iOS app Android app
Clicking Follow Back will add user to your friends list and may allow access to your Social News timeline..

HuffPost Social News

Badges:
Your Badges and the Badge Module will be removed from your profile

religionannarbor's Comments

View Comments:   Sort:
next
1 - 25
Sing Sing Prison and the Rhythm of Prayer

Sing Sing Prison and the Rhythm of Prayer

Commented Jun 10, 2010 at 22:31:54 in Religion

“I did prison ministry for years. It was a great experience.

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/
Rand Paul and the Souls of Some White Folks

Rand Paul and the Souls of Some White Folks

Commented May 22, 2010 at 23:48:11 in Religion

“Rand Paul is not a racist. He made this clear. He was objecting to legal procedure not to content. Come on people.

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/

nicole473 on May 23, 2010 at 18:11:27

“He is a racist. His nonsense is simply a cover-up. And even if you were right, which you are not, I don't WANT a government which condones tacit acceptance of racism.

We will NOT be dragged back to the 1950's by Rand, Palin or ANY of their apologists or fans.”

gypsylcd on May 23, 2010 at 15:29:08

“You can shout from every roof top in town that you are or are not something or other, but in the court of public opinion people still look to see what you DO (read: vote, write in editorial letters, etc). Legal procedure is a straw man. Supporting the right of individuals to discriminate in a fashion that affects another individual's pursuit of life, liberty and happiness on the basis of race is racial discrimination. Ergo, that makes you a racist. Period.”

JessWonderin on May 23, 2010 at 13:46:20

“He may THINK he is not racist . . . but how can one support PRIVITIZED Jim Crow policy and NOT see the racsim?

Libertarianism is a flawed concept that is doomed to fail once more than two people agree to practice it . . at some time the self claimed "rights" of one will conflict with the "rights" of the other and "liberty" will be decided by the one with the faster draw, bigger weapon or most money. "Libertarianism" was a drawing room conversation much the same as the discussion of how many angels can stand on the head of a pin . . . and about as useful.

The era of the Robber Barons proved it useless drivel and the reality of BP underscores it's irrelevance TODAY . . . let alone the naive idea that one should be allowed to post 'No (fill-in the target) Allowed" signs in any public establishment.

Would Sarah stand with Paul the first time she comes to a speaking location and finds the hotel dinning room has "No Re tards Allowed" posted???”

lrlrlr on May 23, 2010 at 10:23:20

“He may not be a racist at all but he's clearly not understanding the issue very well in his overly simplistic view of the world. The overt racism that was going on before the civil rights measures could not be stopped without the measures taken against private businesses and individuals - it simply wasn't possible. It's far too simplistic, and indeed wrong, to believe otherwise when the evidence and history has shown otherwise. Is his ability to reason any better in other areas I wonder?”

HeevenSteven on May 23, 2010 at 07:27:43

“If he thinks it's right to allow businesses to practice Jim Crow, what's the difference? He's so stuck on a narrow ideological point about private property rights, that he can't see the forest for the trees? What the point of liberty, freedom, etc, tea-baggers cry about when some people can't feel like full citizens in the country they were born in?

At minimum he's tone deaf and blind, and didn't think this all the way through before deciding the senate needs him. Either option is sad.

His point about exclusion based on race being a bad business decision these days may be true, but the CRA is surely respsonsible for that. It wasn't bad enough for business prior to 1964 to stop it.”

Lulubelle1 on May 23, 2010 at 03:11:43

“If legal procedure leads to tacit acceptance of overt, active racism (not words, actions), the distinction you and Rand Paul attempt to make is meaningless.

It is acceptable to Rand Paul if a person of color is denied permission to use a restroom during his or her travels simply because he or she is a person of color.

It's NOT acceptable to me. And I don't care what you call it.”
Glenn Beck Attacks Churches on Climate Change

Glenn Beck Attacks Churches on Climate Change

Commented May 20, 2010 at 19:35:17 in Religion

“This is the sort of separation of church that I think the constitution is actually talking about. Having the government help shape the message of the church is scary. If you are a liberal and are sympathetic, ask yourself this. Do you want this precedent to be set for the next republican? Do you want the GOP working with the church to advance their agenda?

