Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Darwin's Finch · 12-23-2001, 08:35 AM

Where there is public auto-eroticism there is bound to be a voyeur.

I still think the guy is a waste of time. I'd be interested to know whether your father finds Hafley's responses even remotely satisfying and, if so, why.

Danya · 12-23-2001, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Please see our web site below for articles on a number of Bible subjects.

I.e., "They won't answer your questions, either, but it'll keep you out of my hair and by the time you finish, you'll have read John 3:16 so many times you won't be able to think."

That cracked me up.

Perhaps if you mention the personal reason that you are interested in his opinions he will be more likely to take you seriously. If he feels he has your dad on his side he might feel more comfortable answering your questions.

diana · 12-23-2001, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Darwin's Finch:
I still think the guy is a waste of time. I'd be interested to know whether your father finds Hafley's responses even remotely satisfying and, if so, why.

For some odd reason, my father wasn't on the mailing list, although my big brother was. Hm.

I have a strict personal policy to not start religious discussions with people, but to stand my ground when they do. For this reason, I won't even mention this conversation to any of my relatives. I will, however, keep a copy of the entire exchange, should my father ever bring up his buddy, Larry Hafley, and even remotely suggest that he could help me or answer my questions.

There is method to my madness.

You bring up an interesting point, though. My father knows I do not believe at all, but does not personally "go there" with me. At all.

d

diana · 12-23-2001, 09:42 AM

Hi, Danya. By the way, welcome to the II. I've been enjoying your inputs since your arrival.

Quote:

Perhaps if you mention the personal reason that you are interested in his opinions he will be more likely to take you seriously. If he feels he has your dad on his side he might feel more comfortable answering your questions.

The thought occurred to me to make certain he knew who I was, exactly, and how we ended up on the same mass-mailing list. Then I thought, he has my rank (my parents are very proud of this and tell anyone who stands still long enough that their daughter is commissioned--parental bragging rights, y'know) and first and last name, and I suspect he can put it together himself.

There's also the fact that I won't intentionally bring my father into this for reasons mentioned above. I think my father refrains from such discussions with me so as to preserve harmony, because he already knows we'd both just get pissed off and nothing would change. I respect that.

Besides...if Larry's being "right," taking advantage of a chance to bring a lost soul to Christ (which he is scripturally bound to do), and having God Almighty on his side isn't enough, I don't think my father's involvement will tip the scales appreciably.

d

Danya · 12-23-2001, 03:30 PM

Thanks for the welcome. I am still slightly intimidated by this board but I like it here so I mainly just read and don't try to post much.

I must say that the regular members have impressed me with their debating skills. It's almost an art form for some.

Keep us posted on your ongoing search for answers on this issue. I will be reading.

diana · 12-24-2001, 05:52 AM

This letter was sent to Larry Hafley from an II lurker (who was kind enough to send me a courtesy copy and grant permission for it to be reprinted here):

Quote:

Subject: Christian Nation?

Dear Mr. Hafley,

I have been following your discussion with "Diana" with great interest. I hope you will be able to find the time to address her specific comments in greater depth.

Given the recent religiously motivated horrors of 9/11, the concept of a national government controlled by a single religious faith belief seems almost un-American and anti-patriotic to me. I am ever thankful to those enlightened minds who crafted our U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights for creating a national government which protects our individual freedom of conscience from those that would eagerly, regardless of how sincerely or zealously, impose their belief system on others through legislative edict.

I feel sure that you are aware that nine of the original 13 colonies did exactly that....governmentally imposed religious denomination adherence on all their citizens following old world examples...before the ratification of our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Obviously those who attempted to preach the dogma of the Church of Christ would have been considered Christian heretics and cast out of those nine colonies...if not coming to a worse end as did the Quakers.

