Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Sunday, June 07, 2009
Jackie Gingrich Cushman :: Townhall.com Columnist
Enjoying Life During Difficult Times
by Jackie Gingrich Cushman
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Several events this past week reminded me of the importance of enjoying life: a friend’s father died, a young mother I know suffered a recurrence of cancer and I got an e-mail asking for advice to give to a high school graduate whose mother died five years ago.

Other reminders: a rededication ceremony of the chapel of Grady Hospital in Atlanta and the tragedy of Air France Flight 447 sufficed.  All reminded me of the fragility of life and the importance of enjoying spending time with those we love.

*** Special Offer ***

So yesterday, instead of organizing my office as I had planned, I spent hours reading to my children, the three of us nestled among the large cushions of our couch in the screened-in porch, with a frog croaking in the background as night fell.  While my office might still need some attention, I don’t regret having spent the time with my children.

In these times of financial trouble, enjoying life might sound self-indulgent, if not impossible – but it is the antidote that these times require.  As Aristotle said, “Happiness depends upon ourselves.”  It is up to us to enjoy our lives, lives that we are constantly reminded are all too short.

In “5 Principles for a Successful Life: From Our Family to Yours,” which I co-authored with my father Newt Gingrich, the fourth principle is “Enjoy Life.”  We include being pleasant and grateful, enjoying gratitudes and pleasures, taking time to recover, giving to others and flowing through life.

Barbara Fredrickson, the Kenan Distinguished Professor of Psychology at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, has focused on the importance of positive emotions in her research.  She found that positive emotions such as joy and contentment have "the potential to broaden people's habitual modes of thinking and build their physical, intellectual, and social resources." Broader thinking is just what we need to survive in these hard times, and to flourish in good times.

Fredrickson found that negative emotions --- fear, anxiety, stress --- tend to narrow tendencies toward thought and action. In other words, it is harder for people to think of potential options when they are experiencing negative emotions than when they are experiencing positive emotions.

There have been times in my life, when my job wasn’t going as I had anticipated and frustrations were mounting, that panic set in.  I wish that I had been able to slow down and open my eyes to all my blessings. Doing so would have enabled me to relax rather than panic.  Still, the experience was not wholly negative: it provided me with a lesson of what not to do again.

One of the best ways to enjoy life is to be grateful.  To express gratitude, you must acknowledge that you are better off because of forces outside your control and be thankful to whoever has provided this benefit. Expressing gratitude is the opposite of complaining.  A simple shift in mindset can make a profound difference in how you view your life, which can then change your thinking.

With gratitude comes a sense of pleasantness. Few people want to spend time with someone who is unpleasant. Try to be pleasant when you feel satisfied and, more important, when you are faced with obstacles, because that is when doing so will provide the biggest payback.

Recovery is key to peak performance, and includes physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual areas.  Challenge yourself by seeking out situations of stress, but make sure that you rest and recover afterward rather than pushing too hard and risking the possibility that you might snap.  When you feel yourself get close to the edge, simply back off for a few minutes and then try again.

Giving to others is true charity and comes from the heart as well as the mind. It reflects a shared sense of humanness. When you help someone, you increase your own sense of being human. And it’s not wholly selfless: when you help others, someday they may help you or one of your loved ones.

Few people have heard of flow in regards to living.  Flow is the sense of effortless action, a feeling that occurs when everything seems to click perfectly into place.  Athletes often refer to being "in the zone," religious mystics call it the state of ecstasy, and artists call it rapture. This state is achieved by using your strengths, and stretching to the edge of your ability – living life to its fullest.

My advice to the recent high school graduate?  Follow all five of our principles, Dream Big, Work Hard, Learn Every Day, Enjoy Life and Be True to Yourself.  Live every day as if it’s your last – because you never know when it will be.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Jackie Cushman is a freelance writer who lives in Atlanta, Georgia. Her column also runs later in the week in the Northside Neighbor.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Romanticising a Bad Economy
During the less severe recession under Bush I, I never heard any of this philosphical, make-due, smell-the-roses thinking. It was all gloom and fear, even on TV. Now, TV commercials like those pompous ALLSTATE spots make this misery seem even fun. It is discouraging to see conservatives going along with this. Much better to swim UPstream and defy the liberal tides.

That is the way you should endure the
shadowlands to get a taste of the real world. Jesus enjoyed himself along the way even knowing the end which was coming. We should do the same and not worry about tomorrow. So Jackie you have my vote for a very common sense approach to life as we know it.

