The 53-meter (175-foot) tall, fifth-century Buddha statue located in Bamyan, about 150 kilometers (90 miles) west of the Afghan capital Kabul, is shown in an undated photo. Afghanistan's hardline Taliban rulers on Monday, Feb. 26, 2001, ordered the destruction of all statues, including this one, the world's tallest Buddha statue. The Taliban says statues are offensive to Islam. (AP Photo)

-- crazy mofos (destroy@great.art), March 01, 2001

Answers

"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth." -- Exodus 20:4.

"And I will destroy your high places, and cut down your images, and cast your carcases upon the carcases of your idols, and my soul shall abhor you." -- Leviticus 26:30.

The True God works in all kinds of ways, eh. Then and now.

-- Chicken Little (cluck@cluck.com), March 01, 2001.

What makes you so certain your god is the true god?

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swngingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), March 01, 2001.

Because HIS God is a rooster!

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), March 01, 2001.

It's WAY too early to post something that funny.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), March 01, 2001.

Just out of curiosity sp? Why did you entitle this thread Religion Sucks?

-- sumer (shh@aol.con), March 01, 2001.

'sumer-

I suspect it's because the Taliban has ordered a fifth-century statue destroyed because it offends their religious sensibilities.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), March 01, 2001.

So is Buddhism a "religion" too. Or an ethical "way" (like Confuscianism) or what?

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 01, 2001.

Where's your competitive "spirit"? May the best religion win!

-- (@ .), March 01, 2001.

>>Where's your competitive "spirit"? May the best religion win!

Sorry to disapoint you but it's not a race. It never was nor ever will be. Jesus said in John 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

-- One Way To Heaven (Jesus is the ONLY way@2.heaven), March 01, 2001.

So there!

-- (nemesis@awol.com), March 01, 2001.

Galatians 6:7 Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows.

-- You will reap (what U@sow.now), March 01, 2001.

What makes the Bible anymore true than the holy book of any other religion?

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), March 01, 2001.

>>What makes the Bible anymore true than the holy book of any other religion?

No other religion claims the son of God lived and died for their sins.

Jesus was and is the savior spoken of in the old testament that would someday come to shed his blood for our sin. Since man first sinned, God has demanded a blood sacrifice to cover our sin. When Jesus was sarificed he was without sin. He choose to take our place as the final perfect sacrifice taking our place as a gift of love to us.

-- You will reap (what U@sow.now), March 01, 2001.

No other religion claims the son of God lived and died for their sins.

You're kidding, right?

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), March 01, 2001.

"God has demanded a blood sacrifice to cover our sin"

What kind of demented mind would demand a blood sacrifice?

QUIT PERVERTING JESUS' MESSAGE!

His message was to love one another.

Stop with the delusions already.

-- (No@way.Jose), March 01, 2001.

Hey Tarzan your religion and my religion have one thing in common. They both take faith to believe.

My religion says in my future I have the promise of eternal life after my mortal death. Your religion says in your future you have death.

John 20:29 Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

-- You will reap (what U@sow.now), March 01, 2001.

>>What kind of demented mind would demand a blood sacrifice?

QUIT PERVERTING JESUS' MESSAGE!

His message was to love one another.

Yes..Jesus' message was/is that indeed. However God himself has demanded a blood sacrifice for sin since Cain and Able. Jesus was the final blood sacrifice for sin. All we need to do is accept Him and His free offer of salvation he provides us.

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, [1] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

-- You will reap (what U@sow.now), March 01, 2001.

"However God himself has demanded a blood sacrifice for sin"

You show me where Jesus said that. I believe in Him, not the other people of the bible.

I also believe I will reap what I sow. But, my attempt at goodness and kindness will be how I'm judged...not through the blood of anyone.

Freaks killed Jesus. It's time to stop the blood-letting.

-- (No@way.Jose), March 01, 2001.

Atheism is to religion as baldness is to haircolor.

Of course, it's a moot point since you and I are both atheists in the broadest sense of the word. Neither of us believe in Buddha, Krishna, Thor, Diana, Hern, and a host of other dieties. It's just that you believe in one less diety than I. As Bertrand Russell said, "When you understand why you don't believe in all of those other gods, then you'll understand why I don't believe in yours,"

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), March 01, 2001.

>>You show me where Jesus said that.

It started here: Genesis 4:4 But Abel brought fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The LORD looked with favor on Abel and his offering,

The last sacrifice was here: John 19:30 When he had received the drink, Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

There is no single place to find what you ask.

God demanded sacrifical lambs to cover sin. Jesus was called the lamb of God and the first and final PERFECT sacrifice for sin.

In Genesis 3:15 God while talking to the serpant(Satan), makes reference to Jesus 'crush(ing) your head'. Meaning dealing a fatal blow to Satan by taking back the authority given to him through sin by man. God also references 'and you will strike his heel'. Meaning a superficial wound made to Jesus that was to be overcome though the blood sacrifice Jesus made on the cross and resurection from the grave three days later.

Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring [1] and hers; he will crush [2] your head, and you will strike his heel."

>>But, my attempt at goodness and kindness

Goodness and kindness doesn't do it. Salvation is a FREE gift. Jesus paid our cost of admittance into heaven. God adressess this here in Ephesians Tarzan.

Ephesians 2:8-9 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- 9 not by works, so that no one can boast.

>> Freaks killed Jesus. It's time to stop the blood-letting. It was time to stop 2000 years ago. There is no more need for any blood sacrifices anymore. Just accepting the free gift of salvation God offers us though acceptance of His Son Jesus Christ will get you a 'get out of hell card' and eternal salvation.

-- You will reap (what U@sow.now), March 01, 2001.

I don't care WHAT your holy book (NOT) says. I could point to dozens of other "one true" paths, and none of them are any more real or truthful than yours. You're a snake-oil salesman, your religion is a scam, and your "offer" is a farce. Selling people goods they can't even see? Man, even used-car salesmen don't have balls that big.

