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

Iamon lyme: make that squares

Iamon lyme: jules talks in circles

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..."

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.

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

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: its really the other way around.

Long-Form Birth Certificate Of Obama Is A Forged Document http://www.westernjournalism.com/long-form-birth-certificate-of-obama-is-a-forged-document/ via @WestJournalism

And hey morons, it's not a claim to say he wasn't born in the US. It's a claim that the released birth certificate IS forged. What's up with that?

Israeli Science Website: Former Netanyahu Adviser: Obama Birth Certificate a forged document. ...: http://youtu.be/QwP6-4ec4e8 via @youtube

NPH said heaven is really great.. Jesus does like to PaRtYyyyy

Artful Dodger: as you will judge yourself by context.

Never said anything about not loving my neighbor. But we are to judge.

Artful Dodger: Love thy neighbour as thyself...

Judge.. love.. see??

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

Abba John the Dwarf said, 'a house is not built by geginning at the top and
working down. You must begin with the fundations in order to reach the top.
They siad to him, 'What does this saying mean?' He said, 'The foundation is
our neighbour, whom we must win, and that is the place to begin. For all the
commandments of Christ depend on this one.'

Abba Poemen said that Abba John said that the saints are like a group of
trees, each bearing different fruit, but watered from the same source. The
practices of one saint differ from those of another, but it is the same Spirit
that works in all of them.

Abba John said to his brother, 'Even if we are entirely despised in the eyes
of men, let us rejoice that we are honoured in the sight of God.'

Iamon lyme: Somehow you miss the poetry?

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

(V): quidquid supernatat vestra navicula

Several citizens ran into a hot argument about God and different religions, and each one could not agree to a common answer. So they came to the Lord Buddha to find out what exactly God looks like.

The Buddha asked his disciples to get a large magnificent elephant and four blind men. He then brought the four blind to the elephant and told them to find out what the elephant would “look” like.

The first blind men touched the elephant leg and reported that it “looked” like a pillar. The second blind man touched the elephant tummy and said that an elephant was a wall. The third blind man touched the elephant ear and said that it was a piece of cloth. The fourth blind man hold on to the tail and described the elephant as a piece of rope. And all of them ran into a hot argument about the “appearance” of an elephant.

The Buddha asked the citizens: “Each blind man had touched the elephant but each of them gives a different description of the animal. Which answer is right?”

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): [ 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.

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

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

Iamon lyme: So you know what judging means now?

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.

(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.

A criminal investigation into the police handling of the 1989 Hillsborough football disaster must happen, an ex-chief constable has said.

Richard Wells, who led South Yorkshire Police from 1990 to 1998, said charges were "absolutely essential" after a damning report into the tragedy. It found police changed statements and tried to blame fans for a crush which led to 96 Liverpool fans dying.

Victims' families and politicians have called for urgent action on the report. The current chief constable of South Yorkshire David Crompton said if the law was broken, there should be charges.

The report also found that 41 of the 96 who died had the "potential to survive" and calls have been made for fresh inquests.

The original inquests into the deaths in 1990 and 1991 recorded verdicts of accidental death.

David Cameron said Attorney General Dominic Grieve would review the report as quickly as possible in order to decide whether to apply to the High Court to order new hearings.

Trevor Hicks, whose two daughters died in the disaster, said he wanted to see new "proper, fair and honest inquests".

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): [ 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: 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?

(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?

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??

Iamon lyme:

[ I'm not an atheist. ]

Prove it.

How?

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

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: 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.

(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]

Übergeek 바둑이: re:The only reason why this is happened is because Stephen Harper is a blind fool."

You still feel closing the embassy was a bad idea?

The prime minister has said he is "profoundly sorry" for what he called the double injustice of the Hillsborough disaster. He was addressing the House of Commons following an independent report into previously unseen documents about what happened on 15 April 1989.

Ninety-six fans died after a crush at Sheffield Wednesday's ground.

David Cameron said the panel found the safety of the crowds at Hillsborough had been "compromised at every level". Relatives of the Liverpool supporters who died at Hillsborough were briefed on the report on Wednesday morning.