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/

Democommon Sense on May 20, 2010 at 23:07:20

“They actually do this all the time. The Republican party is pretty much the evangelical party. This is pretty much factual. Also the Republican party sweeps in Mormon controlled Utah. Just because you want to think that it was to save the churches not the people shows how ill informed you are.”

been2there on May 20, 2010 at 19:58:37

“Churches do have the right to try to influence policy--by their voices and their votes. This is no different than the GOP pushing abstinence only sex education at the behest of fundamentalists.”
Toward a Science of Morality

Toward a Science of Morality

Commented May 9, 2010 at 22:17:26 in Religion

“"You're insisting that logic cannot be a natural occurrence...."

Logic is brain chemicals moving in a particular way. No one cares about bubbles in a puddle of Coca Cola. There has to be a meaning beyond 'stuff' to give the stuff meaning.

"You cannot poof this thing called God into existence and claim you have a scientifically valid theory."

I am saying that you have it backwards. You can't start with science and get to God. You have to start with God to get to science. Knowledge is only possible if we are not just a pile of chemicals and energy.

"under your theory of genetic infusion, all life would be endowed with emotions...."

No, not all animals need to be given the same DNA from God.

"It appears you believe that emotions are not physical phenomena... "

No, that is not what I am saying at all. I do think emotions are physical. Just as software on a computer is physical. But to argue that logic is better than illogic, or rationality is better than wild exuberance one must presuppose some sort of a Programmer who cares about how the computers (humans) run. Electricity, metal and plastic think nothing. But the Image of God, placed in neurons, cells and chemicals are thinking, important, and meaningful. God makes things real.

"...you replied by changing the topic...."

We have sort of touched on both issues (illusion of reality in the materialistic world view and importance).”
Toward a Science of Morality

Toward a Science of Morality

Commented May 8, 2010 at 23:17:04 in Religion

“"Chemicals and electricty can't be logical or illogical." I stick to that. Computers are not a good counter. Their logic is perceived by us, not them. We interpret the actions of the computer in a way that makes sense to us.

""I think our brains are computers running the software that God designed."
How and when is this software fed into our brains?"

As a Christian, I believe that God planned each person's structure before the foundation of the world. He gave us the genes that would develop into the nice creatures we become.

"Write a computer program that finds things important and you might be surprised."

I can do that today (with my two semesters of computer programing). My computer can be programed to react in almost any way to any stimuli. There are already programs that send up warnings and exclaimations at given problems: 'your battery is running out!'; 'your computer may be infected' etc. But the emotions of the computer are nothing. They are electrical pulses flowing through the chemical engineering wonder that is a semiconductor. They will always be that way.

"Importance has nothing to do with something being an illusion."

Ok, what makes something important?”

octopi on May 9, 2010 at 01:14:42

“"Computers are not a good counter. Their logic is perceived by us, not them."
You are insisting that logic cannot be a natural occurrence and must be put there by something you call God, but logic is a natural occurrence and logical minds have evolved unaided by any mind.

"As a Christian, I believe that God planned each person's structure" "He gave us the genes that would develop into the nice creatures we become."
Not all Christians believe that, and besides, it makes no sense. You cannot poof this thing called God into existence and claim you have a scientifically valid theory. On top of that, under your theory of genetic infusion, all life would be endowed with emotions, logic, morals, a sense of importance, and all the rest of the things that humans have.

"But the emotions of the computer are nothing."
It appears you believe that emotions are not physical phenomena because you cannot envision the possibility of creating a program capable of experiencing emotions. I think you should look more carefully at evolution without bringing the thing you call God into it. Life started out without brains and yet brains evolved that are capable of experience emotions.

"Ok, what makes something important?"
I was responding to "The opinions, hopes and arguments that we have are illusions in this world view." and you replied by changing the topic to importance without answering how God turns an illusion into a reality.”
Toward a Science of Morality

Toward a Science of Morality

Commented May 8, 2010 at 21:01:36 in Religion

“Yes, things are different in Ann Arbor that is true.