Take your imaginary god and go home.

-- You're Not Getting My Wallet (Xtians.are@full.of.it.com), March 01, 2001.

Who wants anything to do with a God that ordered murders, war, etc? The Bible is full of stories (if you believe them), of the viliest acts brought against man in the name of God. People who love and worship the Bible are the sickest creatures upon earth. It's easy to see why this world is the way that it is, and religion is always at the head of it.

-- privvy (privvy@hereticc.hre), March 01, 2001.

Why don't the Talibans declare the Buddha statues an historic site, protect it from vandals and mad mullahs and charge fat fees for tourists to visit?

Rhetorical question. They don't want tourists. They don't want Westerners to "corrupt" them with our decadent culture. We are devils.

Let's sic the Recons on 'em.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 01, 2001.

"Why did you entitle this thread Religion Sucks?"

Sumer,

As Tarzan said, I think this stone sculpture is a beautiful piece of culture, and the fact that someone would destroy it in the name of religion is downright pitiful.

But it goes deeper than that. Faith in our Higher Power is a good thing, but most religions distort this into their own egocentric perspective. Our Higher Power is a spiritual force, it has no name, face, or color of skin.

Some groups choose to represent this in the material world by using different symbology, statues, etc. to give them something to relate to. We should respect each others symbology for what it represents in its simplest form, faith in our Higher Power. We should not use this as a way to alienate each other and destroy it because it is not the same as our symbols.

Many religions are missing the point. The best way to show our faith in our Higher Power is through our actions, and discriminating toward others with hatred, violence, and destruction is exactly the opposite type of behavior that our Higher Power represents.

The only true religion is the one which not only tolerates ALL religions, but welcomes them. We who have faith in our Higher Power should join together. Whatever symbols we use in this material world are irrelevant, we should accept them as part of our history and the lessons we have learned.

The #1 way to show that we are spiritually enlightened is through the way we treat our fellow man. We should love them, not seek to destroy them and everything they represent. This is why I think religions are flawed, they just don't get it.

-- religions (need to @ wake. up), March 02, 2001.

JESUS is the WAY not 1 of the way's. when doubting thomas-put his finger in the holes in[RISEN]saviors HANDS. he[thomas] fell on his knees & said''my LORD & my GOD!!

BUDDHA never rose from grave.

-- al-d (dogs@zianet.com), March 02, 2001.

Al,

Buddha is just Jesus through someone else's eyes. All Gods are the same God, the One And Only GOD! Get it?

-- (the bible is @ the. word of man), March 02, 2001.

World begs Taliban not to 'vandalize' history

March 2, 2001 Web posted at: 12:07 AM EST (0507 GMT)

KABUL, Afghanistan -- One of the world's premier art museums has offered to buy Afghan artifacts in a desperate bid to stop the ruling Taliban from smashing priceless historic statues.

New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art has joined the growing worldwide outcry urging the Taliban not to "vandalize" its rich past. Some images destined for destruction represent the most famous relics of Afghanistan's history.

Among them are two soaring images of the Buddha in Bamiyan, believed to the tallest in the world. Hewn from a solid cliff, they date back to a few centuries after the birth of Jesus Christ.

"Let us come at our own cost and let us remove what we are able to remove," said Phillippe De Montebello, director of the Metropolitan Museum, a premier repository of art and artifacts.

The United Nations cultural agency UNESCO has described the campaign as a crisis for world heritage and urged Muslim nations to help halt the destruction.

The Taliban campaign, launched on Thursday in the name of a purist vision of Islam, targeted all statues, including the two unique Buddhas.

The Taliban want to remove any reminders of the centuries before Islam when Afghanistan was a center of Buddhist learning and pilgrimage.

The Taliban also believe that Islam forbids the making of images, such as pictures and paintings of people.

All statues destroyed

"All statues would be destroyed," said Taliban's cultural minister Mullah Qudratullah Jamal, adding that "whatever means of destruction are needed to demolish the statues will be used."

Most statues date from nearly 2,000 years ago. They were largely untouched for more than a millennium after the arrival of Islam, surviving even the onslaughts of Genghis Khan in the 13th century and Tamerlane in the 14th century.

The international alarm began on Monday, when Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar said all statues could be smashed, including the two famous Buddhas that soar 38 meters (125 feet) and 53 meters (174 feet) above Bamiyan.

The Taliban, a fundamentalist movement that regards all human likenesses of divinity as un-Islamic, rejected a last-minute appeal from U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan for a rethink.

"The abandoned relics are not our pride," the official Bakhtar news agency quoted Foreign Minister Wakil Ahmad Muttawakil as saying.

The Pakistan-based Afghan Islamic Press news service later quoted Jamal as saying statues had been destroyed at museums in Kabul, the southern city of Ghazni, the western city of Herat and at Farm Hadda near the main eastern town of Jalalabad.

The statue-smashing has scandalized Buddhists, Christians and Muslims around the world who have said it is not only destroying the history of civilization but it is damaging the cause of both Afghanistan and Islam.

The European Union has urged the Taliban leaders to think again, while Paris-based UNESCO has called a crisis meeting for representatives of the Organization of the Islamic Conference.

Even traditional foes India and Pakistan have found themselves in agreement.

Neighbor India, home in exile for Tibet's Buddhist spiritual leader the Dalai Lama, said it would try to stop the destruction which one Taliban official linked to the 1992 razing by Hindu extremists of a 16th century mosque in Ayodhya in northern India.

Muslim Pakistan, one of the Taliban's few foreign supporters, urged the group to preserve the "world's historical, cultural and religious heritage."

Nepal, birthplace of Buddha, on Friday joined the outcry.

Russia denounced the move as vandalism while an Egyptian Muslim intellectual said the edict was contrary to Islam because it respects other cultures "even if they include rituals that are against Islamic law."

