Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 948 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
krellin (80 DX)
21 Aug 12 UTC
George W Bush on Race Reltions
GWB made Coding Rice one of the MOST powerful BLACK WOmen in the world. NOW she breaks the Mae barrier at Augusta.

THANK YOU George W Bus fo appointing 'Condi?...for FIRST elevating er to power!!!
Onjd
20 replies
Open
President Eden (2750 D)
21 Aug 12 UTC
How I feel about politics all the time
http://reason.com/archives/2012/08/20/the-wrong-side-absolutely-must-not-win
2 replies
Open
orathaic (1009 D(B))
14 Aug 12 UTC
For profit prisons?
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/08/13/681261/mississippi-schools-sending-kids-to-prison-for-misbehaving-in-the-classroom/?mobile=nc

When you put private companies in charge of prisons they make a profit, can you do the same with education and pay for it with public money? i mean prison is free for the user right? Why not run schools on this basis too??
143 replies
Open
Sbyvl36 (439 D)
21 Aug 12 UTC
Vote in the Presidential Poll!
Attention! Everyone is invited to vote in the Sbyvl Presidential Poll. Four parties, Democratic, Republican, Libertarian, and Green are up on the poll. Make sure to vote by September 30, when the site will endorse the poll's winner.
0 replies
Open
orathaic (1009 D(B))
20 Aug 12 UTC
business hours only
I just want to know, who the hell does this: www.freakonomics.com/2012/08/20/this-website-only-open-during-business-hours/
1 reply
Open
slyster (3934 D)
12 Aug 12 UTC
GameID=696969 EoG
Really enjoyable game guys. Will post more later.
48 replies
Open
Lando Calrissian (100 D(S))
20 Aug 12 UTC
gunboat
500 D gameID=97765 48 hours wta
1 reply
Open
The_Pessimist (112 D)
18 Aug 12 UTC
Live games , lots of live games!
I love live games and was wondering if there are any regular live game players who might want to take part in a series of regular live games together, just simple full press non-anon games . We could turn it into a tournament of some kind but mostly i just wanna play a whole bunch of live games soon
34 replies
Open
Fortress Door (1837 D)
20 Aug 12 UTC
Weekly Press EOG
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=88327
9 replies
Open
WarLegend (1747 D)
17 Aug 12 UTC
New Full Press Game!
I've been looking for a game in which people actually write and its not a hassle to have the most basic communication with your neighbor, and.. well I havn't had much luck.

So hopefully starting a game on the forums will help me find a game like that!
So if you wanna join, just sign up. What is everyone's preferred length/bet amount
77 replies
Open
Fortress Door (1837 D)
20 Aug 12 UTC
Boys of Summer
Since the old thread is locked/buried
2 replies
Open
Sbyvl36 (439 D)
19 Aug 12 UTC
Sbyvl.webs.com now has a purpose
My website, Sbyvl.webs.com, now has a purpose. It is now a non-partisan election blog, with projections for each state.Just go to the main page and click "2012 coverage".
4 replies
Open
obiwanobiwan (248 D)
19 Aug 12 UTC
Putn33 on Churchill: "Genocidal Maniac If There Ever Was One"...Fact or Fiction?
Putin, you're free to comment, freer to drop one of your clever cries of "jackass" or "doofus" below for my daring to disagree.
I don't think Churchill was "a Genocidal Maniac If There Ever Was One."
But maybe I'm wrong...am I? Have I missed a key memoir where Winston vows to expunge the Catholics or Jews or threatened to murder someone for saying the bar was empty or something? Or...is Putin being Putin?
90 replies
Open
achillies27 (100 D)
19 Aug 12 UTC
WTA-GB-170
Whew! Glad I got that draw!
4 replies
Open
Zmaj (215 D(B))
19 Aug 12 UTC
EoG: gun 101 fun
gameID=97706 and it was going so well in 1903...
5 replies
Open
Mujus (1495 D(B))
29 Apr 12 UTC
Daily Bible Reading
Wherein the ancient story of God and man, heaven and hell, life and death, love and hate, sacrifice and murder, the fall and the rescue, and angels and demons, continues.

(This thread will replace the previous Daily Bible Reading threads, so let's continue the conversation in this one instead of the previous ones.)
Page 27 of 36
FirstPreviousNextLast
 
Mujus (1495 D(B))
03 Jun 12 UTC
The first story in today's chapter is sometimes called "The Widow's Mite" based on the old King James Language. Here's the first four verses in the New Living Testament version:
1 While Jesus was in the Temple, he watched the rich people dropping their gifts in the collection box. 2 Then a poor widow came by and dropped in two small coins. [fn1]
3 “I tell you the truth,” Jesus said, “this poor widow has given more than all the rest of them. 4 For they have given a tiny part of their surplus, but she, poor as she is, has given everything she has.”

http://www.blueletterbible.org/tools/printerFriendly.cfm?b=Luk&c=21&v=1&t=NLTP
Mujus (1495 D(B))
04 Jun 12 UTC
Footnotes:
21:2 Greek two lepta [the smallest of Jewish coins].
Hi Obi,

Yeah I started one, but your response in the other thread was to a way older post that we'd already dealt with in the converstation. That two (Now three) statement post is the one I'm interested in whether you agree or not. So far, we're getting a list of people to agree that is interesting in itself. You may have to dig a little in the other thread but I've staed them several times and numbered them. So, just check my posts in the last 5 pages or so, lol. I'll try to give a more comprehensive answer to your post them :-) Got Vacation Bible School this week though, might be a bit busy.
obiwanobiwan (248 D)
04 Jun 12 UTC
OK, Mujus...LET'S look at your response to that question of mine...

"I don't understand why God ordered the killing of all men, women, and children, but I can get my head partially around it."

Right off the bat...you can't understand it...and yet...you can, partially...

Well, thank you for starting off as opaquely as possible...you don't understand God's rationale, but you can make out part of it?

I'm sorry--that just seems rather implausible and intellectually dishonest, if you don't mind my saying so (and even if you do mind.)

After all, that gives you the easiest of outs--anything you wish to "explain" that would support your theistic point of view that "God is Good" you can now claim, and anything that contradicts that, you can just fall back on the old, cliched line of "God works in mysterious ways," repackaged for the 21st century in your above statement with "I don't fully understand...but I can wrap my head around it PARTIALLY...with no distinction given as to why I can explain some things and not others--and indeed, why what I CAN explain always seems to paint God in a good light, while what I CAN'T explain would place myself, my faith, God, or some combination of the three in serious ethical trouble."

Now, I'm not saying YOU are using that here...or intending to manipulate such an easy out...but you must admit, the nature of your answer, right from the start DOES allow for such manipulation.

Let's move on.

NOW, you may be saying, "That's unfair, Obi, I had a post BEFORE that one, that you've just quoted, why are you ignoring it?"

I'm not--just calling attention to the context in which your answers may be given, Mujus, when you claim you can have some knowledge and not other knowledge, give no distinction as to WHY you have some and not others when, after all, it's the same source of knowledge, and why all the knowledge you DO have seems to support a pro-God stance rather conveniently.

Just saying.

But on with your response, and now, from the top, with the first of your responses--

"let's look at the historical background from 400 years earlier, when the Amalakites fought God's chosen people and attacked the stragglers as the Israelites passed through the land."

First, let's be CAREFUL what he call "history" here; archaeologists, including Israeli archaeologists, have searched and searched and even David Ben Gurion's team admitted they could find no trace of the Exodus out of Egypt actually occurring, the MOST that can be historically claimed is that, with all the slaves and power the Egyptians DID have, it's not at all out of the realm of possibility that some were Hebrew, but NO ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROOF has turned up evidence the events in Exodus ever occurred, that there ever was a wandering period of 40 years or an escape from Egypt like that or anything else.

Biblical "history" =/= Real history all the time...

In some instances, yes.
In this instance, no proof, so be careful what you call history.

And to be perfectly transparent here--as you might rightly be saying "You're an atheist, of course you wouldn't take the Bible as historically accurate"--I'd first point out:

1. First, not all Christians take the Bible as historically accurate all the time, and often as being metaphorical...so if the sects of your own faith can't decide what's history and what's metaphor, seems unsporting of you to tout it as being historical fact.

2. That Israeli archaeology team Ben Gurion dispatched? They had EVERY REASON to find or even manufacture proof that the Exodus occurred, as Ben Gurion put it, it'd have given the Israeli people "the title deed" to the territory--and they STILL, very bravely and truthfully, with all the incentive in the world to find something to prove Exodus to be historical fact, found nothing of the sort.

So, again--be careful what you call history, please.

Next, you quote scripture, and it'll bloat the size of this response even more if I quote it all, so to summarize--

The Amalekites supposedly attack the Egyptians...
Moses tells followers to strike back...
And then, as you yourself quote, from Deuteronomy:
"17 “Never forget what the Amalekites did to you as you came from Egypt. 18 They attacked you when you were exhausted and weary, and they struck down those who were straggling behind. They had no fear of God. 19 Therefore, when the LORD your God has given you rest from all your enemies in the land he is giving you as a special possession, you must destroy the Amalekites and erase their memory from under heaven. Never forget this!"

So, essentially...what I get from this quote, along with the context provided with the alleged attack by the Amalekites is...

An eye for an eye.
Montagues and Capulets.
Jets and Sharks.
They attacked us, so let's attack them, and wipe them out.

Now, forget for a moment this is the Bible, and God's book, and all of that--
IF ANY OTHER BOOK said this...
IF ANY PERSON said this sort of thing, without the veneer of religion...
We'd call such a person a rage-filled barbarian bent on vengeance in a Captain Ahab way.