One Person's View
This is the view from the other side of out-of-a-job, poverty, unexplained good feeling while the Messiah is killing the American culture and history. Feel good about yourself. Spend quality time with your children. Be not concerned about the future of your childrens' debt and marxist future. This is another ME thing from the relative of NEWT who pushed for NAFTA - one of the treaties that sent jobs elsewhere. She should be hiding!
ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME
ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME
ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME
ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME

Listen To Yourselves
This morning before coming online I looked at my morning papers. Skimming headlines and editorial pages, I could hear in my mind the conservative counterpoint to every news item, because after much time spent on townhall I am picking up the rhythm of how ultra-conservatives think. The theme that stayed with me was how angry and negative posts here usually are, so that any statement or action, no matter how conciliatory or well-meaning, draws a response that is like flung garbage. And I wondered, as I often have wondered, what lies behind this chronic rage.

So. I sat down here and the first article I looked at was this one, which at this moment has three response Comments. The main idea of the article is that when we are reminded of the brevity and fragility of life, we grasp the precious moment that is life. Who could possibly find anything negative in that?

Townhallers could, and have. One of the three posts (scott) points out that faith enables us to find life good even when it's bad. The other two (TeeHall and john) manage to twist an inspirational thought into a political diatribe and/or a personal attack on the author, who merely reacted to a scary moment in life by drawing closer to her children and reported to us that she had done so.

Posters like john ("Much better to swim upstream") define themselves by opposition. They seem not to know who they are unless they are shooting at someone.

"This is the day
that the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it." Psalm 118:24

Old dialogue, oft repeated, but some haven't heard it:

Pastor: How are you doing?
Congregant: All right, I guess, under the circumstances.
Pastor: What are you doing UNDER the circumstances?

I too feel there is much in the Current Occupant's program to cause concern; his policies are already prolonging the recession, increasing job losses, expanding federal control over too many things, projecting weakness to our foes, decreasing the likelihood of energy independence, encouraging criminal enterprises like ACORN and corrupt unions, and further dumbing down the education system.

So why be happy? Listen to Dennis Prager's "Happiness Hour" on the radio a few times. Prager is as concerned as anyone alive about the direction the country is going, but he says it is our DUTY to be happy.
Let him explain this. My space here is limited.

Also, read Willa Cather's short story "Neighbor Rosicky." Hard times, happy sane man.

lilly
Sour dispositions are like bad weather; they afflict liberal and conservative alike.

My sourest colleague is actually a Marxist liberal. She is now convinced that the Current Occupant is not Marxist enough and she is quite sure that the Dictatorship of the Proletariat remains a distant dream.

On the other hand, my most consistently cheerful colleague is what you might call a hidebound conservative. He is convinced that the country is going to hell in a hand basket, but despite severe financial and physical problems he greets every day with a smile and gets us all laughing at his jokes and his unpredictable antics.

And my second most cheerful colleague is a liberal.

Lilly
Sometimes this debate is not for the faint of heart. TH IS a political forum, after all. I don't disagree with the author's observations, I am just pointing out a trend. No need for namecalling, it's nothing personal.

Lilly
Happy good morning.

Cushman's point is accurate and vitally important. Anyone can be happy as soon as a few basic needs are met. Air to breathe, enough nourishing food, shelter, a circle of supportive people. Some powerful folks manage it even under dire circumstance, as Dr. Viktor Frankl has documented. So Cushman prints an upbeat column and what is your response? I choose an affirmation, support the idea that this life is a gift. I believe that it is an incredible piece of good luck to be born in the US. My experience is that another's good luck is not to be envied but appreciated as an event that may come my way too.

Examine your response to this column, Lilly. Is it an upbeat response to a positive view of life? Do you agree an evening spent reading to children is a gift? I did it hundreds of times. My daughter was reading at 6th grade level before she was 6.

Are you defining yourself by opposition?

To Angry:
I can relate to everything you say. But, somehow, I think you got a bit off track on the point of the article.

First, it’s okay to be upset at the things you mention; I am as well. I lost my job a year ago, and have not been able to find work since. I am looking at losing my house and all my savings.

Yet, I have found three things to be true, and they are all mentioned in the article.
1. God helps; I thank him every day for the blessings I DO have or, at least had at one time,
2. Action – I ran for office to stop the waist in spending on my local level and I got elected because voters identified with my back to basics campaign,
3. Do for others, it takes your mind off of how stupid we’ve become, and one simple action – one mindless act of kindness will be remembered and perhaps passed on.

I’m sure you know all of this and while it sounds naive, but this stuff does work because of the simple fact it is a basic truth.

Good luck and God Bless…

Joel
America hasn't "turned her back on God". Stop watching Fox News, they are money hungry b@stards and will say anything to undermine America. Books and some magazine are much better. America, in spit of the torture sham, is on the road to being more moral than in a very long time, around 8 years at least.

