A response to a blog about "Truth Claims".
Category: Religion and Philosophy

How can anyone know another persons heart? How can anyone know that my experiences weren't similar to theirs when I was a Christian? Having been raised in church and having said the same things that are said here and hearing responses that I would have given when I was a Christian says something. I have made claims that I have experienced his (god) presence in the past. I have claimed to have a "one on one" relationship with him in the past. I have told others that it was something they couldn't understand until they accepted Jesus as their savior in the past. I was raised a ministers son as well and heard many sermons. It did not bring me understanding of the "Truth".

These are claims. They are claims that anyone can make and many do often. Claims like these are made by many people of many denominations and many who don't affiliate with any. Similar claims are even made outside of "Christian" faiths. But what do they mean to someone who has studied the history of these beliefs? What do they mean to someone who knows about versions of "Christianity" that existed before the 4th century when Rome claimed it and established it's creed and decided who/what Jesus was? What about someone who knows what the political climate was like and what Constantine was trying to do when he legalized it giving it legitimacy then claiming it as the official religion of Rome? What if they know who first said the things that I once said and that you are saying now and why they said them? What if the person knows about the "Reformation" and Martin Luther, John Calvin and is familiar with others like Wesley and Augustine or Aquinas. Or has studied the impact of early western philosophy on these people?

I can tell you that studying philosophy makes one aware of what an "emotional appeal is". What an "appeal to authority" is. What causes fear and how people can be led by it. What makes an argument sound or legitimate and what it takes to establish a premise for them. It also tells you what a "Truth Claim" is and how to tell if it is true. What I see here are truth claims and appeals to authority. And I see them being made by people who are good people...or people that I will "choose to believe" are good. People that can't answer how or why without further appeals to authority and special pleading.

What can we all agree on? That the moral teachings of Jesus don't have the same problem when the miraculous claims are not not taken as literal truth and asserted as such without support. How do we know this? Because we know people can be good without those claims..with or without using religious language. Because people like Buddha and Confucius taught moral teachings like these before the 1st century. Because they can be understood no matter what race or creed. But, we also know that people who claim to follow them are not always good and sometimes evil. We also know that people who claim to do the work of "God" commit mass murder in "His" name. We know that when these acts take place that they are not good but are done because of the belief in a "Truth Claim" backed by "appeal to authority" which cannot make a person good.

What we should know and understand is what it takes to love our enemies but many don't. What we should know is that ALL Humans can be enemies and the desire to kill them is hate, no matter what the justification. Even if they are Muslims and a leader claiming to be led by god or his word calls for strikes on their country because it is perceived as a threat to an ally. That this is still hate. Ignoring that the violent acts of the country they seek to defend and showing disregard for the suffering caused as a result is Evil and comes from seeing the lives of some as being of less or more value than the lives of others. This is hatred. Excusing the acts of those who they would defend is wrong. This is done by our own country's government. The people making these claims preach in churches here. They claim it is the will of god. Some claim to hear the voice of God directly. More appeals to authority. More truth claims. More hatred and hubris.

Understanding the people we see as enemies allows us to understand why they are our enemies. It provides us with what we need to end conflict with them. Understanding their hate and where it comes from allows us to empathize, show compassion and may help us to understand what we may have done to provoke it so that we can reconcile and forgive. Seeing that they are like us and have the same needs, that they mourn the loss of sons and daughters, mothers and fathers just as we do places a compassion in our hearts that is not common in many people who make "Truth Claims" and back them with "Appeals to Authority". They often have no desire to learn about the lives, history, social political climates or beliefs of their "Enemies" so they are not capable of following the teachings of Jesus. "Love your enemies, bless those who curse you.."

The teachings of Jesus are "Truth" because we can apply them and see their success. They can be tested and we can see the results. They can be applied successfully and achieve a positive outcome as evidence. It's because it is "Truth" and needs not be proclaimed as such to show it's worth. It is "Truth" because it can be followed or believed without it being taught by a person with a title or claim of divinity and without "truth claims" asserted. It needs nothing to back it because it can be lived, understood and practiced by any Human no matter what race, creed or background. It does not need the divine to teach it. It was taught by humans before the 1st century and can be taught by any human. No threat or reward is necessary for people to follow it. It is the "Truth" we seek and can bring the peace we want as well.

