'America’s New Religions'

[BULLDOG]

Except that it's not.

I've told you several times I don't wanna play your silly game.

Bugger off.

How would you know?

Did you investigate any of it?

I can tell you with 100% certainty that you are the only person I know who denies what I have shared. Even your beloved scientists do not deny this.

If you say so.

Yes, because it is part of the geologic record.

OK. I started a thread a while back " I'm not a climate scientist, and you aren't either", or something close to that. Like the title, I pointed out the stupidity of trying to discuss details that nobody here is qualified to evaluate. Bottom line, I believe credible experts in the field over some dumb ass poster, or any so called scientist with a history of conspiracy theories. It's a judgement call, but you accept so called climate change data from the same people that told you Jade Helm was gonna put Texans in FEMA prisons. That's just nuts.

So you take what they tell you on faith?

Without investigating for yourself?

Not faith in the religious sense. It's more like trust in their education experience, and judgement. When a doctor prescribes a drug, I don't investigate all the research that went into developing that drug. I trust that his education and experience indicates that particular drug is the best choice in that particular circumstance, but realize there is a chance his choice could be wrong. It is nothing like the religious based faith you have for your religion.

 

[ding]

How would you know?

Did you investigate any of it?

I can tell you with 100% certainty that you are the only person I know who denies what I have shared. Even your beloved scientists do not deny this.

If you say so.

Yes, because it is part of the geologic record.

OK. I started a thread a while back " I'm not a climate scientist, and you aren't either", or something close to that. Like the title, I pointed out the stupidity of trying to discuss details that nobody here is qualified to evaluate. Bottom line, I believe credible experts in the field over some dumb ass poster, or any so called scientist with a history of conspiracy theories. It's a judgement call, but you accept so called climate change data from the same people that told you Jade Helm was gonna put Texans in FEMA prisons. That's just nuts.

So you take what they tell you on faith?

Without investigating for yourself?

Not faith in the religious sense. It's more like trust in their education experience, and judgement. When a doctor prescribes a drug, I don't investigate all the research that went into developing that drug. I trust that his education and experience indicates that particular drug is the best choice in that particular circumstance, but realize there is a chance his choice could be wrong. It is nothing like the religious based faith you have for your religion.

Maybe you should look up the definition of faith. Because you are placing complete trust in people you have never met on a subject you know nothing about. At least with your doctor you have information about yourself that you can weigh his advice over.

Also, when you are told something by your doctor that doesn’t make sense to you, you would get a second opinion. And if it were important enough to you, you would do your own research.

So since you have done none of those things you absolutely are putting your complete trust in what they tell you. That is faith.

 

[ding]

How would you know?

Did you investigate any of it?

I can tell you with 100% certainty that you are the only person I know who denies what I have shared. Even your beloved scientists do not deny this.

If you say so.

Yes, because it is part of the geologic record.

OK. I started a thread a while back " I'm not a climate scientist, and you aren't either", or something close to that. Like the title, I pointed out the stupidity of trying to discuss details that nobody here is qualified to evaluate. Bottom line, I believe credible experts in the field over some dumb ass poster, or any so called scientist with a history of conspiracy theories. It's a judgement call, but you accept so called climate change data from the same people that told you Jade Helm was gonna put Texans in FEMA prisons. That's just nuts.

So you take what they tell you on faith?

Without investigating for yourself?

Not faith in the religious sense. It's more like trust in their education experience, and judgement. When a doctor prescribes a drug, I don't investigate all the research that went into developing that drug. I trust that his education and experience indicates that particular drug is the best choice in that particular circumstance, but realize there is a chance his choice could be wrong. It is nothing like the religious based faith you have for your religion.

The final proof is that you dismissed factual evidence that was presented to you. Evidence you could have researched yourself, but didn’t. Instead you dismissed it because you had so much faith in your beliefs you wouldn’t even take the time to investigate it.

