451. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #121005 by Kardashovel on February 2, 2008 at 9:12 pm

Not in a scientific context it isn't. And that's the context we mean it when we ask about your reasons for believing in the great bearded skybully.

If you are going to ask me to describe the defining moment that changed me to a theist, I think I get to decide the context...

Calling me a liar just reveals your cowardice and prejudice. In any case, I spoke for myself, and noted from the beginning that it was not likely to be convince anyone but me.

452. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #121002 by Kardashovel on February 2, 2008 at 9:06 pm

Well Goldy, as I have already shown, your testimony would not stand up to cross examination.

Nobody here is bothering to cross examine my testimony.

It's OK. I don't mind. But it was important for me to note the hypocrisy on display.

453. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #120996 by Kardashovel on February 2, 2008 at 9:02 pm

Incidently, testimony is cognate with the word used to describe your knackers - did you hold your balls when giving this testimony ;-)

Now. That was funny.

I can't swear that I held my balls during all of my posts. But I'd be willing to testify in a court of law, if it mattered.

BTW, I think that you read a little too much into my post about schizophrenia. I certainly did not mean to offend you to the point where you sounded like James Carville with his dick caught in a wringer! But props on the juicy rant.

454. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #120990 by Kardashovel on February 2, 2008 at 8:57 pm

Diacanu!

You actually engaged me debate by asking a question. I'm touched.

You question is answered in my scatter-shot of posts above.

455. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #120986 by Kardashovel on February 2, 2008 at 8:53 pm

It wasn't a hallucination, oh colorful but logically challenged one.

And you should respond to my experience differently because I present you the opportunity to cross examine me.

And by the way, I do hate it when I have to refer someone to a dictionary, but testimony is most certainly evidence, Mr. Jennings.

456. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #120979 by Kardashovel on February 2, 2008 at 8:39 pm

That is not evidence.

I beg your pardon. Testimony is not evidence?

I was asked what persuaded me. I responded. It is my report of an experience that I had, and my understanding of it. It's not hearsay, and it is far from unprecedented.

Now, while it may not be evidence sufficient to satisfy your own needs, it worked out great for me. What is interesting is that this evidence was dismissed out of hand by everyone here, just like you would laugh off the latest report of a miracle in Reader's Digest. Thanks folks!

457. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #120972 by Kardashovel on February 2, 2008 at 8:26 pm

Finally Steve, about your post number #120565... I do stand against sexism and homophobia. But that isn't really relevant to my comment, since I am not the one displaying a discriminatory attitude towards schizophrenics. I feel very bad for those people, not in small part because of the childish antics about mental illness that have been on display around here. Not that you we’re involved in any of that.

But I was quite surprised that you think I am faking schizophrenia. How well does that square with me denying that I am schizophrenic, and denying that I suffer from any mental illness?

That idea anyone could attempt to imagine such voices and claim that they speak truth is ignorant and shameful.

That's quite a leap there Steve. I think you neglected to articulate a necessary logical step wherein you conclude that I am a liar. Don't worry though, because I've brought that out in the open now. But you see, whether you call me schizophrenic, or simply a liar, the same effect is achieved: Multiple parties on this thread, including yourself, have called for evidence. I provide first hand evidence of my own experience with God. Not only do you avoid any close examination of that evidence, but you leap from an e-diagnosis of my sanity, to calling me a liar. Congratulations! You sir, are the most professional amateur that I've met in this forum. You're desperado, Steve.

458. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #120970 by Kardashovel on February 2, 2008 at 8:24 pm

Speaking of attractive avatars, I should definitely respond to comment #1402 by annabanana. I appreciate that you did not make the same foolish mistakes as some of your more testosterone laden brethren. And I also recognize that you did in fact ask intelligent questions about the evidence. So full marks for living up to your rhetoric!

Moreover, you're quite right that Diacanus self-conscious suggestion that I am sniveling is utter bullshit. It doesn't matter to me if he thinks I'm crazy; and if you read through my posts you will see that I give no quarter.

Sigh. But what's this:
How the fuck do you think I felt when you called me a "Betty"? How the fuck do you think Steve felt when you said homosexuality was a sin? Don't fucking come here and insult all of us and then whine when people suggest that you may be schizophrenic. That's about the shittiest thing I've ever heard of. You're whining about name-calling when you were the one who came here and started name-calling in the first place. Take your sexist, homophobic, playing-the-victim charades somewhere else.

Well, I assumed that you'd be flattered that I chimed in on the side of your beauty. I realize that no one disputes your beauty around here, but I know that I personally never get tired of compliments. Did it somehow offend you? Could you break that down for me, please?