Ditzybich has never known "hard times"
This reminds me of a member of the Ahmanson family, who set up a corporation with the name of Phil4:12 ("I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation...") As if a member of the Ahmanson (L.A.) clan has *EVER* faced genuine privation....

The worst thing this woman has been through is her father's infidelity.

Try being incarcerated for six years awaiting trial for a crime you didn't commit. Try being deprived to the benefit of the rule of law. Try living out of your '70 Impala for a while. Try experiencing these things and get back to us, Ditzybich.

Joel Stew
Joel: "Nevertheless, I am angry much of the time. Why am I angry?

I am angry because America has turned her back on God, and the Constitution He inspired."

Hate to break it to you, but your god did the stone idol bit first. When your god starts acting in such a way as to actually deserve my reverence and worship, I'll be happy to change my position; right now, there are not the words to express my disgust at your child-molesting ancient tribal sky-daddy.

Joel; "I am angry because so many of my fellow citizens are parasites."

You must be referring to Republicans, who raided the Treasury and destroyed the economy for their selfish gain.

Joel: "I am angry because a once great nation has degenerated into celebrating debauchery."

You mean, like torture and empire? Look in the mirror, man.

Joel: "I am angry because government, at all levels, nitpicks, micromanages, and controls all our lives."

Fair enough. But you let this happen.

Joel: "I am angry that my nation has allowed 55 million persons to be murdered since 1973, and has forced ME to pay for the assassinations."

"Person" is a legal status, and fetii do not have it (and never did at common law). It is up to you to change the Constitution, if you find this intolerable.

Joel: "I am angry that so few understand the threat we face from Islam, and think that “All is well in Zion.”"

What threat? Our homegrown Ba'athists in black robes are far more dangerous than a bunch of crazies 8,000 miles away. Focus on the immediate dangers first.

It's easy to tell others what to do
Joel: "To claim that a pre-born child is not a 'person', despite the DNA evidence that it is a NEW human being is absurd."

Hardly. To claim that a fertilized zygote is deserving of legal protection is absurd, given the impositions it places on the woman who must carry it to term. The victim of a rape should not have to bear the child of her rapist, for that would be literally imposing nine months of hard labor.

Once you make that exception -- and virtually everyone would, except for drooling religious nutters who don't have to pay the freight -- there is no principled ground for depriving a woman of her right to decide whether to bear a child.

It's easy for *SOCIALISTS* like YOU to tell others what to do, Joel. But if you have a right to do it to others, you have no ground for objecting if Barack Obama does it to you.

To oldprof
I love that quotation from Psalms. I buy a brand of eggs that has it written inside every carton of a dozen. I love seeing it
every time I get out an egg to cook.

Abraham Lincoln said, "Most folks are about as happy as they make up their minds they're going to be."

The people who constantly spew venom like a rattlesnake in the Default position and are either coldly seething in or exploding and sputtering with outrage like to focus their anger on politics or social issues, but they usually turn out to be angry about something much closer to home.

It's worth remembering that such as Beck, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Savage, and Hannity are very well-paid for keeping people's anger at boiling point---however it's not their blood pressure that's affected, but one's own. Better to stay cool. Cushman is right when she reminds us that life is both fragile and brief. "Nothing is worth more than this day."

Scripture
says: 1 Thessalonians 5:16-18

Rejoice evermore,
Pray without ceasing,
In everything give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you

We can find joy even these dark days, I am appalled that the American people chose someone who symbolizes death in his policies and evil in his nominations however I KNOW in whom I believed and that HE is able to keep that which is committed unto HIM. This country was committed to Him and the propagation of the Gospel to the world, long before it became a nation..at Cape Henry and Plymouth. We have
turned away from him and trolls can argue til they turn blue, but while we are NOT a theocracy, our Founding Principles were based on scripture including the 3 branches of government as described in Isaiah. ALL the State Constitutions reference Almighty God in one way or another.
If one is a believer and discerning, we can
see this current assault on our liberties and Constitutional REpbulic by a criminal cabal in the Administration and Congress is a satanic
attempt to STOP God's plan for this nation.

Our greatest weapon against our domestic enemies is PRAYER. I am praying that this person and his cabal be in a mass of confusion, ambushments (spiritual for you trolls in Rio Linda), stumbling blocks, in short that his plan to deconstruct our Constitution FAILS! And that GOD will once again be honored by our people.



The spectre of the gun....
Joel: "All sex is chosen or agreed to by the woman, except rape. If it was rape, why did she not prevent that? All Americans have a God-given, and Constitutionally guaranteed Right to be Armed. If a woman is attacked, she should pull out her gun, shoot the attacker in the groin, and then in the head. A dead attacker=woman not raped."

