Jonathan H. B. Lobl

Yes. We did.

No snark intended. I have come to accept that our beliefs open us up to different experiences. The experiences in turn shape our beliefs. I don't want to sidetrack the conversation. For now, let us say that I've had my own experiences.

I think this is perspective -- when the true major is Football and the declared major is a sham.

The point remains. Life is a terminal condition. In time, even the stars grow cold. We die because we live.

I'm not sure that any of this follows. Armies run on hatred of the enemy. Nothing is more lawful than the military with their hierarchical chains of command. I'm also reminded of a Christian formulation. "The love of law or the law of love" Law is about structure. Not love or hate. Structure. To my understanding.

Part of the problem is cultural imposition. I'm sure you have seen dictionary definitions of Atheism, that were so offensive, you didn't know how to respond.

"Some things need to be believed to be seen." Yes?

There are other words. Robin Hood had a band of "merry men". I don't know. Maybe.

Not everyone has your ability to sift out fine points. Your subtleties can be difficult to follow. It is common, I think, for Atheists to not believe in different gods. Love represents the same kind of problem. If two people are working with different concepts of love, they can agree that love doesn't exist -- without being in agreement at all.

I'm having difficulty following you on this one. Lawlessness doesn't seem to fit into your thoughts on love and hate. I'm also not sure I understand you on those points.

So very true. Often, the things we don't believe in are different things.

One more sad detail. The connection between football and brain injury. Maybe football isn't that wonderful for intellectual goals.

Perhaps, if God had actually produced it, the results would be better than they are. As it is, "the word" looks like it was produced by a lot of different minds, with human limitations. In fact, "the word" looks like what I would expect, if people were the source.

This part sounds very good.

Sometimes it takes an ear and a human heart. I don't believe that empathy can be credentialed. Or common sense. Or compassion. Or that they should be.

This is true. Two people who don't believe in God, may be rejecting very different ideas of God.

That makes a lot of sense. I remember Kirby Hensley. He did enjoy poking his finger in the establishment's eye.

Then you have nothing but an attitude?

Since when does evolution not add up? That kind of flat statement needs something to back it up.

If God is unknowable, then Agnosticism makes sense. Alright. That's playing with words. More to the point: If God is unknowable, then God is irrelevant. It doesn't matter what we believe or disbelieve. It's all equally meaningless.

It's alright. We are contradictory creatures.

Well, you are God.

U.L.C. has it's own accrediting agency, which accredits their Ph.D. program. This is not subtle. The accrediting agency has the same address as the Church. It might be tolerable, but for the church advertising it's accredited degree. It does leave a bad taste.

No. Not mistaken. We can go a step further and stipulate the God of the Bible and Koran. It does make things more simple. Of course, that leaves out the Deists and Pantheists as well as the Eastern religions. It also leaves out the people who have gods but not God. But yes. It is an easy approach.

I was talking about the people who spread the terrorist doctrine of Damnation. That leaves out all the non-terrorist Christians who don't spread this evil doctrine. Who do not insist that everyone else is going to Hell. Also, all the non-terrorist Muslims. The goal of terrorism is to get others to submit through fear. That is the essence of Damnation doctrine. The rest of us do NOT -- repeat NOT -- need to respond with violence. The occasional odd -- "Piss off" -- is an appropriate response. If we can stiffen the old spine to "resist". Or are you afraid to be rude to the people who threaten you with Perdition?