Just as obviously, after reading your definition of what members of the Church of Christ believe ("What is the Church of Christ," by Tom M. Roberts) your biblical interpretations would seem to paint these other "Christian" denominations as false Christians. Therefore, since an estimated 64.3% (133,731,140) of the 2001, U.S., adult population (207,980,000) claim affiliation with the Christian faith belief, and since the Church of Christ claims only an estimated 2,593,000 of the 133,731,140, it would seem that there are a great many Americans who are "false" Christians and statistical proof that America is not a Christian Nation. Thank you.

I sincerely hope that you and yours have a wonderful holiday season and fruitful new year.

Best wishes,

Glen P. Goffin (Retired)

(Reprinted by permission from the author, the "evil" Buffman.)

d

BigBlue2 · 12-24-2001, 02:40 PM

Another voyeur here.

Quote:

It always saddens to me see Christians admit, in this way, that they acknowledge being so base and ignorant as to require the threat of eternal damnation in order to behave, that they haven't the ethical development beyond that of a three-year-old child.

Ouch.

Quote:

Most of us don't kill or pillage or plunder because we agree that such basic rules are necessary if we are to live in close proximity to one another in peace. We don't need the threat of being spanked in order to avoid these activities--why do you?

Double Ouch.

Please don't let this bloke off the hook. This thread makes for fascinating reading.

Regards,
BigBlue2

JustDucky · 12-24-2001, 03:09 PM

Peephole's getting crowded--another lurker here.

LMAO! Keep up the good work!

Jewel · 12-24-2001, 06:23 PM

Diana,

I very much enjoy watching you wipe the floor with people who fancy themselves debaters.

I knew it was going to be a good thread when I saw your name there. I enjoyed reading of your exchanges with your grandmother. And this is definitely choice stuff!

I envy your skill and eloquent mind!

-jewel

diana · 12-25-2001, 08:24 AM

Thanks to all for your support. I don't expect Larry to pursue this, though. Ever since he sent the initial e-mail, he's been trying to graciously back out. I suspect he thought I'd tuck my tail and run away when I saw that I was being challenged. I think he's dismayed, to say the least, that I turned out to be so tenacious.

After having virtually invited him to convert me in my first response, I'm amazed that he's been so curt. You'd think, after I threw the doors open like that, he'd prance right in. But he doesn't seem interested.

I know he has time constraints, but...well, I judge Christians based on my family, I guess. They'd drop whatever they're doing and spend all the time necessary to finish the conversation if it looked like there was even a remote chance someone might be interested in hearing about their faith. (To do otherwise, it is believed, will leave you in the unenviable position of having to explaining to God, on Judgment Day, why something else was more important that bring lost souls to him.)

To say the least, Larry has disappointed me in this respect.

In all my online discussions with preachers (um...three of them of note so far), I've discovered that they're often less prepared than the average bear to back up anything they say. I think they get so used to preaching to a herd of sheep who amens their every word that they (preachers) are completely lost when someone asks them to back up any of their assertions. I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule, but I simply haven't encountered them yet.

Larry has done this, as well: ignoring my points and questions and opting to simply send me to his website, where I can read all about his position on things (as if I don't know where he stands on everything already

--this is the denomination I was raised in) and where he can conveniently ignore any questions I raise about his views--just like regular preaching, except it's online.

<rant>

Now that I'm thinking about how Christians are bound to bring the lost to Christ et cetera, I think I'll rant for a moment about those who go to my site, get angry at me, and don't say anything to me about it. I know about these people because the gentleman (I use that term loosely, Derek) I've been, um, spending way too much time with here lately has recently wandered into the agnostic realms. He notified some old friends as a courtesy (he didn't want them assuming otherwise--which they were, up to that point), and he mentioned me. (I think they asked how I felt about his apostacy, and he said, "Um...she's atheist." Now his leaving the Crutch--I mean Church--is my fault...see how that works?).

Instead of defending my position (which he isn't bound or expected to, you ask me), he simply gave them my website url. It's apparently been passed around a bit, because they call him to bitch about it. I, personally, haven't heard a peep--despite the ease of feedback directly to me.