Mr Cameron said the double injustice was both in the "failure of the state to protect their loved ones and the indefensible wait to get to the truth", and in the efforts to denigrate the deceased and suggest that they were "somehow at fault for their own deaths".

He said details of the report were "deeply distressing" and said it showed the Liverpool fans "were not the cause of the disaster". The report, by the Hillsborough Independent Panel, showed police and emergency services made "strenuous attempts" to deflect the blame for the disaster on to innocent fans.

Mr Cameron said that Attorney General Dominic Grieve would review the report as quickly as possible in order to decide whether to apply to the High Court to order a new inquest. Many relatives believe more lives could have been saved and hope the papers will shed new light on events.

Sheffield Wednesday issued an apology on Wednesday morning to all the families whose relatives were involved.The club said on its website: "Throughout the compilation stage, the club has worked closely with the panel and the other donating organisations to ensure that, in line with the ethos of maximum disclosure, we have been totally transparent.

"The club would like to offer our sincere condolences and an apology to all the families who have suffered as a consequence of the tragic events of 15 April 1989." The families have been looking at the Hillsborough Independent Panel report at Liverpool's Anglican Cathedral. Mr Cameron also received a copy of the report after it was given to the families, in order to enable him to prepare his statement.

The panel has been scrutinising more than 400,000 pages of documents for the past 18 months. A number of the victims' families have been campaigning for more than 20 years for the papers to be released. The relatives started going into the cathedral to view the documents at 08:00 BST, before they are released to the public this afternoon.

Cabinet papers are not usually published in the UK until 30 years after they have been written, but MPs agreed to their full, uncensored disclosure last year. Approval came after 140,000 people signed a government e-petition, set up by Liverpool fan Brian Irvine, to trigger a House of Commons debate on the issue.

The panel, chaired by Bishop of Liverpool the Right Reverend James Jones, said it had analysed more than 400,000 pages of documents relating to the disaster from more than 80 organisations.

Ninety-five fans were crushed to death and hundreds more injured on the overcrowded terraces of the Hillsborough stadium, which was hosting an FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest. The 96th victim, Tony Bland, was left in a coma after the disaster and died in 1993.

An independent inquiry led by Lord Chief Justice Taylor found the main cause of the disaster was a failure in crowd control by South Yorkshire Police. But the victims' families hope the papers will shed more light as to exactly what caused the tragedy and what happened in the aftermath.

They want to know how the cabinet and then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher responded in the days and months that followed.

Margaret Aspinall, whose son James died at Hillsborough, said: "I think it is going to be hopefully a good day for the city, for the fans, but most importantly for the families, and hopefully we get what we should have had 23 years ago."


That the report shows that nearly one third of those who died could have been saved...

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.

When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

Iamon lyme: re :If you think you should show respect by not commenting on it today, then by all means go for it "

But I did comment on it

The Col: No, I didn't miss your point and yes, I chose to ignore it. If you think it's that important then by all means, take a day off.

I'm not a politician and as far as I know, neither are you. Do I need to repeat or expand on what I said to V about double standards? If you think you should show respect by not commenting on it today, then by all means go for it. But please be advised, sanctimonious guilt mongering isn't something I will fall down for... I'm not a Democrat.

Yer better off preaching to the choir... your choir.

(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: You missed my point, or chose to ignore ignore it.I was speaking of party bickering.One of the inspirational things I personally witnessed after(and during) 9/11 was how Americans came together.It was brief, but it was inspirational on a humanistic level.Discussing 9/11 today is understandable , to discuss it in terms of party politics and divisions , not so much.But as you said, whatever floats your boat

The Col: "...putting The politics of 9/11 aside for just one day."

Be my guest. No one is stopping you from taking a day off from reality, that's what holidays are for. I take my days off when I choose to.

By the way, this is the one day of the year the terrorists would just love to pull off a strike, but like I say, take the day off if that's your cup of tea. I live in the US, not Canada or the UK.

Übergeek 바둑이: We can agree to disagree , the embassy had been rendered useless,that, and rising temp in the region was reason enough, aside from the political optics that always exist IMO.Other than citing all the other situations where you feel an embassy should have been closed , do you have reasons the Iranian embassy should have remained open?