Dude, you are obviously on more OxyContin than even Drugs Limburger could tolerate! Having 12-year-old girls pack heat 24/7 may be one of *your* wildest fantasies, but it just isn't practical in civilized society.

Once you concede that the product of a rape is not entitled to life, you're stuck. The most accurate gauge of public sentiment is in the fact that ~90% of women faced with the prospect of bearing a Down's Syndrome child choose to abort. Where the rubber meets the road, 90% of child-bearing women -- and they are the only people who ultimately count -- are pro-choice.

Keep your hands off their uterii, John. Stop indulging your urge to be a socialist.

Don
Just where did you get your information and who wrote the book?
Given that the majority of Americans are now on the pro life side of the pendulum, your remarks are ridiculous.
And when you figure that those babies who are Downs are the victims of abortion more so than others, and are the same ones that your president hasn't a problem deciding since Mama wants a dead baby, Mama gets a dead baby even if said baby survives and is then put among dirtied linens and left alone untreated to die.
How humane! Just makes your heart just fill up with admiration for the humanity of this person occupying the White House.
This, sir is the ultimate in SELFISHNESS, that a woman would not want to be 'saddled' with a less than perfect baby. That's what caused the furor when SARAH had Trig..it put these loving Mama's on the spot, the abortion industry on the spot, the leftists, the feminazi's, the hedonists on the spot..because America got to see a REAL Person in this baby. Downs Children
are love personified..that's their ministry to love unconditionally but in our selfish, hedonistic materialistic society..an impediment to the perfect life.
I have tons of sympathy for the mothers who are coerced, frightened and forced into aborting their babies but I have NONE for these selfish women who knowingly decide to kill their baby because it is less than perfect and killing it when it is viable.
And because of this materialistic selfish ME ME ME condition of many Americans ALL of us will suffer the consequences. Be not decieved GOD is not MOCKED! And by electing this fraud, America has crossed the line, not only MOCKING GOD to His face but shaking their collective fist in His face. Until we repent, America will suffer mightily.

For what it's worth,
I have a Down syndrome granddaughter with a non-identical twin sister, nearly a year old. While we have different expectations about them, I'm glad both of them are part of the family, and so are both their parents. Both of the babies are delighted when my wife and I visit, judging by their big smiles and happy babbling.

I think in many cases--not all--the "issues" tend to get very muted when we start raising actual babies, and love takes over, especially if the people involved are full of love for each other already. You pretty much have to be in the actual situation to feel it working out.


Taking charge of the future--a problem
Those who try to control the future by their present actions need to realize that there are no guarantees. Unintended consequences of ANY action or inaction in the present can be devastating. That's the practical concomitant of Jesus' philosophical teaching about living in the present and not "taking thought"--that is, worrying ourselves sick--about tomorrow. I think this is also part of what Ms Cushman is asserting. "Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof."

I'll never forget what happened to the most extreme "helicopter parent" in my neighborhood. Mom worried over every sniffle and every conceivable danger that could befall her son, and made all the neighbors in range of her worrying aware of it. When the kid was a teenager he jumped off a roof and died.

To Tea Party
You sound over the top when you call Obama a symbol of death. Am I guessing correctly that you are talking about him being pro-choice? A majority of the American people want abortion to be legal eg medically safe. A president who goes counter to what the American people want isn't representing the majority, he's taking orders from the minority or else he's doing his own thing, and neither one is how our government is supposed to work. You want people to take your argument seriously? Try to sound less extreme. A vital young president, highly educated, energetic, hard-working, diplomatic, elected by a majority both in popular and electoral vote, and taking more centrist positions than any president in recent history, is not a symbol of death. In saying that, you sound like a symbol of craziness.

Tea Party Yet Again
You jump to the conclusion that a woman is selfish to want "a less than perfect baby". First of all, no baby is "perfect". Every single one of them comes with problems that develop over childhood: allergies, asthma, juvenile diabetes, a hearing loss, cystic fibrosis nearsightedness, some kind of learning disability, extreme shyness, a tendency to fall off bikes and break bones, etc, and all parents expect to cope.

Second, many of the fetuses that parents choose not to bring to light are not just slightly imperfect, they are extremely imperfect. An ancephalic infant (brain too small to function normally) or one with its abdominal organs on the outside of its torso is going to take control of the family's time and resources. A child who will NEVER be able to sit up and who will require tube feedings FOREVER and will still be wearing diapers at age 40 is a huge, huge burden on a family. Many who grew up with a profoundly handicapped sibling did not find the experience even tolerable (perhaps you will call their desire for a normal home life "selfish" also). The $$ expenses of maintaining such a child, and the demands on parents' time, means that much less is available to other children. Many marriages break up in these situations. Life is not a Hallmark greeting card, and all endings are not happy. And what other people decide in their own families, probably in consultation with their doctors and their clergymen, is none of your business. Did God resign and put you in charge?