:)”
Toward a Science of Morality

Toward a Science of Morality

Commented May 8, 2010 at 21:00:31 in Religion

“Replied to your most recent post below.”

octopi on May 8, 2010 at 22:05:24

“"You brought up the computer not me."
I brought up computers because you erroneously wrote, "Chemicals and electricty can't be logical or illogical." Oh, and look, you do it again.

"I think our brains are computers running the software that God designed."
How and when is this software fed into our brains? And at what point in the tree of life would the first brain have been programmed by this computer programmer you call God?

"The computer's program is not important to the computer."
Write a computer program that finds things important and you might be surprised.

"A really great computer with really great software running in some abandoned building with no one to see or use it is unimportant - period."
You are all over the place wrong. Importance has nothing to do with something being an illusion.

"If the world is just stuff, nothing matters."
To you, but we can safely ignore your opinion because it isn't reasonable.”
Toward a Science of Morality

Toward a Science of Morality

Commented May 8, 2010 at 20:59:50 in Religion

“Octopi, You brought up the computer not me. But I like the analogy. I think our brains are computers running the software that God designed. I am going to keep using the analogy because I think it is helpful.

It is not about how evolved something is. It is 'what' something is. Computers are electricity, plastic and metal - a pile of molecules. Stuff (just like our brains are made of stuff). The computer's program is not important to the computer. It doesn't matter how 'evolved' the program is. If our brains are 'simply' highly evolved computers, it doesn't matter in our case either.

"Says who? How would a deity make them non-illusory?"

We give the computer significance. A really great computer with really great software running in some abandoned building with no one to see or use it is unimportant - period. In the same way, we are significant and important because God designed us. Logic is our computer running well. Moral behavior is the software without virus. Just as computers can do good or ill in the eyes of their owner (but not in their own eyes), we can do good or ill only if there is a Owner that cares.

If the world is just stuff, nothing matters. If the world is stuff ordered and directed by God, it is incredibly important.

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/ .”
Toward a Science of Morality

Toward a Science of Morality

Commented May 8, 2010 at 07:37:30 in Religion

“Hi Octopi, the central premise of my argument is not being addressed here. The computer (with it's l-o-g-i-c gates) doesn't actually think. It is a machine. The results that a computer spits out are only significant if there is a non computer there to give them significance. Logic is a trait 'we' see in computers. Computers don't care if they get a virus or run Windows (versus Lenux) or break down all together. You might be able to program them like they do care (you could even give them a HAL voice). But they don't - the emotion would be an illusion. They are electricity and chemicals.

And in the scientific materialist view, we are nothing but organic computers our selves. The opinions, hopes and arguments that we have are illusions in this world view.

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/

religionannarbor on May 8, 2010 at 20:59:50

“Octopi, You brought up the computer not me. But I like the analogy. I think our brains are computers running the software that God designed. I am going to keep using the analogy because I think it is helpful.

It is not about how evolved something is. It is 'what' something is. Computers are electricity, plastic and metal - a pile of molecules. Stuff (just like our brains are made of stuff). The computer's program is not important to the computer. It doesn't matter how 'evolved' the program is. If our brains are 'simply' highly evolved computers, it doesn't matter in our case either.

"Says who? How would a deity make them non-illusory?"

We give the computer significance. A really great computer with really great software running in some abandoned building with no one to see or use it is unimportant - period. In the same way, we are significant and important because God designed us. Logic is our computer running well. Moral behavior is the software without virus. Just as computers can do good or ill in the eyes of their owner (but not in their own eyes), we can do good or ill only if there is a Owner that cares.

If the world is just stuff, nothing matters. If the world is stuff ordered and directed by God, it is incredibly important.

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/ .”

octopi on May 8, 2010 at 20:08:31

“"The computer (with it's l-o-g-i-c gates) doesn't actually think. It is a machine."
You don't deny that humans evolved, do you? The computer you are looking at does not emulate a biological brain, it was not created by evolution, so your comparisons of what a personal computer can do with what the brain of a human (or a lion) can do are ludicrous.