Tainted history

Afghanistan has suffered destruction at the hands of many conquerors in the past. Most recently it suffered a Soviet invasion in 1979, an anti-communist insurgency backed by the West in the 1980s and a civil war that began in the 1990s and still continues today.

A two-year drought has also added to the country's woes, with more than a million people facing starvation or death as refugees in the cold.

The Taliban have steadily conquered most of Afghanistan in recent years, and now control its cities and highways.

Heavily criticised for their restrictions on women and for its public executions, the Taliban are recognised by only three states: Pakistan, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia.

-- (smart.people@think.alike), March 02, 2001.

-- very cool (what's that @ in the sky. a ufo?), March 02, 2001.

BUDDHA never rose from grave.

Actually, according to Buddhism, Buddha reincarnates repeatedly. So from their perspective, he's risen from the grave many more times than Jesus.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), March 02, 2001.

I agree this looks like a beautiful piece of art that shouldn't be destroyed. I tried picturing how I would feel if this was something I found less than beautiful, like a giant statue of some Satanic evil looking demon or a 100 foot tall phallic symbol..could I understand it then? If this were Satanic in nature..would it change your opinion?

In any case...I'd like to see this wonderful Buddha left standing for all to see. It just doesn't seem right, destroying another man's faith because your own faith demands it. It is ones own ego that makes us believe we are right above all others. Letting go of that ego allows us to see the truth, which is that no one is more right than anyone else when it comes to faith.

-- kritter (kritter@adelphia.net), March 02, 2001.

It's just rock, albeit a beautiful, powerful one. I hope it is saved. But if it is not, advanced Buddhists surely know it is just a rock.

Birth is a death sentence, so the Buddha taught. Once one absorbs this, attachment to any thing in this unreality reveals itself to be ignorance in action and a path to suffering, not nirvana.

To those of you who believe you hold exclusive rights to the kingdom of heaven, I hope with all my heart you are wrong, for hell would have to be a very big place otherwise; that someday soon you allow for the possibility that you might be wrong; and you realize how much you hurt people with your Jesus way or the highway to hell preaching.

-- Rich (howe9@shentel.net), March 02, 2001.

"There is no single place to find what you ask."

That is because Jesus didn't say it. Some delusional psychotic in the bible did.

"God demanded sacrifical lambs to cover sin."

No, some delusional psychotic said God did. The only thing killing a lamb provides is mutton.

"Jesus was called the lamb of God and the first and final PERFECT sacrifice for sin."

I think it's sad you think death is the PERFECT sacrifice for sin. So much so, you even capitalized it. What in your background makes you shout with glee over murder? It was murder plain and simple you know. You do recognize that don't you? Until we Christians hold those people responsible for the murder of Jesus, instead of claiming it was the "perfect sacrifice for sin", we will be considered fools forever.

"In Genesis 3:15 God while talking to the serpant(Satan), makes reference to Jesus 'crush(ing) your head'. Meaning dealing a fatal blow to Satan by taking back the authority given to him through sin by man. God also references 'and you will strike his heel'. Meaning a superficial wound made to Jesus that was to be overcome though the blood sacrifice Jesus made on the cross and resurection from the grave three days later."

You're reading words of man, not Jesus. Unfortunately, I think 200 years after the death of Jesus, man placed his own interpretation of Jesus' words in the bible, so as Christians, we will never agree. I prefer to live by the message Jesus brought, and not the mean, evil- spiritedness others placed upon his words.

"Goodness and kindness doesn't do it. Salvation is a FREE gift. Jesus paid our cost of admittance into heaven."

Man, I can't even get into your head with most of the stuff you wrote. Much like I can't get into most of the bible. Goodness and kindness DOES do it for me. Jesus proved that to me by how he lived his life.

I'm sure Jesus has been shedding tears of sorrow over how people have twisted the meaning of his life on earth.

"Just accepting the free gift of salvation God offers us though acceptance of His Son Jesus Christ will get you a 'get out of hell card' and eternal salvation."

I look at it this way...acceptance of Jesus' message of love and kindness will get us a "get out of hell card"...both in this lifetime and beyond.

That was beautiful, kritter.

-- (No@way.Jose), March 02, 2001.

My King was born a King.

The Bible says He's a seven way King.

He's the King of the Jews.

He's the King of Israel.

He is the King of righteousness.

He's the King of the ages.

He's the King of heaven.

He's the King of kings.

And He is the Lord of lords.

Now, that's my King.

I wonder, do you know Him?

Do you know my King?

David said the heavens declare the glory of God.

And the firmament show His handiwork.

My King is the only One where there's no way

To measure or define His limitless love.

No telescope can bring into visibility

The coastline of His limitless supply.

No barriers can hinder Him from pouring out His blessings.

That's my King.

He is God's Son.

He's a sinner's Savior.

He's the centerpiece of cililization.

He stands alone in history.

He's august.

He's unique.

He unparalleled.

He's unprecedented.

He's supreme.

He's preeminent.

He's the loftiest idea in literature.

He's the highest personality in philosophy.

He's the supreme problem in higher criticism.

He is the fundamental doctrine of true theology.

He is the cardinal necessity of true spiritualism

That's my King.

He's the miracle of the age.

He's the superlative of everything good

That you choose to call Him.

He's the only One who's able to supply

All of our needs simultaneously.

He provides strength to the weak.

He's available for the tempted and the proud.

He sympathizes.

And He saves.

He is all God.

And He guides.

He heals the sick.

He can cleanse a leper.

He forgives sinners.

He discharges debtors.

He delivers the captive.

He defends the feeble.

He blesses the young.

He saves the unfortunate.

He regards the aged.

He rewards the diligent.

And He beautifies the meek.

Do you know Him?

My King is the King of knowledge.

He's the wellspring of wisdom.

He's the doorway of deliverance.

He's the pathway of peace

He's the roadway of righteousness.