About Anger
Being angry all the time is painful. It also takes a toll on your health. It can be connected with other things that might be troubling you, such as thoughts or dreams. And it's hard on those around you, for example if you have a wife and children. If you are retired military, it's not impossible that your anger has to do with your service. You can get help with your anger at the VA. Do please give them a chance to help you. If you're not retired military, talk to your family doctor. You deserve not to suffer.

To Pistol
Do you not see the difference between holding differing visions of government and responding with vicious rage to every post? On another TH thread I made the case for urban vs suburban living (it was the subject of the column that preceded the thread). Someone immediately shot back that city residents are rude, don't care about one another, are homeless panhandlers, and (with reference to a point I had made about the convenience of being able to walk to attractions) eager to go and see a particular sacriligious art exhibit from about 25 years ago that still made her angry because it was funded by the National Endowment for the Arts. No matter what the subject, these folks do not discuss---they snarl like really dangerous dogs. I wonder what they're like as next-door neighbors.

Thanks, Jackie
Thanks Jackie for a positive uplifting article. I'm sorry so many Town Hall posters have chosen to make it a political statement. Life is a precious gift given to all of us--conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats, Americans and the rest of the world, Christians, Jews, Muslims and non-believers. We may have different views but we should welcome the free exchange of ideas.

You're right. There's nothing better than spending time with your children. As someone who sent her youngest child to college two years ago, I can't tell you how much I miss bedtime stories, family dinners and all the special time we spent together. It goes so quickly!

While some of us may be "pro-choice" and others "pro-life", no one is pro-abortion. And there's a lot of middle ground even on this issue.

Lilly
Take a look at ellen of 7:05. I disagree with most of ellen's conclusions, but her warm heart shows through virtually every post she puts up.

I'm a grouchy old conservative, deeply unhappy as i watch the implementation of poicies which i sincerely believe will lead to misery, in much the same way that when i watch a 3 year old pig out on candy and junk, i suspect a tummy ache is on the way. But my non-political life is one of love and service. I am a tithing Christian, have spent thousands of hours tutoring endangered children, just back from helping my daughter deal with brand new twin girls. One neighbor is a rock-ribbed rightie, the other leans left. We all get along great. My wife and father in law voted for Obama, my brother and brothers-in-law for McCain. I voted 3rd party because i am a strict constructionist and i believe the constitution is being dangerously eroded. McCain was one of the worst with McCain/Feingold. I am not greedy, mean-spirited, racist or a homophobe. I am well aware that many Democrats are wonderful people. There are very few posting here, as evidenced by their posts. But i know this site is not representative of Americans in general. This morning John made the same point.

Before you repeat, for the hundredth time, what negative things you read here, i'd suggest you face up to the fact that the only positive posts you can control are those you write. I rarely read you, you are pretty much a one note poster, and i mostly gave up on you after an exchange of posts long ago. So maybe i have missed all the positive comments you have posted. Its just that i've never seen one, and i find it somehow worthwhile (silly me) to hold a mirror in front of you.

ellen
A gift, the exact word. In fact i used the same word in my post of 9:36.

Comments to a non-political column such as this one best stick to a pleasant subject. Its so easy to think everyone is a political creature like the passionate types that write here. Actually, we are in a bit of a political wait and see mode right now. Soon enough we'll see some solid undeniable non-nuanced results of what is happening in DC.

The evidence speaks for itself
Tea Party: "Just where did you get your information and who wrote the book?"

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/09/us/09down.html

TP: "Given that the majority of Americans are now on the pro life side of the pendulum, your remarks are ridiculous."

Hardly. It is one thing to be pro-life in the abstract, but quite another when your life is on the line. When push comes to shove, and you're no longer in the realm of airy-fairy theory, you'll find out just how pro-life people are. That 90% of affected women choose to abort is a pretty accurate sample of the general consensus.

Personally, I'm pro-freedom, and loathe the thought of putting millstones around others' necks. What I would do is quite different than what I would ask others to do. It is just that in my personal moral code, doing unto others as I would have them do to me is more than a mere shibboleth.

You're the socialist, TP
Tea Party: "This, sir is the ultimate in SELFISHNESS, that a woman would not want to be 'saddled' with a less than perfect baby. That's what caused the furor when SARAH had Trig..it put these loving Mama's on the spot, the abortion industry on the spot, the leftists, the feminazi's, the hedonists on the spot..because America got to see a REAL Person in this baby. Downs Children are love personified..that's their ministry to love unconditionally but in our selfish, hedonistic materialistic society..an impediment to the perfect life."