"The opinions, hopes and arguments that we have are illusions in this world view."
Says who? How would a deity make them non-illusory?”
Toward a Science of Morality

Toward a Science of Morality

Commented May 7, 2010 at 23:05:25 in Religion

“You missed my point. My point was that the very existence of something called 'science' relies on the idea that our brains are more than chemicals and electricity bubbling in a mass of cells. The difference between rationality and insanity is an almost unrecognizable difference in chemistry. It doesn't matter in your world view. Baking soda mixed with coca cola might be interesting to watch but it can't make an argument. Chemicals and electricty can't be logical or illogical. Your world view is self defeating.

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/

octopi on May 8, 2010 at 00:52:08

“"our brains are more than chemicals and electricity bubbling in a mass of cells."
--You mean brains are not free-floating liquid soups?! Do tell.

"The difference between rationality and insanity is an almost unrecognizable difference in chemistry."
--That is like saying the difference between "snow" and a blue screen on your TV is almost unrecognizable.

"It doesn't matter in your world view."
--What doesn't matter?

"Baking soda mixed with coca cola might be interesting to watch but it can't make an argument."
--And humans are made of baking soda and Coca-Cola. Riiiiight.

"Chemicals and electricty can't be logical or illogical."
--See that thing before you, it is a computer. It's core is composed of millions of logic gates. L-O-G-I-C gates.

"Your world view is self defeating."
--My, look at all the hay strewn about.”
Toward a Science of Morality

Toward a Science of Morality

Commented May 7, 2010 at 23:01:42 in Religion

“Hi Friendly Atheist, see my answer below.

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/
Toward a Science of Morality

Toward a Science of Morality

Commented May 7, 2010 at 23:00:14 in Religion

“The "mind" as you call it is a plant. It is a rock. Is a stream of water. It is a ray of sunlight. It is the wind. It is a grain of sand. Logic is when lightning strikes with a bolt that looks like a 'Z' in the sky. Illogic is when the bolt looks more like a side ways 'M'. Neither are 'better'. Both only last for a moment and then are gone.

In my world view. Logic matters because the God of all things created logic. Reason matters because it matters to the God who put thoughts in our minds. Our lives are more significant than a the sand, rocks, and lightning because we are made in His image.

So you can call me silly (silly a lightning bolt shaped like a sideways 'V') but you really don't mean it - that is just the electricity talking.

Chemicals and electricity are not important. The image of God? Yeah that is important. You see?

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/

TheFriendlyAtheist on May 8, 2010 at 19:14:24

“That might make sense in annarbor, but I asure you, it makes no sense anywhere else.”

octopi on May 8, 2010 at 01:02:02

“"The "mind" as you call it is a plant. It is a rock. Is a stream of water..."
--No, not as I call it. I call a plant a plant, a rock a rock, a stream a stream, etc.

"Logic is when lightning strikes with a bolt that looks like a 'Z' in the sky."
--You are grasping. Zorro has nothing to do with logic.

"Reason matters because it matters to the God who put thoughts in our minds."
--Then you are a puppet.

"So you can call me silly"
--I said your CLAIM was silly, but after reading your responses I might go all the way.

"Chemicals and electricity are not important. The image of God? Yeah that is important. You see?"
--I might if it made any sense. Is the image of God a zigzag of lightning? If so, it is important not to get hit by it, sure.”
Toward a Science of Morality

Toward a Science of Morality

Commented May 7, 2010 at 15:28:31 in Religion

“Hi Collin,

No good and evil are defined by God who created all things. He explains what is good and evil in His Word.

Maybe I am missing your point?

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/
Toward a Science of Morality

Toward a Science of Morality

Commented May 7, 2010 at 15:22:27 in Religion

“I don't know that anything was announced. But it is a necessary truth of scientific materialism (what a great phrase those religious fanatics came up with). Explain how the firing of neurons and the mixing of chemicals in a mass that we call a brain on a random planet orbiting a random star is important? If our brains are simply chemicals and matter, why is logic (the firing of neurons in a particular order) more important or 'better' of than illogic (the firing of neurons in another order)? If you spill a 2-liter of Pepsi and a 2-liter of Mt Dew on the floor, no one asks, "who is winning?" Instead we ask, "who cares?" Chemistry and electricity can't be logical. Logic is impossible without God.