Now as for Steve, I think that if he reviews my comment #119184, and all he comes up with is that I think he's a dirty sinner, then he simply has a chip on his shoulder. I have no personal problem with homosexuality whatsoever. If any of my children turn out to be gay, my biggest concern, aside from how they will be treated), will be how to get some grandchildren. I can speak more about why I think that the bible labels homosexuality as immoral, if you like.

If I have insulted you, or Steve, based on any comments that I have made that you consider to be sexist or homophobic, then I apologize, and I assure you that was not my intention.

Now, AnnaBanana, where exactly did I whine, snivel, or play the victim? I know you will have some choice quotes to choose from, so why not "present the evidence"?

459. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #120969 by Kardashovel on February 2, 2008 at 8:23 pm

There were a couple of notable exceptions to this colossal group-think brain-fart. The best example of someone actually willing to examine the evidence was comment #1392, by walk:
Just curious, when god was talking to you, did he give you ANY information or facts that could not have come from your own mind? I know that if I were conversing with an omniscient being, I would surely ask for some heretofore unknown information that would better the world. Did he give you any such knowledge?

The answer is unreservedly affirmative. Most of the second conversation was a discussion of my business and personal affairs, how to understand what other people are thinking (including by providing me with verifiable facts about situations and people, which I did not know prior to the conversation). I hate to report such a self-centered discussion, but in my defense, that is how the conversation started, and God is very effective at keeping the discussion on task. He did answer a couple of my why questions, but once I knew what I needed to know He did not linger.

By the way, I love your avatar, walk.

460. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #120968 by Kardashovel on February 2, 2008 at 8:22 pm

Wow, Goldy! You really came uncorked there. Nice work, in a Fox News sort of way. Do you wear a pith helmet?

I would remind anyone reading this that I was merely answering questions in good faith, when I disclosed that I have spoken with God. A good majority of the commenters in the thread made a typical desperate mistake of leaping to an entirely unjustified conclusion about my sanity. What a pathetic dodge. For a few days you went on about wanting someone to produce evidence. I produce evidence, in the form of reporting an experience that happened to me. Most of you jumped behind the nearest fence and "deduced" that I am crazy, rather than consider that God exists. It's pathetic.

On a personal level, I would not care if any of you thought that I am bat-shit crazy. I, Kardashovel, will survive the burning shame of being banished from this oasis of clear thinking. But on the level of this discussion, I'm pretty amused by the bleating chant of insanity, rather than engaging your curiosity and actually examining the evidence that you had been demanding. Goldy, my saucy interlocutor, that is what I would call, amateur.

461. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #120967 by Kardashovel on February 2, 2008 at 8:18 pm

Corylus, thank you for your concern. I do admit to a general weariness over the last few years, such as often accompanies entrepreneurship. And I would acknowledge that the first conversation happened during a period of intense work stress. But it didn't rate very high on my scale of difficult situations. The second experience was during a time that I was quite calm and reasonably happy. If it were a situation like you suggest, then you would think I would have heard voices at earlier stages in my life, when I had wrenched myself around a few tight corners.

I will peruse your link with interest. So tell me, in your estimation, do people that externalize an internal voice generally report their experiences similar to the way that I have? I did not 'hear the voice' like an auditory hallucination. It was exactly like an internal voice, in my head, with no though that another witness would possibly have heard it. When I recognized that it was not me, I switched to speaking out loud, so as not to confuse myself by interrogating the new voice my other internal voice(s). And I went for a walk, as requested. My neighborhood was empty, so I don't think that anyone noticed.

More importantly, note the way that I recognized that this internal (not auditory) voice was not me. In essence, I am simply not that smart. No one is, including my Indian friend at school. If you want to tell me that my subconscious had prearranged these conversations, then explain how it reacted so fluidly to my feedback. If you think that it was a fork of my brain processing, then explain how it was drastically faster than what I perceived as my normal, inquisitive and charming self. This remarkable voice put no stress on my brain at all, and permitted me to just be myself. I was not in any sort of a trance, I was lucid, it was a weekday afternoon with nothing in the book and three free hours to sit back and assess.

Since that time I have had not any repeat conversations of this sort… not for lack of trying, though. I have prayed and meditated (sought stillness of mind). I have had "religious moments" of deep emotional significance to me… but none of these was a conversation with God.

As for playing nicely, you'll notice that I quoted your statement in my post above, because you were not banal or inappropriate; although you did make some assumptions in your follow up post. I have reserved my most caustic material for a couple of mosquitoes in here. But I would like to thank you for your demeanor, and to reassure you that my comments about armchair psychologists were not leveled at you, or anyone else that did not cower behind questioning the sanity of the witness upon hearing the testimony.

462. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #120539 by Kardashovel on February 1, 2008 at 11:22 pm

have you ever been given shit before?

Ha. Yes.

If you don't want to listen, then don't pay attention, nit wit. I was engaged in discussion with your betters.

