Salvation for Fallen Humans & Fallen Angels (A Practical Guide)

[RevBogovac]

9 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

The One God with many names is not a new thought.  It's a very old thought.  The question remains.  Does it matter?  Why does it matter?

 

 

It matters to those who feel so overwhelmed by the real world that they need mythology to reassure them... been like that for eons... 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

4 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

 

It matters to those who feel so overwhelmed by the real world that they need mythology to reassure them... been like that for eons... 

 

 

A comforting lie.  Used for control, manipulation and extortion.  Despite the myth being based on fantasy.  Then, it matters, to the churches, the government, manipulators and other power brokers.  Certainly, when a man is kneeling in prayer, it is simple to pick his pocket.

 

An anti anxiety medication.  Like alcohol.  Or marijuana.  Or a numbing agent, like Lidocaine.

 

I suppose the various intoxicants and numbing agents do matter.  It's not what I had in mind, but alright.

 

 

You might have noticed.  I lack piety.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[RevBogovac]

On 4/3/2019 at 9:28 AM, RevBogovac said:

 

It matters to those who feel so overwhelmed by the real world that they need mythology to reassure them... been like that for eons... 

 

19 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

A comforting lie.  Used for control, manipulation and extortion.  Despite the myth being based on fantasy.  Then, it matters, to the churches, the government, manipulators and other power brokers.  Certainly, when a man is kneeling in prayer, it is simple to pick his pocket.

 

An anti anxiety medication.  Like alcohol.  Or marijuana.  Or a numbing agent, like Lidocaine.

 

I suppose the various intoxicants and numbing agents do matter.  It's not what I had in mind, but alright.

 

 

You might have noticed.  I lack piety.

 

 

 

 

Thank you (for driving the point home)!  

 

 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

3 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

 

 

 

Thank you (for driving the point home)!  

 

 

 

 

 

Over time, I have been discovering that the different labels lead to different arguments.  Mostly futile.

 

When I used the Agnostic label, I was greeted with questions about -- What would it take to make up your mind? Or philosophic nonsense about the limitations of knowledge.  In general, it leads to the underlying assumption that I'm searching for answers.  For these and other reasons, I have found the label to be more trouble than it's worth.

 

The Atheist label has been poisoned.  It should be useful.  A simple statement of non-belief.  The pious insist that it's a positive statement of disbelief.  You saw this from Dan.  I have seen worse.  I joined some Atheist groups on Facebook. 

 

We were constantly spammed with demands that we "prove" there is no God.  Because "I don't believe" gets twisted into an assertion that Atheism doesn't make.  Of course:

 

Spam arguments about objective morality.  Because God.

 

Spam arguments about evolution theory.  Because God.

 

Spam arguments about Cosmology.  Because God.

 

Truly mindless arguments about -- "Why do you hate God so much"  or "Atheists just want to sin."  or "Atheist are lying because the truth is written on our hearts."

 

Dan is far from unique.  The worst thing about arguing with all the stupidity, is that it keeps repeating.  Each new fool makes the same demands -- the same arguments -- offers the same proof -- yet again.  For the first time.  It's numbing at the same time that it's annoying.

 

Which is why I found myself driven to Apatheism.  Because I'm tired of arguing with the stupid and the crazy.  Because I can't do it any more.  Because the meta-physics and the philosophy arguments, have taken too much out of me.

 

In the end, Religion fades into Mythology.  It is the arc of history.  Reality prevails.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 4, 2019 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[RevBogovac]

21 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

Over time, I have been discovering that the different labels lead to different arguments.  Mostly futile.

 

When I used the Agnostic label, I was greeted with questions about -- What would it take to make up your mind? Or philosophic nonsense about the limitations of knowledge.  In general, it leads to the underlying assumption that I'm searching for answers.  For these and other reasons, I have found the label to be more trouble than it's worth.

 

The Atheist label has been poisoned.  It should be useful.  A simple statement of non-belief.  The pious insist that it's a positive statement of disbelief.  You saw this from Dan.  I have seen worse.  I joined some Atheist groups on Facebook. 

 

We were constantly spammed with demands that we "prove" there is no God.  Because "I don't believe" gets twisted into an assertion that Atheism doesn't make.  Of course:

 

Spam arguments about objective morality.  Because God.

 

Spam arguments about evolution theory.  Because God.

 

Spam arguments about Cosmology.  Because God.

