Jesus said I am the way.

The Book of Job. Chapter 27. Verse 14.

Pressure of numbers on resources and vanity.

You haven't read the Bible. You content yourself with accusing others of not having done. And what does "read" mean anyway?



I explained what that stuff is worth and what it will do for you. Now you've got Jonestown added on. The younger you are the longer you have to keep spouting it.

You're boring.

Yup. But the lie was to you, not them. I do not tell them I am an atheist. I just told you that to have some fun and see what your response was. Your response was predictable.

Do you think that lie will lessen my chances of experiencing heaven?

Actually, I tell them that I would like to discuss my faith with them and do they have an hour or so to spare.

Actually, there is more truth here.

Praying man let his daughter die

Dale Neumann faces up to 25 years in prison
A US jury has found a man guilty of killing his sick 11-year-old daughter by praying for her recovery rather than seeking medical care.

The man, Dale Neumann, told a court in the state of Wisconsin he believed God could heal his daughter.

She died of a treatable disease - undiagnosed diabetes - at home in rural Wisconsin in March last year, as people surrounded her and prayed.

Neumann's wife, Leilani Neumann, was convicted earlier this year.

The couple, who were both convicted of second-degree reckless homicide, face up to 25 years in prison when they are sentenced in October.

A lawyer representing Dale Neumann said he would appeal.

'Faith healing'

During the trial, medical experts told the court that Neumann's daughter could have survived if she had received treatment, including insulin and fluids, before she stopped breathing.

On Thursday Neumann, who is 47 and studied in the past to be a Pentecostal minister, said he thought God would heal his daughter.

"If I go to the doctor, I am putting the doctor before God," he said. "I am not believing what he said he would do."

He also said he thought his daughter had had flu or a fever, and that he had not realised how ill she was.

Neumann's lawyer said he had been convinced that his "faith healing" was working, and that he had committed no crime.

The prosecution argued that Neumann had minimised his daughter's illness and that he had allowed her to die as a selfish act of faith.

They said the girl should have been taken to hospital because she was unable to walk, talk, eat or drink.

Instead, an ambulance was only called once the girl had stopped breathing.

Not sure how this long post directly relates to the topic. Other than that Mr. Neumann prayed to God.

This was a sad case where a father used very poor judgement and had unrealistic expectations for his prayers.

If you are trying, once again, to belittle religion you are failing miserably. This has to do with the act of one man and has nothing to do with the rest of us who pray but also realize that we have to make an effort ourselves.

This was a sad case where a father used very poor judgement and had unrealistic expectations for his prayers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not being connected to the real universe because you are high on LSD for example and therefore believing you can fly off a cliff top can result in your death just as being "high" on religion and believing that prayers is a better path to solve a medical problem can result in your early death or even your child death as the news story posted related.

Religion is just or even more a danger to you and others around you as any drug and for the same reason as both disconnect you from the real universe.

Eleven men was disconnected from the real universe and believed that they would be rewarded by god for flying four planes into buildings and by killing thousands.

Being a true Christian mean you are going through your life with your judgment as impair as if you was high on drugs 24/7.

The problem with all that Bill is that you are once again relying on evidence for your proposition, which I presume is that doctors outrank God in law, on you having seen the item and it fitting your proposition. And it being presented to your senses in a manner which helps you to arrive at the conclusion both you and the writer wish to do. Your solipsistic ego having distorted your thinking. The writer may simply be under orders.

There are many cases, which I must suppose you haven't seen, or have put on Ignore, where doing nothing other than praying, which whatever that does or doesn't do to affect the outcome, it does reinforce the inaction. The inaction can be chosen without praying. It is even possible that praying can be faked to try to face down the ones clamouring for action if one believes in the power of inaction. i.e. faith in oneself.

The couple may have felt their daughter would be frightened of hospitals.

There are many millions who do nothing and rely on their own body to heal them in its own good time. A lot of them have no choice. But many do have the choice and choose inaction based on their faith in the strength of their evolved bodily mechanisms. Their immune systems. Which reduces the income of the medical profession and its many subsiduaries.

And some do die. And not all of them pray to God.

Suppose religious people had stronger immune systems. If so, and I'm inclined to think so, then they might have more faith in inaction than others.

And many die who seek medical aid first. " Doctors bury their mistakes" is a piece of folk wisdom. There are hospital bugs taking a heavy toll.

The news is full of stories about some miracle cure which later turns out to have knocked off people or wanged them out of countenance. Sun-beds are in the dock here. The Swine flu drug is not being taken by everybody. It turns out it has some negative effects. On thousands of people. Not just one like you are having a free ride on. Where it is a guess that the girl would have survived being treated. In her case probably a good guess but a guess nevertheless. And thus a doubt. Without question.

So you have arrived at a case to prove your point, and which you have chosen, which is an individual case and thus, as an individual case, as I have shown, is subject to a doubt. A faith. We don't doubt the outcome statistically in a large number of cases. But the large number of cases are just those you have on Ignore and not open to doubt and the one case you have chosen is open to doubt. That's rather odd to say the least. It could look like you are trying to pull the wool over our eyes. Or are a dupe for some force that is.

I have had a flu and food poisoning and I didn't take anything for either. And I got right just as fast as those I know who took stuff and paid up. I had a retinal detachment and I was on the operating table within a week. That's mechanical and fixed in the same way that machines are fixed. In my case with eyeball plumbers. But drugs are another matter. They have side effects and the negative ones you don't notice. And those who administered them write the autopsy reports. Unless its a high profile figure with a lot of money of the sort that is in the news now. The flu jab has killed people I gather. I won't be having one and they are free and promoted in the usual fashion. I'm frightened of the prick.