"Hang on!" you may be saying, at this point, "That's not fair, Obi, not at all! After all, these are people long ago, thousands of years ago, and it's not fair to hold them to modern ethical standards...your heroes Plato and Aristotle advocated for a totalitarian state and slavery, respectively, and even your greatest hero of all, SHAKESPEARE, has racism and sexism and slavery and all of that in his works, how can you hold such a double standard, keeping Plato and Shakespeare as heroes while spitting on the Bible?"

Well, I'd argue some parts of Shakespeare--notably "The Merchant of Venice"--isn't racist, or to be more accurate, is far more progressive and even-handed with these matters than fellow writers, and Shylock in particular is more a complex character with good and bad traits and speeches to make us feel sympathy and rage alike towards him, rather than the mere vulgar monster Marlowe created in Shakespeare's source material, "The Jew of Malta"...

But that's for another discussion, and no one cares about my Shakespeare ramblings--

AND YES--Shakespeare DOES have some parts that aren't up to code, as it were, with modern morality,
AND YES--Plato proposed a nightmare of a state in The Republic,
AND YES--Aristotle's suggestion that slaves are necessary for an elite upper class is rather cruel by today's standards and not at all acceptable.

BUT--and here's the important point--THEY'RE HUMAN...AND FALLIBLE...

"GOD" IS NOT.

At least he's not supposed to be--all-powerful, all-loving, all-seeing, all-knowing, perfect...

It's perfectly understandable why Plato cocked up ethically by modern standards.
And the same for Aristotle.
And the same for Shakespeare.
They're human, and were builders of our ethical foundation, so to speak, so naturally they didn't have the ethical guidance we do, that guidance didn't yet exist.
Neither Locke nor Jefferson had yet written "all men are created equal" in their time.

To pile on Aristotle even further, he was vital in getting Western science started...
He was also wrong about the vast majority of what he thought--
But then, he didn't have a telescope like Copernicus or Galileo...
Or the mathematical tools for working out gravity Newton created...
And Newton HIMSELF was an alchemist--so he himself didn't have all the tools, as it were.

Why do I harp on this?

I UNDERSTAND why the Israelites might have wanted to really thrash the Amalekites.
I do.
Given the story's context--true or not--and their time period, it makes sense--
They were weak and tired and the Amalekites attacked...vengeance is tempting.

That's a natural human response, and especially for their day and age, it makes sense.

So I'm not blaming the Israelites here, I don't condone their actions, but it makes sense for their time period that they'd want to do that, and I can understand where they're coming from, namely, a very basic and primal and primitive center of humanity.

My problem?

*GOD* endorses this.

Surely GOD isn't basic, primal, or primitive...?
Surely GOD, if he were all-loving, wouldn't want creations killing fellow creations?
Surely GOD, if he were all-loving, wouldn't take sides in a squabble between his children?
Surely GOD, if he were all-loving, wouldn't instruct Saul to wipe some of his creations out?
Surely GOD, if he were all-knowing, could've seen those Amalekites coming the first time?
Surely GOD, if he were all-knowing, could've told them "Hey, come on, guys, chilll..."
Surely GOD, if he were all-knowing, could've warned the Israelites if they didn't listen?
Surely GOD, if he were all-powerful, could've found a better resolution to this conflict?
Surely GOD, if he were all-powerful, could've done so without entreating upon free will?

(I'd say that in this case, "free will" is important, but if you must suspend "free will" in order to save the lives of thousands who are about to be brutally slaughtered...if you're God...do it? Take away their free will, sit them down, the two tribes, and force them to listen and be a forceful mediator until the mess is sorted out between the two of them?)

My issue here isn't that the ISRAELITES act crudely, evilly, barbarically, or viciously...
It's that GOD here acts crudely, evilly, barbarically, viciously...and he has NO EXCUSE.

If he's all-knowing, all-seeing, all-loving, and all-powerful, he has NO EXCUSE to act like a barbarian from 3,000 BC when he should be acting...well, not even like someone with a basic sense of morality here in 2012, I'd expect God SHOULD be more evolved than THAT...but at least 2012, damn it, and not 3,000 BC!

"OK, Obi" you may respond, wearied to a point, "even if we concede that, though, and say maybe God's acting just a bit too vengeful for an all-mighty being that claims to be morally and otherwise perfect, even if we concede that...wars break out all the time, and you can't expect God to just sort them ALL out, that gives no free will, and anyway, you've said you can see why the Israelites would want to attack the Amalekites right back, so how can you condemn God for allowing man to proceed as he would anyway?"

Well, to begin with...
I COULD say that I think a just God WOULD prevent wars...
But I'll leave that one alone for another day.
Let's just grant that for the moment.

If we assume that God should permit wars, then...well, I NOW must point something out--

God is ACTIVELY ENCOURAGING A WAR...AND TAKING SIDES...AND ENCOURAGING GENOCIDE AT THAT.

"But the Greek gods took sides, and you like Homer and Sophocles!"

Yes, but the Greeks were very much aware that their gods could be rather petty and cruel, and that they took sides, and indeed, that while they were "fair," they weren't always, well, actually fair, it depended on what side you were on.

"But in any case, Obi, the Amalekites started this...and the Israelites were God's CHOSEN people--so why shouldn't he want to look after them and protect them?"

First...has no one else ever wondered WHY God needs "Chosen People?"
Be it Jews...
Or Muslims...
Or Christian sects...
If he created EVERYONE...and is supposed to be benevolent...
Why is God playing favorites? Why does he need an elite class?
Could it BE, maybe, that the Jews writing this book wanted to elevate themselves?
Could it BE, to justify slaughtering all those people, the Jews wanted special rules?
Could it BE, just maybe, that the Jews wanted to feel extra-special and elite?
Could it BE, later on, the Muslims and different Christian sects wanted the same?
SO........
Could it BE, just maybe, the whole "Chosen People/Messiah/God's Children" complex is just a way for people to either feel special and elite, justify their atrocities, or both?

But I digress.

Let's once again grant something I find repulsive and absurd--that God has Chosen People, and wants to look after them.

OK.

Who here has children?
I don't (and don't ever want them, or a wife, or girl/boyfriend, for that matter, I'm just not cut out for that life and don't want it)...but I suspect many of you do?
Now, if someone threatened your children...you'd protect them, yes?
Do anything you could?
You'd maybe kill another to save your children, if it came to that terrible choice?

Well, God has one up on you, parents--he's GOD.
Being all-powerful, to "protect his Chosen People," he doesn't HAVE to kill...right?
He can do...anything?
He can erect a force field to protect the Hebrews?
He can hold a peace summit, forcibly, if need be?
He can protect them in a whole host of other ways?

So...God doesn't HAVE to kill, right, to protect?

So...why is he ordering killing here?
Why is he ordering murder here?
Why is he taking sides, when he should be above that?
Why is he acting like a barbaric Jew from 3,000 BC trying to explain and justify a harsh desert life of atrocity after atrocity and blood feuds that'd make the Hatfields and McCoys blush wrote his character?

Hmmmmmm.........

"Obi, you're STILL not being fair to God's status! God is NOT barbaric, those people didn't believe in him, and shunned him, and had killed Israelites, and deserved to die, it was their own fault for starting this, God was just trying to protect his Chosen People!"

Leaving aside the "Chosen People" bit, as I've already said how ludicrous I find that...

Granted I haven't killed anyone...but *I* don't believe in God--do I deserve his wrath?
Do *I* deserve to die like the Amalekites?
Is God so petty he created the whole Universe and yet is upset a few thousand people in one fraction of one speck amongst a million or more other planets out there didn't like him?

But EVEN IF I GRANT *THAT*...and keep in mind, I've now "granted" about four or five things, it seems, that I find completely irrational, immoral, or both...and we by into this HORRIFIC excuse for genocide, the grade-school excuse "they started it!" being cause to murder all the men and women...

WHY. THE. CHILDREN?!?!

What POSSIBLE BENIGN MOTIVE could a "loving God" have THERE?!?!

The CHILDREN didn't attack the Israelites...
The CHILDREN didn't actively shun God...
The CHILDREN didn't choose to be born into an Amalekite home...
The CHILDREN didn't choose this side...
The CHILDREN have done exactly ZERO to hurt ANYONE...

What is the POSSIBLE justification THERE?!

And the donkeys!

And that's a point I raise with some humor, I admit, but EVEN if someone--not necessarily the Christians on this site--wanted to pull an argument I've heard before that's absolutely DISGUSTING, and something they should be ASHAMED for uttering,

"Well, they were part of the Amalekite bloodline, those children, and so they inherited the sins of their parents and were thus wicked and deserved to die as well,"

Even if someone here wanted to use THAT disgusting piece...well, first, I hate to play the "Jewish background" card, but I WILL say that, if I met someone just now who was just a little child of 5 years old or so, and their great-grandparent had been a Nazi soldier...

I wouldn't demand that that kid be treated like a Nazi war criminal and shot!

What's more, my late grandfather, who served in the artillery shelling Munich in the War...I HAVE to think, knowing him as I did, that as much as he HATED the Nazis--with double cause, for his being at war with them as an American and for what they were doing to the Jews like him in Europe--that if he saw a little 5 year old German girl run up to him to fetch a ball she was playing with that he wouldn't have cruelly blown off her head because she happened to be BORN in the wrong place at the wrong time to the wrong genetic bloodline!