 

[Mike Dwight]

You mean Methodists and Baptists 1830's revivalists , go Americans! You mean the Mormons, the Promised Land with some Manifest Destiny, lets go to Utah! You mean the 1900's Assemblies of God and Jehova's witness and seventh day Adventists, go Americans? Religion asking all the Nations to Peace under Christ! OH CRAP!!! What was the most deadly, actual Church thing, and event in America, its Jonestown cult a guy threw together communism People's Temple and religion and also race mixing , and some new start where the biggest deaths before World Trade Center.

Hm , I agree from that article that in a factual solid historical, and statistical superior civilization sort of way, that Christianity, was the source of all superiority. Party time.
Japanese red-skins. American government is afraid to pay for its sins of like, telling the Holy Horaces they aren't supposed to cause any opposition to Japan. What a vague article you have. I get 10,000 points if one man and one woman marry in Salic primogeniture across the Globe, haha! With a Robot Bishop! You can't grab imperial conquest cassus belli of Christian nations, Europa universalis rules. you'd have to find some other cassus belli. Rub two Japanese Christians together and get George takei.
What, religion collapsed somewhere around here? I am Also too busy to help Queen Min, too many songs, too many songs.

 

[Uncensored2008]

That's just heresy against your retarded religion, fuckwad.

I don't have a religion butt-munch. (Have had to drag out the highschool insults in a while, forgive me if I'm a bit Rusty)

You behave as if you do.

How so?

You believe what you are told without actually understanding anything about it, you take it as gospel on faith and you attack others who disagree with it

Ah, I think you're confused. That's the denier side of the issue you're talking about.

Nah, he has you nailed, creep.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Worshipping their Orange God is Trumps' base #1 religion!

Not all sophisticated like Gaia worship, huh?

 

[Uncensored2008]

[
Look kid, I already told you I wasn't gonna play yer stupid game. You're off topic and boring.

Now bugger off ya little pest.

Aw, did you get your little pee-pee slapped, creeper?

You Marxists get so incensed when someone hands your ass to you....

 

[Uncensored2008]

Ah, I think you're confused. That's the denier side of the issue you're talking about.

Did you see the evidence I already posted here?

But if you really felt that way you wouldn’t have run from my Bull Ring challenge like a scared little girl with a skinned knee.

Not evidence, propaganda.

The glacial interglacial cycles of the past 400,000 years are propaganda?

The transition from a greenhouse world to an icehouse world is propaganda?

The polar regions being isolated from warm marine currents and atmospheric CO2 of 400 ppm which led to the transition from a greenhouse world to an icehouse world is propaganda?

Proxies for CO2 and temperature which show that CO2 lags temperature change by 800 years through out the geologic record is propaganda?

CO2 sequestration by the ocean when temperatures fall and CO2 releases by the ocean when temperatures rise which explains why CO2 lags temperature by 800 years is propaganda?

Look kid, I already told you I wasn't gonna play yer stupid game. You're off topic and boring.

Now bugger off ya little pest.

You are the one who brought it up.

You utterly destroyed the ignorant dolt.

It was fun to watch.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You state conclusions that are not supported by the facts.

What would you, or any fanatic of your moronic religion know of facts?

You Gaia worshipers are the most primitive fools around.

Uhg, Me worship living planet..... Me live in cave with head up ass....

 

[BULLDOG]

If you say so.

Yes, because it is part of the geologic record.

OK. I started a thread a while back " I'm not a climate scientist, and you aren't either", or something close to that. Like the title, I pointed out the stupidity of trying to discuss details that nobody here is qualified to evaluate. Bottom line, I believe credible experts in the field over some dumb ass poster, or any so called scientist with a history of conspiracy theories. It's a judgement call, but you accept so called climate change data from the same people that told you Jade Helm was gonna put Texans in FEMA prisons. That's just nuts.

So you take what they tell you on faith?

Without investigating for yourself?

Not faith in the religious sense. It's more like trust in their education experience, and judgement. When a doctor prescribes a drug, I don't investigate all the research that went into developing that drug. I trust that his education and experience indicates that particular drug is the best choice in that particular circumstance, but realize there is a chance his choice could be wrong. It is nothing like the religious based faith you have for your religion.

