Pat Robertson Predicts Mass Killings in 2007

[Localizer]

Re: Pat Robertson Predicts Mass Killings in 2007

Awesome! Pat acknowledges that his God is malevolent! These are the things that Sam Harris gets a boner about. Using words without reason. Unfortunately many people actually listen to Pat. I could understand faith in nations that live in poverty who have nothing and have access to no education. But in 1st world countries, there should be a significant amount of reason applied rather than illogical fallacies with really no substantial evidence to back up the claims in religious texts.

[subterFUSE]

Re: Pat Robertson Predicts Mass Killings in 2007

as intelligent as you may seem or think you are ... that is a pretty low statement. The fact that I have choose to believe in God is my choice, as much of a choice it is for you not to believe. I do not look down upon nor do I think you are a less of a person. Face it, a choice is a choice. Simply grow up and act like an adult. It is my God given right to believe, and if you wish to "hate" upon that fact ... so be it. There are always two sides to the story, and in this case you are the negative half. I am actually very disapointed in your remark. I would of expected from someone at your level to at least have some tact. Your remark is unequivocally trailor trash. Good day kind sir.

I think you're taking a fairly broad and general comment awfully personally. If you disagree with me so vehemently, then that's all the more reason why you shouldn't feel offended by my thoughts on the matter.

I'm sorry, but I find the whole topic of this thread to be absolutely insane... and forgive me if I post what I believe.

I'm not quite following this "positive/negative" point you are making. Are you saying I am negative because I do not believe in a deity?

[asdf_admin]

Re: Pat Robertson Predicts Mass Killings in 2007

No Mr. Fuse. You are free to believe or not to believe in what you wish. God in my eyes is my own life, a twisted reflection of all things around.

For someone to say that is "sad" is a swift blow to my heart. I respect you mr Fuse, perhaps that is why the blow was felt so whole heartly. That is all. I have come to grasph that you have some turmoil with faith, and I will accept that. I just hope at a personal level you do not mind me choosing my way. As I have accepted that you have choosen yours.

Friends?

[subterFUSE]

Re: Pat Robertson Predicts Mass Killings in 2007

Friends? Absolutely. I never considered otherwise. You don't have to worry about me taking offense to you, or anyone on this board... or in any channel of discourse. I just don't work that way. If I disagree, I will voice my opinion.... but nothing ever gets to me personally, because I don't allow it to. Maybe that is some kind of petty defense mechanism I shield myself with.... but I have always said that if somebody else says something which offends you.... you have no one to blame but yourself. Because it's your own fault for allowing someone else to get to you. You can only be offended if you allow it to happen. In this world, we can only control ourselves..... we can't control others.... so when you allow someone else to get you all riled up, I think it's your own fault. I can't stop the next guy from talking. But I can control how I react to it.

I was having a similar discussion with someone just today. You see, I play a lot of contact sports. Namely lacrosse and ice hockey. Today I was playing a lacrosse game, and one of the referrees stopped during the halftime and asked me where I had grown up. Lacrosse is a relatively small sport in the USA, and the hotbed is the Maryland and Washington, DC area. I grew up in Washington DC, and played lacrosse for one of the best programs in the country. Anyway, this referree who didn't even know me said: "Where did you learn to play lacrosse? Because I can tell you've had excellent coaching." The whole reason he said that was because he saw me playing defense, and my style was very controlled and reserved. Lacrosse is a rough, contact sport.... and when you play defense, it is easy to get too rough and get called for a penalty.... like slashing, cross-checking, holding, etc.... These types of penalties are common. They typically happen 5-6 times per game. But the way I play defense is in a controlled manner, where I don't get called for flagrant penalties. And this referree noticed that, and instantly could tell that I had learned from the best. But, I told this ref.... it wasn't even a conscious decision for me to play that way. I've been playing lacrosse for 20 years, and never once in all that time have been called for a penalty. He couldn't believe it.

Sometimes I get roughed up badly by other people... but I never let that get to me. I don't fight back, or cry and complain to the refs.... Just today I got hit by a guy who nailed me so high that I nearly bit my tongue off.... He got me in the chin, under the helmet... and my tongue is still numb right now.... but I just let it slide. I didn't fight back, or try to get even.... even though it was clearly an illegal, high hit. Most people would have probably reacted, but I didn't.... because I don't let people get to me. I'm able to let stuff slide, even when it's unfair.

The whole point of that stupid story is that I control my disposition, because that's the only thing I know I have total control over. You might consider this to be a "positive vs. negative" outlook.... You think what I said was negative. I think you would have preferred I did not say what I said, because it was "insensitive towards people of faith." But my outlook on it differs from your's. I don't filter what I say with the intention not to offend others...... but instead, I don't allow myself to get offended by what others say... and I hope that people do the same for me.

You believe something I don't..... that's fine. But I'm not going to stop voicing my opinion, as contrary to your's it may be. And if it offends you.... my only suggestion is that perhaps you try to find some way to dismiss me as a nutcase, or something. ha ha ha. Find that place where you can simply ignore me and my crazy outlook on the universe, if that's what it takes to prevent my offending you. Because getting offended is such a waste of time, in the grand scheme of things... whether you believe in an invisible man in the sky, or not.

