Jack, no, you are wrong about communion. Yes, there are churches that believe that somehow that is actually Jesus' body and blood, and other churches that believe that it's actually bread and wine but somehow also his body and blood. But the context of the Last Supper, were Jesus instituted this practice, was a remembrance ceremony in itself, and Jesus was holding the wine and bread that represented the time the Angel of the Lord passed over their houses in Egypt just before he delivered them from Egypt, so when he said "This is my body...This is my blood," it's pretty obvious what the context was. And he also said, "Do this in remembrance of me." Also, in John Chapter 3, Jesus says that people must be born again. When a religious teacher asks him how that is possible, Jesus points out that this is a spiritual truth (and by implication, not a physical one). 1 There was a man named Nicodemus, a Jewish religious leader who was a Pharisee. 2 After dark one evening, he came to speak with Jesus. “Rabbi,” he said, “we all know that God has sent you to teach us. Your miraculous signs are evidence that God is with you.”
3 Jesus replied, “I tell you the truth, unless you are born again, [fn1] you cannot see the Kingdom of God.”
4 “What do you mean?” exclaimed Nicodemus. “How can an old man go back into his mother’s womb and be born again?”
5 Jesus replied, “I assure you, no one can enter the Kingdom of God without being born of water and the Spirit. [fn2] 6 Humans can reproduce only human life, but the Holy Spirit gives birth to spiritual life. [fn3] 7 So don’t be surprised when I say, ‘You [fn4] must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows wherever it wants. Just as you can hear the wind but can’t tell where it comes from or where it is going, so you can’t explain how people are born of the Spirit.”
9 “How are these things possible?” Nicodemus asked.
10 Jesus replied, “You are a respected Jewish teacher, and yet you don’t understand these things? 11 I assure you, we tell you what we know and have seen, and yet you won’t believe our testimony. 12 But if you don’t believe me when I tell you about earthly things, how can you possibly believe if I tell you about heavenly things? 13 No one has ever gone to heaven and returned. But the Son of Man [fn5] has come down from heaven. 14 And as Moses lifted up the bronze snake on a pole in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15 so that everyone who believes in him will have eternal life. [fn6]
16 “For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. 17 God sent his Son into the world not to judge the world, but to save the world through him.
18 “There is no judgment against anyone who believes in him. But anyone who does not believe in him has already been judged for not believing in God’s one and only Son. 19 And the judgment is based on this fact: God’s light came into the world, but people loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil. 20 All who do evil hate the light and refuse to go near it for fear their sins will be exposed. 21 But those who do what is right come to the light so others can see that they are doing what God wants. [fn7] ” http://www.blueletterbible.org/tools/printerFriendly.cfm?b=Jhn&c=3&t=NLTP&x=6&y=5

Putin, no atrocities in Atheist Soviet Union? REALLY? I'm so angry and dumbfounded at that statement....

You are an idiot. Or an ignoramus.

So Jack, if you really want to understand the Bible, you'll need to understand that it's talking about spiritual things. Jesus also said he was the vine, the door, the path, the light, the lamb of God--and it's obvious that he wasn't talking physically. Hello. :-)

I think Putin is more a provocateur than either of those things. He tells untruths (ok, lies) because he wants or needs to object to God. I think Jack Klein is another provocateur, angry about God and determined to argue against him. Finally, Jack, you had a good point about personal experience--but the difference is, I don't go around harping on people who claim to have seen UFOs and being derogatory about their experience, as you are doing. At root, a person's philosophy can be judged by how he or she acts.

@Obi,

Why should the sane members of any group spend all their time denouncing the insane ones? Mitt Romney would spend all his day denouncing every nutcase the mainstream media could find if they had their way. That's a trap, and it's ridiculous. Same goes for religious people. If you want to interact or communicate with people who are religious, you should have the sense to ignore the idiots. The burden on me is to give reasonable arguments, not to denounce every dumb hick that people want to foist on me. That's not seeking to interact. That's seeking to silence.

Mujus, I can't possibly be angry towards something I don't believe in. Logic fail.

I can be disdainful towards people who believe in myths. If it makes you feel any better, I feel as disdainful or more so towards all believers in myths, fairytales, and other kids stories. I mean, I believed in Santa Claus too... when I was six. Then I realized that it didn't make any sense. You too, sir, may eventually grow up. I hope so.

Just because you feel you need an ethereal father figure to scare you into being a decent human being doesn't make any of the rest of us so handicapped.

I admit to my handicaps, which are not the ones you have ascribed to me. But Jack, from your choice of words and your derogatory tone, you are handicapped in other ways.

Congratulations. You're now a hypocrite as well.

So noble your cause that while I insult your beliefs, you insult me directly.

Let me be clear. I find your beliefs laughable. This is a fact. However, I don't find you laughable. You're probably a decent enough person. There are plenty of people so deluded that are also decent. They believe in all kinds of different myths as well.

Decency or lack of same doesn't make what you say any more or less true. Being true makes it true (tautologies are fun).

So, Jack, Obi, Mujus, semck, dipplayer2004, Jamiet? What are your stances?
Putin seems to say that atheists don’t commit atrocities, or more accurately atheistic governments do not.

Given that the entire article was to find ten things that atheists and Christians agree upon.


“Neither atheists nor Christians are immune to being brought into a mob mentality that allows atrocities to take place."