 

Truly mindless arguments about -- "Why do you hate God so much"  or "Atheists just want to sin."  or "Atheist are lying because the truth is written on our hearts."

 

Dan is far from unique.  The worst thing about arguing with all the stupidity, is that it keeps repeating.  Each new fool makes the same demands -- the same arguments -- offers the same proof -- yet again.  For the first time.  It's numbing at the same time that it's annoying.

 

Which is why I found myself driven to Apatheism.  Because I'm tired of arguing with the stupid and the crazy.  Because I can't do it any more.  Because the meta-physics and the philosophy arguments, have taken too much out of me.

 

In the end, Religion fades into Mythology.  It is the arc of history.  Reality prevails.

 

 

 

 

 

At least, from time to time, someone "new" comes along and finds your words inspiring (and it saves that person a long detour to find those same arguments/conclusions)... 🤔

 

 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

6 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

 

 

At least, from time to time, someone "new" comes along and finds your words inspiring (and it saves that person a long detour to find those same arguments/conclusions)... 🤔

 

 

 

 

 

Thank you for the thought.  It helps, not being alone.

 

          

 

 

 

Edited April 5, 2019 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[cuchulain]

The only thing that makes this forum worth it for me is compatriots and an understanding of lurkers who need exposure to the other side of the debate.  Kind of like politicians trying to get the fence sitters.  

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

2 hours ago, cuchulain said:

The only thing that makes this forum worth it for me is compatriots and an understanding of lurkers who need exposure to the other side of the debate.  Kind of like politicians trying to get the fence sitters.  

 

 

Life has it's little jokes.  You may remember me, from the days when I was an easy going Pantheist.  You, were a liberal Christian.  Life among pious Fundamentalists, has made me much more extreme than I was.  Dan in particular, but there are others.  Perhaps, I should be grateful?          No.          Not grateful.          They were not being kind.     

 

But they helped me get where I am.     

 

Life's little joke.  The Fundamentalists on this board, are doing way more than we are, to spread Atheism.  Even, anti-theism.     

 

 

[Dan56]

12 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

They were not being kind.

 

This coming from Mr Congeniality

 

12 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

But they helped me get where I am.

 

No, you got there all by yourself

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

2 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

This coming from Mr Congeniality

 

 

No, you got there all by yourself

 

 

I remember my Pantheist days.  I had convictions about God being the totality of existence.  You insisted on calling me an unbeliever.  It was a very small influence on my development, but it was real.  You might not remember.  But I do.  At the time, your calling me an unbeliever got me angry.  Angry enough that I actually examined my beliefs.  I started asking myself questions.  Questions like -- What do I really believe?  Why do I believe these things?  What do I actually know about God?  What does anybody actually know about God?  Is my evidence objective?

 

When I had my answers, I discovered that I was an Atheist, meaning that I really didn't believe in God.  You were a tiny part of my development, but you were there for me when I needed a push.  You did not push out of kindness.  At the time, I was impressed by your meanness.  But it was a push that I needed.  Somehow, I find it difficult to be grateful.

 

As to your influence on the lives of others on this board -- it is not for me to say.  Still, I expect that you have had more impact than you know.  Not what you intended, but an influence.

 

 

 

[Dan56]

3 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

I remember my Pantheist days.  I had convictions about God being the totality of existence.  You insisted on calling me an unbeliever.  It was a very small influence on my development, but it was real.  You might not remember.  But I do.  At the time, your calling me an unbeliever got me angry.  Angry enough that I actually examined my beliefs.  I started asking myself questions.  Questions like -- What do I really believe?  Why do I believe these things?  What do I actually know about God?  What does anybody actually know about God?  Is my evidence objective?

 

When I had my answers, I discovered that I was an Atheist, meaning that I really didn't believe in God.  You were a tiny part of my development, but you were there for me when I needed a push.  You did not push out of kindness.  At the time, I was impressed by your meanness.  But it was a push that I needed.  Somehow, I find it difficult to be grateful.

 

As to your influence on the lives of others on this board -- it is not for me to say.  Still, I expect that you have had more impact than you know.  Not what you intended, but an influence.