So that argument is DISGUSTING...and those who use it are sickening immoral denizens of the most dastardly and maliciously-dark parts of humanity, and if ANYTHING deserves to be completely and totally expunged from humanity, it's thoughts like THAT.

But I digress, where was I?

Ah, yes--God was just using what I must assume is that very rationale to order the horrible deaths of innocent children.

But EVEN with that atrocious cruelty, something so unbecoming of mankind I shudder to think of the millions who must think it "holy" if it is employed in "God's/Allah's name"...

THE DONKEYS aren't human...WHAT THE HELL have they done?

You've said before, "Well, maybe God didn't want the Israelites to profit from this attack, and so the donkeys had to go," but...if God didn't want them to profit from this...

WHY NOT LET THE DAMN DONKEYS ROAM FREE?

What POSSIBLE harm is there in that?

Now, hopefully that was a thorough response to THAT portion of your response, let's continue, because I want to be sure I get to everything here, at least everything I can...

Back to the second post, and we pick it up with:

"I don't understand why God ordered the killing of all men, women, and children, but I can get my head partially around it."

And I've already stated my problem there, so, moving on to the next sentence...

"The first point to understand is that the Amalekites set themselves against God, and God promised retribution for that, and yet he waited 400 years to do so. I don't know why, but I can only assume that he was giving them time to repent as he did Nineveh when he sent Jonah to them to warn them about their actions, but the Amalekites rejected him while the people of Nineveh turned back to God."

I've said it before, so I'll be brief--

You don't think that's petty of God, master and creator of all the cosmos, to get hung up on the fact a few thousand people who are of no consequence whatsoever aren't fans of his?

Must EVERYONE love God?

If so...well, what sort of "free will" is that, "You have the free will to love me, and if you don't choose to love me and praise me, I'll order a genocide against you and wipe you all out...but if you're REALLY lucky, and I'm particularly nice, I'll wait 400 years first so YOU can just see how wrong YOU are and decide how lovely I am and love me."

That's "loving?" And that's "free will?"

"The second point is that God gave life and also has the power to take life. He raises up nations and also can tear down nations, and on this occasion he does so. I guess I don't have the right to expect to understand all of God's reasons and methods in my 2 and a half pounds of brain tissue."

Ah, there it is...

"I can understand some parts--like why God might've been caring enough and benevolent enough to give them 400 years before totally wiping them out--but as to why God had to wipe them out when, within my 2 pounds of brain tissue, I and anyone WITH 2 pounds of brain tissue could probably think of 10 different ways to resolve this, and resolve it better, using the power God is allotted."

I'm sorry, Mujus, but that's a cop-out, it's an old cop-out, it's one I've dealt with for years...and I'm calling you on it.

"I do know that God loves each person, including each Amalekite, more than any of us possibly could, and sent Jesus to die for the sins of all people."

OH WOW...

WOW.

I'm not sure you could've been more pandering and insulting if you TRIED!

God loves everyone...including the people he ordered to be horribly killed in a genocide involving primitive tribes...including innocent children and farm animals who did nothing...yet God ordered them slain...

You don't know WHY it had to end up like that, with them dying such gruesome deaths...

But you DO know a Jew descending as the Messiah loves them all and will make the fact they were brutalized and raped and executed agonizingly OK, and that God "loves" them???

When I say "If anyone besides God said this, it'd be considered immoral," THIS is what I mean--

If HITLER--sorry to use the cliche, but we're past that point--had said:

"We must exterminate all Jews and create a Master Race...but I'm only exterminating you all because I love you and everyone and the Master Race's Messiah will make it all better"...

How would the world have reacted?

Because that's essentially YOUR point, replacing God with Hitler, and given what God's doing in this part of the Bible...that's not at all far off.

THAT IS DISGUSTINGLY INSULTING, Mujus, and while I rarely pull the "Shame" card, as let's face it, I'm far from respectable--

You should be ashamed for uttering such a simpering, insulting, and callous reply, in the name of God or not.

"Why men, women, and children? I don't know."

Oh, well, how convenient--

You know God loves them and Jesus died for their sins...but not why God ordered a Final Solution for them in the first place?

See what I mean about this argument being academically dishonest?

" I certainly don't know everything about it. I only trust that the God I know always does the right thing."

I call to mind the last words of our dearly departed comrade Boxer the Horse...

Who died from working so hard for Animal Farm, until Comrade Napoleon sent him to the "hospital" in that "cart"...

And I recall his three mantras that he'd repeat, over and over, throughout his life:

"It must be some fault with us..."
"I will work harder..."
"NAPOLEON IS ALWAYS RIGHT."

#1 for the Fall of Man...
#2 for life as a Christian with every setback and injustice...
#3 for your statement above, that God always does the right thing...

How EASY it is to swap God for Comrade Napoleon...

Good words to live by, eh?
semck83 (229 D(B))
04 Jun 12 UTC
Don't I get a response, obi?
obiwanobiwan (248 D)
04 Jun 12 UTC
Yes, but I was going to wait until Mujus responded to that monstrosity...

But while we're waiting, OK, let's take a look... :)
Supercilious
Superfluous
Superficial
your writing is super obi
obiwanobiwan (248 D)
04 Jun 12 UTC
"1). The animals. From my point of view, you're looking at this specific issue wrong (I'm not saying that makes the children, women etc. easier to take. I'm just focusing on the animals). First, understand that killing an animal was not really seen to be wrong in general in the OT (unlike, say, children)."

No, I get that--after all, after God pulls a "Psyche!" on Abraham, he and Isaac actually DO sacrifice a ram, if I recall, so clearly they don't have a problem killing animals...

And I'm OK with that, I'm not arguing animal rights and "Oh, the poor, beleaguered donkeys, how cruel, how horrible the world is towards them, why can't we all rally for donkey rights!" ;)

But again...why kill ALL of the donkeys? Doesn't that seem unnecessary, logically or in terms of manpower or otherwise? If they don't want to/aren't allowed not take them as their own, why not leave them be? They're not a threat, so why the mass extermination, what's the logic behind that?

But the bigger issue--God's ANGRY that some donkeys are left alive.

To repeat--GOD, the creator of all...well, Creation, is miffed because some DONKEYS are left alive...

How can I take such a petty, borderline-insane God seriously, let alone as a beacon of logic and morality?

I'd like to THINK if someone created the infinite vastness of the cosmos, a few asses left alive in the Middle East wouldn't completely send him or her or it into a rage...?

"Second, I don't think the animals were being killed to punish the animals. I think they were being killed to keep the Israelites from profitting from the whole thing."

But again, how hard is it for God to say "And thou shalt not partake of the donkeys and cows and livestock of the Amalekites, or profit from this in any fashion, Or I shall surely dropkick thy asses from here to Ass-yria." ;)

Just saying...?

"The Amalekites were to be killed as a punishment, but God didn't want to turn the Israelites into a plundering people who started to like going around and killing other peoples and taking their animals. So the animals were supposed to die too."

How well did that work? I'll admit, I'm not an expert on the Bible, far from it--again, reading it right now, trading off between that and my new volume of "The Picture of Dorian Gray and Other Works" by Oscar Wilde, though I have to admit, I'm more drawn to Wilde and that story than Exodus so far, but we'll see--but anyway...

I'm pretty sure the Israelites DO fight other people...maybe not for gain, but still...if God wanted to turn them into pacifists--which would've been a bad idea in that region anyway, in all fairness--he seems to have failed...?

But in any event, again--HE'S GOD.

We can see clear flaws in what should be a flawless plan...and before someone says "But perhaps it was the best of all plans/God works in mysterious ways," if *I*, a mere mortal atheist monkey with a keyboard, can give a CLEARLY SUPERIOR plan (ie, just have God tell them not to take the donkeys, and if they didn't listen, punish them then, or else, hell, just whisk the donkeys away through the power of God so that the Israelites wouldn't be tempted at all, that way, no death, they don't profit, and the lesson is learned that genocide is OK...just as long as God says so and you don't profit from it) then it's a flawed plan.

And that's just it, God seems to act, as a "character," like a flawed, barbaric Middle Eastern creation of 3,000 BC with that level of understanding and ethics...

Which is what he is, if I'm right that man created God and not the other way around...

And if I'm wrong--God just IS a petty, barbaric Middle Eastern product of 3,000 BC?

Hardly worthy of praise here in 2012, wouldn't you say?

An eye for an eye makes sense for Ancient Babylon, but isn't viewed as evolved today...

And that's what this is, an eye for an eye + "Those people ain't showin' Master G the proper respect, so go forth and bust a cap in their ass--an' on da subject of asses, kill them too, 'cause they're just too tempting to leave alive, you might take 'em and like 'em."

I kid, but again...that's what it is, eye for an eye and religious hatred, by the Israelites, by God being miffed someone doesn't like him, or both.

"That also explains why Saul didn't kill the animals: they were very valuable. And it explains why God was so angry at him for not killing the animals. God sent Saul on a mission of judgment, and he was not supposed to profit from the horror he was wreaking on these people, but instead he profitted a great deal, and God was furious."

OK...but then, why keep the king alive, why spare his life?
For profit?
If so, OK, Saul's just an asshole, I suppose, but then, God ordered this genocide to begin with so...
If he saved him out of compassion, at all...
Well, how is that worthy of anger from a compassionate God?