He's the highway of holiness.

He's the gateway of glory.

He's the master of the mighty.

He's the captain of the conquerors.

He's the head of the heroes.

He's the leader of the legislator.

He's the overseer of the overcomers.

He's the governor of governors.

He's the prince of princes.

He's the King of kings.

And the Lord of lords.

That's my King.

His office is manifold.

His promise is sure.

His life is matchless.

His goodness is limitless.

His mercy is everlasting.

His love never changes.

His Word is enough.

His grace is sufficient.

His reign is righteous.

His yoke is easy.

And His burden is light.

I wish I could describe Him to you.

He's just indescribable.

He's incomprehensible.

He's invincible.

He's irresistible.

I'm tryin to tell you -

The heaven of heavens cannot contain Him.

Let alone a man like me tryin to explain Him.

You can't get Him outta your mind.

You can't get Him off your hands.

You can't outlive Him.

And you can't live without Him.

The Pharisees couldn't stand Him.

But they found out they couldn't stop Him.

Pilate couldn't find fault with Him.

The witnesses couldn't get their testimony to agree.

Herod couldn't kill Him.

Death couldn't handle Him.

And the grave couldn't hold Him.

That's my King.

He always has been.

He always will be.

I'm tellin you -

He has no predecessor.

And He has no successor.

There was nobody before Him.

And there'll be nobody after Him.

You can't impeach Him.

And He's not gonna resign.

That's my King.

Thine is the kingdom

And the power

And the glory.

And all the power belongs to my King.

We can all sit around talkin about

Black power

And white power

And green power,

But it's God's power.

Thine is the kingdom

And the power

And the glory

Forever

And ever

Amen.

-unknown

-- (bygrace@thru.faith), March 02, 2001.

Good way to ruin a good discussion, bygrace. C&P always makes for stimulating discussion

NOT

-- (STOP@the cut and .pastes), March 02, 2001.

"BUDDHA never rose from grave.

-- al-d (dogs@zianet.com), March 02, 2001."

Prove that Jesus rose from the grave. NO ONE SAW JESUS rise from the grave! You can't prove anything al-d! It's heresay! A fairy tale!

-- privvy (privvy@privvyy.ppp), March 02, 2001.

I've not known by grace to be anything other than amiable, gentle and passionate about their spiritual path without forcing it down our throats.

Nothing kills a thread for me - slow internet connection - like a slew of graphics. A long, impassioned piece, C/P or not, doesn't necessarily strike a death knell for this thread, IMO.

-- Rich (howe9@shentel.net), March 02, 2001.

... I tried picturing how I would feel if this was something I found less than beautiful, like a giant statue of some Satanic evil looking demon or a 100 foot tall phallic symbol..could I understand it then? If this were Satanic in nature..would it change your opinion?

Kritter, no, if it were an ancient statue of a satanic or phallic figure, it shouldn't be destroyed. How would you feel about it if, say, a Mayan or Aztec tribe had made a pilgrimage north and created a large frescoe or statue of their version of "satan" 1000 years ago in say, Texas, and after modern discovery, a band of hardcore right-wing moral-majority types demanded that it be smashed because it depicted "satan" in idol form? Because "satan" is the big bad-boy to their religion, that statue no longer has artistic or historical value and is nothing but a threat to... something?

This is why religion gets a bad name - it allows people to embrace hypocracy and turn off their brains too easily, just because the Bible, or Qu'ran, or whatever blessed word-of-god book they hold dear "speaks" to them.

-- Bemused (and_amazed@you.people), March 02, 2001.

It was an exercize to try and help me see the other side, Bemused, and I agree,..it wouldn't have changed my opinion. I may only say that had it been some terribly satanic creation, my number one option would be not to look at it..not too hard to do.

-- kritter (kritter@adelphia.net), March 02, 2001.

If God did not exist, we would have to invent Him.

--Voltaire

This is true for me. I need to believe in something. Since there is nothing that is obviously true, non-rational faith is necessary. You atheists choose to have faith in nothing. Doesn't work for me, not anymore.

What's to lose in believing in something greater than yourself? If you're wrong, you haven't lost anything (Pascal's wager). In the meantime it's a good exercise in humility. As TS Eliot said, "humility is endless".

Soon enough, we'll all know.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 02, 2001.

Geez, Lars. This is the second time on this forum in the past two days that I've posted simultaneously with you not realizing that you didn't close your tags.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), March 02, 2001.

-- (-@-.-), March 02, 2001.

It's all your fault Anita. Somehow your vibes are screwing up my html. Makes me want to scream!

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 02, 2001.

Pascal's Wager assumes a choice between no religion and a single religion. Since there are obviously many religions different from which to choose, Pascal's Wager, as a logical construct, is totally inapplicable to the real world. As soon as some religious fellow or another can present some evidence for or against some specific religion, then we can narrow the odds. Until then, all religions are nothing more than slots on a cosmic roulette wheel, and atheism is one of those slots, too. So why bother choosing?

-- You're Not Getting My Wallet (Xtians.are@full.of.it.com), March 02, 2001.

What's to lose in believing in something greater than yourself? If you're wrong, you haven't lost anything (Pascal's wager).

That's a new spin on Pascal's Wager for sure.

Personally, I've never seen any convincing evidence for religion, spirituality, or any higher force. Consequently, I do not believe. It sounds like you haven't either, but have chosen to believe because you find life is easier to live with belief. Whatever. At least you're honest about it.

If you need to believe in a higher power to get through the night, that's your life and your problem. Others do not have that need, so please spare us the sales pitch.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), March 02, 2001.

-- Die Motherfucker! (off@with.their.heads), March 02, 2001.

I'm not selling anything T, just stating my own POV. I personally don't care what you believe in; I am not the least concerned with your soul. The thing is, you do believe in something, even if that something is nothing. You can't prove there is no God anymore than I can prove there is one.

