A Open Letter To All Volconvo Members

[MerlinsByte]

Keypad ministry


Fri. 9:08 AM est.

Merlin writes...It seems that, upon introspection that I have exposed a few glaring personal faults of my own. I am an open theist Christian and use forums and blogs as a low intensity evangelical ministry. Not by design per se but just to spread the good word when applicable.

I have allowed my temper to get the best of me on too many occasions, especially here at Volcanvo, which results just the opposite of what I try to accomplish and is diametrically opposed to the example that I should set as a man of god. My method of rebuttal is not healthy to the recipients or myself.


Therefore an apology is in order. If I have injured by angering , insulting or other means I ask for forgiveness and will attempt to improve my communication skills. I have prayed about this and the answer that I received from god wasnt so nice.

God bless all of you and yours in your endeavors

Mb

[Starboy]

Merlin, if you are an honest advocate of your religion then you should not proselytize here. This place is for debate.

Starboy

[Mr.Vicchio]

Merlin, you are only human, while every man of God tries to walk the path we often stumble along the way.

It's easy to get angry when you reach out and get slapped, when you make a point only to be rideculed, when you preach your beliefs only to be harangued by those whose hearts are closed to the Word, the Spirit.

It takes a real man to admit his failings, it takes a better man to look failure in the eye and not surrender.

Keep it up.

[Samildanach]

Ah Starboy...but what is debate for? Debate as far as I am aware is the presenting of an argument in favour of a position to determine which position out of many is the more correct one. If Merlin feels free to have his position analysed and debated on then I say its fine in the religion and philosophy forum. That is what this particular forum is for. It is up to individuals to decide whether his view has any relevance to them and he doesn't need to apologise for it.

[Starboy]

Quote by: Samildanach Ah Starboy...but what is debate for? Debate as far as I am aware is the presenting of an argument in favour of a position to determine which position out of many is the more correct one. If Merlin feels free to have his position analysed and debated on then I say its fine in the religion and philosophy forum. That is what this particular forum is for. It is up to individuals to decide whether his view has any relevance to them and he doesn't need to apologise for it.

You would have a point if Merlin or most of any of the magical thinkers actually engaged in honest debate when they were promoting their religion. I have yet to see it. It would be refreshing. And until they can do it they are not posting within what Sean intends for this board.

Starboy

[Nono]

Jesus, Starboy, the slightest itty-bitty little chink in the Iron Curtain of Atheism is an intolerable false premise in your book and thus unworthy of any discussion.
Seems to me a totally undebatable position you got yourself there. How close-minded -- how devout -- of you.

[Gorgo]

Quote by: Nono unworthy of any discussion

No, he has a point. What is there to debate about religion? Most theists would agree. You either believe or you don't. There is no debate involved. Debate requires logic and a desire to learn. Religion requires a fear of reality, and thus a desire to avoid learning and logic.

It's admirable that MB is looking within to discover his emotions, we all need to do that. What he doesn't realize is that religion is based on the same fear of reality that his anger is based on. They are one and the same.

We all have anger and we all have delusions. I appreciate his example and will try to be more vigilant in improving myself in that area as well.

It's difficult when you're dealing with people to remember that it's their mental climate that angers them, and their anger has nothing to do with anything outside of themselves.

[Nono]

I agree to the extent that if you believe you believe (or if you don't you don't) and there's no discussing it.
So I'm not advocating yet another of those debates.

What gets me is the attitude -- exemplified by Starboy and Poops -- that if (say in connection with another discussion) you show the slightest willingness to even consider the possibility that just maybe some sort of "sky fairy" could conceivably exist, you're summarily condemned as out to lunch.

A woefully dogmatic and unrational approach in my view.

[Mr.Vicchio]

Quote by: Gorgo No, he has a point. What is there to debate about religion? Most theists would agree. You either believe or you don't. There is no debate involved. Debate requires logic and a desire to learn. Religion requires a fear of reality, and thus a desire to avoid learning and logic.

Religion and logic go hand in hand, it's those that fear and reject what God has to offer that are avoiding reality.

When you learn this Gorgo, you will see the errors of your ways.

[MerlinsByte]

Merlin, if you are an honest advocate of your religion then you should not proselytize here. This place is for debate. Starboy

Debate Verb…2 a : to contend in words b : to discuss a question by considering opposed arguments
3 : to participate in a debate



I disagree with your comment. Read the definition of debate above. If everyone agreed that there was a god (or that there wasn't one) then we wouldn’t need debate this issue. However I know that there is a GID (god or intelligent designer). It seems there are a few in disagreement with me, hence a debate.

Also star boy, if I could direct your attention to the top of this web page you might see that this is the religion and philosophical topic page. That is self-explanatory I would hope, i.e. meaning that we would endeavor to discuss /debate religion which does include god here. If by a contact exposure to the word of god , the true word converts some, then it is a good day, but not by my design per se, as I alluded to in the original thread.

To summarize, any truth whether it be a religious truth or a scientific truth will win converts by the power if its purity. I mustn’t force any of my ideals upon anyone that is capable of free thought. Most will read ,reject , accept or put file it in the subconscious for later review, it is the latter seed that I attempt to plant.

