Scrutinizer

Oh, that's because God doesn't like the taste of the metaphysical cheese you laid. You should try carrots, or even chocolate. Then you'll be bound to trap him.

Regards,

- Scrutinizer

lpetrich

This reminds me of a discovery that the late Dr. Isaac Asimov had once made. From a New York City apartment late in his life, he heard a low rumbling every Sunday, which he tracked down to a Christian Science church's air conditioner.

He recalled the Christian Science belief that the phenomenal or material world is not real and that disease can be cured by faith and prayer; and he laughed long and loud over how a whole churchful of Christian Scientists preferred to employ some materialistic contraption rather than to try to pray away the sensation of heat.

Noble

I thought you guys knew this! The evidence is found in the unlikely places, thru humble people, thru the peacefullness of nature etc. It is quite extraordinary evidence, and most of you had a good glimsped of it as young kids. Unless you become like children you will not see...well you know the rest. Just try to you remember the wonder years!

Noble

Toto

It's taken me years of therapy to come to terms with those "wonder years". And anyone who can talk about the "peacefullness of nature" (sic) hasn't really met up with nature in all its bloody contentious glory.

Koyaanisqatsi

Polycarp

Quote:

Originally posted by Gurdur: Out of serious interest, what do you agree with Spong on, Polycarp? BTW, don't you think a "Tim" should be proud of the name?

Scrutinizer raised two points of Spong’s with which I’d agree. Royalty in the Church stinks, as does small-mindedness from it’s members. However, I find Spong to be a huge hypocrite in his critique of church hierarchy. Look at some of the subtitles of his books: “A Bishop Speaks to Believers in Exile” or “A Bishop Rethinks the Meaning of Scripture”, and so on. Most of the subtitles have the word “bishop” in them. He tries to use his title of “bishop” as some sort of pedestal that grants him greater authority in his writing. Some of his critique of biblical literalism is valid, but I think he goes to Thomas Jefferson-like extremes of cutting out the passages he doesn’t like. And this is the main problem I have with Spong. He wants to re-define an entire religion, and he gets pissed off when everyone in the religion doesn’t agree with him. It would be like me joining the Ku Klux Klan, and then trying to convince all of the members to believe that all races are equal, affirmative action should be enacted in the hiring practices of companies, and interracial dating is a socially beneficial habit. A better idea would be for me NOT to identify myself as a Klan member, and I think Spong should think along similar lines. He shouldn’t act so shocked when a group that’s been around for almost 2000 years doesn’t want to change certain things.

I think he’s a very smart guy who’s making a lot of money off people who are mad at Christianity and want someone with clout in the church to hammer the church for them. Spong is more than willing to do the hammering, and take your money while he’s at it. It’s been about two years since I’ve read anything by him, so other than the few small items I listed above I can’t think of much else positive to say about him. Sorry I have little agreement with him.

“Tim” is a name to wear with pride, but I’ve always tried to remain anonymous. I’ve heard that some skeptics at the SecWeb stalk Christians, and try to de-program them once they find them. At least that’s what Pat Robertson heard in a message from God several months ago. I know Pat wouldn’t be wrong if it came in a message from God…

Polycarp

Quote:

Originally posted by Apikorus: Another thing to remember about illness and recovery is that the human body is extremely complex and every so often something extremely unexpected happens (for good or bad) that seems to defy medical explanation. Given the complexity inherent in living beings, I think a clearer test of the power of prayer might be to direct one's prayers toward simple physical systems which are thoroughly understood and accurately measurable. This is why I propose an experiment to see if prayer has any measurable effects on gravity, or on the lifetimes of excited atomic states, or a host of other potential tests. Do you believe that prayer can affect gravity?

Apikorus,

Long time, no see. I hope you're doing well.

I disagree with the god you've described. You basically seem to be saying that the only god you'd believe in is one that can be manipulated by people. It's sort of a "genie in a bottle"-type god. Rub the bottle and out pops god. Tell god what to do and he does it for you. The god I believe in can not be manipulated by humans. I know the verses in the Bible that can be quoted as giving this impression, but I'm not going to get into that whole discussion. Elijah on Mount Carmel is the perfect example of the dueling gods, with "genie in the bottle" overtones. I have such talks with friends of mine who are "open theists", but I think the language used by biblical writers reflects their own interpretation of certain events in most instances.

Do I believe prayer can affect gravity? Only if god decides to affect gravity. It's not as if we get enough people praying for a certain thing, then suddenly god is coerced into doing it. That isn't the Judeo-Christian god. And this is why I believe we don't see god catering to the demands of us mere humans, especially the demands of people who don't even believe in him/her.

[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: Polycarp ]</p>

Apikorus

It's not as if we get enough people praying for a certain thing, then suddenly god is coerced into doing it.

Polycarp, I've heard many sermons, and read many quotes of respected Christian religious leaders, exhorting that "we really need everyone to pray" on some particular issue (usually something of national importance). It seems to me that most Christians hold somewhat fuzzy and confused views on this issue. On the one hand, they would assert that God hears and has the potentiality to act on their individual prayers, no matter what they might be. On the other hand, they also seem to believe that there is strength in numbers, as far as prayer goes.

Muad'Dib

Where, when, and from whom did you hear this? I have heard of no such thing, and so far as I know neither have the administrators or the board of directors.

In the past, people on both sides of the fence have struck up e-mail conversations off the boards, some of which I've heard are rather heated, but I've never heard of any kind of behavior that might be described as obsessive or dangerous. If you know of such an occurrence, please tell us, or have your source let us know.

Has Pat Robertson explicitly mentioned the Secular Web in that context, or was he referring to unbelievers in general?

Edited to add: if you wish to remain anonymous in your discussions here, that is certainly your prerogative, and I have neither the right nor the inclination to dispute that. I myself usually do not reveal my full name. My concern here is to find out if there is in fact an instance of a stalker acquiring his target here, which would certainly be a matter to report to the authorities.

[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: Muad'Dib ]</p>

Scrutinizer

Muad'Dib,

I could be wrong, of course, but I think Polycarp is just joking. That's the impression I obtained from reading his post. I mean, trusting what Pat Robertson hears from "God"? Hmmm...

Regards,

- Scrutinizer