More like this.
I bet Greenman is searching for paragraph that Biden that is confusing.
But he fails to see the word salad that Trump produces on a daily basis.
Not only Greenman ignores the word salad but the insane stupid things Trumps talks about.
Magnets don’t work under water
Windmills cause cancer
Drink bleach
Shove UV lights up your ass
He said he would date his daughter
Frederick Douglas still being alive,
Airplanes during the War of Independence,
Nuclear weapons to stop hurricanes,
Not knowing the UK has nuclear weapons,
Exercise depletes your energy,
Describing a hurricane as "one of the wettest we’ve ever seen, from the standpoint of water,"
The President of Apple is Tim Apple while the President of Lockheed is Marilyn Lockheed,
"Nobody knew that healthcare could be so complicated!"
Said his coronavirus test turned out "positively toward the negative"
Pretty sure we got about 5% of them between the two of us.
Seems on point for the state with the worst healthcare.Hearing aids in MS…?
View attachment 91567
Frederick Douglas still being alive,
Airplanes during the War of Independence,
Nuclear weapons to stop hurricanes,
Not knowing the UK has nuclear weapons,
Exercise depletes your energy,
Describing a hurricane as "one of the wettest we’ve ever seen, from the standpoint of water,"
The President of Apple is Tim Apple while the President of Lockheed is Marilyn Lockheed,
"Nobody knew that healthcare could be so complicated!"
Said his coronavirus test turned out "positively toward the negative"
Pretty sure we got about 5% of them between the two of us.
Not necessarily.And sent plagues, famines, had firstborn killed, and killed 99.9999% of all life on the planet. The christian god is one sick motherfucker.
Not necessarily.
A theist does not need to take it literally.
For example:
A theist could keep the context of the writer in mind. Their world view, their social context, their finite inability to comprehend God, and their willingness to edit history to justify the present actions of their time.
A theist could believe the bible holds divine truths about God, but it also was written by finite creatures who are unable to comprehend God, had their own agendas, and any truth to be found is only by careful study of the whole through the lens of prayer.
One possible example that may or may not be true:
The book of Revelation is a documentary of the suffering of a highly educated man who has become afflicted with psychosis. This man is driven out of his career, his home, his community, and is forced to wander the desert. He has no idea his psychotic visions are not real. This poor man experiences hell on earth, but retains his faith in God. The divine truth here is through his suffering his faith somehow brings him some sort of grace, some sort of peace.
The words written? The only truth is to document the extent of his madness, and that his faith somehow helps him deal his extreme suffering. A loving God would not do anything described. It is all madness.
note: the book of revelation is not included in the orthodox bible.
Another fun example that is way more entertaining to think about:
I think your example of killing 99.9999% of life on the planet refers to "the flood" in the book of genesis. The book of genesis is obviously written by early Hebrew writers who have a very limited understanding of the world. What is more interesting is their word for God, shaddai, or el shaddai. Most western translations just translate that almighty. However, in actual Hebrew, that translation changes overtime. Including God of the breast, God of the mountain, God of domination, God of the ox, etc.
The whole concept of the flood runs contrary to any reasonable understanding of God. However, as soon as a person starts to take the writers concept of God into mind, the entire story changes quite dramatically.
Lastly, since you seem to be taking things a bit literally, lets have some fun:
So, in the bible, you have 1 book of Ezra.
So, what happened to books 2, 3, and 4? Why is book 1 divinely inspired literal word, but not 2, 3, or 4?
What happened to the other 17 books missing in the protestant bible? Who determines what is the literal word of God and what is not?
Lets have some more fun:
In the protestant bible, the book of Esther is only 2/3rds as long as it is in the Roman Catholic or Orthodox bibles. Did you even know this? Do you know why?
Its because in the protestant bible Esther does not have the personal relationship with God like she does in the others. Were females originally not allowed to have a personal relationship with God in protestant tradition? Did you know Luther originally wanted the book of James tossed? It didn't sit well with King James.
...........................