Don't tell them I said so, because they'll think it's damnation by faint praise.

463. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #120536 by Kardashovel on February 1, 2008 at 11:11 pm

The point, for the lazy among you, is that calling me schizophrenic is your immediate response, based on next to no evidence, in support of your forgone conclusion. How rational.

Y'all are hopelessly amateur.

464. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #120533 by Kardashovel on February 1, 2008 at 11:06 pm

Defensive? It's an indictment.

You folks decry sexism and homophobia... but you have no trouble mocking those that you e-diagnose to be mentally ill? How twentieth century.

465. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #120524 by Kardashovel on February 1, 2008 at 10:23 pm

Corylus said: I don't think that Kardashovel is crazy (not a word I like BTW) Merely deeply mistaken and giving an internal dialogue the status of an external one.

Like everyone here, I conduct internal dialogs, in order to sort through problems; analogous to playing oneself in a game of chess. Usually I don’t articulate them, but even if I did that does not make me crazy.

So… am I schizophrenic? Let’s go to the Mayo Clinic: http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/library/DS/00196.html

Signs and symptoms of schizophrenia may include:

1) Delusions �" personal beliefs not based in reality, such as paranoia that you're being persecuted or conspired against
2) Bizarre delusions �" for example, a belief in Martians controlling your thoughts
3) Hallucinations �" sensing things that don't exist, such as imaginary voices
4) Incoherence
5) Lack of emotions or inappropriate display of emotions
6) A persistent feeling of being watched
7) Trouble functioning at work or in social situations
8) Social isolation
9) Difficulty with personal hygiene
10) Clumsy, uncoordinated movements

Generally, schizophrenia causes a slowly progressive deterioration in the ability to function in various roles, especially in your job and personal life. The signs and symptoms of schizophrenia vary greatly. A person may behave differently at different times. He or she may become extremely agitated and distressed, or fall into a trance-like, immobile, unresponsive (catatonic) state, or even behave normally much of the time. Signs and symptoms that occur continuously and progressively may indicate schizophrenia.


Let’s go down the list.

1) I doubt it. I would screw up a lot more if I did not have a basic grasp of reality. I’m managing to maintain a family of four in decent health and comfort. I’ll educate my kids to be loving, tolerant, free-thinkers, regardless of what obstacles arise. I’m not deluded, I’m just confident that I can survive and flourish.

2) Bizarre delusions? Well I just said that I wasn’t delusional. Even if you thought that I was delusional, at least you can take comfort and say “no” here, because I believe that neither the Martians, the FSM, nor God Himself are controlling my thoughts. I am in control of my thoughts, and I am responsible for my actions. When I meet God upon judgment day, I will take responsibility for my choices. So will you, I believe.

3) Hallucinations? First of all, prior to, and since these two episodes, I have not heard any voices. These two episodes were unique and unprecedented events. The first time I came begging to God… the second time He came coaching to me. I would also state that this was something very different from what I would expect if it were a hallucination. For that matter, it was also nothing like the typical conversation between the internal voices in my head.

The most immediately apparent difference was the lack of any delay whatsoever, on the part of the new voice. I am accustomed to a certain delay between my internally conversing voices, while my mind moves the “conversation” forward. But, in this case, the responses were instant, authoritative, and didactic. During this second conversation, which lasted around half an hour, I was aware that the voice that was speaking was attached to a vastly more knowledgeable and clever person than myself.

I had a friend like that in grad school; at least, he was like that about physics. It was clear that he was thinking ten times faster than any of us, with command of massive wisdom on every subject and their interrelations. Granted, he was a bit focused on work. So the voice in my head had the same, immediate answer, and the follow-up explanation, that invariably got me over any obstacle to understanding.

The conversations were quite different from my own typical internal discussion about a technical, logistical, or inter-personal problem... For my part, I took my time, reflected, and gave my best responses. But the Answer came back, in my own internal voice, instantaneously and without my intention, almost before I spoke my piece or assembled my question… much like a well organized lecture. Occasionally, it waited for me to process and to provide answers to its questions, walking me through what I needed to understand. There was no sign of impatience, which is a bit of a weakness of mine; and though this voice had my accent and timber, it definitely was not me.
~~~

4) Incoherence? Well I certainly feel like I’ve been misunderstood many times in this thread, but I’m somewhat willing to work with those that would discuss matters of faith honestly.

For example, do you all think faith really stops with yourselves? Have you no faith in the fellow that’s driving the truck towards you on an icy single-lane highway in Ohio? Or faith in the ecstasy that you’ll experience from one of those pretty blowjobs that you keep discussing? What other faiths do you have, that inform your methods of thinking? What do you call on, inside of yourself, when you have a gun in your face? What about your faith in logic?

Anyway, have a look at my collected comments and tell me if you think I’m incoherent.
~~~