Fear of punishment is the tool of tyrants. Seeking to gain rewards outside of the benefits gained from our actions is meaningless vanity. Life can have meaning without fear of punishment or hope of reward when we know that a relationship with our neighbors has value. Knowing that life ends brings a sense of urgency to all of our endeavors as Humans. If belief in a "God" helps then so be it, but claims of his existence have nothing to do with it. Practicing a belief system without that understanding is done in vane.

I've recently read Ecclesiastes again and although it contains some wisdom it lacks the hope that I have. Some might call it faith. Who has it and who doesn't?

4:31 AM - 9 Comments - 4 Kudos - Add Comment

Missuse of language by the religious. From my response to a blog.
Current mood: aggravated
Category: Religion and Philosophy

I was a "believer" myself once but that is always argued against by those who claim to know my heart and claim that the old book they read says that I never shared their experience. What does it say when they claim to know my thoughts? Are they omnipotent? They claim that they know that they could never reject "God" given their personal relationship. Why is that "rhetoric"? Because I used to say it and used the same language to argue my positions and express my "Beliefs" as a believer. The problem is that the Bible is a religious text, by definition, and one who believes in and follows a "God" is religious by definition. The attempt of religious to distance themselves from the fact that they are religious, by definition, is unsettling. You can't redefine the word to suit the perceptions people will have. It is like me claiming to be a dog or a cat when I am human. Not belonging to a denomination or just claiming to believe the Bible in no way changes the definition of "Religious". Belief in God can only be "Non-Religious" when the person who believes there is a god, or may be a god, does not adhere to any doctrine or have any opinion about the teachings of a religion or it's religious texts. If you believe that Jesus died and rose you believe "doctrine" and when you add the 10 commandments and that you follow a religious text this proves objectively that you are religious by definition. It doesn't matter how many people say that as a "Christian" that they are not religious....it is simply/objectively/clearly not a true statement. Every claim is part of what defines it as such. The only claim that can be made is that your religion is different from another and using language in this way seems to seek to demean people of other faiths and is "special pleading"....by definition.

I can say that a car isn't a car or a horse isn't a horse and have 5 billion people who agree but it doesn't change what they are. All Christian faiths proclaim their religious affiliation by claiming to be such. It is a fact and changing what you call it makes no difference. This is part of what I was talking about and it promotes ignorance, confusion, intellectual dishonesty, denial, deceit and, of course, irritation by someone who knows English and the definition of the word "Religion". Repeating that you are not "religious" is rhetoric by definition and I used the same language as a member of the Church of God. Anyone with a dictionary or encyclopedia can look up the word so why make the claim when it is a blatant contradiction?

What is a person capable of when they can ignore completely objective facts and when they are unwilling to accept them and even willing to argue against them? Some blow up buildings or go to soldiers funerals waiving signs like "God Hates Fags". Blatant denial of facts shows an unwillingness to think objectively or accept truth. It is dangerous and leads to division, delusion, violence and some might say it is insanity.

How does this help support your claims when you also believe in a book that contains supernatural claims not unlike those in other texts, mythology or fairy tales? If you make a claim that religion is not religion that what should be expected of the person who receives the message? What are they to think when you make "Truth" claims? Can they be expected to believe that you accept what "Truth" is or even understand the concept?

It seems that one could think in the same way in which they use language to express ideas. If you choose to use language to express ideas it is important that you at least use it properly. If you mean to point out that you practice religion differently than most then you should explain how you do it differently. I am an individual but still a man and would be dishonest to claim otherwise. No amount of special pleading can change the definition of a word.

The arguments I used when I was a "Bible Believing Christian" were made honestly but in my ignorance. I didn't understand what was necessary to support my claims, didn't understand them and did not know that I was constantly using "special pleading" to support my positions along with many other methods that were highlighting all of the logical fallacies in arguments that had little support and almost no meaning. What did this say about my beliefs? If my language was so vague and contradictory when I was expressing my ideas then they completely lacked substance.

This is something very basic when learning logic structure or critical thinking. This is taught in any accredited school. I only have a High School diploma and only catch them myself because I had a genuine desire to understand what was going on in the world along with the courage to question. It is important that our language be correct in order to think and understand complex ideas and having been raised the way I was I did not posses the ability to understand politics or any social ideas like communism, socialism, democracy etc.