My point is your perception of theism has been shaped by ignorant dogma. You have been educated about theism by ignorant people who blindly believed in dogma, and had the foolishness to believe it was not dogma. You are then relaying that ignorant dogma onward.
More like this.
Those monsters make a lot of noise, ruin a lot of lives, and spread great suffering.There are a lot of people in this country who call themselves "Bible literalists." Like the vast majority of conservative evangelical Christians. We're more concerned about them than those who aren't quite so literal.
More like this.
Those monsters make a lot of noise, ruin a lot of lives, and spread great suffering.
However, they are a minority among theists. Their ascendancy was in 2014, but many have abandoned that madness. I think most have gone to something-ism, atheism, but a good number have also gone into traditional non-literal theism.
Mainline protestant affiliations have seen growth, especially inclusive types that welcome lgbtq, atheists*, etc.
*if your a humanist and you don't believe god exists, but you want to do social justice in some areas church coalitions have the best ground game going. These church's don't care if you ever attend service, they will still happily accept whatever you want to contribute, sit on social justice committees, and not give a shit about what you believe.
Actually a national poll just a couple years ago showed that non-belief in all its forms is on the rise, but the ranks of non-believers has been increased by a decline in mainline Protestantism, not fundamentalism, which remained stable. Meaning we are now seeing more religious polarization just as we're seeing increased political polarization.
I don't know what you mean about their "ascendancy in 2014" or what you think happened then, but Bible literalists have been among us since the Bible first came into being. There's no question that both kinds of theists exist, and have existed ever since there has been religion. I do think you're understating the scale of religious fundamentalism in America today, however.
That is one perspective, but another possible perspective has God not creating life at all . . .God also made perverts, rapists and child molesters so him making a pussy-grabbing rapist is easy to believe.
Also Hitler. Because why not.
scroll to figure 2.PRRI Census of American Religion — 2022
The 2022 PRRI Census of American Religion provides unprecedented county-level data on religious identity and diversity in the United States.www.prri.org
notice how the evangelicals are in decline
unaffiliated is winning big time
But also non-evangelical protestant ( most of which are non-literalists ) reversed their decline in 2016, and passed up the literalists in 2022. Although covid hit hard, as the vulnerable were actively encouraged to stay home, and that remains the case.
But once you add in the catholics (all of which are non-literalists), the literalists were never in majority. What is fascinating is in the US catholics are by far most fanatically conservative of catholics, and are most actively resisting reform in the wider catholic church. To the point the Pope himself is sacking US bishops. Not really representative of the wider catholic viewpoint. I think any liberal leaning catholics left a long time ago for a non-evangelical protestant of their choice in the US.
It is interesting to see judaism come back among the younger population. Historical study and scholarship are a requirement there, and make for fascinating conversation.
Of course, if one is going to be a theist, there are many paths to the divine.
its not.PEW runs a survey every 7 years. The latest shows 24% identify as "born-again or evangelical Protestants." Which they also mention is down 7% since 2007. This is consistent more or less with polls I've seen over the past 20 years, where they've variously come in 22-30%. Your source puts them at 13.6%. Not sure about the comparison in methodologies here, but that's a widely discrepant result.
About Three-in-Ten U.S. Adults Are Now Religiously Unaffiliated
Self-identified Christians make up 63% of the U.S. population in 2021, down from 75% a decade ago.www.pewresearch.org
That is one perspective, but another possible perspective has God not creating life at all . . .
God is said to have made domestic cats. But think about it. If you made a robot that tortured its victims before murdering them you would be spending your life in prison for the rest of your life. Why does God get away with it?... But if you think about it, humans bred domestic cats.
Lets take it a step farther. We know that life developed through evolution. Evolution is at its essence mutation, or corruption. For each success their will be many failures, and far more cancers and sufferings. It all seems rather cruel. Why would God even bother with creating life?
Then again, if we think about it, corruption is not really the domain of God. The book of genesis oddly claims Lucifer did the greatest act of creation. What if life was never Gods idea to begin with? Rather some angels science experiment gone wrong?