Pascal's wager

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 02, 2001.

BTW, if you can read all that link, you're a better man than I am.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 02, 2001.

Lars, one does not prove a negative assertion, i.e. that there is no god. One does, however, have to prove a positive assertion, i.e. that there is a god. In the absence of proof, a negative is neither proven nor disproven. In the absence of proof, a positive is not proven, and is rejected.

If you claim there is a god, then it is incumbent upon you to prove its existence.

BTW, all, does that sound file contain Gilbert Gottfried? I really hope to run into that irritating little bastard alone in a dark alley one night. I'd like to introduce him to my Signature Edition Louisville Slugger.

-- You're Not Getting My Wallet (Xtians.are@full.of.it.com), March 02, 2001.

I'm not selling anything T, just stating my own POV. I personally don't care what you believe in; I am not the least concerned with your soul.

Then why the exhortations to join in your belief? You're being disingenuous.

The thing is, you do believe in something, even if that something is nothing.

It may make you feel better to think that you and I have belief in common, but that is not the case. It is not that I believe in nothing, but rather that I lack belief in the supernatural period.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), March 02, 2001.

JESUS [speaking of himself] said''a great LIGHT has come into the world---but men PREFER darkness''

so bro. [by grace] don,t be suprised by the resistance!! and HE did say-the end of the ages would be''gross darkness''

chill & watch GOD fullfill=prophecy. remember=''the earth is his footstool''

-- al-d (dogs@zianet.com), March 02, 2001.

You're--

I said that I could not prove that there is a God. I simply choose to believe. It is not incumbent on me to prove anything.

Gilbert Gottfried, now there's a name from the past, the lil creep.

Send money.

Tarz--

Here is what I said. It is so eloquent that it deserves re-posting

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If God did not exist, we would have to invent Him.

--Voltaire

This is true for me. I need to believe in something. Since there is nothing that is obviously true, non-rational faith is necessary. You atheists choose to have faith in nothing. Doesn't work for me, not anymore.

What's to lose in believing in something greater than yourself? If you're wrong, you haven't lost anything (Pascal's wager). In the meantime it's a good exercise in humility. As TS Eliot said, "humility is endless".

Soon enough, we'll all know.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Where are the "exhortations"? I merely asked a question. I am nothing if not ingenuous.

Excuse me, I must get back to fudging my taxes.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 02, 2001.

Lars, you said "You can't prove there is no God anymore than I can prove there is one."

Since one does not prove a negative, then your statement is inapplicable. That's what I was saying. If there's any proving to be done, it's on the side of the affirmative.

-- You're Not Getting My Wallet (Xtians.are@full.of.it.com), March 02, 2001.

But I feel no need to prove dick.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 02, 2001.

Then don't, Lars. Just don't expect to persuade any atheists or agnostics.

And bear in mind that atheists don't bother trying to prove the nonexistence of a god, for the reasons I cited earlier. If YOU believe that one or more do exist, fine. Just recognize that you can't prove that it/they exist(s), and you'll have to do that before you can persuade atheists. The burden of proof falls on the affirmative assertion. If you choose not to assume that burden, then don't try to pass it off onto the negative assertion. Basic debate.

Clearer?

-- You're Not Getting My Wallet (Xtians.are@full.of.it.com), March 02, 2001.

Well, we certainly are not communicating but that's ok. Sheesh, again I'm not trying to convert you. I could not care less. My question was "what's to lose by believing in something greater than yourself?" I detect a pride issue with you.

Here's a relevant link for anyone interested in mathematics. I excerpt two paragraphs--

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

God - Man

God is dead and alive; alive if alive in us, if not, dead. Like many features of human life, if God did not exist we would have to invent Him (or Her). We have invented Him. Whoever or whatever our God may be, that God is the construct of our highest hopes, yearnings, creativity, values and imagination. As the famous evolutionary biologist, Gaylord Simpson, wrote, "Man Makes Himself." This includes the God(s) we worship unless, unlike most religions, "God" is equated to "Universe." If the universe is, as physicist Freeman Dyson indicates, "Infinite in all Directions," then man and man's world can once again be seen at the center.

The alternative, conventional view, that God exists apart from Man, somehow higher, apart from and independent of humanity, has been the source of incredible inhumanity, brutality and grief throughout recorded history. The end of such history is not yet in sight. This non-self-similar view has allowed Man to project himself on God and to project God upon states, wars and alliances. Thus, Kings and other rulers, their rationales for oppression and their wars are made holy, through unholy alliances between rulers and organized religion. As Ernest Becker (1975) has shown (and as William Blake realized 200 years ago), such projections are the essence of evil.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Extracted from

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 02, 2001.

Try again--

The Fractal Revolution

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 02, 2001.

"Well, we certainly are not communicating but that's ok. Sheesh, again I'm not trying to convert you."

So you say. I think your "you can't disprove" statement was a dig at atheism. Plus, Pascal's Wager is a well-known tool of evangels and proselytizers.

"I could not care less."

Irrelevant.

"My question was "what's to lose by believing in something greater than yourself?"

My question is "what's to gain from taking Pascal's Wager, especially when there are so many religions out there?" Jehovah's the same as Thor, Set, Inanna, Damballah and Amaterasu to me. None exist, and none are worth any time or effort.

"I detect a pride issue with you."

Funny, I was going to say the same thing about you. If you don't want to prove something, then don't. But your statements about how atheists can't disprove the existence of a god are disingenuous. There is no god that CAN be proven, therefore there is no imperative to disprove his/her/its existence. A god's existence is unproven, therefore there's nothing to disprove. You might as well ask me to prove that there's not a family of gnomes living in your head, using your eyes for windows and using your nostrils as garbage chutes.

Lars, I have a Star Trek-style transporter in the glove compartment of my car. Discuss and disprove.

We're communicating a lot better than you think, Lars.