5) Lack of emotions or inappropriate display of emotions? Well, it should be reasonably clear from this thread that I do exhibit a few emotions, but I’m simply trying to engage you in an honest discussion about religion. And unlike in science, where no one would ever dream of being emotional, religious discussions can get heated; how else can we explain the frantic antics around here? Is it my fault?
~~~

6) A persistent feeling of being watched? Well who doesn’t these days, really? Unless you’re so boring that you have nothing to hide and no red flags. You’ve heard that silly rumor about Project Echelon, right? What about the PATRIOT Act, or wiretaps of “internationally originated” phone calls? If you live in Europe, do please tell me if you are being watched right now? Not security cameras, not TIA, nor the eye in the sky, no they never, ever lie, comrades. But your home is your castle, right?

Oooohhh. You mean being watched, like being stalked, or staked out, or hunted? Or do you mean that only crazy folks think God is watching them, like Santa Claus? Just like only crazy folks ever worry about Project Echelon, the PATRIOT act, “extraordinary” renditions, etc…

Anyway, aside from human mechanisms, I actually don’t think that I’m often being watched. I think that God has better things to do than chase all of our every thoughts. God gave us free will for the same reason that He exploited evolution: He has better things to do than worry about every atom or every nose-picking that goes on in the universe. He cares about results: Works. If you’re not part of the solution, then you’re a part of the problem.
~~~

7) Trouble functioning at work or in social situations? Well, I’m getting ready to hire my fourth employee; my billables are better than ever; and my company achieved all four internal goals I set last year, with a B grade in my opinion. As for me, I’ve gotten sales, and knocked out solutions to complex technical problems, and at the same time I’ve had my second child (a daughter), and learned the meaning of anchor vs. anvil. Overall, I’m doing fine, which means that I am willing to put up with your insults at a cost of a few thousand dollars worth of time. But hey…I love you folks; even the bile soaked mushroom, Diacanu. You remind me of me.
~~~

8) Social isolation? Sometimes I wish. My wife is the queen bee. You could totally nail Vox on this one, though. He lives in an underground bunker.
~~~

9) Difficulty with personal hygiene? Do I smell?

At one point the guy who often sat in front of me for Italian II had some sort of cobweb-like fungus growth in his ears. He always wore the same clothes, five days a week. He struggled in that class, but he was a savant about math; multivariable calculus and set theory in the 10th grade. He was awesome. He had prominent cobwebs growing in his ears. I don’t.
~~~

10) Clumsy, uncoordinated movements? Maybe if I drink too much…but, usually, no.
~~~

As for the summary of symptoms, all I can say is that running a business, while dealing with the challenges of fatherhood, is just tough. I do “behave differently at different times”, and I occasionally “become extremely agitated and distressed”. But fortunately I do not experience “trance-like, immobile, unresponsive (catatonic) states”.

Nevertheless, I think the most damaging evidence is that I “behave normally much of the time”. So you can’t possibly trust me; I mean, you don’t have any faith in me… or my testimony.

So, am I schizophrenic? Probably not; I got one out of ten symptoms if I grant you that “hearing voices” counts. But note that I have only ever heard one external voice; in my head. And that voice was not in control of me. I could have blocked the communication at any time, by worrying about some appointment, or simply refusing to listen. And the controller of the voice was nothing like me.

So, go back to google, you pop-psychologists, and do your best to find a fig leaf to cover your unclothed nether regions. Find a list of psychological ailments that I might have that would induce me to hear a voice, twice?

Or perhaps you would prefer not to talk about psychology any more, you feeble minded pedestrians... Because if you continue on that front, I get to fight back. It might get ugly, fast, now that I have already turned my other cheek. Do you want to strike me again?

466. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119866 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 11:53 pm

Sigh. I'll be back.

In the mean time, tell me if you think it might be inappropriate to be making judegements of my sanity based on some blog posts...

Schitzophrenic? Really? Oh dear. You probably have cannot prove that assetion, can you?Is it a faith based diagnosis? Or does it simply reduce to a wish to reject this witness because he is damaging to your case?

Rampant douchbaggery in the last

467. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119321 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 1:30 pm

You missed a fine chance to ask God, "Which god are you?"

Actually I had more important things on my mind at the time.

The second (and last) time that I spoke with God, I did ask how I should know that He was the Almighty, and not some other spirit.

He did not answer directly. He said, "Walk with me, and judge for yourself." And so I proceeded to take a walk around the neighborhood, talking out loud with God.

And to answer an earlier question, the accent and the voice are my own, the one that I think with. But this definitely was not me.

468. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119317 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 1:22 pm

Al-Rawandi,

Your post #925 was not directed at me.

469. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119306 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 1:15 pm

Wrong Goldy,

It would take some hours to explain the process, including the background. Especially in this type of environment, where more than half of the audience is actively hostile and interested only in puerile bickering.

470. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119301 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 1:11 pm

Well, you can at least tell us what the clencher was.

Well, hearing God talking back to me, I guess. There's really no going back once that has happened.

But to be fair, that is not what made me a Christian... it just made me a theist.

471. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119299 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 1:08 pm

Diacanu,

Not a single pleasant word has crossed your fingers here, except your obsequious platitudes towards AnnaBanana. You're like twisted knot of hate, not even interested in understanding those that you oppose.

Would you prefer it if only atheists commented here? I guess not, because you like to roll in your vomit.

You would treat Gauss with contempt. What a gasbag you are.

472. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119292 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 1:01 pm

Kardashovel, you still didn't answer my question completely. Tell us your conversion story from atheism to Christianity. What led you to conclude that it was correct?

I would like to tell that story, but it would take some time. Perhaps another day. For now I will say that it happened in stages. I did not accept Jesus as my savior until last year. And, considering the way that I have done so, I would say that the majority of Christians would conclude that I am not one of them. For example, I have not yet been baptized at a church, unless you'd count a symbolic baptism at a Coptic church in Cairo last summer. But there was no ceremony... just me, God, and my tears.

473. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119282 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 12:53 pm

I do not think that Atheism is a faith. On the contrary, it is the rejection of faith on matters of how and why the universe works as it does.

However, Atheists still operate on faith. It's essential to life. You have faith in yourself, your senses, your memories, your abilities. Or else you wouldn't, couldn't do a single thing or think a single thought.

474. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119263 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 12:38 pm

No, it's because starting with a conclusion and cherry-picking for "evidence" to support it is opposite from the way science actually works. It is scientific and intellectual dishonesty.


I am not cherry-picking for evidence. Leaving aside the particulars of my Christian faith, or any specific qualifications on God other than creator, I think there is an even chance that there is a God. I cannot prove it; you cannot disprove it (settle down, I'm not asking you to do so).

Given an even chance, what is the harm of extrapolating what we know about physics to conjecture about how such a God came to be? I'm not threatening science in the slightest. I'm not claiming that what I am doing is science. I am just walking across the ground discovered by science on a path to try and find God.

Don't tar me with the same brush you reserve for evolution-deniers.

475. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119256 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 12:33 pm

Also, throughout your whole diatribe, you speak about your particular interpretation of scripture as the reason why you believe what you believe. What makes you think that your interpretation is better than someone with a different interpretation than yours? Are you so arrogant to assume that your understanding is much superior to a good percentage of other people?

Well, I'm not the world champion of arrogance, but I do think that most people do not think critically about their faith, atheists included.

Mostly I guess the answer is that I do not claim knowledge of these matters, but rather I state my case as best I can to theist or atheist alike. I would note that, when it comes to theists, I think that there is some very uncritical acceptance of incorrect dogma, which is stamped into young minds and reinforced with fear and loathing.

476. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119251 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 12:29 pm

Why? Why is his existence contingent on him/her/it being a good and just god?

Because if He were capricious and expected the same for us, He would never come to be, travel back through time, and set the fine structure constant by observing "I AM". Instead, we would just nuke ourselves.

477. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119246 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 12:26 pm

Why would death be any different than before you were born. You weren't alive then, and you won't be alive after you die.

before I was born I had no body... Life after death would require a physical resurrection.

This was the greatest work of Jesus, to show that death is temporary.

478. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119238 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 12:23 pm

I mentioned that they have to go when it got tough. He claimed I was arrogant to assume I was right. Yet despite being busy, here he is.

I am my own boss. Besides, it's worth it to continue to engage you all in a discussion of religion.

479. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119223 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 12:12 pm

You said that it is not necessary to believe in God or Jesus in order to get into heaven. How do you know this?

First of all that is not what I said� I said that belief is necessary to get into heaven (the Kingdom of God), as are works (helping the poor, teaching, self-sacrifice, buying in to existence). For this I would cite the numerous parables told by Jesus about the Kingdom of God, as well as Revelations. Now bear in mind that I do not have faith that the Bible is perfect, literal, and error free. But, having thought about the scheme of organization some, the bible makes sense to me on this account.

Very few people will go to heaven; I doubt that I will make it, but I'm gonna do my best.

More likely I will end up among the resurrected, living again outside of the Kingdom, but hopefully with a decent appointment given my perception that I try to do the right thing, and that I try my best to follow Jesus's two primary commandments. I believe that you, and most of the people here, will be there with me, living out the consequences of our choices in this life. This place is not hell, and need not be a torment at all (but might be sometimes). But it is not the Kingdom of God. Again I cite Jesus's parables and Revelations. I can tell you chapter and verse, if you are interested.

