Jonathan H. B. Lobl

Hello again Dan: Once again, you have chosen to present Atheism -- and Atheists -- through a lens of Christian faith. You don't care how Atheists understand Atheism. You don't care how Atheists understand themselves. What you care about in this regard -- is how Dan views Atheists and Atheism. It should come as little or no surprise, that some Atheists, have a biased view of Christianity and Christians. Surprise. I found you an Atheist blogger, who has much to say on the subject. Is the blogger fair or accurate in describing Christianity or Christians? No. Both fairness and correctness leave much to be desired. Is this Atheist blogger as correct and fair, in describing Christianity and Christians -- as you are in describing Atheism and Atheists? Yes. In that sense, the blogger is spot on. Life is a two way street. If you get to define us -- then we get to define you. Enjoy. https://www.patheos.com/blogs/rolltodisbelieve/2019/08/27/christian-peace-marketing-tactic/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=BRSS&utm_campaign=Nonreligious&utm_content=364 I almost forgot.

I followed your link. This is where you go for advice? That was instructive. It explains a lot about you. The first point is pure supposition. All Atheists are insincere? Seriously? Someone has to come down off his high horse -- and smell the chloroform. The second point has partial truth. Atheists don't rely on absolute moral codes. This much is true. Atheists don't need absolute moral codes, in order to look at obvious evil -- and draw their own conclusions. The illusory nature of absolute codes, is another discussion. The third point is simply irritating. Atheism does not support Abortion or anything else. Atheism is not a code of conduct. Atheism is a conclusion about God's existence, based on a lack of evidence. Nothing more. You keep making Atheism into something that it is not. It seems, so does your source of advice. 1. Children are innocent, so why would God order their deaths? II. Before answering, let me point out that the atheist asking is insincere A. An atheist doesn’t believe in God, nor in any absolute moral code. B. Atheism has long supported the killing of children in the form of abortion. They justify the destruction of “unwanted” children for convenience. 1. Therefore to claim that God is unjust for ordering what they think is morally correct is an insincere position. C. Second, to claim that the killing of children is wrong is an appeal to a moral code. This undermines their own belief that morality is relative. You can’t have it both ways.

Thank you. It's nice to know that my attempts at fairness are understood. The thing is -- when I'm expressing my deep opinion -- I have to remember that not everybody agrees with me. I'm not always fair -- but I try.

I understand your concerns. My concern is management. I don't want the thread to get locked.

A note of caution: This thread is about proving the truth of Christianity. The abundant evil, of the God character, is a different issue. It shifts the conversation from truth and evidence, to moral evaluation. I think that if we go down that path; this thread will degenerate quickly.

To be clear -- the story of Adam and Eve is literal history -- and the story of Noah's Flood is not literal history -- and the difference is what you believe. I'm going with objective, verifiable facts. None of it is literal history. Or true.

That's funny.

As you say, the author of this blog, does not like the message. In fairness, neither do I. In my opinion, this is mere icing on the cake. Before we get anywhere near Jesus -- or the Christian message -- there is the small matter of God. Not any God. The God of the Bible. In my own case, this is a much harder sell than Jesus. Belief is a structure. Like a house. There is small virtue in crafting the perfect roof, until the cellar is installed. IMO There is a lack of objective, verifiable evidence, for the existence of God. I understand that faith works for you. It does not work for me.

Usually when I see a what if post -- (What if God's existence could be proven?) -- the poster neglects to say which God. I was surprised by how specific this was.

If Christianity were proven true. "Godless Mom" speaks her mind in a blog. https://www.patheos.com/blogs/godlessmom/2019/08/what-would-you-do-if-christianity-were-proven-true/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Imagine+No+Religion&utm_content=44

Yes.

