Jonathan H. B. Lobl

It is difficult to respond when you answer inside the box. You know that. There are no reasons to believe. None at all. We have no objective, verifiable facts about God. None at all. Scripture is not proof of anything. The faith of others is not proof of anything. I refuse to be terrorized with threats of Damnation. That should serve for now. I hold these truths to be self evident. 😐 Do not answer inside the box.

Argumentative? Not having a reason to believe is argumentative? Seriously?

Yes. Life is too short for silly arguments.

"The Dude abides." 😐

I forgot a few. Because people who claim to hold Scripture inerrant, have no problem ignoring the commands of Jesus. They do this, because it is more important to them to be cultural bullies -- than to obey God. A. To pray in secret instead of in public. B. Forced public prayer at government functions C. Forced public prayer at sporting events D. "In God we trust" on all the money. E. "Under God" in The Pledge. F. Forcing Nativity scenes onto Public Land. G. Forcing Creationism into Science Classes in Public School. H. Fighting gay rights in every possible venue. I. Forcing Ten Commandment monuments in front of government courthouses. I'm sure I forgot a few more. I do despise bullies. "By their fruits you will know them."

Alright. I have no objections to being polite. Civility is good. "I don't believe in your God" (we should specify) "because....." 1. because there is no reason for such a belief. None at all. 2. because there is no objective, verifiable information about this God. None at all. 3. because Scripture is not proof of anything. Neither is the faith of others, proof of anything. 4. because I refuse to be terrorized by threats of eternal damnation. 5. because Christian history. "By their fruits you will know them........." 6. because Christian persecution continues -- Jews, witches, gay people, Pagans......... "By their fruits......." 7. because, the Holocaust 8. Holy wars between the Christian groups. "By their fruits....." 9. The Holy Land, claimed by all three Abrahamic faiths. 10. Because Jewish history Is that enough?

I generally try to avoid these arguments. They are such a time suck. Nothing good ever come of them and life is too short. On those rare occasions, when I do allow myself to be pulled in -- I keep my responses simple. "Why would I do that?" That is, if you want to be nice. The not nice answer is -- "Because I'm not stupid." At this point, they walk away and you get to go about your business. When someone insists on knowing why you don't believe -- they are proceeding on the assumption that you are broken and need fixing. They are here to help you -- you lucky wretch. It is a miserable foundation for conversation. Nobody has to show you anything, unless they want to change you. Then it's their problem. Not yours. What do you have to prove? Nothing. The sooner they leave you alone, the better.

It's your ministry. The only constraint ULC asks of you, is that you do what's right. The details are up to you. I say -- Go for it. Have fun.

There are very few -- if any -- behaviors which meet the standard of "objective and measurable". Such a standard is unreasonable. Bad behavior does have cultural norms. Walking into a church -- or this forum -- and pissing on the walls is bad behavior. I stand by my statement. Preaching at the unwilling -- insisting that they are wrong and need correcting -- is bad behavior. At minimum, for an Interfaith Church -- it is a shocking breech of decorum. It is rude. It is bad behavior. Your unreasonable and arbitrary standards change nothing.

This is a problem basic to religious discussion. We are working without objective, verifiable, facts. Without facts, we have nothing but opinion -- and faith --which is opinion.

Welcome back. I have come to value you as a voice of reason. If you think that I have become unreasonable, I am prepared to reconsider. Your constructive criticism is welcome.

That can easily be made worse. Say that you go through a Star Trek style transporter. What emerges? Is it you? Or a copy of you?

The elephant in the room that nobody is addressing -- is the soul. Do we have souls? Are we souls that have temporary bodies? I don't know.

This thread is going off in a different direction. The new direction is the subject of Preaching. Since I identify both as Agnostic and as Atheist, I feel a need to define those terms -- expressly as I use them -- regarding preaching. I am not laying down usage terms for anybody else. This is how I use them. Atheist: The term is simple. It means "I don't believe." I am not preaching at anybody else. I don't care what anybody else believes. I don't believe. That's all that it means. Agnostic: The term is simple. It means "I don't know." I don't care what anybody else thinks that they know. I don't know. That is all that means. So we are clear. I'm stating my own positons. That is all I'm dong. I have nothing to sell. I am not trying to change anyone else.

Are you serious? That comes close to defining bad behavior. You find me strident? Because I expect visitors to be house broken? Are we supposed to supply we we pads?

By all means. Let management step up and protect the membership. When this happens, nobody else needs to get into it. Then we have peace. Peace is good. Peace needs to be enforced. When someone comes in and pees on the wall, or pees on the members, they should not feel welcome. If management will not protect the members, the members will get tired of being abused and wander off. I think this is a real danger and I hope that management steps up.

Yes. It does. I have often said so. Be patient.

That is some seriously faulty reasoning. If I walk into a church and piss on the walls -- the congregation will not respond by pissing on the walls. It is more likely, that I will be made to feel unwelcome.

When the church has a physical "brick and mortar" presence -- nobody thinks that they can simply walk in and preach at the congregation. We are an Interfaith Church. When people walk in with false assumptions, about the church that hey have entered -- and begin preaching at us -- it is the job of the moderators to inform them that they are behaving badly. If the moderators shirk that responsibility -- the task falls to the congregation. That's us -- to tell them that they are behaving badly -- that they need to correct their bad behavior or get out.

If people are complaining to you -- perhaps we should shine some Sunlight on matters, with it's own thread? I'm not shy about Agnostic rights.

I understand. I have been watching the exchanges. Breath deeply and calm yourself. The world is not yet perfect. Life goes on.

Atheists and Agnostics don't threaten everyone with Eternal Damnation.

It is wonderful to have a career that you enjoy. Truly, something to rejoice over. It ranks right up there with finding the right life partner. Much joy may this bring you. I never get tired of good news.

Seriously? "What if they are right?" This time, your intellectual purity has gone over the cliff. I know that you're trying to be reasonable and even handed. This isn't it. If someone truly believes that his religion is right -- and all the rest of us are wrong -- not simply incorrect, but WRONG -- then what the blank is he doing here? Besides being a thorn in everyone's flesh? We are not here for the express purpose of being preached at -- by someone who is here for one purpose only. To preach at us. That is not fellowship. That is not mutual learning. That is not discussion. That is only irritating, and we are under no obligation to endure it. Even less are we obliged, to be respectful.

Traditional imagery, is the drop of water, merging with the ocean. The drop both exists and is gone. Life is short. We'll know soon enough -- or not.