Recent Comments

1. 5 days ago on Pooch Cafe

   I do wonder about the inspiration for the artwork on his wife.

2. 5 days ago on Strange Brew

   To respond to the above post from William: At no time did I “agree with” his statement. I told him his statement was “understandable and reasonable sentiment”. Understanding his thought process and the reason behind it is quite different from agreeing with him.

   This was made most clear in the following paragraphs, which showed that opinion and sentiment to be incorrect. I explained the scriptural account of the creation of man and his fall from perfection. William rejected that explanation and has been employing false statements and half-truths, and indeed “exaggeration and sarcasm” in his posts ever since, just as he has in the post above. Pointing out such is not an attack; it is a statement of fact. If he did not wish such response, he should not have used such methods in his posts.

   As example, he claims that I “didn’t reply to any of (his) points, not one”, which anyone can simply read back and debunk. The discussion is still there in black and white. Yet he labels others delusional. The only things I didn’t answer were trite accusations which were clearly irrelevant to the point of discussion.

   Truth or falsehood. Personal opinion or reality. People see things differently and understandably have differing beliefs. When I was young, being polite vs rudeness… and exercising common sense were still a thing. I responded politely and informatively to his initial post. William did not exercise the same courtesy in his responses.

3. 6 days ago on FoxTrot

   Yes indeed, the Dragonriders of Pern series is one of my favorite series of all time. At times it got a bit tedious with the repeated “evil Lord Baron” theme, but when when she was prime, she was prime. I can count on one hand books so well-crafted and emotional that the plot line made me cry. I am not ashamed to say McCaffrey’s series did so.

   Besides, dragons are real. :D

4. 6 days ago on FoxTrot

   There is a trick to reading Lord of the Rings. The first 100 to 150 pages are designed to set up the background story and yes, I had to just slog through them. But I’d been told the trilogy was great by some trustworthy friends, so I stuck with it. Boy was I glad I did, because once Tolkien “set up the foundation” so to speak and got to work on the real story, I couldn’t put the books down.

   You’ve read books and seen movies with 2D characters and thought “bleh!”. Tolkien’s characters are deep and extremely developed in those first drudgery pages, and it’s that foundation that makes the rest of the series so fascinating.

   So you might want to give it a try once more, especially considering that Tolkien is widely considered the grandfather of modern fantasy. There’s likely a very good reason why. ;D

   Then again, consider Dune. Some people absolutely love the book (I certainly did). Others hate it. Reading is a very individual experience and tastes do differ. But if you find you actually dislike LOTR after giving it a shot… YOU’RE WRONG, OH SO WRONG, AND IF YOU ARE EVENTUALLY EATEN BY A BALROG WHILE BEING DRAGGED INTO THE DEEPEST PITS OF THE DWARVEN MINES, IT’S YOUR OWN FAULT! BWAHAHAHAaa..a…

   Uh, oh, sorry there. There may be some side-effects to reading the whole series…

5. 6 days ago on Pooch Cafe

   Same here. Claxton fruitcake is pretty good stuff for the price. Now there are other fruitcakes that are better… but somehow I just can’t warrant $1.50+ per bite.

   I don’t like the mushy-type fruitcakes. I like the ones most people hate: hard, chewy, heavy, can be weaponized in a pinch. Lots of nuts. Sadly, none of my friends have offered to give me the fruitcakes everyone is supposed to hate so much… so I tend to question that nigh-universal claim that people don’t like fruitcake. I mean, it’s rather difficult to believe considering how much of the stuff Amazon sells each year.

   Well, unless it’s one of those gag-gifts you hand your enemies. But then, they could always cudgel you with it…

6. 6 days ago on Strange Brew

   Now to answer your points: Ussher was not an inspired Bible writer, and I am not a member of the Church of Ireland. I am neither expected nor required to be aware of or accept his teachings. Regardless of his history: personal beliefs and opinions that contradict scripture and reality both don’t impress me as being all that learned or valid… especially since he lived in the 1600s. Using his teachings as a basis for your argument was absurd.

   I briefly researched him on the Net and found he also taught that Jesus was born in 5 B.C., which means his understanding was as limited, faulty and antiquated as one would expect from the 1600s. Or should I start quoting random scientists from the 1600s to disprove your beliefs?

   I study inspired scripture, not the personal opinions of men. All you’ve done is bring us back to the point I’ve made from the beginning: don’t confuse man-made religions with God and Scripture.

   “How can one sentence repeatedly attack God? Give me the details.”

   You’re still playing the victim. The details are you didn’t post just “one sentence”. You continued to post things you knew to be adversarial. You yourself stated, “Many conservative Christians believe the world is 6,000 years old”… which means that you are well-aware that the majority of Christians do not accept that teaching. Your statement was absolute propaganda. I’m surprised you didn’t try to use the fundamentalist teaching that the universe was created in a literal seven days. You blew that one.

   What did I tell you about confusing God and religion? Falsehoods and truth? More than once you’ve been given the chance to learn the truth, but you’ve rejected it every time.

   Still you whine when others call you to task for intentionally-misleading posts. You started this battle and have insisted continuing on with it. You are not the victim here; you’re the instigator. “Truth is not in you.”