It has the makings of a Supreme Court case. And a high profile one. The right to refuse treatment and to take the responsibilty for one's children. As people who take their children in vehicles and airplanes do when the children are not old enough to assess the risks.

You are using a principle derived from a large number of cases to judge an individual case and avoiding the doubt associated with the individual case.

Is that not un-American?

There are many cases, which I must suppose you haven't seen, or have put on Ignore, where doing nothing other than praying, which whatever that does or doesn't do to affect the outcome,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There been a number of fairly large double blind studies about how well prayers work or does not work in a health care setting and the results was zero.

Unfortunately, I must come to the conclusion that you are a complete idiot. This is not a judgement on you, but rather ON your writings. Nobody but a complete idiot could post some of the utterly ridiculous stuff that you have posted.

One would have to conclude that it is you who remain under the influence of some mind altering substance.

You keep talking about people who flew planes into buildings. This in a thread about Jesus. THEY WERE NOT CHRISTIANS!

Setting aside the ridiculous attempt to tie 9/11 to Christianity, one of the P.R. problems for Christians is that well over 90% of Americans do profess belief in some form of higher power and the large majority of those are Christian.

So....almost certainly because of the exposure.....those mentally ill or sociopathic folks who commit crimes are far more likely to mistake their impulses as being 'from God' or "Jesus' or will state that as the reason for their impulses.

And that gives anti-Christian folks like Bill license to accuse Christianity of promoting or fostering such crimes. They ignore the fact that it is a miniscule fraction of all Christians who commit such crimes 'in Jesus' name', or that those not exposed to Christianity will name another source for the 'voices in their heads'. Also you will notice that Bill completely ignores all the evidence of good works and relief of human suffering 'committed' in the name of Christianity as related by Spendi, me, and others, and instead focuses on anything negative he can find or make up.

And I continue to wonder what drives such irrational fanaticism that is so often demonstrated by such committed Atheists.

just as you ignore the fact that it is the miniscule fraction of non-believers (like Bill) who are overty hostile to religionists. The vast majority of atheists that I know personally are NOT hostile to christians or any other believers.

I haven't ignored that at all. I have clearly commented on and stated that I appreciate those who are indifferent to religion and that I enjoy being around them. I have never at any place or in any post suggested that many or most or all non-Christians are hostile to Christianity. I think I had a brief discussion with at least one member about at least some of that on this thread.

I have commented on those who flock to threads like this and ridicule or demean or actively try to destroy the faith of believers. I can't see people like that as anything but fanatics just as I see 'in your face' Christians who tell you you're going to hell as fanatics.

Perhaps you could point me to any of Bill's posts, for instance, in which he was complimentary, concilitory, tolerant, or friendly toward any aspect of Christianity. You might start with the one in which he would like for it to be made illegal for parents to expose their children to Christianity before they reach a certain age.

you know what i'm going to do

if i ever commit a really horrific crime, i'm going to claim that god told me to do it, but i argued with him that i didn't believe in him and he wasn't going to steal my glory by taking responsibility for my really horrific crime,and i was going to do it and say it was my own idea

that's what i'm going to do

and i'm not going to let the devil take any credit either

if god and the devil want to do horrible things, they can do them with out me

this post is directed to foxfyre (or anyone else) who cites the polls indicating 80% (whatever) americans profess a belief in "god." My parents did not believe (even slightly) that jesus was the son of god or divinely inspired or that the bible was any more than an interesting account of the history of jewish philosophy, but, they always felt and expressed that they were "christians." My guess is that my parents approved in the ethos of the beatitudes. They would have been in that 80% that report being "christian."

Sorry Foxfyre but the history of the world is full of the Christian organizations including the “mother” church being just as “sociopath” as individuals and just as willing to rape and kill in the name of god as those “few” sick individuals.

Yes, most people claim to be Christians in the US today if no longer to any where near to the same degree in European but even here it is mostly lip service thank “god”.

When you have real true believers in charge of your society you have killers and torturers in charge that are willing to burn and torture and stone people to death just as the bible command.

See the Muslins countries where the true believers are in charge for an example of the hell on earth true believers bring to any society when they reach power.

You do raise an interesting point that I hadn't thought of before. I wonder how many defense attorney's encourage their clients to claim that "God ordered them to do it" to make an insanity plea more plausible?

This post is directed to Dyslexia (or anyone else) who questions the polls re who does and does not claim belief in a higher/supernatural/divine power and that the majority of those who do also profess the Christian faith.

Here is a discussion of one of many polls that backs up my observation:
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/usa/news/article_1383127.php/More_than_8_out_of_10_Americans_identify_with_a_Christian_faith

You are certainly welcome to present any credible poll that backs up your skepticism.

Until then I will continue to believe that America continues to be a mostly religious country, more of the religious are Christian than something else, and we will be the poorer for it when that is no longer the case.

Until then I will continue to believe that America continues to be a mostly religious country, more of the religious are Christian than something else, and we will be the poorer for it when that is no longer the case.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We all know you are the type that is more then willing to belief in fairy tales so your statement is not a great surprise now is it<grin>.

Do you think that's an adequate response to my post? I was exposing your sophistry. And your blinkered selection of reading.

You jibed at religion for making society easier to control, which it does, and when I asked you if you are in favour of making society difficult to control you failed to reply. I presume you didn't like to say yes, which would have been logical, and nor did you like to say what sort of control you would bring in to fill the gap left by religion being taken away.

So you are now deciding who is only paying lip service are you? All the "Christians" you cite as committing evil deeds I assume you have down as not just paying lip service and being true believers.

You're treating us as if we are stupid.