I'm not in the habit of passing judgment on others. Only the burro knows the weight of his load.

Sorry but this is just pathetic
It always amazes me when people talk like this, as if the downturn in the richest nation in the world has ruined their mental health, and has sucked the air right out of them.
" In these times of financial trouble, enjoying life might sound self-indulgent, if not impossible – but it is the antidote that these times require. "
--
Guess what - it's the same crybaby crap we endlessly hear from democrats spruced up with the idea that one should "enjoy life anyway". Well all the rest of us are enjoying life anyway - the very idea that the economic downturn suddenly instills mental depression into the entire national populace is really, really something.
The arrogance and out of touch stance for the fattest monety loaded pigs in the entire world is nothing short of amazing.
I guess that is the whole problem, really - the bloated endless Christmas spree for the always aspiring to beat the Jones', those that run their whole life based upon it, must have really had a depressive mental strike driven through their hearts...
I frankly cannot even understand it - but the pampered "successful" dough swimmers must really be having a fit.
If you're already so far gone that this gave you a depression you have to somehow remind and pull yourself out of, good luck with the rest of your life and your afterlife for that matter.

Lilly on choosing happiness
Anyone who loves Psalm 118 has my attention.

A great many people who name the name of the Lord seem not to catch much of the spirit of Scripture.

I've taken many graduate courses in theological seminary, though my professional field is college English. One way the seminary work has borne fruit has been teaching aduIt Sunday School classes for over forty years.

In light of this experience, it now seems to me that nearly all the negative events and people and assertions found both in Scripture and in the world can be fruitfully "interpreted" by considering them in relation to a triad of complementary concepts, all of which are asserted at many points in both the Old and New Testaments: God's joy of creation and my appreciation of it; God's love for me and mine for God; God's love for all my fellow humans and my love for all my fellow humans.

No greater behavioral challenge can be given than the challenge of putting these three pairs of ideas to practical use in every area of my life; no greater intellectual challenge can be given than the challenge of relating these three pairs of ideas to the problems of theology, philosophy, psychology, anthropology, history, etc. Alexander Pope tried to answer the intellectual challenge in his remarkable theodicy, the Essay on Man. He succeeded, a little.

Even if some of us are short-term pessimists, we ought to be long-term optimists.

Contra Psalm 118
OldProf: "God's joy of creation and my appreciation of it; God's love for me and mine for God; God's love for all my fellow humans and my love for all my fellow humans."

Even if your Jesus is who you claim him to be, he is imbued with a character so foul and execrable, no epithet can hope to do it justice:

http://s641.photobucket.com/albums/uu131/Karl_Roves_Conscie nce/scottshot.jpg

He who knows the good he ought to do and does it not, sins. Jas. 4:17. Remember that, if you are right, this is not the imperfect world that the deist strives to make better, but the perfect world your perfect god intended. By definition, your god willfully and intentionally inflicts suffering on “his children” for his own sadistic pleasure. And to what end?

You answer this question yourselves: “For His glory!” Your god is as insatiably selfish as he is congenitally insecure. It is a sin for us to have goals and aspirations apart from his will, but he thinks nothing of using us as his cosmic sex-toys. Shattered dreams. Broken lives. And to what end?

And no, this is not about “sin” or “free will.” It’s about injustice. There is nothing that could stop an omnipotent god from dispensing perfect justice in an equable and timely manner. And, as Dr. King observed [quoting Thurgood Marshall], “justice too long delayed is justice denied.”

Don, I have read
Mark Twain's Letters from the Earth, Bertrand Russell's Why I Am Not a Christian, and many other antireligious polemics, some literary, some merely argumentative. Enjoyed them too, back when I was an agnostic, happily teaching English at a midwestern university with fellow agnostics and atheists. I can still enjoy them. The agnostic mood is never far from consciousness and very congenial in the dreaming inner warmth.

Karl Barth was told by a student, "Dr. Barth, we must submerge the old Adam!"

The old Swiss theologian replied, "Ya, but he swims!"

Besides much atheistic material I've also read Shakespeare's Hamlet, King Lear, Othello, and Macbeth; Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov; Tolstoy's War and Peace; Solzhenitsyn's A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich; Bellow's Mr. Sammler's Planet, J.B. Phillips' Your God Is Too Small; Rabbi Kushner's When Bad Things Happen To Good People; C.S. Lrwis's Till We Have Faces; Eiseley's The Immense Journey, The Star Thrower, and The Unexpected Universe; and hundreds of other works of poetry, drama, fiction, philosophy, theology, science, politics, history, etc. etc. The writers of these works don't agree with each other, but most of them assert, one way or another, that life is an amazing thing, that the universe is mysterious beyond all imagining, that love is the most powerful of human attributes, and that faith, like happiness, is largely a CHOICE one makes for good or ill.