 

 

 

 

I don't remember, but I'm sure my comments of referring to you as an unbeliever were related to Christianity. Glad you re-examined your path into Pantheism,  but I doubt I had any influence on your ultimate choice to believe in no God/gods, that decision emanates from within a person. I suppose its better to believe in no gods than to believe in the wrong one. Your real struggle is with "belief" itself, you can't or won't believe in anything...period... But that's okay, I understand that its very difficult for some people to believe in anything these days. But the philosophy of, "If you can't prove it, don't believe it" certainly leaves a void in one's life. Belief is your best guess to unanswered questions, while believing nothing is surrendering to what can't be factually known. One approach offers hope, the other invalidates any meaningful existence. If the universe was an accident, and nothing came from nothing, your on solid ground, but for myself, that assumption is much harder to accept than to believe that everything in existence is the result of intelligent design.. "I don't care" is an attitude of someone who's given up, can't find satisfactory answers, and is tired of trying to intellectually rationalize God, but God is not perceived that way. The answer to a divine being won't be found in any scientific experiment.

 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

3 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

I don't remember, but I'm sure my comments of referring to you as an unbeliever were related to Christianity. Glad you re-examined your path into Pantheism,  but I doubt I had any influence on your ultimate choice to believe in no God/gods, that decision emanates from within a person. I suppose its better to believe in no gods than to believe in the wrong one. Your real struggle is with "belief" itself, you can't or won't believe in anything...period... But that's okay, I understand that its very difficult for some people to believe in anything these days. But the philosophy of, "If you can't prove it, don't believe it" certainly leaves a void in one's life. Belief is your best guess to unanswered questions, while believing nothing is surrendering to what can't be factually known. One approach offers hope, the other invalidates any meaningful existence. If the universe was an accident, and nothing came from nothing, your on solid ground, but for myself, that assumption is much harder to accept than to believe that everything in existence is the result of intelligent design.. Belief is your best guess to unanswered questions, while believing nothing is surrendering to what can't be factually known. is an attitude of someone who's given up, can't find satisfactory answers, and is tired of trying to intellectually rationalize God, but God is not perceived that way. The answer to a divine being won't be found in any scientific experiment.

 

 

 

 

I suppose its better to believe in no gods than to believe in the wrong one.

Spoken like a true believer.  You have not yet established, that your God is the right one.  Or that a different God is the wrong one.

you can't or won't believe in anything...period.

Back to that again?  How very tedious of you.

 

Belief is your best guess to unanswered questions, while believing nothing is surrendering to what can't be factually known.

One honest question mark, is worth ten thousand dishonest exclamation points.  If you don't know, don't pretend.

 

I know when I don't know.  I am honest enough to admit when I don't know.  It's the Secular way.

 

You still can't tell the difference between natural process and accident.  Not that it matters.  We are not talking about Cosmology.  Still, nice attempt at deflection.

 

Not caring about silly, irrelevant and meaningless meta-physics is not "hopeless".  It's a time saver.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 6, 2019 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[Dan56]

7 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

I suppose its better to believe in no gods than to believe in the wrong one.

Spoken like a true believer.  You have not yet established, that your God is the right one.  Or that a different God is the wrong one.

you can't or won't believe in anything...period.

Back to that again?  How very tedious of you.

 

Belief is your best guess to unanswered questions, while believing nothing is surrendering to what can't be factually known.

One honest question mark, is worth ten thousand dishonest exclamation points.  If you don't know, don't pretend.

 

I know when I don't know.  I am honest enough to admit when I don't know.  It's the Secular way.

 

You still can't tell the difference between natural process and accident.  Not that it matters.  We are not talking about Cosmology.  Still, nice attempt at deflection.

 

Not caring about silly, irrelevant and meaningless meta-physics is not "hopeless".  It's a time saver.

 

 

I've established that my God is the right one and only one for me, but that's a personal determination that no one can establish for you. Establishing something as fact removes the necessity of belief.

 

Yes, back to the obvious, belief is a choice, a choice you've chosen not to exercise.

 

Life is a question mark.. Belief is the enthusiastic exclamation point to the meaning of life... The secular way is a dead-end period that answers nothing.

 

I completely understand the difference between natural process and accident, I just believe the natural process is the result of intelligent design, and not some fluke way that everything just happen to fall into place and work together after some unexplained big bang.

 

Not caring is having no curiosity, its having no sense of wonderment,  it is surrendering to hopelessness.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

38 minutes ago, Dan56 said:

 

I've established that my God is the right one and only one for me, but that's a personal determination that no one can establish for you. Establishing something as fact removes the necessity of belief.