7. 7 days ago on Non Sequitur

   Jesus preached “This good news of the Kingdom”… which boils down to his imprisoning Satan and ruling over mankind himself. And while this message is being preached globally, for the most part we see religion supporting wars and man-made governments (instead of God’s Kingdom) and both teaching things and conducting themselves in contradiction to the teachings of scripture. Christianity in general has failed.

   Religion is not alone in that. Science has failed mankind too. While many advances and wondrous discoveries have been made, look at what technology has done to the Earth in such a short period of time. There is good science and good religion, but the bad overwhelms the good.

   In this messed up world people have actually developed the habit of supporting that which is bad (which was prophesied). We know what we’re doing to this planet, yet keep on doing it, with valiant efforts to reverse such things all too few and far too ineffective. Belief and understanding of God is equally flawed. Just as much of science is based on opinion and conjecture rather than reality, and draws people away from God, so too false religion misrepresents scripture and truth and equally turns people away from God. Even if people claim to be Christian, their actions do not follow the teachings of Christ.

   It is encouraging to know that all of this, both failed science and failed religion, is about to come to an end. Scripture states, “Look! I am making all things new.” What we see going on right now on a global basis is visible fulfillment of scripture, even though most people reject that concept (which itself was also prophesied). Very soon now these issues will be settled in a very definite manner. Once the virus is eliminated, then the body can heal.

8. 7 days ago on Non Sequitur

   I have to agree on every point. Christian religion in general has betrayed mankind in its misrepresentation of God. Fortunately that’s not the case with all, but when one mints 100 coins and only one turns out good while the other 99 bad, the craftsman has failed (in this case the craftsman being the vast majority of man-made religion).

   “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” That is a main theme of scripture, and it applies to all of us. I feel like Paul who stated, “Miserable man that I am!” Yet that is what mercy is all about. “As far off as the sunrise is from the sunset, he has put our transgressions… for he remembers that we are dust.”

   So many times I have mentioned to people to be careful to not confuse religion with God and scripture. In general, “Christian” religion portrays God as vengeful and excessively demanding, condemning people to eternal suffering. In reality the exact opposite is true.

   “For there is going to be a resurrection of the righteous and the unrighteous.” The resurrection is all about giving people a second chance. It’s like God saying, “Okay, you rebelled against me and saw how that turned out. Now let’s do things my way and see the difference.” A world without pain, without suffering, without war, crime or other wickedness, and especially without degrading old age and death. Eternal youth and good health. Mankind can never achieve all of these things on its own. Only God can accomplish all of those things.

   cont

9. 8 days ago on Non Sequitur

   I examine the basis of science, the things that pertain to the larger issues, but realize that I can live my entire life in a healthy and wise manner without needing to know exactly how quarks work. ;D

   Certain knowledge is good and valuable. Beyond that it becomes obsession… and begins to interfere with more important things. The same scientists who obsessively examine string theory tend to totally ignore spirituality, which is far more important and life-impacting. They allow curiosity to override common sense. As my friend used to say, “The secret to life is balance and moderation in everything. That includes both science and faith.”

   We have seen what an imbalance in faith can do in the form of the Crusades and the Inquisitions. We have seen what an imbalance in technology can do in the current worsening condition of our planet. Lacking wisdom and balance in either tends to negate their value.

   On the other hand, many scientists, biologists and Doctors have come to believe in intentional creation because they have studied science intensely… and realized that life is simply too complex to possibly have happened by accident. (Complex as in a chance of one vs the total number of atoms in billions of universes.) Sometimes impossible is indeed impossible. Abiogenesis is impossible.

   Biological evolution is biased conjecture and guesswork, not fact. God is fact… if a person is willing to open both eyes and bother to properly examine the issues involved in an unbiased manner. Unfortunately, humility and honesty are not dominant traits in humankind… and one cannot examine the spiritual without them. That’s the reason scripture repeatedly states that God hates the haughty; such attitude blocks perception, true knowledge and wisdom.

10. 8 days ago on Non Sequitur

    One of the most significant questions against atheism is, “Why are you an atheist?” They falsely claim “there is no proof of God” (such evidence is plentiful. They simply reject it.) But when I ask them to provide proof against God, their reply is the cliche, “You can’t disprove a negative”… which is even wrong scientifically and mathematically. The reality is they don’t believe because they have never bothered to properly examine the issue, have just swallowed down evolution propaganda hook line and sinker, or basically don’t want to believe (like Eve, they want to be their own God).

    On the one hand they will claim it is not possible for God to have existed forever. But then they will claim that the universe either miraculously arrived from nothing… or that somehow it has always existed. Neither argument stands up to the reality of the source of all energy, the person who created time itself. They argue against our “fairy tales”, only to come up with claims far less sensible.

    One example of such is the “scientific” claim of abiogenesis— the belief that life could evolve from non-living matter. The scientific evidence against such a hypothesis is staggering and obvious, and scientists should know better. Still they propagate that “scientific fairy tale” as if it were conceivably possible… when they know fully well it is not.

    As I told evolutionists more than once: there is no claim of evolution that cannot be countered by the concept of intentional creation. One person pointed to the fins of a whale and the human hand being very similar, then claiming that as “proof” they must have had a common ancestor. My answer to him, “No. It means they had a common designer.” Designers tend to repeat patterns and concepts in their work.

    The concept of “accidental life” is preposterous, and honest scientists know that. Still many claim the impossible is possible. That’s not science; that’s a delusional power-based con game.

    cont…