I am not trying to be disrespectful or condescending but willfully ignoring facts is ignoring what is true.

I fear that this dialog will go nowhere when words are so blatantly stripped of their meaning. It's like taking the word "Change" out of the definition of "Progress". This is something that needs to change in Christian language if it is to be taken seriously.

Personally, I find the moral teachings of Jesus, which I know quite well, to be very sound and and they can be understood cross culturally without any miracles or the death and resurrection. I have heard it said, and often said myself, that without his virgin birth and resurrection his existence would have been meaningless. This is also a very untrue statement and also strips his words of their meaning. This is very unfortunate and seems a to be a symptom of the problem I have been talking about.

The message of Jesus' was what makes him "alive today" in the hearts and minds of many. It was his message of tolerance, love and compassion that makes him important not the claims of divinity. Titles mean nothing unless given by merit. Titles given by inheritance or bloodline, which we clearly reject as having validity as American citizens, mean nothing either. Miraculous claims that cannot be supported in everyday experience mean nothing either. The message is being neglected and, in spite of it's simplicity, is not understood or followed by people otherwise. This was understood by Thomas Jefferson and is the reason he compiled "The Jefferson Bible" using what was clearly true and hard to argue against, without the miracles and  divinity claims.

Why not explain that to have compassion and love your neighbors and enemies that you must first have a desire and commitment to gain understanding of who they are and why? Why accept the dehumanization of our enemies by the people around us? Why accept that the genocide in Africa has not stopped and that we ignore the atrocities of people who don't agree with us? Why accept the failure of public policies that are not compassionate? Why accept the treatment of Palestinians and the belief by John Hagee and his minions that we must act as the "Hand of God"? If these be the enemy then as Christians you are commanded to love them and bless them...Jesus gave no exceptions...Why do those who claim to follow him?

5:50 PM - 4 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment

What is "God"? Is it something that exists only in our minds? A "personal God"?
Category: Religion and Philosophy

There is no consistent argument for the existence of a "God". The only thing that is consistent is  that it is confusing, vague and causes division. When "God" is accepted as something more reasonable then it is attacked by Fundementalists for being blasphemous. There are many ideas of what the word means and it varies from person to person, accross cultures and constantly changes throughout time. What is "God" today will be an "idol" tomorrow. What is religion today will be blasphemous in the next century. The definition of "God" has always been changing and always will.

11:12 AM - 4 Comments - 0 Kudos - Add Comment

It’s been a while.
Current mood: argumentative
Category: Religion and Philosophy

I haven't posted a blog or answered any in a while. Going to try to get back into it. Someone challenge me on something..lol...Send some asshole who has been a pest or something. I haven't had a decent debate in a while.

8:12 AM - 2 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment

Time for a new argument.
Current mood: argumentative
Category: Religion and Philosophy

This is for debate. Take your best shot:)

Currently listening : Perseverance By Hatebreed Release date: 26 March, 2002

6:37 PM - 29 Comments - 13 Kudos - Add Comment

The Bible and Wisdom.
Current mood: accomplished
Category: Religion and Philosophy

Limit knowledge and maintain control by thinking for those whom you rule over.

As fiction the Bible does contain the truth/wisdom. The Bible, when properly interpreted, contains knowledge of "good and evil" and the "wisdom" to distinguish between them. Wisdom comes only with understanding without which we can have no compassion and cannot know what it means to love our neighbor. The Bible shows us a cycle starting with evil and with Jesus/god becoming man to remove evil/threat of death and hell and establish a "New Covenent" with man so that "God" could be in your "heart" and not your ruler. Jesus became a brother who washed your feet and was humble/human.


Evil uses fear for control and hates to be questioned because of greed/hunger for power(lust). God became a man to establish a New Covenant. This brings salvation. This puts "God"/wisdom/knolege/questions/doubt/critical thinking in place of THE "Lie"/the biggest lie/ultimate lie that Rome imposed all too well.

10:53 AM - 7 Comments - 7 Kudos - Add Comment

What is evil? What is an argument?
Current mood: aroused
Category: Religion and Philosophy

Limit knnowlege and you can impose authority.