What's more, AGAIN I ask why the donkeys weren't just spirited away to, I don't know, the ancient equivalent of Turkmenistan if they were SUCH a huge temptation (God DOES seem to like going that route, doesn't he, instead of removing temptation--the apple, the donkeys--he just leaves them there, waiting for things to go wrong, rather than acting proactively...and AGAIN, before someone pulls the "free will" argument, 1. for the donkeys at least, come on, they're stupid donkeys, you can't tell me his spiriting them away would be such a huge breach of "free will" that it'd turn people into automatons, and we can't say it'd remove their ability to choose right from wrong anyway, since unless you're condoning this genocide, they've ALREADY chosen wrong, and 2. I say again, if you say "you have free will to love me and obey me or not, but if you don't, i'll wreak genocide against your entire people" that's hardly "free will" as we would generally take it to mean in a CIVILIZED sense.)
2) I confess I skimmed the second point, but I'll admit that the GNC's presentation of the story seems problematic to me. It seems to lead to the conclusion that God's people should kill those who worship other gods, which was not actually even the lesson of the Amalekites, who instead were being punished for specific wickedness."

As happy as I am to hear you agree that interpretation is problematic...

That seems to be the interpretation we were working with, that they were being punished for not believing in God/turning away from God on the one hand, AND for attacking the Israelites.

For God to condone genocide for EITHER is horrific, to be clear.
For God, being all-loving, to condone war at all seems horrific as well.
But AT LEAST for the latter point, on a human level, we can see a reason for war, *maybe.*

But there WAS that other point, and attacking due to a difference in belief/lack of faith in god seems part of it as well, and even Mujus seems to have accepted that as art of teh reason with his "400 years to repent" comment...

So, how is that not part of this immoral moral?
because as I said before, the donkeys are not seen as living things but as posessions and in exterminating the amalakites God wanted the israelites to purify the world of Amalek and be sure that it was not an act of looting or profit. Women and Childred were killed so that tribe would not be able to threaten Israel as it had before, and as a post-script the Isralites did not kill all of Amalek.

Thats the rationale, I'm not saying its right but there it is, so you don't use your ignorance as another launching off into another projectile spewing of verbal vomit
obiwanobiwan (248 D)
04 Jun 12 UTC
^And as I'VE Said before, if they're such valuable possessions, why not just whisk them away?

Surely GOD sees them as living things?

He describes them as such in Genesis, right? They walk and creepeth and the like upon the Earth, the living things...donkeys fall under such a category?

So, why not just whisk them away?

And why not just rain Godly purification over the Children so they won't want to threaten the Israelites...that just killed their parents...

Anyway, the point is, this is NOT a moral story any way you slice it, SC, and you seem to agree with me there, so why the vitriol above?
no,God actually says all living things belong to man very explicitly in genesis. Why would he whisk them away? He gave the to human beings to eat and enslave, seems to be it is better to use such possessions to test the resolve of your chosen people.

And I might not agree with it but as usual I find your logic and overall demeanor obnoxious and feel like I should correct somethings.
Gobbledydook (1389 D(B))
04 Jun 12 UTC
I still think the God of the Old Testament is a huge jerk.

Creates humanity; also creates a source of temptation as a trap.
Tells Moses to bargain the freedom of the Israelites; makes the pharoah refuse.
Sees successful, holy Job; tells the Devil to curse him.

and etc. etc. Really, if every hardship that God imposes is a "test" and every fortune that God grants is "grace", you have just described every occurrence in the world as an act of God, even though it could be so heinous that no-one could accept it as moral.
Mujus (1495 D(B))
04 Jun 12 UTC
So, Obi, to pull some points out of that tirade (minus the derogatory language), here's what I got: 1) God should have "whisked" their "asses" away, 2) I'm being weaselly because I said that there are things in the Bible that I don't understand completely, 3) The lack of archaeological evidence of an event that happened thousands of years ago means that it never happened (even though there is *plenty* of archaeological evidence of many of the events in the Hebrew Scriptures, and 4) If I had said that God told Hitler to exterminate the Jews, that would have been despicable.
Your assignment for future posts is to rewrite your posts, pulling out only the most important points, and edit them for emotional language, since this is *supposed* to be a rational conversation. That is all.
Mujus (1495 D(B))
04 Jun 12 UTC
Plus 1 to Santa for the "super" comment, and + 1 to Semck for asking Obi to write more. lol
Mujus (1495 D(B))
04 Jun 12 UTC
Today's Bible reading is Luke Chapter 22. At the Passover meal, Jesus says to eat the bread in remembrance of him (the unleavened --no yeast-- bread at Passover was to remind Israel of the time in Egypt when they ate unleavened bread because there was no time for the bread to rise before they left, and serves to remind Christians to always be ready to leave this world and live each day as if it's the last one before Jesus returns). The wine represented the blood of the lamb that was killed, the blood smeared on the doorposts to signal the angel of death to pass over that house, and Jesus was saying that it's his blood that causes us to escape the angel of death. Christians today celebrate the Passover every time they take communion, whether they know it or not! Judas betrays Jesus, he is arrested, heals the ear that was cut off, is beaten and questioned by the guards, and Peter betrays him and weeps bitterly.
Mujus (1495 D(B))
04 Jun 12 UTC
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Luk&c=22&v=1&t=NLT
@ obi (still no response in the other thread, but I'll give you a partial response nonetheless)

*GOD* endorses this.

Yes


Surely GOD isn't basic, primal, or primitive...?
I’d agree about basic & primitive, but not primal. The creator of the Universe is primal by the very definition of the word.

Surely GOD, if he were all-loving, wouldn't want creations killing fellow creations?

Why Not? God provides a Day of Resurrection and an afterlife for everyone. The Amalekites were killing widows and orphans, the sick and the wounded (who else would be the stragglers, other than the soldiers lagging back to try to protect them). If they are to have free will then they have to be allowed to commit the crime. They are also to be allowed to suffer the consequences of their actions. Was God raising the bar? Saying “Okay, Everybody in the region and for centuries on, look what happens if you go around bashing refugees”.

God may be eternal, but that situation was not and the people needed a resolution right then. A resolution that says “God will step in to prevent you from being harmed, don’t worry about taking care of each other” which is essentially the one you seem to advocate for is no resolution at all. It is worse than useless, it makes the people completely dependent on God as a cosmic referee and/or guide away from trouble.


Surely GOD, if he were all-loving, wouldn't take sides in a squabble between his children?
Israel is the people through which He will eventually save the entire world. Why wouldn’t He take a side if their existence is threatened by the Amalekites. As for doing away with free will for a bit to set things right, How? It ceases to become free when he starts to suspend it.

Surely GOD, if he were all-loving, wouldn't instruct Saul to wipe some of his creations out?
See above, basically the same answer. Was he raising the bar for the region? Think about the Romans ‘salting the earth’ in Carthage. A war between two small tribes was probably a war of extinction more often than not. How many Hittites have you met?

Surely GOD, if he were all-knowing, could've seen those Amalekites coming the first time?

See above. Sure, He could see the Amalekites coming, yet you demand a God that jumps in and keeps any harm from befalling any of His creations. He didn’t create them to be physically eternal? If you’re going to indict God then it has to be that He has created us with nearly 100% mortality, due to a design flaw. To which he would probably reply “What design flaw? It’s planned obsolescence.” You can’t say “God killed those poor people look they’re dead” and conveniently deny His grace in creating beings with eternal souls. Neither Can you say “Look what a meany! He threw them all into Hell!” Were you there at the trial?

Surely GOD, if he were all-knowing, could've told them "Hey, come on, guys, chilll..."
He did. “Thou shalt not murder”. The Amalekites were murdering stragglers. The Israelites were waging war. It was a brutal war and it made a statement about what to do and not to do with regard to conduct toward refugees.

Surely GOD, if he were all-knowing, could've warned the Israelites if they didn't listen?
See above, regarding free will. He is not a GPS system.

Surely GOD, if he were all-powerful, could've found a better resolution to this conflict?
I don’t think that any of the resolutions that you propose are better. God makes a statement about how people should treat one another. Sorry but the donkeys are just not an issue. They were domesticated animals and property. People burn bridges in wartime to keep any enemies from using them. It makes sense that the livestock wouldn’t be run off to benefit the next hostile tribe, and they were all hostile.

Surely GOD, if he were all-powerful, could've done so without entreating upon free will?