Finally, there is the lake of fire: God's dustbin. I don't think that many people are going there. But those that would use cynically God to harm others will certainly be on that train, because they would necessarily have denied the Holy Spirit with their hearts to commit grave sins, and steer others towards that fate, in an effort to profit or control. These are the people that think they are God, or should be.

I don't recall ever studying those passages in my Biblical Religion course or in my other readings of the Bible. If you are contending that you have some sort of special relationship with God and/or Jesus where he explicitly tells you things like this, I would like you to provide some proof.

I have spoken with God, I believe. Can I prove it? Not to you. But it satisfied my own requirements. I did not speak to God about these matters, however. What you read above is my own interpretation.

Other than the two options I have explored, I don't know how you would come to the conclusion that people who do not believe in God and/or Jesus can still get into heaven or some sort of a purgatory at least by simply living good lives. I would ask you to explain how you came to this conclusion and what proof you have that this is correct.

Again, I am saying that Belief + Good Works = Heaven. Total Disbelief + Commitment to Evil = Hellfire. And everywhere in between leads to resurrection to the fate appropriate for the choices that we made in life.

I cannot prove this to an atheist, although if a Christian challenged me on these matters I could provide scriptural support for my views.

For you, an atheist, I will say this: Every child knows in their heart that a God that threatened you with eternal punishment for lack of worship would be a total cunt, to use NaughtyBoy's word. This also contradicts numerous statements made in the NT about judgment, most especially the words of Jesus, son of God, and a phenomenal example of a human.

As has been said here, that is just some crap somebody invented to get people to do what they said to do. And the idea that you can get away with adultery, and still get to heaven, as long as you repent properly, is even more pernicious and controlling.

God is just. God is good. He needs to be that way, so that he can exist. He needs us to be that way, within the scope of our own will, so that He can complete His plan (of creation).

That's what I think. I cannot prove it, at the moment.

480. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119202 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 11:47 am

Someone may come along with an apparent interest in scientific explanations (indeed, that interest may be genuine), but there is usually some religious basis, and science is being used as nothing more than an attempt to justify faith. I have a particular dislike of that.

Why is that, Steve?

If I have faith, shall I then ignore science? Is this just a pet peeve or do you have a reason for this distaste?

If I may be so bold as to conjecture, I would suggest that you feel this way because someone that refuses to test their faith with science would be particularly easy for you to defeat or ignore. You don't like faith heads stomping on your sacred ground of science, do you?

481. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119198 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 11:41 am

It is sick that you think the injunction to kill homosexuals is bad because it makes people hate God and Church.

It would be sick if I did not feel even more strongly that it is morally wrong and anti-Christian to persecute anyone, including homosexuals, liars, tax collectors, senators, and ninjas.

482. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119189 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 11:38 am

Diacanu, #834.

Actually you cowered in the background until you'd thought that I left, letting your comrades treat me like an ass clown.

Now that you've come out in the open, I predict that you will only get more shrill and ad hominum the longer I stay here and remind you of your cowardice.

483. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119184 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 11:33 am

Al-rawandi, you actually used my handle!

I don't know who BTA, or Blacknad are. I did not come here with them.

I did note that many of the posters here were enjoying a good laugh at BTA about his momma's "box", and so I made my comment... followed by: "Not that there is anything wrong with that."

As for homosexuality in the bible, I have a real problem with the OT in general, and with Paul in the NT. In any case, it astonishes me that contemporary Christians would so much hay over this particular sin, and yet turn the other way towards the rest of the ten commandments. It's ridiculous on the face of it, and it feeds a hatred of the church and of God by people such as yourself. (Even if you don't believe in Him, you still think He's a cunt if you're wrong about His existence, right?)

As for your predicting the end of the argument, get over yourself. It is inevitable that I will leave, and considering the zeal of the parishioners here, there will never be an end to questions or challenges. Your prediction is trivial, and misguided. It makes you look pretty foolish to keep trotting it out.

I cannot currently prove to you that there is a God, so I don't accept that this should be my goal. I can see why you and others here would want that to be my goal. But that's not why I came here.

I'm pleased to hear that you are not that ninja, and I hope for your sake that you find a good swashbuckler's costume.

484. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119172 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 11:17 am

Diacanu,

I haven't seen you since you were making fun of people's mamma's boxes. Just as soon as I say I'll leave you show up with a pickle in your pants.

Don't worry. I can't stay here forever. But you probably will.

485. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119168 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 11:16 am

Well, for you I'd make an exception, AnnaBanana.

I did not speak to you as if you were a silly little girl. I merely complimented your appearance, assuming that it is you in the picture.