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/

octopi on May 7, 2010 at 17:53:38

“"Explain how the firing of neurons and the mixing of chemicals in a mass that we call a brain on a random planet orbiting a random star is important?"

You can't have "importance" without a mind that finds something worth doing. Humans, being products of evolution with highly developed minds, find plenty of things important for a vast array or reasons, some simple like not getting hurt or eating and some complex like who to vote for. You are the one who needs to explain why we need to throw a god in the mix to make things like eating important. Would eating be unimportant if there was no god? You see? Your claim is silly.”
Toward a Science of Morality

Toward a Science of Morality

Commented May 7, 2010 at 15:16:01 in Religion

CollinJE on May 7, 2010 at 15:23:58

“Ok. Well let me point one thing out.

If God is good then he cannot also be the standard by which good/evil are established. If he is the standard then he cannot be good, he would just be the standard.

So when you say that God is good, then you are implying there is a standard above God by which you judge him.

just some food for thought.”
Toward a Science of Morality

Toward a Science of Morality

Commented May 7, 2010 at 13:00:02 in Religion

“I never understood why atheists give a crap about anything. If your brain is bubbling chemicals and neurons than the difference between good and evil; logic and illogic; rationality and irrationality etc is just electrical pulsing firing in a mass of cells in a small corner of a vast universe at a small moment in an endless history. Logic rests on the idea that our thoughts are important. Scientific materialism tells us our brains are not important. The two don't go together.

I believe in science because I believe in God. There is no other way.

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/

octopi on May 7, 2010 at 17:43:53

“"I never understood why atheists give a crap about anything."

For the same reasons you give a crap about anything. You don't spend all day doing things solely for your psycho friend, God, do you?

"If your brain is bubbling chemicals and neurons than the difference between good and evil; logic and illogic; rationality and irrationality etc is just electrical pulsing firing in a mass of cells in a small corner of a vast universe at a small moment in an endless history."

Atheists accept that there are natural explanations for all of it, you don't, otherwise our experience is not much different from yours.

"I believe in science because I believe in God."

What do you mean by that? Science describes and explains the world. If you don't believe in it, you are in denial. God has been naively used as an explanation for many things about human psychology, the origins of life, and other big questions before, but each time God was replaced with science. There is nothing left for God to be an explanation of. It is a failed hypothesis.”

TheFriendlyAtheist on May 7, 2010 at 14:33:39

“"Scientific materialism (a term coined by religous fanatics) tells us our brains are not important. " I must have been looking the other way when that happened. Damn! I hate missing important stuff. Although when it comes to religous belief the brain is obviously not important at all.”

CollinJE on May 7, 2010 at 13:16:36

“Is the God you believe in good?”
Southern Baptists Want More Baptisms!

Southern Baptists Want More Baptisms!

Commented May 5, 2010 at 11:01:41 in Religion

“I think what is growing is people who will admit to 'no formal religion'. It used to be that even if someone was not religious they would list "Catholic" or "Methodist" or whatever if asked. Now they don't. The growth of evangelicalism shows that what you have is a polarization in America not a shrinking of the religious. A recent Pew Forum poll showed that over 26% of the population is now evangelical (that is huge). Now people are either very religious or very irreligious in America. Historically, the country was much more moderate and in the middle.

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/
Death Panels, Dignity, and You

Death Panels, Dignity, and You

Commented May 5, 2010 at 10:33:52 in Religion

“No, God created humans to care for and protect/preserve life. If he didn't want people to survive he would just end their lives Himself.

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/

KristinNoelle on May 5, 2010 at 22:48:05

“God can end a person's life; however, we have developed the technology to continue to pump air in their lungs, feed them through tubes, and even insert devices that prompt their hearts to beat. A person in a persistent vegetative state is not alive, everything that made that person who they were is gone. What you are keeping alive is a body which many people feel is disrespectful to that person's memory.

When a person is gone, many people wish to bury that person, pay respect, and move on. It is a personal choice that anyone entering a hospital or anyone diagnosed with a serious should be prompted to think about. It is a terrible burden to leave your family to argue about what they think you would have wanted.”
Death Panels, Dignity, and You

Death Panels, Dignity, and You

Commented May 5, 2010 at 10:32:15 in Religion

“Oh. Ok. What does 'tea bagger' mean?”