Maybe you should look up the definition of faith. Because you are placing complete trust in people you have never met on a subject you know nothing about. At least with your doctor you have information about yourself that you can weigh his advice over.

Also, when you are told something by your doctor that doesn’t make sense to you, you would get a second opinion. And if it were important enough to you, you would do your own research.

So since you have done none of those things you absolutely are putting your complete trust in what they tell you. That is faith.

Trust and faith are not the same thing.

 

[ding]

Yes, because it is part of the geologic record.

OK. I started a thread a while back " I'm not a climate scientist, and you aren't either", or something close to that. Like the title, I pointed out the stupidity of trying to discuss details that nobody here is qualified to evaluate. Bottom line, I believe credible experts in the field over some dumb ass poster, or any so called scientist with a history of conspiracy theories. It's a judgement call, but you accept so called climate change data from the same people that told you Jade Helm was gonna put Texans in FEMA prisons. That's just nuts.

So you take what they tell you on faith?

Without investigating for yourself?

Not faith in the religious sense. It's more like trust in their education experience, and judgement. When a doctor prescribes a drug, I don't investigate all the research that went into developing that drug. I trust that his education and experience indicates that particular drug is the best choice in that particular circumstance, but realize there is a chance his choice could be wrong. It is nothing like the religious based faith you have for your religion.

Maybe you should look up the definition of faith. Because you are placing complete trust in people you have never met on a subject you know nothing about. At least with your doctor you have information about yourself that you can weigh his advice over.

Also, when you are told something by your doctor that doesn’t make sense to you, you would get a second opinion. And if it were important enough to you, you would do your own research.

So since you have done none of those things you absolutely are putting your complete trust in what they tell you. That is faith.

Trust and faith are not the same thing.

But they are absolutely related.

faith: complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

trust: firm belief in the reliability, truth, ability, or strength of someone or something.

And since you have not investigated anything, especially evidence contrary to your position, you have placed complete trust in what you have been told by others. That's faith.

 

[BULLDOG]

OK. I started a thread a while back " I'm not a climate scientist, and you aren't either", or something close to that. Like the title, I pointed out the stupidity of trying to discuss details that nobody here is qualified to evaluate. Bottom line, I believe credible experts in the field over some dumb ass poster, or any so called scientist with a history of conspiracy theories. It's a judgement call, but you accept so called climate change data from the same people that told you Jade Helm was gonna put Texans in FEMA prisons. That's just nuts.

So you take what they tell you on faith?

Without investigating for yourself?

Not faith in the religious sense. It's more like trust in their education experience, and judgement. When a doctor prescribes a drug, I don't investigate all the research that went into developing that drug. I trust that his education and experience indicates that particular drug is the best choice in that particular circumstance, but realize there is a chance his choice could be wrong. It is nothing like the religious based faith you have for your religion.

Maybe you should look up the definition of faith. Because you are placing complete trust in people you have never met on a subject you know nothing about. At least with your doctor you have information about yourself that you can weigh his advice over.

Also, when you are told something by your doctor that doesn’t make sense to you, you would get a second opinion. And if it were important enough to you, you would do your own research.

So since you have done none of those things you absolutely are putting your complete trust in what they tell you. That is faith.

Trust and faith are not the same thing.

But they are absolutely related.

faith: complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

trust: firm belief in the reliability, truth, ability, or strength of someone or something.

And since you have not investigated anything, especially evidence contrary to your position, you have placed complete trust in what you have been told by others. That's faith.

Big difference between trust and complete trust. You don't get that?

 

[ding]

So you take what they tell you on faith?

Without investigating for yourself?

Not faith in the religious sense. It's more like trust in their education experience, and judgement. When a doctor prescribes a drug, I don't investigate all the research that went into developing that drug. I trust that his education and experience indicates that particular drug is the best choice in that particular circumstance, but realize there is a chance his choice could be wrong. It is nothing like the religious based faith you have for your religion.