How? It ceases to become free when he starts to suspend it.
Mujus (1495 D(B))
05 Jun 12 UTC
Today's Bible reading is Luke 23, in which Jesus stands trial three times, is found innocent three times but sentenced anyway, crucified, dead, and buried. It's worthwhile to look at what he says to whom in this chapter, and to see that there was a good man on the Jewish High Council who took his body and put it in his own family tomb.\http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Luk&c=23&v=1&t=NLT
Mujus (1495 D(B))
06 Jun 12 UTC
Today's Bible reading is Luke 24, in which Jesus is raised from the dead and a number of his disciples see him.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Luk&c=24&v=1&t=NLT
Mujus (1495 D(B))
06 Jun 12 UTC
One of my favorite passages is this one:
44 Then he said, “When I was with you before, I told you that everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and in the Psalms must be fulfilled.” 45 Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures. 46 And he said, “Yes, it was written long ago that the Messiah would suffer and die and rise from the dead on the third day. 47 It was also written that this message would be proclaimed in the authority of his name to all the nations, [fn6] beginning in Jerusalem: ‘There is forgiveness of sins for all who repent.’ 48 You are witnesses of all these things.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/tools/printerFriendly.cfm?b=Luk&c=24&t=NLTP&x=8&y=14
Mujus (1495 D(B))
07 Jun 12 UTC
Today's Bible Reading is Acts Chapter 1. The full name of the book is "The Acts of the Apostles," and in it, the physician Luke tells the story of the early Christians immediately following Jesus' death, resurrection, and ascension into heaven.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Act&c=1&v=1&t=NLT#1
Full text:
The Promise of the Holy Spirit
1 In my first book [fn1] I told you, Theophilus, about everything Jesus began to do and teach 2 until the day he was taken up to heaven after giving his chosen apostles further instructions through the Holy Spirit. 3 During the forty days after his crucifixion, he appeared to the apostles from time to time, and he proved to them in many ways that he was actually alive. And he talked to them about the Kingdom of God.
4 Once when he was eating with them, he commanded them, “Do not leave Jerusalem until the Father sends you the gift he promised, as I told you before. 5 John baptized with [fn2] water, but in just a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.”
The Ascension of Jesus
6 So when the apostles were with Jesus, they kept asking him, “Lord, has the time come for you to free Israel and restore our kingdom?”
7 He replied, “The Father alone has the authority to set those dates and times, and they are not for you to know. 8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you. And you will be my witnesses, telling people about me everywhere—in Jerusalem, throughout Judea, in Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”
9 After saying this, he was taken up into a cloud while they were watching, and they could no longer see him. 10 As they strained to see him rising into heaven, two white-robed men suddenly stood among them. 11 “Men of Galilee,” they said, “why are you standing here staring into heaven? Jesus has been taken from you into heaven, but someday he will return from heaven in the same way you saw him go!”
Matthias Replaces Judas
12 Then the apostles returned to Jerusalem from the Mount of Olives, a distance of half a mile. [fn3] 13 When they arrived, they went to the upstairs room of the house where they were staying.
Here are the names of those who were present: Peter, John, James, Andrew, Philip, Thomas, Bartholomew, Matthew, James (son of Alphaeus), Simon (the Zealot), and Judas (son of James). 14 They all met together and were constantly united in prayer, along with Mary the mother of Jesus, several other women, and the brothers of Jesus.
15 During this time, when about 120 believers [fn4] were together in one place, Peter stood up and addressed them. 16 “Brothers,” he said, “the Scriptures had to be fulfilled concerning Judas, who guided those who arrested Jesus. This was predicted long ago by the Holy Spirit, speaking through King David. 17 Judas was one of us and shared in the ministry with us.”
18 (Judas had bought a field with the money he received for his treachery. Falling headfirst there, his body split open, spilling out all his intestines. 19 The news of his death spread to all the people of Jerusalem, and they gave the place the Aramaic name Akeldama, which means “Field of Blood.”)
20 Peter continued, “This was written in the book of Psalms, where it says, ‘Let his home become desolate, with no one living in it.’ It also says, ‘Let someone else take his position.’ [fn5]
21 “So now we must choose a replacement for Judas from among the men who were with us the entire time we were traveling with the Lord Jesus— 22 from the time he was baptized by John until the day he was taken from us. Whoever is chosen will join us as a witness of Jesus’ resurrection.”
23 So they nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. 24 Then they all prayed, “O Lord, you know every heart. Show us which of these men you have chosen 25 as an apostle to replace Judas in this ministry, for he has deserted us and gone where he belongs.” 26 Then they cast lots, and Matthias was selected to become an apostle with the other eleven.


Footnotes:
1:1 The reference is to the Gospel of Luke.
1:5 Or in; also in 1:5b.
1:12 Greek a Sabbath day’s journey.
1:15 Greek brothers.
1:20 Pss 69:25; 109:8.
Mujus (1495 D(B))
08 Jun 12 UTC
v. 29 "Matthias was selected"...Does anyone know if this was the Matthew who wrote the gospel?
Mujus (1495 D(B))
08 Jun 12 UTC
Today's Bible reading is Acts Chapter 2, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, after which 3,000 new believers were added to the growing church.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Act&c=2&v=1&t=NLT#1
Mujus (1495 D(B))
08 Jun 12 UTC
Full text:
The Holy Spirit Comes
1 On the day of Pentecost [fn1] all the believers were meeting together in one place. 2 Suddenly, there was a sound from heaven like the roaring of a mighty windstorm, and it filled the house where they were sitting. 3 Then, what looked like flames or tongues of fire appeared and settled on each of them. 4 And everyone present was filled with the Holy Spirit and began speaking in other languages, [fn2] as the Holy Spirit gave them this ability.
5 At that time there were devout Jews from every nation living in Jerusalem. 6 When they heard the loud noise, everyone came running, and they were bewildered to hear their own languages being spoken by the believers.
7 They were completely amazed. “How can this be?” they exclaimed. “These people are all from Galilee, 8 and yet we hear them speaking in our own native languages! 9 Here we are—Parthians, Medes, Elamites, people from Mesopotamia, Judea, Cappadocia, Pontus, the province of Asia, 10 Phrygia, Pamphylia, Egypt, and the areas of Libya around Cyrene, visitors from Rome 11 (both Jews and converts to Judaism), Cretans, and Arabs. And we all hear these people speaking in our own languages about the wonderful things God has done!” 12 They stood there amazed and perplexed. “What can this mean?” they asked each other.
13 But others in the crowd ridiculed them, saying, “They’re just drunk, that’s all!”
Peter Preaches to the Crowd
14 Then Peter stepped forward with the eleven other apostles and shouted to the crowd, “Listen carefully, all of you, fellow Jews and residents of Jerusalem! Make no mistake about this. 15 These people are not drunk, as some of you are assuming. Nine o’clock in the morning is much too early for that. 16 No, what you see was predicted long ago by the prophet Joel:
17 ‘In the last days,’ God says,
‘I will pour out my Spirit upon all people.
Your sons and daughters will prophesy.
Your young men will see visions,
and your old men will dream dreams.
18 In those days I will pour out my Spirit
even on my servants—men and women alike—
and they will prophesy.
19 And I will cause wonders in the heavens above
and signs on the earth below—
blood and fire and clouds of smoke.
20 The sun will become dark,
and the moon will turn blood red
before that great and glorious day of the LORD arrives.
21 But everyone who calls on the name of the LORD
will be saved.’ [fn3]
22 “People of Israel, listen! God publicly endorsed Jesus the Nazarene [fn4] by doing powerful miracles, wonders, and signs through him, as you well know. 23 But God knew what would happen, and his prearranged plan was carried out when Jesus was betrayed. With the help of lawless Gentiles, you nailed him to a cross and killed him. 24 But God released him from the horrors of death and raised him back to life, for death could not keep him in its grip. 25 King David said this about him:
‘I see that the LORD is always with me.
I will not be shaken, for he is right beside me.
26 No wonder my heart is glad,
and my tongue shouts his praises!
My body rests in hope.
27 For you will not leave my soul among the dead [fn5]
or allow your Holy One to rot in the grave.
28 You have shown me the way of life,
and you will fill me with the joy of your presence.’ [fn6]
29 “Dear brothers, think about this! You can be sure that the patriarch David wasn’t referring to himself, for he died and was buried, and his tomb is still here among us. 30 But he was a prophet, and he knew God had promised with an oath that one of David’s own descendants would sit on his throne. 31 David was looking into the future and speaking of the Messiah’s resurrection. He was saying that God would not leave him among the dead or allow his body to rot in the grave.
32 “God raised Jesus from the dead, and we are all witnesses of this. 33 Now he is exalted to the place of highest honor in heaven, at God’s right hand. And the Father, as he had promised, gave him the Holy Spirit to pour out upon us, just as you see and hear today. 34 For David himself never ascended into heaven, yet he said,
‘The LORD said to my Lord,
“Sit in the place of honor at my right hand
35 until I humble your enemies,
making them a footstool under your feet.”’ [fn7]
36 “So let everyone in Israel know for certain that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, to be both Lord and Messiah!”
37 Peter’s words pierced their hearts, and they said to him and to the other apostles, “Brothers, what should we do?”
38 Peter replied, “Each of you must repent of your sins and turn to God, and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. Then you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 This promise is to you, and to your children, and even to the Gentiles [fn8] —all who have been called by the Lord our God.” 40 Then Peter continued preaching for a long time, strongly urging all his listeners, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation!”
41 Those who believed what Peter said were baptized and added to the church that day—about 3,000 in all.
The Believers Form a Community
42 All the believers devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching, and to fellowship, and to sharing in meals (including the Lord’s Supper [fn9] ), and to prayer.
43 A deep sense of awe came over them all, and the apostles performed many miraculous signs and wonders. 44 And all the believers met together in one place and shared everything they had. 45 They sold their property and possessions and shared the money with those in need. 46 They worshiped together at the Temple each day, met in homes for the Lord’s Supper, and shared their meals with great joy and generosity [fn10] — 47 all the while praising God and enjoying the goodwill of all the people. And each day the Lord added to their fellowship those who were being saved.

Footnotes:
2:1 The Festival of Pentecost came 50 days after Passover (when Jesus was crucified).
http://www.blueletterbible.org/tools/printerFriendly.cfm?b=Act&c=2&t=NLTP&x=9&y=11
2:4 Or in other tongues.
2:17-21 Joel 2:28-32.
2:22 Or Jesus of Nazareth.
2:27 Greek in Hades; also in 2:31.
2:25-28 Ps 16:8-11 (Greek version).
2:34-35 Ps 110:1.
2:39 Or and to people far in the future; Greek reads and to those far away.
2:42 Greek the breaking of bread; also in 2:46.
2:46 Or and sincere hearts.
jmo1121109 (3812 D)
08 Jun 12 UTC
@Mujus, Please do not spam the forum I enjoy or I will spam this thread you enjoy, ps you know you are in trouble when obi is posting more interesting replies then you.