I made no errors in logic. I qualified my speculation for what it was, and I defended my knowledge of physics from a rather ineffective series of posts, each of which claimed that I had been proved wrong (I thought that you atheists were big into proof, but I see more assertions than evidence around here).

One comment I would make is that if you want people to take your arguments seriously, you might consider making some instead of cheer-leading for Steve here.

486. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119158 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 11:03 am

Al-rawandi,

Did I call you names like Asshovel? No.

Did I answer the questions of all those who approached me with respect? Yes... to the best of my ability. And that included answers to difficult questions, and a certain amount of sharp elbows from Steve here.

But your question about Jesus's sexual orientation, after your repeated ad hominum attacks, just didn't rate a response. If you were to ask me respectfully what I think about the bible's teachings on homosexuality, I would answer. But you were not respectful, because you are afraid to dialog and would rather fight.

Eventually we must all attend to our lives, regardless of the existence of God. Your pride is as appropriate as your ninja costume.

Pirates get the all the chicks. Not ninjas.

~~~

Radesq, Steve asked essentially the same question last night. I gave him an answer to the best of my ability, although I admitted that it was very hand-wavy. Steve said that it reminded him of what some dude named Paul Davies has been saying. I have googled his name, and I am quite happy to have learned about his work.

So I for one have taken something of value from this discussion, thanks to Steve.

487. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119129 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 10:39 am

Well, folks. It's been real. Good luck to all of you.

Regardless of how you feel about me, or God, I hope that you all love your neighbors as yourselves and do the best that you can to leave the world a better place for your having lived in it.

Thanks for the discussion.

488. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119117 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 10:32 am

Where are we going with this anyway? Are we about to recieve a big - "ergo the talking snake hypothesis - QED

Ha. No. If you look through my posts you will see that I speculated about how God could could arise by discovering time travel sufficient to affect the early universe in such a way that this would be more likely to happen.

The recent pissing contest about cosmology is because I returned to find Steve here claiming that I know nothing of science, when he is sitting on bupkis and trying to call my hand out of turn. then, when exposed, he goes back to the original speculation and says that isn't very scientific.

Then people started to ask me theological questions and I gave answers about my interpretations of these matters. Then came the parade of name-callers amidst the continued sniping by Steve about how I don't understand physics.

489. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119102 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 10:21 am

AnnaBanana,

I am sorry if I offended you by commenting on your beauty. I did not mean to offend you.

What atrocious logical errors have I made?

490. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119099 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 10:15 am

If you assume that there was a gravitational singularity, then going back towards it in time is very much like falling towards a singularity within a black hole. We will reach that singularity in a finite experienced time. In the same way, expansion from the singularity would have happened in finite experienced time.

If you want to talk about what happened before the big bang, then we would be talking about living at the singularity, not falling into it.

But you are obviously correct that the expansion must have happened in a finite time, once it got started.

491. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119092 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 10:07 am

You are confusing time dilation with red-shift.

Sigh. No Steve.

The Doppler effect gives us a way to measure relative velocity. The relative velocity is what "causes" time dilation, ala special relativity. Time dilation does not cause the Doppler effect. As for the expansion of spacetime affecting redshifts, what do you suppose describes that process? Three cheers if you guessed general relativity.

Hey look! Special and general relativity, applying to objects from the distant past, time-shifted relative to our current space and time. Wow. It's almost like I knew what I was talking about when I said that if you extrapolate this physics to the infinite energy-density of the singularity, it would mean that time stretches beyond any reasonable understanding that we could have based on our current knowledge of physics.

Inflation is bad enough, but if you take it to the singularity, time has no meaning. Yes, if you could have a clock there it would still tick off the picoseconds, but from our vantage point explaining what happened in the first 10^-30'th second is pure speculation, whether of the scientific or religious variety.

492. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119078 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 9:54 am

irate_atheist: The notion of a 'Holy Spirit' is ridiculous in, and of, itself. What is it made of? How does it work? Strangely enough, they don't seem to find any 'Holy Spirit' at CERN or other such establishments when investigating fundamental particles. I wonder why.

Check this out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser

What do you think is going on there? Explain it in purely materialist terms.

493. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119070 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 9:48 am

As for Kardashovel's assertion that there was no time before the beginning of the universe -- that makes a very illogical and unsupported statement that there was a "beginning of the universe". Do a search for a discussion I had with Steve Zara on that topic for more clarification.

Actually, if you accept that time dilation relative to now, was infinite at the singularity (due to infinite gravitational force experienced by the entire universe), then in fact there was no beginning. The first moment lasted for eternity, in todays terms.

494. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119061 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 9:42 am

Don't be so obtuse. You know exactly the point I was making. Responding with something that is totally irrelevant doesn't advance your argument at all.

Epeeist, my comment was not at all irrelevant considering the conversation I've been having. You engaged me with a question, and I answered it.

I suspect that you wish I would say that God has His own time outside of our time, and that in that time he has it marked on His calendar when he created our time.

Perhaps that is true. But the subject of this discussion I brought up is about time travel. If you want to say: "Time travel is stupid and impossible!" ... then just say it and be done with it.

495. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119054 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 9:32 am

That makes no sense. Time can't be relative to time. There is no universal standard of time by which we can compare "rates of time" now and then.

Well Steve, if this is another example of you showing me that I have a flawed understanding of physics, than I can see why you became a botanist.

The very notion of time dilation is that rates of time can be compared between different frames of reference in space time. Time here and now can be compared with time at the beginning, and even studied by looking into the far-field.

It's ok. Time dilation is hard to wrap your head around. I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you. Keep trying and maybe you'll get it someday.
~~~

