All Activity

Fargo? George

Actually Human did add MC to the other two. Whichever of you wants to go, go ahead. George

It's entirely possible whoever it was just connected a few dots to the plot of Paper Moon with Ryan and Tatum O'Neil.

That's revolting, Penworks. Just so wrong.

Thanks for this, Rocky. As for tactics TWI used in the past to find prospects. In the 1970s, one big time leader I won't name, told us to comb throught the obituaries to find the names of families who'd lost loved ones so we could approach them, offer "comfort," and try to sign them up for the PFAL class. I found that piece of advice so revolting I never did it. At least I had some good sense tucked in my mind somewhere back then ...

He doesn't answer how he believes but points out the biblical variables... he's got me thinking... which is good...

I gather from listening to Sam Harris's pod that he, too, has grown weary of the topics of religion and atheism. I was reading and listening to Christopher Hitchens before his God Is Not Great book, since before he moved right of center politically. So much of the so-called "New Atheist" movement was a reaction to 9/11, which was an act of terror in the name of god. A reaction with which I can sympathize. I don't believe good dogma is the answer to bad dogma, or right ideology fixes wrong ideology. Dogmatism and ideology themselves are inherently problematic. There is simply too much subtlety and nuance and complexity in this life. To see this requires being able to see. Ideology and dogmatism cloud the required vision. IMHO.

"I have the impression that we woke you about three-thirty this morning." "No, it was ten of four." "Did we say why?" "Uh, you said you wanted to sacrifice a virgin." "Did we?" "I was too sleepy." "Ladies and gentlemen, take my advice. Pull down your pants and slide on the ice."

I got Michael Jackson and Taylor Swift. Human got Mariah Carey. Did I miscount, or did neither of us get "three"?

It's funny. I found the "New Atheists" helpful at the beginning of my deconversion, but I find my patience for them wearing thin as time goes on. Some of their arguments are still quite useful, but I honestly care about them so little as people that it bores me when people bring them up as spokeswhatevers for atheism. More later.

Below is a quote from the article linked below where McClellan is responding to a book written by Sam Harris titled "The End of Faith." Although I sincerely wonder whether I fit in with those McClellan speaks of in his two last sentences, he does seem to be saying that criticizing fundamentalist dogma (which is based on the inerrant accuracy of the bible) is making "much ado about nothing" since the concept itself is erroneous/illogical and therefore should not have to necessarily cause the end of someone's faith. "The irony of Harris’ claim is that he has to adopt a fundamentalist dogma in order to serve his own ideology (“Religion bad!”). This is a habit with a long and storied history in ideological bickering. It’s a lot easier to criticize religious traditions if you adopt the fragile and brittle worldviews of the most fundamentalist and uncritical groups within that tradition. Then the more reasonable and informed and complex perspectives can be dismissed before they complicate your arguments and make you think too hard. This is a tactic employed frequently by apologists of all kinds, including, evidently, the dogmatic and belligerent apologists from the New Atheist movement. Dogmas, whether religious or anti-religious, are a lot easier to proliferate when they’re black and white and reducible to small conceptual chunks that are easily digestible for young white males in trilbies who are infatuated with the transcendence of their own genius." Since McClellan believes the bible has no inherent authority or inherent meaning and that it is thoroughly inconsistent, what matters are the "more reasonable and informed and complex perspectives" concerning it. I'm assuming that through these perspectives, one is able to still believe in God and have a subjective, but authentic, relationship with him and Jesus Christ. This appears to be similar to perspectives shared by some posters on this forum. I still don't get the practical application of this, but I am continuing to find out more about McClellan's scholarly viewpoints on a variety of topics. On the Myth of Scriptural Literalism

My "test" link I just posted didn't work so I've edited out the whole post.

I think I was thinking of The Vampire Diaries. George

The list, with number of #1 hits: Beatles, 20 Maria Carey, 19 Rihanna, 14 Michael Jackson, 13 Drake, 13 Madonna, 12 The Supremes, 12 Taylor Swift, 12 Whitney Houston, 11 Janet Jackson, 10 Stevie Wonder, 10 I would think The Supremes, Stevie Wonder, and maybe Madonna would be in the category, with Rihanna and Drake in the WTF? category. Anyway, Human got three of them, so I'll give this round to him George

It was. I suppose the Asimov references made it easy, but everything else was Will Smith references, which probably also would have been easy. George

No. Was there really a TV show with that name?

Might as well.