KristinNoelle on May 5, 2010 at 22:40:32

“Uhhh, I'll let wikipedia explain that one to you

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teabagger
Death Panels, Dignity, and You

Death Panels, Dignity, and You

Commented May 4, 2010 at 23:44:42 in Religion

“Hi Kristen, I think you mean tea partiers. You said tea bagger.”

KristinNoelle on May 5, 2010 at 06:01:43

“No, I meant what I said. Only tea baggers call themselves "tea partiers." Everyone else calls them tea baggers.”
Southern Baptists Want More Baptisms!

Southern Baptists Want More Baptisms!

Commented May 4, 2010 at 23:42:24 in Religion

“The church is growing worldwide. There is no doubt about that. The question is what will American Christianity look like.

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/
Noah's Ark FOUND? Evangelist Group Says It's In Turkey (PHOTOS, VIDEO)

Noah's Ark FOUND? Evangelist Group Says It's In Turkey (PHOTOS, VIDEO)

Commented Apr 27, 2010 at 20:37:01 in Religion

“I am not a geologist. What is the difference between young earth geology and regular geology in the oil exploration industry?

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/
Noah's Ark FOUND? Evangelist Group Says It's In Turkey (PHOTOS, VIDEO)

Noah's Ark FOUND? Evangelist Group Says It's In Turkey (PHOTOS, VIDEO)

Commented Apr 27, 2010 at 19:43:59 in Religion

“They called you every name in the book? Really? Most Christians I know are used to people doubting the flood story. I have never heard of anyone name calling about it.

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/

dante2810 on Apr 27, 2010 at 20:04:43

“Well they are so used to my debunking many of their comments (usually the type of stuff you get in those chain emails that lie, take Obama clips out of context, images of deity appearing in random things, health care misinformation, etc..) that they are automatically defensive by nature when I post/comment.
Like i said, lashing out usually happens when they reach the point of not being able to respond to my questions logically (faith and because the bible said so do not qualify as logical).”

kas70 on Apr 27, 2010 at 19:49:17

“I agree. It can be hard to be a liberal and have people you consider friends ideologically and otherwise think you're a kook about the bible. Ah, well. At least we don't argue politics.”
Why Christianity Must Adapt -- Or Perish

Why Christianity Must Adapt -- Or Perish

Commented Apr 27, 2010 at 17:03:19 in Religion

“Hi Kirk, not sure but Christianity adds more Christians than Islam does every year. You often hear about Islam as the 'fastest growing religion' but that is really meaningless because they are talking percentages. Islam is half the size of Christianity (roughly 1 bil versus 2 bil). That means that Islam would not just need a faster growth rate, it would need almost double to have as many new adherents annually.

But as a principle, you are right. According to Jenkins, the future world will be conservative Christians and Islam.

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/
Why Christianity Must Adapt -- Or Perish

Why Christianity Must Adapt -- Or Perish

Commented Apr 27, 2010 at 14:27:12 in Religion

“Phillip Jenkins, a scholar at Penn State, in his book 'The Next Christendom' states that the 20th century will go down in history as the Christian century. Christianity had the most growth that it has had in all of its history. Africa went from 2% Christian to 50% Christian. S. Korea? Same. China now has between 70 and 100 million Christians. What is growing? Liberal watered down Christianity? No. Fire and brimstone, heaven and hell, Bible-is-literally-true Christianity is growing.

A similar thing is true in the US. Another recent Pew Forum study said that 26% of the US population is evangelical now. That is huge compared to 50 years ago when evangelicalism was a tiny subset of broader Protestantism (now it is more than half). And it is growing. The denominations in the US that are dying? The liberal ones.

I would answer the question the opposite of the author. Christianity must not get more liberal to survive, instead Christian churches must be true to their historical creeds to survive.

http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/

Kirk59 on Apr 27, 2010 at 15:42:03

“How many Muslims were there in 1900 as compared to 2000?”
next
1 - 25