Maybe you should look up the definition of faith. Because you are placing complete trust in people you have never met on a subject you know nothing about. At least with your doctor you have information about yourself that you can weigh his advice over.

Also, when you are told something by your doctor that doesn’t make sense to you, you would get a second opinion. And if it were important enough to you, you would do your own research.

So since you have done none of those things you absolutely are putting your complete trust in what they tell you. That is faith.

Trust and faith are not the same thing.

But they are absolutely related.

faith: complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

trust: firm belief in the reliability, truth, ability, or strength of someone or something.

And since you have not investigated anything, especially evidence contrary to your position, you have placed complete trust in what you have been told by others. That's faith.

Big difference between trust and complete belief. You don't get that?

The difference is the degree of trust. Faith has a higher degree of belief than trust does. Faith, by definition is complete trust. Trust, by definition, is a firm belief.

You have placed complete trust in what you have been told by others. I know this by your actions. I presented factual evidence that you could have investigated on your own, but instead of doing that you dismissed it because you had complete trust in what you were told by others. If you had only had a firm belief in what you were told, you would have investigated it for yourself.

 

[BULLDOG]

Not faith in the religious sense. It's more like trust in their education experience, and judgement. When a doctor prescribes a drug, I don't investigate all the research that went into developing that drug. I trust that his education and experience indicates that particular drug is the best choice in that particular circumstance, but realize there is a chance his choice could be wrong. It is nothing like the religious based faith you have for your religion.

Maybe you should look up the definition of faith. Because you are placing complete trust in people you have never met on a subject you know nothing about. At least with your doctor you have information about yourself that you can weigh his advice over.

Also, when you are told something by your doctor that doesn’t make sense to you, you would get a second opinion. And if it were important enough to you, you would do your own research.

So since you have done none of those things you absolutely are putting your complete trust in what they tell you. That is faith.

Trust and faith are not the same thing.

But they are absolutely related.

faith: complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

trust: firm belief in the reliability, truth, ability, or strength of someone or something.

And since you have not investigated anything, especially evidence contrary to your position, you have placed complete trust in what you have been told by others. That's faith.

Big difference between trust and complete belief. You don't get that?

The difference is the degree of trust. Faith has a higher degree of belief than trust does. Faith, by definition is complete trust. Trust, by definition, is a firm belief.

You have placed complete trust in what you have been told by others. I know this by your actions. I presented factual evidence that you could have investigated on your own, but instead of doing that you dismissed it because you had complete trust in what you were told by others. If you had only had a firm belief in what you were told, you would have investigated it for yourself.

I'm not arrogant enough to think reading a couple of articles will give me the years of knowledge needed to credibly evaluate all the data, as you seem to be, and like you, I don't intend to invest the years needed to do that. Believe what you want, but you aren't qualified to comment on the reasons or strength of my beliefs. You aren't god.

 

[ding]

Maybe you should look up the definition of faith. Because you are placing complete trust in people you have never met on a subject you know nothing about. At least with your doctor you have information about yourself that you can weigh his advice over.

Also, when you are told something by your doctor that doesn’t make sense to you, you would get a second opinion. And if it were important enough to you, you would do your own research.

So since you have done none of those things you absolutely are putting your complete trust in what they tell you. That is faith.

Trust and faith are not the same thing.

But they are absolutely related.

faith: complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

trust: firm belief in the reliability, truth, ability, or strength of someone or something.

And since you have not investigated anything, especially evidence contrary to your position, you have placed complete trust in what you have been told by others. That's faith.

Big difference between trust and complete belief. You don't get that?

The difference is the degree of trust. Faith has a higher degree of belief than trust does. Faith, by definition is complete trust. Trust, by definition, is a firm belief.

You have placed complete trust in what you have been told by others. I know this by your actions. I presented factual evidence that you could have investigated on your own, but instead of doing that you dismissed it because you had complete trust in what you were told by others. If you had only had a firm belief in what you were told, you would have investigated it for yourself.