... if that is the case, well, God didn't create hitler, or rapists, or child molesters, or Trump.
Trump, Trump is a creation of the society that created him. Of his fathers teaching. Of his families relationships. Of the expectations placed on him. Of the schools he was sent to. Alot of humanity in that, and quite possibily very little of God.
I think you’re not using “born again” in the context that evangelicals use the term. And Episcopalians certainly do not traipse around declaring they are “Born Again” like evangelicals do.its not.
PEW is asking different questions.
born-again or evangelical Protestants != evangelical
For example, the ELCA layperson consider themselves born again, but would be deeply offended if you called them evangelical.
Not just a ELCA layperson. Anglican, Episcopalian, Moravian, Lutherans all consider themselves born again. Baptized in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, they are Born Again in Christ.
And they all are absolutely not evangelical and would be extremely offended if you implied such a thing.
I am fairly confident I missed a bunch of protestant traditions in my ignorance.
While your outrage is noted, please keep in mind that the #2 in line to the Oval Office firmly believes that dinosaurs were on the ark with Noah.Not necessarily.
A theist does not need to take it literally.
For example:
A theist could keep the context of the writer in mind. Their world view, their social context, their finite inability to comprehend God, and their willingness to edit history to justify the present actions of their time.
A theist could believe the bible holds divine truths about God, but it also was written by finite creatures who are unable to comprehend God, had their own agendas, and any truth to be found is only by careful study of the whole through the lens of prayer.
One possible example that may or may not be true:
The book of Revelation is a documentary of the suffering of a highly educated man who has become afflicted with psychosis. This man is driven out of his career, his home, his community, and is forced to wander the desert. He has no idea his psychotic visions are not real. This poor man experiences hell on earth, but retains his faith in God. The divine truth here is through his suffering his faith somehow brings him some sort of grace, some sort of peace.
The words written? The only truth is to document the extent of his madness, and that his faith somehow helps him deal his extreme suffering. A loving God would not do anything described. It is all madness.
note: the book of revelation is not included in the orthodox bible.
Another fun example that is way more entertaining to think about:
I think your example of killing 99.9999% of life on the planet refers to "the flood" in the book of genesis. The book of genesis is obviously written by early Hebrew writers who have a very limited understanding of the world. What is more interesting is their word for God, shaddai, or el shaddai. Most western translations just translate that almighty. However, in actual Hebrew, that translation changes overtime. Including God of the breast, God of the mountain, God of domination, God of the ox, etc.
The whole concept of the flood runs contrary to any reasonable understanding of God. However, as soon as a person starts to take the writers concept of God into mind, the entire story changes quite dramatically.
Lastly, since you seem to be taking things a bit literally, lets have some fun:
So, in the bible, we have 1 book of Ezra.
So, what happened to books 2, 3, and 4? Why is book 1 divinely inspired literal word, but not 3 or 4?
4 Ezra: A Biblical Book You've Probably Never Read - The Whole Counsel Blog
In one of the earliest postings on this blog, the difficulty of defining the exact limits of the Old Testament within the many language traditions of the Orthodox Church was described. Though there is clear agreement on a certain set of books and their authority across all of Orthodox...blogs.ancientfaith.com
What happened to the other 17 books missing in the protestant bible? Who determines what is the literal word of God and what is not?
Lets have some more fun:
In the protestant bible, the book of Esther is only 2/3rds as long as it is in the Roman Catholic or Orthodox bibles. Did you know this? Do you know why?
Its because in the protestant bible Esther does not have the personal relationship with God like she does in the others. Were females originally not allowed to have a personal relationship with God in protestant tradition? Did you know Luther originally wanted the book of James tossed? It didn't sit well with King James.
...........................
My point is many peoples perception of theism appears to be blind to alternate possibilities. They seem to have been educated about theism by people who blindly believed in dogma, and had the foolishness to believe it was not dogma. They then appear to be relaying that dogma onward believing it is the only possible belief.