What is it with these people? If you have the truth (as they invariably claim), you shouldn't fear engaging the enemy. If you fear engaging the enemy, I suspect you already know, deep down inside in places you don't talk about at parties, that you don't have the truth and the alternative is too terrible to contemplate. At the very least, what the hell are they doing calling him about it for?

Some people's kids....

</rant>

d

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-23-2001, 08:35 AM	#11
Darwin's Finch Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Gardnerville, NV Posts: 666	Where there is public auto-eroticism there is bound to be a voyeur. I still think the guy is a waste of time. I'd be interested to know whether your father finds Hafley's responses even remotely satisfying and, if so, why.

12-23-2001, 03:30 PM	#15
Danya Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: USA Posts: 638	Thanks for the welcome. I am still slightly intimidated by this board but I like it here so I mainly just read and don't try to post much. I must say that the regular members have impressed me with their debating skills. It's almost an art form for some. Keep us posted on your ongoing search for answers on this issue. I will be reading.

12-24-2001, 03:09 PM	#18
JustDucky Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: MO Posts: 25	Peephole's getting crowded--another lurker here. LMAO! Keep up the good work!

12-24-2001, 06:23 PM	#19
Jewel Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Northern Virginia, USA Posts: 1,112	Diana, I very much enjoy watching you wipe the floor with people who fancy themselves debaters. I knew it was going to be a good thread when I saw your name there. I enjoyed reading of your exchanges with your grandmother. And this is definitely choice stuff! I envy your skill and eloquent mind! -jewel

12-25-2001, 08:24 AM	#20
diana Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Colorado Springs Posts: 6,471	Thanks to all for your support. I don't expect Larry to pursue this, though. Ever since he sent the initial e-mail, he's been trying to graciously back out. I suspect he thought I'd tuck my tail and run away when I saw that I was being challenged. I think he's dismayed, to say the least, that I turned out to be so tenacious. After having virtually invited him to convert me in my first response, I'm amazed that he's been so curt. You'd think, after I threw the doors open like that, he'd prance right in. But he doesn't seem interested. I know he has time constraints, but...well, I judge Christians based on my family, I guess. They'd drop whatever they're doing and spend all the time necessary to finish the conversation if it looked like there was even a remote chance someone might be interested in hearing about their faith. (To do otherwise, it is believed, will leave you in the unenviable position of having to explaining to God, on Judgment Day, why something else was more important that bring lost souls to him.) To say the least, Larry has disappointed me in this respect. In all my online discussions with preachers (um...three of them of note so far), I've discovered that they're often less prepared than the average bear to back up anything they say. I think they get so used to preaching to a herd of sheep who amens their every word that they (preachers) are completely lost when someone asks them to back up any of their assertions. I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule, but I simply haven't encountered them yet. Larry has done this, as well: ignoring my points and questions and opting to simply send me to his website, where I can read all about his position on things (as if I don't know where he stands on everything already --this is the denomination I was raised in) and where he can conveniently ignore any questions I raise about his views--just like regular preaching, except it's online. <rant> Now that I'm thinking about how Christians are bound to bring the lost to Christ et cetera, I think I'll rant for a moment about those who go to my site, get angry at me, and don't say anything to me about it. I know about these people because the gentleman (I use that term loosely, Derek) I've been, um, spending way too much time with here lately has recently wandered into the agnostic realms. He notified some old friends as a courtesy (he didn't want them assuming otherwise--which they were, up to that point), and he mentioned me. (I think they asked how I felt about his apostacy, and he said, "Um...she's atheist." Now his leaving the Crutch--I mean Church--is my fault...see how that works?). Instead of defending my position (which he isn't bound or expected to, you ask me), he simply gave them my website url. It's apparently been passed around a bit, because they call him to bitch about it. I, personally, haven't heard a peep--despite the ease of feedback directly to me. What is it with these people? If you have the truth (as they invariably claim), you shouldn't fear engaging the enemy. If you fear engaging the enemy, I suspect you already know, deep down inside in places you don't talk about at parties, that you don't have the truth and the alternative is too terrible to contemplate. At the very least, what the hell are they doing calling him about it for? Some people's kids.... </rant> d

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.