I'm not arrogant enough to think reading a couple of articles will give me the years of knowledge needed to credibly evaluate all the data, as you seem to be, and like you, I don't intend to invest the years needed to do that. Believe what you want, but you aren't qualified to comment on the reasons or strength of my beliefs. You aren't god.

But you haven't done anything at all. You even dismissed actual scientific evidence without investigating it at all. You take what others told you on faith.

I have spent a decade studying it.

 

[ding]

But they are absolutely related.

faith: complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

trust: firm belief in the reliability, truth, ability, or strength of someone or something.

And since you have not investigated anything, especially evidence contrary to your position, you have placed complete trust in what you have been told by others. That's faith.

Big difference between trust and complete belief. You don't get that?

The difference is the degree of trust. Faith has a higher degree of belief than trust does. Faith, by definition is complete trust. Trust, by definition, is a firm belief.

You have placed complete trust in what you have been told by others. I know this by your actions. I presented factual evidence that you could have investigated on your own, but instead of doing that you dismissed it because you had complete trust in what you were told by others. If you had only had a firm belief in what you were told, you would have investigated it for yourself.

I'm not arrogant enough to think reading a couple of articles will give me the years of knowledge needed to credibly evaluate all the data, as you seem to be, and like you, I don't intend to invest the years needed to do that. Believe what you want, but you aren't qualified to comment on the reasons or strength of my beliefs. You aren't god.

But you haven't done anything at all. You even dismissed actual scientific evidence without investigating it at all. You take what others told you on faith.

I have spent a decade studying it.

Did you even read my previous posts? I am not qualified to critique results found by real scientists, and I don't care to invest the years required to be qualified to do so. Specialization has been a way of life for centuries. Would you argue with GM about the best torque for a 350 head gasket? No. You accept their credibility on that. Main stream climate scientists say man caused global climate change is real, and they have earned the credibility to be believed. Those that disagree with main stream climate scientists are the same people who claimed Jade Helm would use Walmart tunnels to put Texans in FEMA Prisons, the birth certificate was fake, chemtrails are a real thing, and a long list of other conspiracy theories. If you lay down with conspiracy theory dogs, you wake up with fleas and a lack of credibility.

Yes, I did read it. Are you arguing that you aren't qualified to investigate things for yourself so you shouldn't even try? How do you believe people become qualified for anything? They make an effort to learn and understand it. You are literally making an argument that everyone should accept knowledge blindly.

I am a big believer in accepting knowledge on authority of others. I am not a big believer in blindly accepting knowledge on authority of others.

I accept knowledge on the authorities of others when what they are saying makes sense. Which means I have an obligation to at least make an effort to understand and corroborate what they are telling me.

I have served as a professional witness in hearings. I can tell you that there was always a professional witness opposing my testimony. That's why the evidence has to be weighed.

I have done that. You have not. You take it on faith. I didn't.

You are still dismissing my evidence without investigation. Why? Because you take it on faith that what you have been told cannot be wrong.

 

[deanrd]

This is interesting and while I disagree in part, it is still worth a read.

Political cults are filling the space left by the decline of organized faiths.

"And so we’re mistaken if we believe that the collapse of Christianity in America has led to a decline in religion. It has merely led to religious impulses being expressed by political cults. Like almost all new cultish impulses, they see no boundary between politics and their religion. And both cults really do minimize the importance of the individual in favor of either the oppressed group or the leader."

'America’s New Religions'

Andrew Sullivan: America’s New Religions

"If the concept of God has any validity or any use, it can only be to make us larger, freer, and more loving. If God cannot do this, then it is time we got rid of Him." James Baldwin, 'The Fire Next Time'

I usually can’t stand Andrew Sullivan because he’s a gay man who hates being gay. To me that just proves that you’re born that way.