I world hope that by reading my posts, this “seed” would take root and produce fruit of a god type . If my words would prompt some to think about god as a substantial alternative to the nothingness of atheism, then it is a glorious day.

mb

[MerlinsByte]

By mr Vicchio...Merlin, you are only human, while every man of God tries to walk the path we often stumble along the way. It's easy to get angry when you reach out and get slapped, when you make a point only to be rideculed, when you preach your beliefs only to be harangued by those whose hearts are closed to the Word, the Spirit.It takes a real man to admit his failings, it takes a better man to look failure in the eye and not surrender. Keep it up.

thanks for your support.

mb

[Starboy]

Quote by: MerlinsByte Debate Verb…2 a : to contend in words b : to discuss a question by considering opposed arguments 3 : to participate in a debate I disagree with your comment. Read the definition of debate above. If everyone agreed that there was a god (or that there wasn't one) then we wouldn’t need debate this issue. However I know that there is a GID (god or intelligent designer). It seems there are a few in disagreement with me, hence a debate. Also star boy, if I could direct your attention to the top of this web page you might see that this is the religion and philosophical topic page. That is self-explanatory I would hope, i.e. meaning that we would endeavor to discuss /debate religion which does include god here. If by a contact exposure to the word of god , the true word converts some, then it is a good day, but not by my design per se, as I alluded to in the original thread.

I never said that it couldn't be debated honestly and openly. What I did say is that it would be refreshing if it actually were debated in such a fashion.

Starboy

[Samildanach]

Religion and logic go hand in hand, it's those that fear and reject what God has to offer that are avoiding reality.

what exactly has God offered me? I have no contract don't see his signature anywhere and none of his lawyers have approached me. :)

[fedfem]

Quote by: Nono I agree to the extent that if you believe you believe (or if you don't you don't) and there's no discussing it. So I'm not advocating yet another of those debates. What gets me is the attitude -- exemplified by Starboy and Poops -- that if (say in connection with another discussion) you show the slightest willingness to even consider the possibility that just maybe some sort of "sky fairy" could conceivably exist, you're summarily condemned as out to lunch. A woefully dogmatic and unrational approach in my view.

Not to defend anyone but trying to debate issues when god or religious ideology is being used as the opposing issue is not rational or logical.

The majority of the pro war stance who accept proven lies as facts happen to also be the same throwing in supernatural or cult like points to support their views. Debate is about facts not faith(unless that is the topic of debate)

What Merlin and the rest don't realize is the stress of trying to spread the word while debating is an insurance they will never absorb the opposite point. One cannot learn while trying to push a specific agenda or while in fear of accepting the opposite point of view.

[Gorgo]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio Religion and logic go hand in hand

Religion stems from the idea that life is not worth very much, so we have to create Creators and afterlives in order to give it worth. This fear is present in everything you do. Examine yourself honestly, and you'll see it.

Religion is a twisted sort of logic. It starts from the premise that life is not worth living, so therefore we must create a fantasy world to live in.

[Gorgo]

Quote by: fedfem The majority of the pro war stance who accept proven lies as facts

That's a good point, except that religious people are also against the war, although those people generally aren't as dogmatic as the pro-war crowd.

The point, though is a good one that people like Vicchio are unconcerned about facts, as long as they have someone to "have faith" in. That's GWB and Ronnie Reagan's popularity. They told us not to think, but rather have faith in them to protect us from the devil.

[dotcoma]

I see nothing wrong with this topic Merlin, and I am not too religious. :)

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio Religion and logic go hand in hand, it's those that fear and reject what God has to offer that are avoiding reality. When you learn this Gorgo, you will see the errors of your ways.

I'm sorry I had to comment on this. Look, I respect your right to live your life and believe what you will, but if your religion made logical sense then we would not have totally different faiths, and non-believers Vicchio.

It is logical to me that people, who feel the need for "purpose" and who fear death would construct a reassurance for themselves and their children that they will not just be dust when they die. God explains what we cannot. He is the filler for our failure to conceptualize how something came from nothing. There could indeed be a God, who knows, but it does not make "logical sense" lol.

Also, God in the institutional form is a good way to keep the have-nots content with their position (as they fear stealing, killing, etc). You see, without this idea that an immortal being who controls your access to the afterlife we would likely have more people who would simply not give a damn about killing, robbing, etc. God is the untouchable enforcer. It makes sense. I think it is necessary, but it once again does not make God's existence "logical".

Your faith is great if you actually use it to make your purpose in life doing something Jesus would (I have never heard you say turn the other cheek), but it is not a logical faith by any means. It is logical WHY you have faith, but God's existence is not a closed book sir.

[Nono]

Quote by: fedfem Not to defend anyone but trying to debate issues when god or religious ideology is being used as the opposing issue is not rational or logical.

Yeah, I agree, but what I'm talking about are things like this thread.

[Starboy]

I would say that supernatural religion is a reaction to reality. What most all supernatural religions do is anthropomorphize reality and then try to negotiate with the personification. A spirit or elemental or demon or jinn or angel or god is simply a particular manifestation of that personification for that particular susperstition. There are then those that claim that they can communicate with that personification or control it. The covenant of the old testament is simply a purported contract with such a personification. Christianity is based on a "new deal" with the personfication created by the Jews. The really funny dang thing about it is that for the most part the Jews think that Jesus had nothing to do with their god. Go figure. But when you live in an imaginary world everybody gets to make up any dang thing they want. I just wish they wouldn't try to force everyone else to live in their particular dream world. That they would just be happy to be allowed to be functionally insane.

Starboy

[Samildanach]

Hehe...a psychoactive allergic reaction....now I have heard it all...