Jonathan H. B. Lobl

Real life creates problems. I don't like State violence. The police need their weapons. Pragmatism wins out over idealism.

Last month, I was one of three clergy conducting a funeral service. Ordination is not required. It does let people know that you are serious about your calling.

I find it difficult to answer this kind of question in the abstract. That is the problem with moral absolutes. It is always possible to come up with a situation, where bad actions are needed for good reasons. Is it wrong to kill? Yes. What about killing someone, intent on shooting down a yard full of children? Suddenly, "yes" becomes "no." Life is like that.

I have a sense of belonging. It feels right and good to be here.

Everybody dies but many lives are not lived. Life is important.

Let us not forget Sunday and Moonday. Two more gods on the calendar. As described in Genesis, the Sun and Moon are both gods. They have to be gods. They both "rule." Genesis 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

I take it as a given. Humanity creates their gods. All of them. I don't mean to suggest that the gods are a fiction. I regard them as personifications of something real. All of them. There is a Buddhist statement that I enjoy. "The gods are illusory, but if we call upon them for assistance, they will help us anyway."

Sort of. We grow up thinking that Monotheism has replaced everything that came before. Except that if we take a closer look, and actually see what we are looking at; the old gods are still here. The names change. The forms change. But they never left. They hide in plain sight.

Sometimes, we can see the old gods being worshiped. Consider old Hermes, the "messenger of the gods." We see him depicted even now as the symbol of FTD Florists, winged sandals and all. Hermes had an interesting development. He started off as "messenger of the gods." From there, god of the roads. Then god of the cross roads. What happened at the cross roads? Hermes became the god of commerce, physicians, thieves and gamblers. Yes. Gamblers. What do people shout when they are throwing the dice? "C'mon Seven! Daddy needs a new pair of shoes!" It makes sense. Nobody understands the need for nice footwear like the "messenger of the gods" who also has a special interest in gambling. Hermes, messenger of the gods, also had a well known staff. Messengers would have a staff. Look at Hermes's staff. It is the symbol of the American Medical Association. He is the god of physicians. When we look at the staff, what do we see? Wrapped around the staff, there are two snakes. The staff represents the human spine. The two snakes are the energies that travel up and down the spine. Where they meet are the seven major chakras in the head and spine. Santa Claus is an interesting deity. He keeps lists of who's "naughty and nice." He knows when we are sleeping and he knows when we are awake......... He sure looks like a god. Jack Frost paints our windows with Frost. He sure looks like a minor weather deity. Old Man Winter is used to sell snow tires. Our old enemy, out to get us. Who is Lady Luck? The ancient Greeks and the ancient Norse knew all about the Three Fates. The Fates have consolidated into Luck, but the line is clear enough. Mother Nature looks a lot like the old Earth goddess, known by many names. So it goes. You would never guess that Monotheism had won out.

Even now, if we know what we are looking at, the old gods are still with us. In Guys and Dolls, when the gambler sings "Luck be a Lady" -- nobody has to explain who Lady Luck is. We all know who Lady Luck is. We also know who Jack Frost is, without an explanation. And Father Time. And Old Man Winter. And Baby New Year. And Mother Nature. Death rides a pale horse. The old gods have name changes. They are depicted differently, but they live on. Sometimes even without a name change. Cupid hasn't changed at all. Look at the Statue of Liberty -- "Lady Liberty." All we need to add is a priesthood and an altar, and we can literally worship at Liberty's feet.

It is one of the weaknesses of the Atheist label. People don't bother to specify what God, or gods, they don't believe in. The minority options are ignored. There are a few videos, where Sam Harris talks about how he used to say thqt nobody believes in the old gods, while still believing in God. Then he started getting hate mail from the people who do follow the old gods. Even the Atheists and Agnostics forget that the old gods, or at least their followers, are still around. Of course, the old word was "Atheoi." Without gods.

The chart seems to be concerned about the spectrum of belief and knowledge. Why then are there no distinctions between Monotheism, Polytheism, Deism, Pantheism, etc.? They are all interchangeable. Mild acceptance is equal to passionate devotion. Without good questions, the answers don't matter. Unless of course, all belief and knowledge are interchangeable. The underlying assumption behind the chart is a Judeo-Christian Monotheism. It is going to distort everything else. Even within these narrow limits, we need at least one more axis for intensity levels.

On reflection, there are a few weaknesses with this chart. There is no distinction between Theists and Poly-theists. The chart also makes no distinctions about the intensity of religious belief/opinion. Perhaps a third axis?

You have as much business on this thread as anybody else. Obviously, you're a Theist. It goes with being Christian. The question is, are you a Gnostic Theist or an Agnostic Theist? Your call.

I agree that we can not know with certainty whether or not God exists. That leaves us to examine the evidence and think in terms of probability. To me, the existence of the Biblical God seems unlikely. The probability of God's existence is still greater than absolute zero. If we expand the definition of God to something other than the Biblical God; the odds in favor of God's existence seem to improve. Certainty either way continues to elude. Happily, I am Agnostic, so I don't feel that I need to "know." I don't know. I am also Atheist, meaning nothing more than I lack belief. God might exist. I lack "belief," either way. In case it needs to be said, I have no issues with those who disagree with me. Clearly this is a matter of opinion which can not be proved either way. Does God exist? Maybe. Maybe not. What is, is. What is not, is not. Neither belief nor disbelief changes anything. IMO

For me, the chart is in a slightly different context. The people who get all bent out of shape arguing about the difference between Atheist and Agnostic. This chart is an expression of that argument. The passions over this issue are astonishing.

It was. You stopped by just long enough to throw a smug bomb and leave.

Alright. My mistake.

I'm sure this is why you used the Atheist label. That does not mean real Atheists are of like mind. Seriously, people who don't agree with you are "blind" and "prefer to wander in darkness?" How very hostile of you. And rude. That's a conversation killer.

It's thinking "inside the box."

"Why?" only leads to a philosophic treadmill. I prefer "What?"

Behind the details of technique; what is this urge to chart and graph and define everything? Your goal is not to be "useful." You made that clear. What then?

I find their physics and Cosmology more compelling than Genesis.

Do you disagree with Prof. krauss? What about Dr. Neil D. Tyson?

People with out connectins to Web, also won't be active.