Thanks for the Invite.

Thanks for inviting me to make post on your blog and I will try not to disappoint you. I haven't really ever told anyone out here that much about myself and figure I should probably do that in this posting. 

I tend to avoid being very open about myself even to people I know. I am a 46 yr old male who until just a little over a year ago finally started to get involved in fighting against the negative influence of religion. I knew at a fairly early age I wasn't like most of the others around my age when it came to religion. Me and one of my brothers was always getting into trouble for playing tic-tac-toe during the church services and we even got called out by the preacher once. I never bought into that 6000 year old earth belief and I think that when I asked my dad about how could the dinosaurs have lived millions of years ago, it was the only time I saw anger in his eyes at a question like this. I never got a straight answer from him but I knew not to ask it again. I know I was under 14 when I asked this and I don't think I have ever asked him another religious question. I guess I had already decided at that time I believed in something other then creationism but at the time I didn't know what it was. I can't say religion was an important part of my life at anytime and it was in vacation bible school that I knew for sure I was different then others. I was 13 or 14 and the next year I wouldn't be attending vacation bible school but would be there to help out in instructing the younger kids if I went. One of the other guys there was just to excited about how he was going to pass on the words of the lord next year. I felt embarrassed for him and it was shortly after that that I quit attending church. 

I don't see myself as an atheist but I know that I am not a theist. I don't believe there is a being or force anything like what people here on earth claim there is. I don't think I ever saw myself as a christian so I have no conversion story.

I enjoy studying history for the most part and I think that is one of the key factors in deciding that religion is full of crap. I see religion not as a major factor in the evils of man but the guiding force which has caused man to make the same stupid mistakes over and over. Religion has for thew most part held mankind back until the last few hundred years. Yes they did have educational institutes but they weren't for all people but a select few. How many people who could have helped to advance mankind were denied the education they needed by religion? Even now religion keeps people who could help mankind advance from following their dreams when they were young. I have no stats on the number of people who want to go into advanced sciences or other fields but because these fields conflict with their religious views they abandon those dreams. I have a niece who could have gone into most any field she wanted but because of her religion she abandon those so she could remain blind to the facts. She isn't the only one I know that hid from facts because of their brainwashing as a child. I live in a fairly rural area that puts religion about all else and have seen many leave for college just to return when they were forced to admit that their beliefs weren't universal. Instead of facing these other views they ran back to their group of like believers. 

This is a true human.

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/36174722/ns/today-today_people/  I just saw this story on MSNBC and I have to say I wish more people was like this. People who help others no matter what the reason shouldn't try to self promote themselves. I can understand people discussing the actions they are taking while trying to help others in a natural disaster since these people can't really hide from the press. I hope this guy never takes credit for his actions but continues his life as if it never happened. This is the kind of story that makes me sure people are not evil at heart as many within religion claim but want what is best for all. The problem is many within the press seem to avoid these types of stories unless kids are involved. Yeah I could rant about many negative things now but this story tells me good people are in the world and that together they can save 1 or 1000s of lives given the chance.

Should I have said something?

This morning I heard about a news story that is going on here in Arkansas and told a co-worker about it. The story I mentioned doesn't have anything to do with the title but from this I learned about another event. http://www.fox16.com/news/local/story/UCA-student-charged-with-588-counts-of-child-porn/cSV4p0HHxEKP0H2oR_1q1A.cspx?rss=315 This is the story I mentioned.

It was about 4 years ago that a guy I worked with quit and since then I haven't really had any contact with him. While we worked together we talked a lot about religion and how bad I was. He said I would be going to hell and all. My brother and I both missed his conversations when he quit. We both used to have fun baiting him on areas of religion and I am sad to say it was easy to get him flustered. I would hang out with him sometimes after work but he wasn't what I would call a close friend but someone I could debate with at times. A few times we discussed how Hard Copy would do those chat room hookups pretending to be minors and he would get a bit to emotional about this area of conversation. There was something about the way he acted and said stuff that made me wonder about how true his words were. I wasn't the only person that felt he was hiding something but neither of us had any kind of evidence to base this view on. I think it was his reaction to some of the comments I made and how fast he let his emotions get away from him.

Today I was told he has plead guilty to inappropriate touching of a minor under 14 years old. I always thought that his reaction were off but had nothing to base them on. It felt about the same as all those anti gay preachers and politicians that end up being caught in homosexual acts. Should I have said something more or was I correct in not announcing my thoughts?

What does evidence mean to people?

This morning I was listening to the normal radio program I listen when I work. I happen to hear them discussing how a group of guys were claiming to be close the point of armed revolution. I didn't hear the actual conversation but got the idea it was mainly hot air because the health care bill passed. This lead to people making the claim that President Obama was either the anti-christ or the new Hitler. I have actually tried to find the evidence they are using to make these claims and have found nothing that even comes close to what and how Hitler came to power. Most of the few sites I went to were the normal hot air and empty evidence.