-- You're Not Getting My Wallet (Xtians.are@full.of.it.com), March 02, 2001.

You might as well ask me to prove that there's not a family of gnomes living in your head, using your eyes for windows and using your nostrils as garbage chutes.

THAT was funny to me. My imagination is still churning at the thought.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), March 02, 2001.

You're,

That sound byte is from Howard Stern's movie of his life. "Private Parts". The voice in question is his old boss, "Pig Vomit" with whom Howard did not get along, and who in the end lost his temper with Howard, resulting in the above outburst.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), March 02, 2001.

Whatever flips yer skirt

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 02, 2001.

How articulate, Lars.

Oh, well, guess that's the most graceful exit one can make, given the circumstances.

Unk -- that would make the voice in question that of Paul Giamatti, then. Ah, so.

-- You're Not Getting My Wallet (Xtians.are@full.of.it.com), March 03, 2001.

Mr/Ms Arent,

Thankyou, I worked hard on that response and then was concerned that Anita would think it was directed at her.

Fact is we are not communicating. But no hard feelings on my part, I trust none on yours.

Colloquy over.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 03, 2001.

No Way Jose, how do you know what Jesus's message was? How do you know that His message to love one another? How do you know that you are not following what some delusional person attributed to Jesus?

-- Dr. Pibb (dr.pibb@zdnetonebox.com), March 03, 2001.

"Mr/Ms Arent, Thankyou, I worked hard on that response"

Ah, yes, it is evident that Quality is Job 1 with you, Lars. :)

"and then was concerned that Anita would think it was directed at her."

Hmm. Directed at? Sounds more like "aimed at." Just confirms what I was thinking. Just can't leave an atheist alone, hmm?

"Fact is we are not communicating."

Fact is that you and I are communicating all too well. You're just not making any headway, and I think that bothers you. I love to see xtians of any stripe get all huffy when I tell them what I've told you. I have nothing TO prove. Lars. The only proof that's sitting out there unsupported is yours. Just accept that, and we'll get along fine.

"But no hard feelings on my part, I trust none on yours."

Nah. Xtians don't bother me much. They usually end up bothering themselves a lot more.

"Colloquy over."

What an arrogant thing to say. Did you really think I'd drop the discussion simply because of *your* claim that it was over? If you want it to be over, then just stop posting to the thread. But saying something like that to me is simply waving the red flag. You stop engaging in the colloquy whenever you're ready, and I'll do the same, regardless of any high-handed pronouncements from you.

Have a nice day, Lars.

-- You're Not Getting My Wallet (Xtians.are@full.of.it.com), March 04, 2001.

Excuse me, I must get back to fudging my taxes

ROFL, um, good one lars:-)

raises ice water in a 'toast' for those of 'us' who must.

fudge that is.

-- sumer (shh@aol.con), March 04, 2001.

Mr/Ms Youre--

Wonder why I called you "arent"?

OK, one more reply-----

We aren't "not communicating" so much as we are talking past each other. Similar, but not quite the same thing. It only takes one to end a colloquy and obviously I could have done so in silence. But I didn't want to skulk away and give you some odd satisfaction of "winning", so thank you for rising to the bait of "colloquy over". I figured you would.

What makes you think I am a Xtian? I might be a spiritualist a la FS or Rich?

What bugs me about atheists is probably much the same as what bugs you about religiosity. Many atheists adopt an air of superiority. Their spoken or unspoken attitude seems to be "you foopid stool, how can you believe in a superstition superstition such as "God"?

I "believe" precisely becuse there is no rational answer to the universal question of why? It's a relief to me to accept that there is no explanation for almost everything. Every answer just leads to more mysteries. That doesn't mean that I am against science. It does mean that, in order to believe in anything, I must believe in Something greater than myself, someting unknowable. I am comfortable calling It God. I can't prove there is a God but it makes sense to me and I choose to believe it. There is no need to prove there is a God in order to believe in God.

If I may be so bold, what do you believe in? You are obviously a thinking person. How do you live in a world without answers and not go crazy? Camus said something to the effect that "the only important question in philosophy is whether or not to commit suicide?" How do you answer that?

I think Camus's question is important although I am stuck at more elemental questions: "why and how?" Why are we here, why does anything matter, how did we get here, where is here, etc? "God" may not be a satisfying answer but it is the only one that comes to my mind.

This thread is a pain in the arse to load because it is so long. I may not be back for that reason alone.

Again, I am not evangelizing; just testifying.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 04, 2001.

"Mr/Ms Youre -- Wonder why I called you "arent"?

Don't know. Tell me?

"OK, one more reply----- We aren't "not communicating" so much as we are talking past each other."

No, you're not talking past me. I understand exactly what you're saying. What you do not seem to understand is that positive assertation requires proof. Negative assertation does not. Your earlier claim that atheists can't disprove the existence of a god, while you simultaneously can't prove the existence of one is pointless, disingenuous and illogical on its face. As I indicated in my head-gnomes example, you can't expect someone to disprove the existence of something that you can't even prove exists.

Once again, if YOU are happy with your faith, then be happy with it. There's no need to dig at atheists by making logically irrelevant claims like "you can't disprove that god exists." Such claims have a distinct schoolyard tone to them.

"Similar, but not quite the same thing."

Agreed.

"It only takes one to end a colloquy and obviously I could have done so in silence."

Or you could have done so in a much less arrogant tone than the one you chose to take. You might have found me much more amenable in such a case. But to say "colloquy over" is arrogant, and I chose to respond to your statement in kind.

"But I didn't want to skulk away and give you some odd satisfaction of "winning", so thank you for rising to the bait of "colloquy over". I figured you would.

In the first place, Lars, this discussion need never have devolved. What, exactly, did you expect you'd find on a thread entitled "Religion Sucks?" A more conciliatory set of responses from you might have received a more conciliatory set of responses from me. Arrogance and attitude from you were met with the same from me. Fair's fair.