It brings out my Agnostic impulses. What objective, verifiable facts or information, do we have about God? None. None at all. God could still exist -- but there is no reason to believe, based on this material. In fairness, I hasten to add -- IMO

A Pagan blogger, with thoughts on devotion and commitment. It's a thoughtful piece, worth reflecting on. https://www.patheos.com/blogs/heathenatheart/2019/08/pagan-priests-laity-and-playgans/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Pagan+News+and+Views&utm_content=37

A blogger -- with much to say about the true and false in Bible history. Mostly false. Here is a hint. The Exodus never happened. Or a lot of other things. https://www.patheos.com/blogs/godlessindixie/2019/08/20/episode-12-none-of-this-really-happened/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Imagine+No+Religion&utm_content=44

Yes. The casinos. What do people chant before rolling the dice? "C'mon Seven. Daddy needs a new pair of shoes!" This sort of makes sense -- if the chant is directed towards Hermes, Messenger of the gods. Nobody appreciates good footwear like a messenger. Just look at his winged sandals. Speaking of the old gods. On Valentine's day -- who do we see flying around with his bow and arrows? It's Cupid. Not even a change of name or form. It's CUPID. Don't forget the Fates. Every Christmas, Nat King Cole sings -- "if the Fates allow". I almost forgot the obvious. Today is Thor's Day. Tomorrow is Frey Day. As in -- Thank God for Frey Day.

Here we are in August. The heat is on. It's time to start thinking about December. It's time to start thinking about Santa Claus. What do we know about Santa? It's all in the children's songs. "He's making a list. Checking it twice. He always knows who's naughty or nice. Santa Claus is coming to town." "He knows when you are sleeping. He knows when you're awake. He knows when you've been bad or good, So be good for goodness sake." Where does this leave us? An old man with a beard. Watching everything that we do. He keeps lists. He flies around the night sky, in the company of magical creatures. He rewards the good and punishes the bad. This is God Lite. Santa isn't alone. There is also Old Man Winter. He's on television. He sells snow tires. Jack Frost is also still around. A relative of Frosty the Snowman. The old gods have changes in form and name. They never quite go away.

Welcome back.

Have we all seen the Statue of Liberty? She stands in New York Harbor, looking very much like a Greek goddess. She is the personification of "Liberty". She is known as "Lady Liberty". I find myself thinking. We need only install an altar -- and a priesthood. Then we can actually worship at Liberty's feet.

The thing about the article that got me, was the broad sweeping classifications. It listed Pantheism as a subgroup of Paganism. Seriously? Someone can't tell the difference between Pan and Polly -? Some distinctions are worth making. Just because we have a religious designation, outside of Monotheism, does not make it Pagan. It's a small thing. Like a mosquito bite. Still, it irritates me.

I went to my inbox and found a blog from Starlight Witch. She seems to think that Wiccans are not welcome under the "Pagan Umbrella". I don't want to take sides. Or inflame anything. To me, this looks like a cultural divide. As divides go -- not that bad. I look at a real divide, say -- between Catholic and Protestant -- or Sunni and Shia -- Really. Not that bad. Real divides have body counts. People will have disagreements. https://www.patheos.com/blogs/starlight/2019/08/the-big-pagan-umbrella-witchcraft/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Pagan+News+and+Views&utm_content=37

In my limited experience -- some of the people that I met -- who said that they were Pagan -- had no idea of what a Pagan is. Some were frauds. Some were delusional. Most were simply silly. A few were real.

That makes what you have to say, all the more interesting. I hope you will stick around.

I have a lot of dim memories, which have fused. Memories of people being accused of being witches -- so of course, they were unfit parents. Or public officials. Or what ever. At minimum, they were subject to public ridicule and suspicion. Have things really changed? I'm not in a position to know. My perception lingers.

I would like to throw in a few words of caution. By and large, real Pagans are not advertising to the outside world. That makes Pagan priests, high priests, schools of ancient wisdom and seminaries etc. -- who are advertising -- to be suspect. They don't have to be frauds, but I would be suspicious. It's an old bit of practical wisdom. "The people who know, are not talking. The people who are talking, don't know." Seriously. It's hard enough coming out as Atheist. I don't have to tell you. Coming out as Pagan, can't be easy.