I have studied some of the history around WWII and am at least loosely familiar with how Hitler and the Nazi party came to power. They used the SA, brownshirters, to create hate and anger at minority groups such as the Jewish people, gays, and communist. They were also used as a means of intimidation against those in politics that stood against the Nazi party. I haven't found any organization that Obama helps support that does these things. I figure people can claim Acorn was doing this but it seemed they were more interested in getting people to vote instead of getting people to stay away from the polls. The only groups I have seen doing this are those that appear to be supported by Republicans. The Tea Party appears to be more like the SA then any other mainstream organization at this time. I know they didn't start that way but people who want more hate out in this world got a few spokesmen to draw those types in. This isn't really any different then what the Nazi party did with Goebbels propaganda. If you go to http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cord-jefferson/becks-fearmongering-mimic_b_512150.html

you will find how closely the words of one of those pushing The Tea Party are to those that were responsible for a massacre.

I will continue this as I get more information.

Does watching or attending sporting events make you more patriotic?

I was watching a sporting event and a commercial came on for an upcoming event. I only saw it one time and wasn't really paying to close attention to it when I heard how this sport is the most patriotic in the nation. I doubt that they are using the proper definition of patriotic. The first thing I thought was, how can a sport be patriotic? I have only come up with the fact that anyone attending or buying products linked to that sport would be patriotic. That doesn't make the sport itself patriotic.

The sport is seen by most as one with many christians within it and they seem to think that being religious means you are patriotic. I think most don't understand what being patriotic means. Being patriotic means you love your country and what it stands for. The way I see it you have to put your love of your country first in all things or you aren't really being patriotic. I know that this view of patriotic is a view that makes it almost impossible to be patriotic. I would have less respect for someone that would put country first in all things. The point I am driving at is that christians can't put country first if they truly are christians. According to all I know, god has to come first in all they do. This means that they will ignore needs of the country if it is in conflict with the bible. The way many of the christians I know have fixed this is making the claim that this country is based on christian principles. If you ask them to point out those principles in the Constitution they fail at being able to do that. Instead they turn created by the government that was formed by the Constitution to support their belief. They fail to look into history that most of these laws have predated christians in one way or another. They try to make the common laws into christian laws but again the common laws predate christianity in England. What does all this mean? It means christians need to better educate themselves before they speak about anything to do with being patriotic.

Science and religion.

I was talking with a guy that claimed he is a christian. He started out with the normal claims that he could prove god exist and that he had no doubts about that. It got me to thinking about some of his proof and why he was using it the way he did. Don't worry I haven't changed my mind about the truth of the bible but it did raise a few questions about how science has caused christians to change their interpretation of the bible. I am really interested in finding how some of the verses he used were interpreted before the advances in science caused the change in their interpretation. These are some of his proofs as he claims or more then likely The Discovery Institue or Answers in Genesis claim.

"The Holy Bible holds that God created the universe and the only reason we continue to exist is because God upholds our existence. (Genesis 1:1) (Hebrews 1:3) Scientifically, this Biblical worldview belief is confirmed by the laws of physics and by our existence living within our universe on the planet earth. You can think of the laws of physics as part of God’s invisible qualities."

"The Holy Bible’s Old Testament (Isaiah 40:22) which teaches us that God stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them out like a tent to dwell in; which suggests that the universe has actually increased in size since its creation. Scientifically, this Biblical worldview belief is confirmed by redshifts in nearly all galaxies and the Hubble Law which states that distant galaxies show greater redshifts than nearby galaxies."

" The Holy Bible tells us that the age of the earth is about six to ten thousand years old based upon God creating everything in six literal 24 hour days (Exodus 20:11) and genealogies recorded in (Genesis 5, 11) first starting with the first man God created, Adam. The Holy Bible said that a massive flood covered the whole earth. Noah’s Flood was a global, year-long, global catastrophe.

Scientifically, the geological features of the earth today are exactly what we should expect to result from such a complex, year-long, destructive event as Noah’s Flood which was global in its nature. Also, an incredible find of fossils we find are of shallow marine organisms, like corals and shellfish—and sometimes we find those even in very high sedimentary layers, even on top of Mount Everest!"

I am not wanting to refute these claims but am looking to find how christians interpreted some of the verses he used and others that are claimed to be supported by science. I am not having much luck in finding anything about the way some of the more obscure verses were interpreted. I doubt very much that christians from 100 years ago saw the bible as many see it today. I will keep looking but any help would be appreciated.

I doubt that most christians have a problem with changing how a bible verse is interpreted if it can help them to hide from the fact that their bible isn't very good in the science department.

Report

Church sign.

I drive a truck locally here where I live and since I am in the bible belt I get to see many church signs. I try to remember to take pictures of them but seldom remember to. I drove by this sign 3 or 4 times before I took this picture. I have been trying to figure out what it is suppose to mean. I get the first half of it but the second half makes no real sense to me.

The way I take it is that if you attend their church you will never grow up. I couldn't really see some church calling its member children though. The other way I took it was that unless you attend our church you will never become an adult. Does anyone else have any thoughts on what this is suppose to mean?

I have another challenge for any that read this. There is enough information in this photograph to determine the town and state it was taken. Who can be the first to name the town and state correctly?