In the second place, bringing up "winning" again seems to indicate a "pride" issue on your part. Hmm . . . arrogant responses, combined with a concern that the other poster is "winning" . . . yep, looks like pride to me. Isn't pride one of the deadly sins, Lars?

In the third place, I could say the same thing -- "I figured you would" -- about your continued responses. If your pride demands that you absolutely have to have the last word, Lars, then just say so, and I'll gladly give it to you. But you really could use a long hard look in the mirror.

"What makes you think I am a Xtian? I might be a spiritualist a la FS or Rich?"

Maybe you are. In any event, my atheism applies to ALL religious and spiritual belief systems, so we'd still be having the same discussion regardless of what your beliefs happen to be. In any event, what other religion or belief systems uses Pascal's Wager as a conversion tool? I'm not aware of the Theosophists, Jehovah's Witnesses or Scientologists making any use of it.

"What bugs me about atheists is probably much the same as what bugs you about religiosity. Many atheists adopt an air of superiority."

As do many xtians and adherents of other religions. Atheism has no corner on that particular negative personality trait.

"Their spoken or unspoken attitude seems to be "you foopid stool, how can you believe in a superstition superstition such as "God"?

And the attitude of many xtians seems to be "you can't possibly not believe in god. Nobody could possibly not believe in god, unless they were evil or satan-worshippers or baby-eaters or democrats or something." So what's your point, Lars?

"I "believe" precisely becuse there is no rational answer to the universal question of why? It's a relief to me to accept that there is no explanation for almost everything."

Then I will repeat what I have said to you several times before. If you are happy with that, then GO FOR IT. Don't bother looking for proof, accept your belief system and BE HAPPY. But don't ask me or anyone else to disprove what you yourself cannot prove. Clear?

"Every answer just leads to more mysteries. That doesn't mean that I am against science."

No one here suggested that you were. So why do you bring it up?

"It does mean that, in order to believe in anything, I must believe in Something greater than myself, someting unknowable. I am comfortable calling It God. I can't prove there is a God but it makes sense to me and I choose to believe it. There is no need to prove there is a God in order to believe in God."

Read carefully, Lars. I AGREE WITH YOU. However, I need not disprove the existence of something that can't be proven to exist in the first place. If you COULD prove the existence of god, THEN you've got some business saying "you can't disprove it, atheist." But if you can't prove it, then perhaps you should keep clear of the digs at atheism. It makes you look like you're carrying around that aforementioned superior xtian attitude.

"If I may be so bold, what do you believe in?"

Tarzan said it best. Atheism is a belief system like baldness is a hair color. Your question really is inapplicable.

"You are obviously a thinking person. How do you live in a world without answers and not go crazy?"

I hate to say it this way, but I really have better things to do than worry about Cosmic Answers. We're all finite people, and there's only so much we can see, know and do, so why sweat it? Best thing to do, IMO, is simply to find happiness in wherever you are, whatever you do and whoever you happen to be with, if you choose to be with anyone at all. We've each got one life, so enjoy it and try not to mess up anyone else's. :)

"Camus said something to the effect that "the only important question in philosophy is whether or not to commit suicide?" How do you answer that?"

I never thought very highly of Camus or his opinions. And I took a year of philosophy in college, and came away from it with a bad taste in my mouth. I always wondered if, to paraphrase Edmund Blackadder, perhaps philosophers and Romantic poets were just wandering around Europe in big shirts, trying to get laid. :)

"I think Camus's question is important although I am stuck at more elemental questions: "why and how?" Why are we here, why does anything matter, how did we get here, where is here, etc? "God" may not be a satisfying answer but it is the only one that comes to my mind."

My answer is more of a metaphysical shrug. "I'm here, no point worrying about it, better enjoy it while it lasts."

"This thread is a pain in the arse to load because it is so long. I may not be back for that reason alone."

Well, if you do come back and want the last word, Lars, then just freekin' say so.

"Again, I am not evangelizing; just testifying."

Two words for the same thing.

-- You're Not Getting My Wallet (Xtians.are@full.of.it.com), March 04, 2001.

Horray, You're!

(Purses lips together)

Whistle, Whistle...

(Slaps hands together with ear-deafening sound)

Clap! Clap! Clap!!

Outstanding job.

I appreciated it :)

-- (Just@hanging.around), March 04, 2001.

Then I will repeat what I have said to you several times before. If you are happy with that, then GO FOR IT. Don't bother looking for proof, accept your belief system and BE HAPPY. But don't ask me or anyone else to disprove what you yourself cannot prove. Clear?

Cheerist, get over yourself. How many times do I have to say it: I am not trying to prove anything to you or to myself. Clear?

Bye, :-)

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 04, 2001.

"Cheerist, get over yourself."

Pfffffffft, go look in the mirror. You asked me questions, I responded to them. If you don't like the responses, that's too bad.

"How many times do I have to say it: I am not trying to prove anything to you or to myself."

I don't believe you. I don't mean any insult by that, but I simply don't believe that statement.

"Clear?"

Not. Clear?

"Bye, :-)"

C-ya, Lars.

-- You're Not Getting My Wallet (Xtians.are@full.of.it.com), March 05, 2001.

Just had to get the last word huh?

You don't "believe" me? Why would I lie? If you know my voice here, you should know that I am not selling anything. Feel free to email me directly. Of course then you would have to reveal your ID. I won't hold my breath.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 05, 2001.

"Just had to get the last word huh?"

Lars, I OFFERED you the last word. If you want it, then simply SAY so. If you keep posting, so will I. Clear?

"You don't "believe" me?"

No, I "don't."

"Why would I lie?"

Don't know, Lars. I can't speak to your motives.

"If you know my voice here, you should know that I am not selling anything."

You appear to be selling your god.

"Feel free to email me directly. Of course then you would have to reveal your ID. I won't hold my breath."