"We're all human; it's our duty to realize that we can commit atrocities, so we can be on guard against them in the future. "


Thus far Spyman and I agree to these two statements. All you need to do is say yes or no guys, it isn’t hard.

I'd simplify that into "Nobody is immune to mob mentality that allows atrocities to take place"

The second part I can completely agree with.

@ jack

You're going past just insulting his beliefs when you say stuff like this,



" I should be happy that you're not allowed to light me on fire anymore, right? :) " and telling him, “ you of all people are a sterling example of why religion should be pushed back.”



Asserting that he’d a murder you if he were “allowed” to when, he has expressed no violence at all that I’ve seen. Then telling him that he’s a prime example of everything you find disgusting in religion. I’d say that’s pretty insulting. I can see why he’d be tempted to fire back. Even though I don’t think you deserve to be insulted either, even if you’re not quite as innocent as you claim. In the whole “insult the beliefs not the person” thing, but you knew that I told you it was ad hominem right after you posted it, right.

Ok, thanks then that's one more for in agreement over this one.

Jack, Spyman, and I agree on this one.

"Nobody, atheist or theist, is immune to mob mentality that allows atrocities to take place"

fair enough?

Jack, one last comment, just to set the record straight, and one follow-up point: You called me handicapped, and I pointed out that you are also handicapped, so your accusation doesn't hold water. The difference is that I have Jesus and the Holy Spirit to help me with my handicaps.

I'll agree.

I'd say its ad religium (or some such) I'm quite open in my hostility to religions in general. I'm not hostile towards Mujus as a person. Or you as a person. Just the bronze age beliefs that you hold.

And if you're going to be as public as mujus has been, he can't exactly bleat about the mean old atheist mocking his beliefs(and I am. Openly). You put yourself out in the public sphere, and you expose yourself to public opposition.

And Mujus... if you want an idea about how silly your claim about having your triune god help you... just have the same thing, but substitute Cronus and Zeus. It also means as much. :)

Oh, I'd like to point out that its because of atheists that you're able to discuss this with me.

I'd imagine you're using one of three major operating systems.... Windows. Bill Gates. Atheist. MacOS. Steve Jobs. Atheist. Linux. Linus Torvalds, atheist.

Oh, and there is good old Alan Turing, the father of modern computing. Atheist, and harassed about his sexual orientation by the dominant creed of the day, Anglicism.

So I find it deeply ironic. Also amusing.

Thanks dipplayer2k4,

that evens it up again,

Spyman, Jack, dipplayer and I agree on this subject of atrocities.

"Nobody, atheists nor theists, is immune to mob mentality that allows atrocities to take place"

"We're all human; it's our duty to realize that we can commit atrocities, so we can be on guard against them in the future. "



Now we seem to be etting somewhere.



Mujus? semck? Obi?

Is he here yet?

"Windows. Bill Gates. Atheist. MacOS. Steve Jobs. Atheist. Linux. Linus Torvalds, atheist."

Really do these guys only hire atheists, or do you think there might have been some Christians in those companies? Yet I agree that "lot's of people Christian and atheist have worked for the betterment of the world"

Perhaps that could be plank #3 in our bridge :-)

@ N baby

Nope, there's still time :-)

What about you N Baby?

do you agree with these statements?

"Nobody, atheists nor theists, is immune to mob mentality that allows atrocities to take place"

"We're all human; it's our duty to realize that we can commit atrocities, so we can be on guard against them in the future. "

"lot's of people Christian and atheist have worked for the betterment of the world"

Peer pressure is a very powerful thing, but what about the 'Stanford Experiment', some humans will and do resort to murderous activity very quickly.... the difference being killing and murder is enshrined in religious texts and religious history, atheists have a certain amount of free will and free thinking in these matters

The Sanford experiment says no such thing. It is about obedience and nobody is immune to it. It was replicated many times with many different groups, and just about 65% of the population was susceptible. If you've found someting different I'd really like to see the report to check the methodology. It is so midely known that it's hard to get anyone that doesn't know the experiment beforhand, so it's hard to get accurate finding anymore. 65% was the standard for people that haven't heard of the experiment. It quickly goes down to 0% with populations whohave previous knowledge of the experiment.

I was thinking of Milgram Experiment, which doesn't differentiate. I'll look into Stanford. So far I've found nothing to back up your assertion, but I'll continue looking.

I'm not even sure if there were any atheists among the subjects in the Stanford experiment. The articles I read said nothing about athism at all. It mentions ideologies and they can be atheistic or theistic as I've said.

So what is your stance? Are atheists immune to mob mentality that allows atrocities to take place. Remeber that political ideologies can be as potent as any other in providing authoritarian powers to their followers. that was the whole point of the Stanford experiment. I don't know what Zimbardo was thinking though making himself the superintendent.

"Windows. Bill Gates. Atheist. MacOS. Steve Jobs. Atheist. Linux. Linus Torvalds, atheist."

Gates: "In terms of doing things I take a fairly scientific approach to why things happen and how they happen. I don’t know if there’s a god or not, but I think religious principles are quite valid."

Steve Jobs was a devout Buddhist.

But what does this have to do with anything? If inventing a computer operating system/running a company that invents or buys a computer operating system endows one with special powers to divine the hidden secrets of the universe, I know what I'm going to be doing this weekend!

Sorry CA, didn't realize you were still waiting for me. I agree. (I meant to imply something similar in my initial post, which is on page 2. But I guess it wasn't that explicit, and anyway there's no reason for you to memorize my posts).