The whole topic of this thread is how some mortal human named Pat Robertson basically claims to be an authority on the supernatural. He claims that the deity spoke to him, etc..... Well, I find that to be completely absurd, and I think it's ridiculous that millions of people would follow his prophesy.

A long time ago, there was a man named Galileo.... and he studied the physical world. The Church at the time had a monopoly on the rules of the physical universe.... they claimed the earth was the center of the universe, and that objects fell towards the earth at a rate which corresponded to their weight. Well, Copernicus proved that the earth is not the center of our universe..... and Galileo proved that gravity is a constant. Both were condemned as heretics in their time, yet we teach all children today about their discoveries. Well, I am a humanist.... pure and simple. I distrust religion, and Christianity most of all. And I will make no apologies for that. My outlook comes not from ignorance, but rather from a religious upbringing (raised Episcopalian) combined with a scientific education which taught me to question everything. I will believe something only when it has satisfied scientific scrutiny. And when a guy says he spoke with the Deity, who told him the savior would come again this year.... you'll just have to forgive my skepticism.

[asdf_admin]

Re: Pat Robertson Predicts Mass Killings in 2007

Nice post ... I as well played Lacrosse and still play some pick up games here and there. Great and lovely sport. If you would like to know I play center-midi. Back to the core ... the Church has done many things wrong, and people in the name of faith have done things wrong as well. I am not discrediting that. There, yet, and will be "normal" if you consider me normal, people out there. I do not push my values or beliefs onto others, nor do I think it is right. It is a personal choice, and in that aspect I am not really sure why your comment struck me so hard ... perhaps it was just simply bad timing. Normally I look on and move forward, this halted me in my tracks. I wish I wrote nothing, but I did what I did.

[Miroslav]

Re: Pat Robertson Predicts Mass Killings in 2007

We all know Pat Robertson is a douchebag. I find the atheist/theist argument more entertaining. Devil's advocate for the theists:

Attention atheists! are you sure that your entire position doesn't ultimately unravel to just as much of a "belief system" as you knock the theist for having?

[88Mariner]

Re: Pat Robertson Predicts Mass Killings in 2007

We all know Pat Robertson is a douchebag. I find the atheist/theist argument more entertaining. Devil's advocate for the theists:

Attention atheists! are you sure that your entire position doesn't ultimately unravel to just as much of a "belief system" as you knock the theist for having?

If atheism werea belief system, it would consist of an integrated system of doctrines, beliefs, and ideas that would used to provide guidance and stability in people's lives. Obviously it does none of this.

Check.

[superdave]

Re: Pat Robertson Predicts Mass Killings in 2007

The Bible does warn about false teachers and not to be led astray. I'm not sold that Pat's a false teacher, but if he continues then I will think he may be. I'll give him the benefit of doubt at this point and let God judge.

[Miroslav]

Re: Pat Robertson Predicts Mass Killings in 2007

If atheism werea belief system, it would consist of an integrated system of doctrines, beliefs, and ideas that would used to provide guidance and stability in people's lives. Obviously it does none of this.

Check.

From the perspective of that definition, sure. But when a person states "there is no God", sounds like a belief statement to me

[88Mariner]

Re: Pat Robertson Predicts Mass Killings in 2007

From the perspective of that definition, sure. But when a person states "there is no God", sounds like a belief statement to me

well you're talking about a statement. what you were looking for was a system. I see where, you are going, but atheism is not a religion. Just as a steering wheel is not a car, so follows that atheism is not a belief system.

[rubyraks]

Re: Pat Robertson Predicts Mass Killings in 2007

^true, but atheism is a belief...unless you could prove that there is no god...

[rubyraks]

Re: Pat Robertson Predicts Mass Killings in 2007

The Bible does warn about false teachers and not to be led astray. I'm not sold that Pat's a false teacher, but if he continues then I will think he may be. I'll give him the benefit of doubt at this point and let God judge.

Seriously, how much more crazy (let alone hateful) sh*t does Pat have to spew before you stop giving him the benefit of the doubt?

[AntonyM]

Re: Pat Robertson Predicts Mass Killings in 2007

Everyone........
Let us pray
The fact Pat Robertson is deemed newsworthy
and stirs up religious debate contains infinite amounts
of humor.

[88Mariner]

Re: Pat Robertson Predicts Mass Killings in 2007

^true, but atheism is a belief...unless you could prove that there is no god...

I don't need to prove the non-existence of God anymore than I need to prove the nonexistence of Zeus, Jupiter, or Wotan. Can theists prove God over any alternatives? Of course not. With regards to your question, I simply cannot prove a negative.

[rubyraks]

Re: Pat Robertson Predicts Mass Killings in 2007

but that's exactly the point. Just as theists cannot prove that god does exist, neither could atheists prove god doesn't exist...hence they are both beliefs.