This is irrelevant. There was very little variation in anything after inflation, so talk of any serious time dilation is meaningless.

So, I confined myself to the box you wanted to put me in (we can only talk about time dilations at the same time in the universe), and point out that there is some variation. Then you leap onto it and dismiss that variation as meaningless. I was trying to be charitable. Tell me, Steve, do you think that the time dilation that we observe in distant galaxies is happening "now" there?
~~~

You seem to be trying to stretch physics to fit your model of how you want the universe to work. That is pretty much a religious approach. A good scientist would let go of a model (like yours) as soon as it was shown to be based on a flawed understanding of physics (as it has been).

Science does not consist of making things up to fit what you believe, like this:
Yes, well once you learn how to travel through time


I'm sorry� I thought we were discussing religion here. Never mind the fact that you have only demonstrated your own ignorance of cosmology� I have been upfront in saying that I am speculating about God.

You retreat into your comfy corner of (misunderstood) science and shout out at me that I need to get in the corner too. But the subject of the discussion that we've been having is decidedly meta-scientific.

And as for my joke to epeeist about how he'll have a different point of view when he learns to time travel� well now you're just grasping at straws.

496. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119016 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 9:11 am

You've missed the obvious fourth outcome of "divine judgment" - that it's all a bullshit idea created by humans to exert control over others.

No, that isn't in the bible, although there is a pretty damning condemnation of the brood of vipers that sought to use God's word to control others.

As a matter of fact, the incorrect teaching that you will go to hell if you don't believe in Jesus is a prime example of the type of thing that will earn Jesus's scorn upon judgment day. Almost as bad is the teaching that works don't matter, and that you can be as lecherous as you want and still get into heaven by repenting and believing. Both of these lies are meant to control the masses.

Besides how do you know that the Christian Bible is correct?

It depends on what you mean by correct. I believe that a lot of it is allegory, analogy, and parables not meant to be taken literally. And I believe that, given the limitations of language, it cannot be a complete statement of God's will or intentions.

497. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #119003 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 9:00 am

I know I was there, and I know I did all the preparatory work with my pupil to get him there.

Yes, well once you learn how to travel through time you will be able to do all of your preparatory work at any time of your choosing, including after the event.

Then when someone asks you when you prepared you will look at them with a raised eyebrow.

498. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #118999 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 8:58 am

Time dilation has to be relative to something else. As there is no "outside" of the universe, it makes no sense to talk about time going faster or slower in the very early universe - everything was in the same environment.

Yes. Relative to now, for example. Also, once inflation was completed, there were outsides to the light cones of every point. Even within those light cones, there was some variation...

But I would agree that time in general doesn't make a whole lot of sense in the early universe. That was kind of my point.

499. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #118989 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 8:49 am

After all the xtians claim that their god is all about loving you - and then it throws you to hell.

There are three possible outcomes of divine judgment as written in the Christian Bible. As you have perceived, one of these judgments is to be thrown into the lake of fire, a punishment reserved for the rebellious angels and those humans that deny the Holy Spirit.

Sinners may still be saved from this fate by grace, even if they are VeryNaughtyBoy's that don't believe in God... as long as they don't categorically reject the Holy Spirit. So, fear not. You probably aren't going to hell, as your name is probably written in the book of life.

However, it is very unlikely that your name is written in the lamb's book of life, which would earn you citizenship in the Kingdom of God. To do so requires works... primarily this means that 1) You must love your neighbor as (and) yourself. and 2) You must love God with all of your heart.

Very few people will be part of the Kingdom of God, if the bible is taken at its word. But many will be spared hell, and will re-live life outside the gates of the kingdom, in a world where there is no doubt of God's existence.

Most preachers and self-righteous "xtians" will end up right there with you, after having heard their judge say, "I never knew ye."

500. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #118979 by Kardashovel on January 31, 2008 at 8:34 am

Good morning, BTA.