You sound either young and angry or old and bitter, but for all I know you could be middle aged and "just kidding."

I don't, in other words, know anything about you except that you're human and, as Walt Whitman asserted, nothing human is alien to me.
I choose faith; you choose its opposite; time or eternity will tell who is the wiser.

Sorry if I sound arrogant; most I FEEL pretty ignorant.

Literature vs. reality
Oldprof: "The writers of these works don't agree with each other, but most of them assert, one way or another, that life is an amazing thing, that the universe is mysterious beyond all imagining, that love is the most powerful of human attributes, and that faith, like happiness, is largely a CHOICE one makes for good or ill."

Faith ... in what? The denizens of Heaven's Gate had faith that they would be picked up by an invisible spaceship hiding behind Comet Hale-Bopp and taken to a "Higher Level." And by all accounts, they were happy people. Do you counsel that we take up their mantle?

If faith without facts is folly, faith in the face of contrary facts is absurdity.

The Christian god must be judged by his own putative representations, and it is by this reasonable metric that he fails miserably.

It is not necessary to believe in your god to believe in *A* Supreme Being; your adaptation of the Jewish version of an psychotic ancient tribal sky-daddy (they were all capricious in that day) is an EPIC FAIL, by its own terms. If "morality" is truly objective, your god is spectacularly immoral, and if it is not, then "morality" does not exist. There is no third option.

Faith v. facts
OldProf: "You sound either young and angry or old and bitter, but for all I know you could be middle aged and "just kidding."

I don't, in other words, know anything about you except that you're human and, as Walt Whitman asserted, nothing human is alien to me. I choose faith; you choose its opposite; time or eternity will tell who is the wiser.

Sorry if I sound arrogant; most I FEEL pretty ignorant."

You are free to worship a cargo ship, if that helps you get through life. Yours is a blind leap into the abyss; although I am a recovering ex-Christian who has experienced the folly of that bizarre religion, I do not begrudge others the right to learn from their own mistakes.

To speak frankly of the gross moral failings of your stone idol of a god is to be candid, as opposed to being "bitter" or "angry." To fail in the duty of candor is to fail ourselves.

Dennis Prager,
who is among the more intelligent of Jewish pundits on this issue, makes a cogent case for the Old Testament God who gave us a better handle on morality than all the philosophers of the ancient world. He's fun and truly worth reading.

C.S. Lewis's The Problem of Pain gives a highly readable Christian version of the issue. He says that when he was a brilliant atheist, railing against the pain in the world, and the supposed god who caused it all, there were some rather obvious philosophical points he wasn't noticing.

These two men are remarkably different personalities, but they come together on the point that when you reject theism and still assert a moral compass, you stand a good chance of sawing off the intellectual branch on which you sit.

Thinking people tend to convert
from whatever they were raised with. Many an agnostic (wonderful word invented by T.H. Huxley, if I remember correctly) is rebelling against a version of deity suitable for a child.

No thinking religious Jew or serious devout Christian can live without wrestling with the facts of a seemingly uncaring universe (Stephen Crane's cold star staring down at the shipwrecked men in "The Open Boat" is my favorite image of this) and man's inhumanity to man, nor can he or she fail to be aware of the danger of reading some Scripture in an intellectually foolish and dishonest way, whether literally or figuratively, since Scripture is literarily complex, containing poetry, fiction, drama, history, and polemic.

Religion is a dangerous intellectual adventure. It can alienate your friends and family, it can make you change careers, it can kill you. But true religion and true science--neither of which can ever be completely understood--will NEVER be in conflict. Some of the most devout Christians and Jews are theoretical physicists.--admittedly a minority, but brought to their knees by the mysteries of their own science,

C.S. Lewis immolates himself
"Believing things on authority only means believing them because you have been told them by someone you think trustworthy. Ninety-nine per cent of the things you believe are believed on authority. I believe there is such a place as New York. I have not seen it myself. I could not prove by abstract reasoning that there must be such a place. I believe it because reliable people have told me so."

C.S. Lewis, The Case for Christianity at 53.

Upon what "rock" do we build the Christian church? We know nothing of substance about the leaders of the Church; for all we know, they could have been televangelist-class sociopaths who couldn't be trusted if they said the sky was blue. On what basis does anyone believe that Jesus rose from the dead? Because someone *claimed* that five hundred saw him after his death. The author of canonical Matthew didn't even know that the Jewish day began at sunset.