And larsguy@yahoo.com is such a fucking risk? That's almost as brave as needing an imaginary friend to get you through your days. At any rate, get ready for a sharp intake of breath, Lars. YOU can e-mail ME directly at DL_PM@hotmail.com. Of course, I won't be holding my breath. Have a nice day.

-- You're Not Getting My Wallet (Xtians.are@full.of.it.com), March 06, 2001.

Lars plies my inbox daily with info on the Egyptian sun god & the connection between it and JC. His pleas for donations to help in spreading the message are getting annoying.

I'm tired of Lars' demand that people follow him. He knows the way, he says, into the library under the right paw of the Sphinx. He's leading an expedition to the Valley of the Kings in the fall.

Lars channels Edgar Cayce, so he says. I have the emails to prove all this and much more. He's one bad egg.

My ability to resist his charms and repeated exhortations to join his cult is fading fast. How do I make him stop?

-- Vacillating in Virginia (howe9@shentel.net), March 06, 2001.

Give in Rich, just give in. Perhaps your calling is to go to Egypt on your way to India. Yeah, that's it!

-- Aunt Bee (Aunt__Bee@hotmail.com), March 06, 2001.

Well, he's already working on my inbox. Let's see where he goes with it. He hasn't hit me up for money. Yet.

-- You're Not Getting My Wallet (Xtians.are@full.of.it.com), March 07, 2001.

Lars: I thought you were a christian?

Pardon my lack of knowledge here, but who is Edgar Cayce?

-- sumer (shh@aol.con), March 07, 2001.

You're both wrong. It's already been established in EZboard and this forum that Lars is the demigod in charge of the 4th level of Hell. (I'm not kidding.)

-- Bemused (and_amazed@you.people), March 07, 2001.

Lars, your communciations with You're reminds me of childhood responses, "I know you are but what am I" or those that simply repeat your sentences. Lars no way to end it, just declare You're the winner.

Sumer, Edgar Cayce (pronounced KC) a channel. Pick one up at the library and decide for yourself who he is.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), March 07, 2001.

Ah, Edgar Cayce... Here ya go:

Ou r boy Edgar

-- Bemused (and_amazed@you.people), March 07, 2001.

Pick one up at the library and decide for yourself who he is.

Oops sorry that's book. He wrote many about life and death and the spiritual world.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), March 07, 2001.

sumer, I was kidding about Lars. The inquisition he endured was so silly I felt it might be fun to take it to its illogical conclusion by making stuff up out of whole cloth. You know - fib 'til I couldn't fib no more.

Guess I need to use emoticons more often. ;)

-- Rich (howe9@shentel.net), March 07, 2001.

"Lars no way to end it, just declare You're the winner."

Wrong, Maria. I have thrice offered Lars the last word; twice here on this thread and once in private e-mail. If Lars wants this to be over, then all he's got to do is say something like "You're, I want the last word. Please stop posting," and my posts on this thread will magically stop.

Doesn't look like there's "no way to end it," Maria. Also doesn't look like he's got to declare me the winner or anything else. Perhaps you should read things more closely.

-- You're Not Getting My Wallet (Xtians.are@full.of.it.com), March 07, 2001.

Cripes, I lost my scorecard -

Which one is the alpha & who is the omega?

-- flora (***@__._), March 07, 2001.

To the board,

Thank you to my friends for your good natured support. If you've never been attacked by an anonymous troll, I can tell you it's unsettling. Good thing I have that Navy Seal backgound. I seek no last word. This post is to the board, not to "you're".

Over and out.

-- Lars (lars@yahoo.com), March 07, 2001.

Lars-

Not seeking the last word? You've got to be kidding me!

I can respect your beliefs, but I think that you've been rather disingenuous at several points in this exchange. I also think that "you're" has been unnecessarily harsh, so I've stayed out of it. Still, I think that on this subject you may lack your usual perspective, for whatever reason. Maybe it's a side effect of your recent conversion?

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), March 07, 2001.

"To the board,"

To Lars,

"Thank you to my friends for your good natured support."

Unspoken -- 'to heck with the guy that argued with me.'

"If you've never been attacked by an anonymous troll, I can tell you it's unsettling."

Get stuffed, Lars. Three times I offered to back off. Three times. If you didn't want to accept that, then you have only yourself to blame for my continued postings.

Plus, it seems like you have something in common with Dennis Olsen. Anyone who disagrees with either of you -- especially sone who disagrees with you EFFECTIVELY and PERSISTENTLY -- gets labeled a "troll." Well, I guess I'm the Troll King then, Lars.

"Good thing I have that Navy Seal backgound."

Good thing I have that Army Sniper background. It teaches one persistence and patience.

"I seek no last word."

Bullshit. Your own words earlier in this thread betray you.

"This post is to the board, not to "you're"."

And this response is to anyone who cares to read it.

"Over and out."

Be seeing you again soon, Lars.

-- You're Not Getting My Wallet (Xtians.are@full.of.it.com), March 07, 2001.

>>"Good thing I have that Navy Seal backgound."

Good thing I have that Army Sniper background.

Good thing I have that Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff background, it makes me more of an expert on the current subject than anyone here, unless Colin Powell is lurking.

-- Bemused (and_amazed@you.people), March 07, 2001.

"Good thing I have that Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff background"

DINGDINGDINGDINGDINGDDINGDINGDINGDINGDINGDING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's right, Bemused, you've just won an all-expenses paid trip to Minsk and a year's supply of wing nuts. To claim your nuts, point your browser to SleazyBored.

That's the best response I've seen on this thread! :)

I did go to Sniper training, though . . . and I did meet Colin Powell once, so NYAH. :)

-- You're Not Getting My Wallet (Xtians.are@full.of.it.com), March 07, 2001.

-- (bye@bye.buddha), March 12, 2001.

-- (kaboomey@da.buddha), March 12, 2001.