"obiwanobiwan (289 )
Wed 08 AM
Well, as I actually *did* come seconds from death when I was seven...

I've spent a lifetime (as short as that lifetime may have been) thinking about this...

So, here's my take, just for me, as it's part of the reason I am an atheist in the first place, and part of the reason I shun theism, and indeed, something that's really at the core of my world view as it stands, so I'll explain my position as I came by it.

Afterwards, as a child, though I believed in God, I never really believed all the things in the Bible could be true; after all, on the one hand, I had one of those Children's Bibles growing up, and for a time, my sister, father and I would read a story from it--illustrated and all--every Saturday or Sunday...

But ONLY ever from the Old Testament, which I suppose is why I never really trusted the Bible; you see, the OT passages had blue lettered titles, and the NT passages had green lettered titles...now, my father's since converted to Christianity, and how, you'd NEVER guess today that this man, who has New Testament quotes and Crosses all over his workplace and who serves as usher for his Church was the same person who would tell my sister and I not to worry about those green passages, that they were about Jesus and that we didn't believe in his being the Messiah and only the blue passages were important for us.

So I grew up believing in God as a kid, but not the Bible, so when *I* very nearly died at seven--I had a blood clot lodge in my frontal lobe which caused a very rare and very nearly fatal stroke--I felt the same thing that many people have said that they've felt after a near-death experience:

"I must have been allowed to live for a REASON...I mean, the odds were so stacked against me, the odds say I should have died, I must have been kept alive for a PURPOSE."

And for that reason--and one other I'll mention in a moment--I believed in God, if not the Bible, as even at seven I found it fishy that you could just pick which sections of this book were "important" and which were not, and that for some people, this Jesus fellow was everything, and yet for my Jewish family growing up, he wasn't really much of anything, and those green passages went unread (occasionally, like any seven-year old who's been told "no" about something, I DID sometimes very briefly peek at those green NT passages and look at the pictures of the young Baby Jesus, or Jesus as an adult, or a smiling Mary...and yet always with a slight sense of guilt, like I was looking at something I shouldn't have been...my father never said "DO NOT look at those passages," but just from his tone of voice when he said they weren't "important to us" I could tell even as a kid there was a reason he didn't necessarily want me looking at them, at least not instead of the blue, OT passages.)

So I believed in God mainly because I wanted to believe in God...

Because I wanted it to be true--I wanted it to be the case that I'd been saved by some divine act and that, indeed, God had some sort of great purpose for me...

That's a natural thought, yes...it's also, however, a very immature thought looking back, or to be more fair about it, a very self-serving thought, to feel like everything had been tilted my way for that moment just because God took a special interest in me while many others died.

And that I actually witnessed as well--just before I had my stroke, when I was in the hospital for my Crohn's Disease (which would lead to the blood clot later) I went through a miserable period where I couldn't eat anything for days and was hooked up to IVs and wires and all the rest until there was no food left in me so they could do a colonoscopy (and if you've HAD the "pleasure" of having a colonoscopy, or are understanding of medicine at all, you may be asking "Why didn't they just give you that special, foul liquid they so often give patients days before, the one that tastes foul and makes you "go" so often that you quite literally shit your bowels clean of any blockage whatsoever?" and to this very day, I don't know why...and as foul as that drink is, it would've been a LOT better than the feeling of literally eating nothing for close to a week or so and feeling increasingly week and sick everyday.)

I felt horrible. I was just seven, and this was the worst I'd ever felt in my life--I'd go on to many, many worse feelings and situations (I've already given you one, that stroke-inducing blood clot) but for the moment, this was the low for me...for more reasons than one, for lo and behold, who should be sharing this room with me but another boy, about my age, and HE WAS very literally on his deathbed, from what I can recall. So. No food for nearly a week, feeling weaker and worse every day, and my roommate actually was dying at the moment I felt physically worse than I ever had up to that point...

Maybe it's no surprise, then, all those factors included, that I started to wonder if I'd die too, and at that point in life, I hadn't yet read Shakespeare or Milton--believe it or not!--so I was far less concerned with having my life end meaninglessly with my having done nothing with it than with what I felt, at seven years, was just the scariness of death...

AND the thought of Hell--because I hadn't looked over many of those green NT passages, but I knew about Hell, and anyone who's ever read about Hell and is honest with themselves can easily think of some instances in their life where they've done something that wasn't quite kosher (shall we say) and was wrong, and whether or not you learn from those things helps determine what sort of a person you are, but me being seven, all *I* can think about is:

1. I feel like I'm dying,
2. The person next to me is dying, and
3. I don't know what death is...but it sounds scary...and what if I go to that Hell place, if it exists, I mean, I'm not a robber or murderer, but I'm no Baby Jesus either, what if not honoring my father and mother and arguing with them, or the time I accidentally hit my sister in the head with a baseball bat (true story, and a sheer accident, I was in Little League, and my sister was really little and stepped behind me when I swung, and her being so little and my being focused on my swing I didn't see her until it was too late) or something else is enough to land me in Hell...where I roast in fire forever?

All that's going through my mind--at seven.

So, I shout out "I want to kill myself!" with about half of me meaning it and too tense about the worry of going to Heaven or Hell and just wanting to find out already (and end this starvation) and half of me...being seven years old in a hospital in the worse physical shape of my life with a dying roommate and the fear of Hell put into me, and so naturally just being a (hopefully very understandably) distraught and afraid child.

But I survived that episode.
And the stroke, even though I was in a coma as well and they thought they'd have to operate.
And the many infusions that followed, because I was very anemic due to all of this.
And the seizures that followed as complications of the stroke.
And learning how to grip a pencil again and getting through physical therapy.

I got through ALL of that, going into high school...

And I felt there MUST be a God; the Bible I could leave be, I was, after all, very interested in biology (who wouldn't be, after so much first-hand experience with it in terms of medicine and human anatomy and hospital visits) and rather good at it for my age, and so I accepted evolution as fact pretty easily, and always said in public--to avoid a total conflict--that sure, evolution AND Genesis might have happened...but in the back of my mind, I already knew that wasn't true, I could just tell, and after I started actually reading Genesis in high school, I felt that even stronger.

"But surely" I felt, "SURELY I had to have survived all that for a REASON...and after all, there must be a PURPOSE to life, so I must've been allowed to live so I could complete my purpose in life!"

So that was one reason for believing in God, and coping with how close I came to death--and there was one other...

And surprise of surprises...it came from literature.

But not Shakespeare, and not Milton...

I was home-schooled for a year and a half or so, during middle school, partly because I just couldn't get along with the kids in middle school and partly because I didn't exactly have the best teachers there (though my sister did alright when her turn came)...

And though I'd always been ahead of my class in terms of reading, and though I'd already read Poe and Twain and some Dickens and the like...

NOW was when I really started to devour books--
I didn't have any friends (I was, and largely still am, rather anti-social in terms of making friends, I make a ton of acquaintances and very few friends)...
My medical conditions meant I couldn't play baseball or football or other sports with other boys (not exactly good for someone already not the best at making friends and standing out as being different and controversial and mouthy, which I've always been)...
And my dad and I...we've never gotten along very well, and he and I certainly were at a low point over these years--

So I wanted some companionship, and someone to look up to as an idea...

And so I came to read the poems and ballads and pieces of literature for King Arthur and His Knights of the Round Table for the first time.

For me, that filled the void--Arthur felt like the kind of father I'd always wanted, I could identify well with Gawain (a good knight, seemingly always screwing something up along his quest, so not perfect, but still good, and bold and he tried to learn from his mistakes, such as with the Green Knight) and the other knights were like friends I'd always wanted...all had pros and cons and flaws and were great, they felt like people I could relate to as well (except Lancelot, Mr. Perfect AND the guy who spoiled everything by sleeping with Guinevere...he and I never "got along" very well...I'm not a fan of the Lancelots of the world.)

AND THIS was another way I coped with having nearly died--

Because King Arthur and all those stories employed magic and the power of God, or the Holy Grail, and I WANTED to believe this was all true, that it COULD be true. As much as I suppose those who worship Jesus want to (or genuinely do) believe he was as amazing as he's advertised, and that he WAS real and DID do all of that...I wanted that to be at least a possibility for King Arthur, I wanted it to be possible for these people to have really existed and for these things to really have happened.

They were my ideal at the time, and in some ways still are, they were my vision of everything I wanted to be as the weak, medically-challenged kid who didn't fit in--brave, strong, bold, true to one another, great friends, great individually and yet greater still as a team--and the legend ends, after all, with it stating that King Arthur and his Knights still asleep, "awaiting the day when the Land of Britain should be in its darkest hour, so that they may once again save Britain and bring forth the great kingdom of Logres."

"WHAT A PURPOSE!" I thought, "WHAT MEANING! To live your whole life a crusader for truth and justice, and then to die, and sleep until you're needed in the darkest hour, and then to bring light to darkness and save the day again and resurrect that great kingdom and reunite all these great friends that made such a great team...THAT is worthwhile!"

I wanted a purpose to life, because I felt I had none at that point (and in fairness, I really didn't) and THIS could be my purpose, maybe, in some way...that maybe I COULD be like those Knights, like Gawain, not literally, but to live like that and then die and await a day when I could live again and do even more good...THAT seemed like a just system...and it seemed like maybe it could happen, at least to me at that point; Arthur was made king because he was destined to pull a sword out of a stone, after all, surely I must have some great destiny if I was kept alive through all those chances to die, or to go into an irreversible coma, or be permanently paralyzed...