But this was the best part of his article:

Evangelicals are among the holiest and most quietly devoted people out there. Some have bravely resisted the cult. But their leaders have turned Christianity into a political and social identity, not a lived faith, and much of their flock — a staggering 81 percent voted for Trump — has signed on. They have tribalized a religion explicitly built by Jesus as anti-tribal. They have turned to idols — including their blasphemous belief in America as God’s chosen country. They have embraced wealth and nationalism as core goods, two ideas utterly anathema to Christ. They are indifferent to the destruction of the creation they say they believe God made. And because their faith is unmoored but their religious impulse is strong, they seek a replacement for religion. This is why they could suddenly rally to a cult called Trump. He may be the least Christian person in America, but his persona met the religious need their own faiths had ceased to provide. The terrible truth of the last three years is that the fresh appeal of a leader-cult has overwhelmed the fading truths of Christianity.

——-
I’ve been saying for a long time the traditional Christianity is dead to the right wing. Looks like he pretty much agrees. They still call themselves Christian but they believe nothing that Christ taught.

Their Policies, they’re idolizing the rich, their love of money, and their hatred for other people proves all that.

He still tried to say something good about evangelicals. But if they follow leaders with certain beliefs, then they have those beliefs.

The same thing with Republicans. If they follow a leader who is the scum bag then they too are scum bags.

 

[Mike Dwight]

If you historical-critical approach address what people thought they know about God, or like, what God would sound like if he Could write to us today, he's been dead 2000 years, God would be a he/she, a he/she that marries anybody. Get off all the doctrines, unite around what we all get to do with God. We could get concubines in an imperial chinese harem, more efficient like Islam. Its called hippy Charlie Manson.
Whats a "lived faith", you like people doing yoga , praying in a closet, and getting more useless. Light the Buddha incense.
Well I'll tell you I never attempted to look religious to anybody ever, what, people going to get a step up from bible thumping?! going all Lutheran terrorist?! Christianity is supposed to be the institution forming the countries that forms the laws, not the other way, we like the tribes already. How about the Teutonic Order, Prussian Empire? What about Scotland? What about the Pope's Rome? People built societies on the Church's view of society.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If you historical-critical approach address what people thought they know about God, or like, what God would sound like if he Could write to us today, he's been dead 2000 years, God would be a he/she, a he/she that marries anybody. Get off all the doctrines, unite around what we all get to do with God. We could get concubines in an imperial chinese harem, more efficient like Islam. Its called hippy Charlie Manson.

Yes, there's all the evidence in the world that the God of the Bible would have become JUST like an amoral, sex-addicted leftist . . . in the leftists' heads, anyway. In the real world, no.

 

[Mike Dwight]

How fake is Japan, they used to prowl the world collecting fake Geisha from everywhere, Geisha are already Formalized Prostitutes! But you know so they call Geisha all the comfort women they gathered from everybody, and they were gay lovers all the time, and there's any number of sexual relations with anybody. One Man and One Wife and sex only that point in marriage is totally the Christian Crusades institution, and who cares if Japan got a hold of that and looked like it for Westerners, their fake Christmas, too? Why half the Christian Europe wouldn't care about Christmas, its commercial.
We think islam is weird they can breed their multiple wives, or pagan spring sex orgies, or the far East, nothere's nothing Natural or worldwide from Chalcedonic Christian Marriage. I guess Catholics invented the one-and-done, have all the children you can relationship, point is its not in the bible.
Another American will spout gibberish tomorrow, its another tax write-off religion organization, worst nightmare in the world. I was thinking that I would join the Moonies then I tried painting with my poop instead.
You know we got a lesson in the German Teutonic Knights after converting Lithuania, because the Germans went to Poland, said we don't think you Polish actually converted, isn't your King a werewolf and knows demons, etc. The Germans in a long line of invading Poland. They're defeated by the Polish-Lithuanian alliance became the commonwealth of Poland-Lithuania. They used to be able to check just crazy Nationalists, what do people expect religion to do now days though? Do you speak English, do you wave my flag, do I understand you?