 

Yes, back to the obvious, belief is a choice, a choice you've chosen not to exercise.

 

Life is a question mark.. Belief is the enthusiastic exclamation point to the meaning of life...The secular way is a dead-end period that answers nothing. 

 

I completely understand the difference between natural process and accident, I just believe the natural process is the result of intelligent design, and not some fluke way that everything just happen to fall into place and work together after some unexplained big bang.

 

Not caring is having no curiosity, its having no sense of wonderment,  it is surrendering to hopelessness.

 

Establishing something as fact removes the necessity of belief.

Yes.  Yes it does.  At least we can agree on this.

 

belief is a choice, a choice you've chosen not to exercise.

You like quoting from works of fiction.  Here's one from Peter Pan.

 

"If you believe and clap your hands, Tinkerbell will live"

 

Yes.  Belief.  The power of Clap.

 

The secular way is a dead-end period that answers nothing. 

That answers nothing?  I know where the Sun goes at night.  The people who wrote Genesis didn't know that.

 

Not caring is having no curiosity, its having no sense of wonderment,  it is surrendering to hopelessness.

I see that you are still confused on this one basic point.  It is only God that I don't care about.  You do love to muddy the waters.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 7, 2019 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[Dan56]

13 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

That answers nothing?  I know where the Sun goes at night.  The people who wrote Genesis didn't know that.

 

I see that you are still confused on this one basic point.  It is only God that I don't care about.  You do love to muddy the waters.

 

I didn't say secular thinking didn't have some common sense, but it answers nothing beyond what can be studied and physically observed.. nothing spiritual or beyond the grave.

That was my point, imo not caring about God is a hopeless existence because it ends in death.

Edited April 7, 2019 by Dan56

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

1 hour ago, Dan56 said:

 

I didn't say secular thinking didn't have some common sense, but it answers nothing beyond what can be studied and physically observed.. nothing spiritual or beyond the grave.

That was my point, imo not caring about God is a hopeless existence because it ends in death.

 

 

 

 

 

[RevBogovac]

On 4/7/2019 at 7:16 AM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

[...]

 

The secular way is a dead-end period that answers nothing. 

That answers nothing?  I know where the Sun goes at night.  The people who wrote Genesis didn't know that.

 

Not caring is having no curiosity, its having no sense of wonderment,  it is surrendering to hopelessness.

I see that you are still confused on this one basic point.  It is only God that I don't care about.  You do love to muddy the waters.

 

On 4/7/2019 at 8:35 PM, Dan56 said:

 

I didn't say secular thinking didn't have some common sense, but it answers nothing beyond what can be studied and physically observed.. nothing spiritual or beyond the grave.

That was my point, imo not caring about God is a hopeless existence because it ends in death.

 

 

So you can be totally oblivious about how basic astronomy works but still be 100% right philosophically...? Interesting conclusion you make there, Dan...

 

I've got news for you Dan: we all die. I know that for a fact.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

30 minutes ago, RevBogovac said:

 

So you can be totally oblivious about how basic astronomy works but still be 100% right philosophically...? Interesting conclusion you make there, Dan...

 

I've got news for you Dan: we all die. I know that for a fact.

 

 

Of course we all die.  In time, even the stars grow cold.  But why drag reality into this, now?  All we have to do is believe and wish real hard -- and it's ice cream and gum drops forever and ever.     

 

 

[Dan56]

10 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

I've got news for you Dan: we all die. I know that for a fact.

 

I don't disagree, nearly everyone dies physically.. But I was speaking spiritually.. Tell me how astronomy addresses spiritual death? And I don't mean the mere transformation of energy,  because it fails to address your consciousness, and that's why I wrote that the limitations of secular thinking makes it a dead end street. 

 

 

[RevBogovac]

14 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

 

So you can be totally oblivious about how basic astronomy works but still be 100% right philosophically...? Interesting conclusion you make there, Dan...

 

I've got news for you Dan: we all die. I know that for a fact.

 

3 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

I don't disagree, nearly everyone dies physically.. But I was speaking spiritually.. Tell me how astronomy addresses spiritual death? And I don't mean the mere transformation of energy,  because it fails to address your consciousness, and that's why I wrote that the limitations of secular thinking makes it a dead end street. 

 

 

 

Nice deflection Dan... the point is that if you do not understand basic principles you are not even coming close to understanding higher principles...