Everything in the Arthur Legend had MEANING, nothing was pointless...surely that's how life was, I felt, so my reason for wanting their to be an afterlife, for believing in God, boiled down to, in the end,

"EVERYTHING MUST HAPPEN FOR A REASON."

Again, a popular view, and one that's egoistic, but understandable.

And that's how I viewed death and came to face it--surely, I felt, my death would come in a good way, I'd die in a good way, in an important way, or at least after doing something important, after all, god had saved me before I could die an unimportant, hollow death, CLEARLY he must want me to live and have a purpose to life--like Gawain.

That's how I dealt with and justified my nearly dying for years--not believing in religion anymore, but in some sort of being (any, I didn't care what) that would justify my having survived and give my life and death purpose and make my King Arthur-fueled fantasy view of life a reality.

And then...I went to high school...and that all changed.

My grandfather on my mother's side had Alzheimer's, and badly by this point, but I'd known him before its onset, and known him well enough he told me about his time in WWII--something he never talked about with his own children. Naturally, to a kid who responds to the word "stormtrooper" by not thinking about someone he fought in a war but someone Luke Skywalker always seemed to evade easily, and who'd by this point become enamored with King Arthur and The Iliad and Robin Hood and all these stories of heroes killing for good and for God and saving the day and living with a PURPOSE, when I first heard these stories, I always got very excited, thinking they'd be like that.

My grandfather, to his undying credit, was a very wise man, surely wise enough to realize four vital things in life:

1. A little bit of humor can go a long way,
2. Turning down an Army promotion for a wife and family is probably the way to go,
3. If you want to be happy in life, root for the Yankees, not the Mets, and
4. War's not the sort of picture of glamour King Arthur or Homer or Star Wars paints it as...and it's NOT a way to live and give purpose to your life, it's a tragedy when it occurs, and purpose comes from a triumph over tragedy, rather than succumbing to it

So he never treated those stories as if they were daring exploits, and I never heard him describe one violent act or character, be it on TV or movies or King Arthur otherwise, as heroic or something to set up as a way to view life.

And so when he finally passed on in high school, I was left with that being my most lasting memory of him, and those stories all meaning something I hadn't seen at 11 or 12--it wasn't King Arthur and purpose in life through war and fighting...it was that it was a tragedy such events ever had to occur at all, and while (himself always being one to slip in a joke where he could) the stories usually had a light moment or two (which is a lesson in itself, that even in the darkest of times, there's still that small light of laughter) they made it clear death wasn't something to be seen as something glamorous.

And it was around that time I read Shakespeare and Nietzsche as well.

So between a grandfather's stories showing how purposeless and tragic death can be...
Hamlet saying speech after speech to the purposelessness of life...
And Nietzsche pushing nihilism and saying "God is Dead"...

And growing up and realizing just how good *I* had things, all my troubles aside, and just how much suffering there IS in the world, and how many people HAVE died anonymous deaths, or painful deaths, or meaningless deaths, or died as babies and never truly got to live at all...

I couldn't feel I had "been kept alive for a purpose" anymore.

It just didn't feel right...it felt all wrong--how selfish of me, to suppose I was saved and had a purpose, but that all those who died either didn't have a purpose or had already fulfilled that "purpose" when they died so young or so sick or so impoverished.

I didn't feel so special anymore, I wasn't destined for something like King Arthur was.

And so my main reason for believing for God vanished...and the more and more I read, the more and more I talked to people and saw all the logical problems of a God existing and how horrible, it seemed, life was under a God that would allow it, and finally, in college, how horrible a heaven must be, so stagnant...if there was a full eternity of purpose, after all, how much purpose could it really have? Wasn't part of what made King Arthur amazing was that he and his Knights did so much in such a short span of time? Wasn't part of what already had made Shakespeare and Nietzsche and now, slowly, Milton and Eliot into my heroes the fact that they were able to write so much and say such profound things in such a short space of time, and that they were a unique, quick burst of genius, never to be repeated?

I'd already lost the reason for wanting to believe a God existed, and lost the logical foundations for believing in one long ago, when I first learned of evolution...my reason for being an agnostic Jew leaning towards hoping there was a God had always been just that, a willingness to suspend logic in some cases in the HOPE there was a God, not because it made sense that such a thing would be true, but because I WANTED it to be true...and with that reason for wanting it to be true gone and vanished, so too, now, did God himself.

And naturally, at that point, I myself came full circle, and asked once again--

"WHY DID I SURVIVE THAT STROKE?
WHY AM I ALIVE, AND NOT DEAD?
WHAT DOES IT MATTER?
AND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN I DO DIE?"

The answer to THAT, Zmaj, comes after a very, VERY long, soul-searching journey (pardon the term, fellow atheists), and as a college student, I don't plan to pretend to tell you that the journey's anywhere near over (unless, of course, I die extraordinarily suddenly) but since it's been a journey of over 14 years or so, I feel like I can say this much:

FOR ME...dealing with death...

The first thing to realize is that the feeling I had for all those years, that is, willing to suspend logic in an area in the hope that my life would have purpose and be crowned in death, is a mistake.

Life is all you have, that's your one chance at purpose--in death, you are, as you put it, " absolute nothingness"...with one exception, and that's what turned me around.

You're nothing in death, you're dead, you're done, that's the end, you exist no longer...

Except in what you leave behind--and leaving something behind and making THAT and the life that spawned that monument to your existence as full and eventful as possible is what makes what you leave behind beautiful...and what makes it MATTER, THAT IS YOUR PURPOSE.

Shakespeare's dead--"dead and turned to clay," to quote Hamlet, as for once, it's somewhat appropriate.

Shakespeare is dead.
There is no unearthly realm I can wait for in order to meet him and chat him up.
But I don't need to wait for such a place--
I'VE MET Shakespeare--through what he left behind, I know him through his works.

It's the same with all my "heroes"--Shakespeare, Milton, Nietzsche, Eliot, D.H. Lawrence, Virginia Woolf...I know them through the words and recordings they leave behind, and those words live on and keep them, in turn, "alive," not in a literal sense, but, far greater, in a meaningful sense.

Say what you will about Shakespeare and all those other people--

But while they're dead, their words are not, and even better, they're forever "in discussion," as it were, they're forever "in the game" that is life. As long as the human race exists as it is, Shakespeare will be chatting to us, if we care to listen. So will Milton. So will Nietzsche.

What's more, what's better, they'll never run out of things to say--they have a finite amount of words, sure, but each generation sees something new, lives through something new, and so they say something new and, in turn, hear something new from Shakespeare on the matter, or Milton's old words will take on a new meaning, or, hell, Plato, dead and gone for 2,500 years, will STILL have something to say about education and the soul and ethics and politics and so much more.

It's telling, we can see it--if you've ever read "Brave New World," where society is conditioned at birth to act and think according to their roles in life, creating a "utopia" but at the cost of severely cutting personal freedoms...

That's Plato's Republic--he's been dead and gone for millenia, yet there it is, there he is, rearing his head in discussion again, in a new form, for Plato knew nothing of Shakespeare, and so certainly couldn't have ever have had his works banned...but he knew of Homer, and banned HIS works in the Republic, and so here it is again:

Huxley reiterating Plato, agreeing on some points and disagreeing on others, and in turn, he gives new life to Plato and gives himself a way to "live on" in the eternal, everlasting discussion that IS mankind's progression as a species, as a being upon this planet.

And that's just literature--I'm a citizen of the United States because my family immigrated here, but we never could've come here if the USA didn't exist, and it never would've existed without Jefferson declaring that "all men are created equal" and Washington losing battles on the field but winning the battle of morale with his troops at Valley Forge and keeping the army from disintegrating and Adams and Franklin and all the other great figures of the Revolution--without them, there's no USA for us to come to, and you and I aren't speaking today, and quite probably, you and I don't exist.

Mozart and Beethoven and John Lennon and Tupac alike, ALL of them still stir emotions in their respective audiences decades or centuries after dying...they're still part of the fabric of makind, they've died, physically, but the meaning they put into their work--

THAT, more than anything else, is their "soul," or "spirit," and it lives after them, through us, through every amateur trying to learn Mozart or every concert playing Beethoven or every record player or stereo ever to play "Imagine" or every MP3 player with Tupac's albums on it.

But it's not just about becoming "great," and leaving a famous legacy behind--that's not all there is to life and death.

NONE of us are here without our parents...and none of our parents are particularly famous.
In fact, truth be told, history suggests that, within a few generations, they'll be forgotten.
And you and I as well.
But any children you might have, should they have children, well, they'll owe their being to you, and there's your legacy...
And all the lives you may shape as a teacher or save as a soldier or doctor or police officer or firefighter, there's your legacy, for if you hadn't saved those people, who knows, maybe you'll save the life of the great-great-great-great-grandfather of a future President of the United States, or the person who first sets foot on one of Jupiter's moons, or cures Alzheimer's or invents the flying car (really, we were promised that by the Jetsons 50 years or so ago, aren't we about due for some flying cars?)

I'm not here if not for a grandfather and fellow soldiers who fought a war to stop Hitler.

And I'm not here if not for that grandfather putting aside a promotion to Sergeant in order to start a family instead.