When passionately seeking wisdom EVERY statement IS an argument. If I say "the grass is green" then I have given an argument    if I am too be sure that it is true. Argument/doubt/critical thinking ect  just  questions searching for the "truth". "Power" calls it a "discussion" when you agree and an "argument" when you do not.  Who would discourage this and emphasize "Faith" in stead. How many contexts can faith be used in and why is the word itself so unclear? Could it be the most powerful tool for control that is in question when "Faith" is challenged? "Faith" is "Evil" in this context. What context do you wish to use in your own language/thinking?

Is god separate from reality or does god encompass it?

What is evil? Is knowledge and disobedience evil or is finding answers good? How do you get answers? If you are not allowed  for whatever reason to ask the question then you CANNOT get an answer. If I can get you to stop questioning my rule as an "Authority" then I can impose "MY" wisdom on you. I can emploiy fear because I have "CREATED" uncertainty for you by making you incapable of free thinking.

Currently listening : World's Strongest Man Soundtrack By 12 Stones Release date: 17 December, 2007

10:27 AM - 2 Comments - 0 Kudos - Add Comment

The "Cornerstone" of Ethics/morality is the desire to understand others.
Current mood: curious
Category: Religion and Philosophy

 Isn’t that simple?

Currently reading : I Am America (And So Can You!) By Stephen Colbert Release date: 09 October, 2007

9:01 PM - 4 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment

God as infinate and not bound by logic.
Current mood: accomplished
Category: Religion and Philosophy

Let me know what you think:)


Love exists in the mind, emotions exist in the mind and the Christian God exists in the mind.


The Christian "God" is often said to be infinite and not bound by logic. This aids in defense of whatever belief you have in your mind regardless of facts, so long as you say it came from "God".


Being a revealed religion makes it that much more suspect, especially when the "book" says that the magic "Holy Ghost" can speak to an individual directly. We see what can happen when people make these claims. Just read Joshua and Deuteronomy(assuming that there may be some truth to the story).


When an argument for "God" is introduced it/him/her can become non-descript until an opportunity arises in which the believer can modify his/her argument at will.


The defender of the "Faith" constantly contradicts the "idea" when they open their mouths because they introduce logic through language which they can manipulate. As an opposing argument demonstrates itself as sound the argument can immediately change and derail the whole discussion making progress impossible.


Once you define god you have limited him to your logic so he becomes your god which according to the talking snake book is idolatry. Every Christian I speak to uses a different defense for god at some point. Their facts need not be arranged to any standard because their god is not held to any standard. If we were talking about cars we would have an opportunity to introduce logic and maintain a coherent argument structure and facts that would not change, because no matter what we say, if we genuinely want each other to understand what a car is we will be honest and as objective as possible.


With the imagination and no limits you have already proven that god only exists in the mind. I am just trying to point that out in language so that people will realize that the idea of god completely contradicts all wisdom and knowledge.



That is why I am writing my book:)

7:06 AM - 9 Comments - 4 Kudos - Add Comment

Putting things into words is difficult. A response to a believer.
Current mood: contemplative
Category: Religion and Philosophy

Your "world view" undermines what Jesus taught when he said "seek and ye shall find". The OT god(authority symbolic or not) hated wisdom and forbade the love of it. Jesus came to make things "new" and establish a "New" covenant between "god"(real or symbolic of authority) and man. The stories of the virgin birth were to appeal to those who followed other faiths and had nothing to do with Jesus and everything to do with superstition. Jesus message stands alone without miracles.
You should read what our founders had to say about your "faith". Jesus spoke against "blindness", not against seeking or knocking. Jesus spoke of understanding and compassion (good Samaritan) not judgment and damnation, this is mans choice for the Roman Canon and a perversion of the message of Jesus (or the Gnostics if he wasn’t real). Anything that contradicts the core philosophy of Jesus is clear when you "understand", and as your understanding becomes more clear your "world view" comes closer to "truth".<br style="display:none"/>


Don’t buy into a view that destroys the "mind/soul?spirit" and don’t "accept" the rhetoric that makes you think there is a difference between the them. Surrender and acceptance are the friend of tyranny and the enemy of "truth". Remember that understanding ALWAYS has an explanation and then asks OTHER questions. Wisdom is never static, when it becomes static or has all the answers then it has ended it’s search and prefers being led just for comfort and finds no comfort in truth or wisdom.

Currently reading : I Am America (And So Can You!) 2009 Desk Calendar By Stephen Colbert Release date: 01 August, 2008

2:13 PM - 11 Comments - 8 Kudos - Add Comment