against your own modus aperandi."

No.. I'm stating a fact of the difference between the USA and the UK. In the UK apart from a very small minority most Christians are very happy and ACCEPT EVOLUTION.

IN AMERICA a big portion of Christians are taught that it is atheism to think so.. and/or of SataN .. da big red creature with liddle pointy horns... the RCC demonising a common old pagan God so dey can covertly convert the poor superstitious people....

... In America many people think the world is going to end.... taking again a bit of the Bible totally out of context in relation to events of the past.

I could go on, but I'll probably fry your brain MUHHH HA HA HA HA

(V): judg·ment [juhj-muhnt] noun

1. an act or instance of judging.

2. the ability to judge, make a decision, or form an opinion objectively, authoritatively, and wisely, especially in matters affecting action; good sense; discretion: a man of sound judgment.

3. the demonstration or exercise of such ability or capacity: The major was decorated for the judgment he showed under fire.

4. the forming of an opinion, estimate, notion, or conclusion, as from circumstances presented to the mind: Our judgment as to the cause of his failure must rest on the evidence.

5. the opinion formed: He regretted his hasty judgment.

Iamon lyme: So you know what judging means now?

(V): Would "judging" a hot dog eating contest include points for form? or just pure numbers ingested

The Col: Our biological difference engine would come into effect. Old school no water.

(V): [ So you know what judging means now? ]

I'm saying you are confusing different meanings of the word judgement by ignoring context. Whether intentionally or not you are implying there is only one meaning. I won't be the judge of whether you do this intentionally or not. But I will say that I don't need you to interpret the Bible for me, especially in light of your not being able (or willing) to acknowledge something as simple to understand as this.

I don't need to be judgemental to understand the distinction between a day of final judgement, and judging words and actions.

Are you able to comprehend that if no one were able to judge themselves, or what they do, or what they say, that (literally) nothing could get done? You would be in a constant state of indecision.

Frankly, I'm relieved that only God is qualified to judge my soul. If it were left up to nincomepoops to arbitrarily decide if I was good enough or not, I would truly have reason to be afraid.

Iamon lyme: No.

"I don't need to be judgemental to understand the distinction between a day of final judgement, and judging words and actions."

Final judgement as an entire world event or a personal level final judgement? IMO there is no 'end of the world' final judgement as the message is then taken out of context. Yet it is still a message to prevail.

"Are you able to comprehend that if no one were able to judge themselves, or what they do, or what they say, that (literally) nothing could get done? You would be in a constant state of indecision."

As in personal reflection... I can understand that, of one tossing off a bad limb. But, in that... what is.. is.

"Frankly, I'm relieved that only God is qualified to judge my soul. If it were left up to nincomepoops to arbitrarily decide if I was good enough or not, I would truly have reason to be afraid."

Then you accept as a fellow person in the body of Christ (as written we are all part of) that I do not listen to "nincomepoops". .. I remember a great Zen story on this point!!

(V): quidquid supernatat vestra navicula

Iamon lyme: Somehow you miss the poetry?

.. You've never walked the dessert have you!!

Iamon lyme: He's missing the obvious fact that the Bible does say we are to judge.

Artful Dodger: Love thy neighbour as thyself...

Judge.. love.. see??

Iamon lyme:

[ I'm not an atheist. ]

Prove it.

How?

(V): [ I'm not an atheist. ]

Prove it.

"How?"

That's easy... just say something an atheist wouldn't say.







Hey, I said it was easy... I didn't say it wouldn't be painful.

Iamon lyme: its really the other way around.

Bwild: [ I'm not an atheist. ] ~ Prove it.

"Iamon lyme: its really the other way around."

Do you mean it's up to me to prove he is? Or did you mean something else?

He made the statement that he is not an atheist. That's fine, but so far he hasn't said anything that would make me believe that he isn't. It can't be the other way around because it's not up to me to back up or disprove his statement. Based on everything I've seen him say up to this point I believe he is an atheist, so it's puzzling that he would say that he isn't and then act as though that's all that needs to be said.

If a duck told me he is not a duck, I'm not going to believe him unless he can back up that claim with something (anything) resembling evidence of him not being a duck. It's as simple as proving (demonstrating) that he is actually some other kind of bird.

If he can tell me about the god or gods he truly believes exist then okay, he's not an atheist.

And if he doesn't want to tell me, then that is okay too. But the only way someone can back up the statement he is not an atheist is to demonstrate some kind of belief in a god or gods. And I don't mean some high ideal or fuzzy idea about the universe, or some cheap workaround about how he is the god that he worships, and therefore he cannot be an atheist.

The guy can build his own computer, but he can't explain why he isn't an atheist? I'm not interested in playing word games with him, and I assume his grasp of the English language is adequate... but maybe that's where I've made my mistake, maybe I've assumed too much. How hard can this be?

Iamon lyme: no...I mean its really not up to an athiest to prove there isnt a god.

Bwild: [ no...I mean its really not up to an athiest to prove there isnt a god. ]

That's not what I was asking him to prove... in fact, I've never asked anyone to try proving that.

Iamon lyme: Oh yeah, well prove to me that it's not up to an atheist to prove there is a god. Or I mean to disprove there isn't a God. Oh wait....now I'm confused....just a sec....

..



Never mind. Needed to jump start the brain. Carry on. I"m better now.

Artful Dodger: "Oh wait....now I'm confused....just a sec.."


LOL ~~~~ Hey, I know the feeling! Is it just me, or is it getting surreal in here?

Iamon lyme: Nearly as surreal as a The Daily Mail complaining about how women dress... then confirming this with pictures ... BIG ONES!!

(V): [ BIG ONES!! ]

Women, dresses, or pictures?

Iamon lyme: Pictures...n' anything else they feel morally obliged to point out.

Yet an old Zen saying stipulates the peacefulness of letting goooooooooooooo. .... ... ooooooooooooo

(V): I let go a lot. Nancy yell then.

Iamon lyme: have you heard of the second law of thermal underwear? It used to be Weight=Warmth. But that's no longer true. Arctic fabric technology is lightweight fabric and surpasses thermal undies for heat capture. Another theory debunked.

Artful Dodger: Second law of thermal underware? What's the first law?

No, wait... never mind. If it doesn't itch that's all I need to know.

Iamon lyme: jules talks in circles

Artful Dodger: Well some points seem to be hard to get across. I know what I mean.. but in that lies a problem.

I cannot define a God that inherently has no real description that is fit. As soon as you try to define then you do not.

That principle I understand easily.. Moses had the same problem didn't he

(V): What??? Crap!!! YOu just made sense! What's up with that??? But you're right and I agree. The finite describing the infinite. It's not possible. How can we describe that which we cannot fully comprehend? It's better that way. I would hate for God to be limited to my puny understanding of HIM.

Artful Dodger: I could say I can say three words that nudge my brain into ... .... ... .... I cannot and will not try to describe it. It is.

Iamon lyme: make that squares

Iamon lyme: It is enough.

"If he can tell me about the god or gods he truly believes exist then okay, he's not an atheist."

Believing, belief.. that is a statement that leaves doubt.. Are you telling that a fellow son of God as laid down in plain text in the Bible is not to aim to.. .... ....

.. Ok, Christ... did he as our brother just believe!!!

Wouldn't that lead to "..a constant state of indecision..."

Artful Dodger: And Hillary is no better. Whatever she wasn't involved in, she was aware of. Having her for president would be like having Bill all over again, the only difference being is that she apparently knows how to keep her pants from falling down.