And I'd not have this view, in fact, at all, if not for EVERYTHING that I mentioned above--

That Children's Version of the Bible,
Those feelings and worries about dying and Hell,
My stroke,
My multiple hospital visits,
The dying roommate,
The pain and loneliness and occasions of sheer terror during those hospital stays, Growing up differently from others,
Learning to read a lot faster and more proficiently than others,
Not making a lot of friends,
Not getting along well with my father,
Reading King Arthur's Legend and wishing for that sort of sense of purpose,
Having a grandfather tell me war stories and show how wrong living for death is,
Reading Shakespeare, Nietzsche, Milton, Eliot, Woolf, and every successive author,
Hating Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins because of their attitude
Coming to love Hitchens and Dawkins and seeing such an attitude is sometimes necessary,
Debating all this with friends and strangers alike,
Typing overlong posts on WebDip,

IT ALL amounts to the sum total of your life,
Which is what you put into it and what you're lucky enough to have others influence,
And THIS is what lives on after death,
And THIS is what staves off the fear of death--

And it's why I want, more than anything in the world, to be a writer, so that I can, with any luck, say something, and have that something live on in the collective health and minds and hearts of humanity as "me."

Maybe it won't be anything special.
Maybe it won't be groundbreaking.
Maybe I'll only get one book, or one article, or one poem published, and it will be panned.
Maybe someone will read that, and think they can do better...

And WILL, and so, out of sheer disgust at how poor a writer and thinker I am, perhaps the next Dickens or Woolf or Hitchens will take a step closer towards helping humanity a step closer towards another great leap for mankind.

In any case, that's how I deal with death--

At first, by fearing it and selfishly hoping there was some special purpose for my living,
And now, by accepting it and driving myself hoping I can achieve that purpose for life.

Death comes, and you and I and everyone else here will be nothingness--

But so much of what we do, what we've all done, what we may still do in our lives may affect future lives, may contribute something valuable in that everlasting conversation humanity has ongoing with itself, as that's where any and all purpose comes from, by way of humanity's manufacturing it, and learning to do so more maturely and more brilliantly with each successive generation--

So in dealing with death, I have only to think of how loud a voice I might have in that conversation...

And what I wish to do and say for all-time in that conversation...

And what, in the end, after I have ceased to be, what I want my voice to CONTINUE TO BE in that conversation.

That's life, and death, for me, as an atheist--and "The rest is silence.""
Grandouiller (100 D)
08 Jun 12 UTC
@Mujus , Matthias and Matthew are not the same, Matthew was one of the first 12 apostles, a tax-collector, chosen by Jesus, "Matthias was selected" after the death and resurrection of Jesus to replace Judas Iscariot as the 12th apostle.
Mujus (1495 D(B))
08 Jun 12 UTC
@jmo, I don't know where Obi's story was first posted, but thank you for reposting it. Romans 8:28: Everything works together for the good....

Obi, that's a fascinating story and some fairly logical conclusions. I'd like to address some of your points though, and hold out some other possibilities.

1. You write "Because King Arthur and all those stories employed magic and the power of God, or the Holy Grail, and I WANTED to believe this was all true, that it COULD be true. As much as I suppose those who worship Jesus want to (or genuinely do) believe he was as amazing as he's advertised, and that he WAS real and DID do all of that...I wanted that to be at least a possibility for King Arthur, I wanted it to be possible for these people to have really existed and for these things to really have happened."

First of all, it's easy to confuse miracles and magic, or superhuman power, and what kid growing up doesn't want that? I was particularly enamored of Andre Norton's Witch World stories and the power that came with sci-fi magic and wizardry of various types. That's the reason Harry Potter sold so many copies, too. But miracles aren't like magic in that we can't control them--only God can--so in that way, following God doesn't have the same appeal as following magic/superpowers.
But that's no reason to reject God, either.

2. You write, "I'd already lost the reason for wanting to believe a God existed, and lost the logical foundations for believing in one long ago, when I first learned of evolution...my reason for being an agnostic Jew leaning towards hoping there was a God had always been just that, a willingness to suspend logic in some cases in the HOPE there was a God, not because it made sense that such a thing would be true, but because I WANTED it to be true...and with that reason for wanting it to be true gone and vanished, so too, now, did God himself."

First of all, wanting to believe that God exists has nothing to do with whether he does or not. I think it's important to separate those two points. Second, even though there are Jews and Christians that believe that creation happened in the seven literal days, there are also many who believe that the timeline is not literal, and that people were not created literally out of dust. One doesn't have to believe that literally to connect with God, just as we don't have to believe that Jesus was a literal door, vine, path, or that it was literally his blood that the disciples were drinking. So in sum, a belief in evolution does not preclude a belief in God.

3. You write, "FOR ME...dealing with death...
The first thing to realize is that the feeling I had for all those years, that is, willing to suspend logic in an area in the hope that my life would have purpose and be crowned in death, is a mistake.
Life is all you have, that's your one chance at purpose--in death, you are, as you put it, " absolute nothingness"...with one exception, and that's what turned me around.
You're nothing in death, you're dead, you're done, that's the end, you exist no longer...
Except in what you leave behind--and leaving something behind and making THAT and the life that spawned that monument to your existence as full and eventful as possible is what makes what you leave behind beautiful...and what makes it MATTER, THAT IS YOUR PURPOSE."

In reply, I would say that you should not throw out the baby with the bathwater, by which I mean, just because it's not logical to expect to be a hero like King Arthur or have magic powers like Andre Norton's witches, that doesn't mean that God isn't real or that he doesn't in fact have a plan for your life--but one that meets his standards, and not our own juvenile ones. It's just like learning that the Piltdown Man was a hoax shouldn't destroy your faith in archaeology and the science of anthropology, although you should certainly take similar claims with a grain of salt.

So yes, it is possible that God is real, that he has a plan for your life, and that you can life with him forever if you seek him with all your heart. I can understand not wanting to be disappointed again, but that's the thing--God doesn't disappoint, not in the long run, even though our own particular interpretations of how we want things don't often come to pass.

Obi, again, thank you for sharing this honest, from-the-heart story of your own upbringing and formative experiences. I respect that tremendously. And Jmo, thank you again for reposting it where I could see it. And I'll try to keep spam down to a minimum in the future. :-)
Mujus (1495 D(B))
08 Jun 12 UTC
life = live
Mujus (1495 D(B))
08 Jun 12 UTC
Grandouiller, thank you! I was too tired to look it up.

Page 27 of 36
FirstPreviousNextLast
 

1056 replies
game anonymous experienced players
I would really like to play a game with some of you more experienced players for a bit of a challenge if some of you are up for it!
16 replies
Open
rpzrz (417 D)
18 Aug 12 UTC
possible bug?
In the game i was playing me and Russia had a good alliance until suddenly it said he had muted me. On the global chat he said on his end it said i had muted him, there was no reason for betrayal as we needed each other and the game ended up having an annoying 5 way draw, how do i report this to a mod or someone, or do you think he just randomly muted me?
20 replies
Open
redhouse1938 (429 D)
18 Aug 12 UTC
What's happening with Putin33?
A few months ago he developed a sense of humor, now he's omitting punctuation, something I thought he was pretty precise about. Anybody else notice this?
25 replies
Open
Socialgenius78 (0 DX)
16 Aug 12 UTC
Making map variants (mac)
Hello everyone, I know how to make a map variant on windows but my current computer is a mac, does anyone know a mac equivalent to mapmaker for windows? As I have some good variant ideas that ifs like to have in online playable form
16 replies
Open
diplomacy_seeker (178 D)
19 Aug 12 UTC
anyone just get an error? or just me?
The message said:
7 replies
Open
Sandgoose (0 DX)
16 Aug 12 UTC
Am I cool enough?
I don't get it with webdiplomacy...here I am hovering at a 75 GR...play a pretty fun and exciting game with people but nobody wants to play a game with me....am I doing something wrong? How does one up the cool-o-meter to want to play games with you?
48 replies
Open
dubmdell (556 D)
18 Aug 12 UTC
Romney wishes to cut funding to PBS, Arts, Humanities
http://www.examiner.com/article/romney-says-will-eliminate-pbs-and-arts-funding-will-invest-war-technology?CID=examiner_alerts_article
22 replies
Open
orathaic (1009 D(B))
18 Aug 12 UTC
Diplomacy World Articles...
Message from Diplomacy World's Doiglas Kent (see inside)
2 replies
Open
redhouse1938 (429 D)
17 Aug 12 UTC
"Not right now, Lumbergh. I'm kinda busy.
In fact, I'm going to have to ask you to go ahead and just come back another time. I have a meeting with the Bobs in a couple of minutes."
6 replies
Open
TheWizard (5364 D(S))
10 Aug 12 UTC
wdc, bitches
World diplomacy championships in chicago.

Awesome crowd, tournament has started, the who is who in diplomacy is here, alan calhammer coming, it is already a blast.
41 replies
Open
NigeeBaby (100 D(G))
18 Aug 12 UTC
Diplomacy .... a metaphor for life
The way we play Diplomacy is just a metaphor for life ..... discuss.
1 reply
Open
Mapu (362 D)
17 Aug 12 UTC
Why do people
not finalize and leave it with the gray check all the way to the limit? Is it some kind of strategy or just oversight?
19 replies
Open
flc64 (1963 D)
18 Aug 12 UTC
Paradoxical Quote of The Day From Ben Stein
"Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to
prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen."

Now add this, "Many of those who refuse, or are unable, to prove they are citizens will receive free insurance paid for by those who are forced to buy insurance because they are citizens."
6 replies
Open
Putin33 (111 D)
17 Aug 12 UTC
Favorite artists; period of art
Surely the high culture types will have opinions on this?

18 replies
Open
Page 948 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top