"By the very act of arguing, you awake the patient's reason; and once it is awake, who can foresee the result?" [id. at 2.]

Injustice disproves your god's existence
Oldprof: "No thinking religious Jew or serious devout Christian can live without wrestling with the facts of a seemingly uncaring universe (Stephen Crane's cold star staring down at the shipwrecked men in "The Open Boat" is my favorite image of this) and man's inhumanity to man, nor can he or she fail to be aware of the danger of reading some Scripture in an intellectually foolish and dishonest way, whether literally or figuratively, since Scripture is literarily complex, containing poetry, fiction, drama, history, and polemic."

Rules of law are stated simply. I judge your god by his own standard -- the standard he ostensibly uses to judge me: "Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it, sins." Jas. 4:17. By that objective test, your god is an "epic fail," unless you posit that might makes right and the ends justify the means (which obliterates the very concept of morality).

Man's inhumanity to man is predictable; your god's inhumanity to man is intolerable. The problem of injustice is the fatal blow to the concept of an interventionist god.

Christianity makes a mockery of God
Oldprof: "Thinking people tend to convert from whatever they were raised with. Many an agnostic (wonderful word invented by T.H. Huxley, if I remember correctly) is rebelling against a version of deity suitable for a child."

The god of Christendom IS a deity suitable for a child.

I can envision no reason why a god capable of creating the universe would have any craving for our worship, or would be so congenitally insecure as to immolate us for failing to do so. I'll quote a friend:

"Christianity makes a mockery of God. At the same time that Christians claim to worship God as an omnipotent, omnipresent, omnibenevolent being, they make him out to be incompetent bumbler. Or worse. Simple forgiveness is beyond his capacities. God must "sacrifice himself to himself to change a rule he made himself!"

This is not only an absurdity, it is an essential absurdity. It is present in almost all forms of Christianity, and one can scarcely remove it and remain a Christian in anything but name. By definition, all Christians worship Christ - in some form - and most worship him as a saviour.

But what, exactly, is he saving us from? Though it varies from church to church, no matter what they call it, it's God himself. A hell created by God, a world fallen as a result of God's negligence, a separation from God imposed... by God."

While Paul admitted that faith in Christ was irrational, he understated the situation by several orders of magnitude.

Agnosticism
To me, the existence of God is kind of like the existence of invisible pink wombats on Rigel 7: As the truth or falsity of either claim has no discernible impact on my life, I don't waste a lot of time fretting over it. It's not so much that I don't know; it is rather that I honestly don't care.

If God wants me to know about s/he/it/them, he presumably knows where to find me.

Prager? (Snicker)
OldProf: "Dennis Prager, who is among the more intelligent of Jewish pundits on this issue, makes a cogent case for the Old Testament God who gave us a better handle on morality than all the philosophers of the ancient world."

I find Prager to be an insufferable idiot with an over-inflated opinion of himself. I listen on occasion, but have yet to hear him present a cogent case for anything. Sophistry is his stock in trade.

Don
I see you've read some CSL, heard DP on the radio, know St. Paul's evidence. Paul didn't do much work in apologetics; he was too busy doing evangelism and getting tortured for it.

Many years ago (1947-9) my father was an adjunct professor of speech and dramatics and was the only Methodist at a Catholic women's college. He used to come home and comment, "You know, it seems as if the Catholics want to argue about faith all the time. I don't know if all that arguing converts anyone, but they certainly are persistent."

I share his doubt that an argument is likely to change anyone. Dale Carnegie did a pretty good job of supporting that doubt. But it was through quietly reading much literature, a small part of it polemical, that my own conversion from agnosticism occurred.

I'm posting a sonnet of mine separately for your delectation and probable constructive criticism.

A sonnet as promised to friend Don
Theologians’ Purgatory
(for Mary of Bethany)

A multitude, naked, afraid and cold
Float in a fog, no ground on which to stand,
No gravity apart from that they hold
Within themselves, no trace of a demand
For their opinions. Yet without a show
Of doubt they hold forth, make great argument
On things divine—things that they cannot know—
And cast doubt on all others’ good intent.

But wait—one has gone silent in the crowd
Of moving mouths and discourse-deafened ears.
Waiting in wonder, she ignores the loud
Voices that hide hearts full of ancient fears
Until at last, unburdened, free to fly,
She soars into the waiting silent sky.


Mimi
Where are you? The discussion is one you might wish to get in on.

Life is the most compelling argument
OldProf: "But it was through quietly reading much literature, a small part of it polemical, that my own conversion from agnosticism occurred."

Real life liberated me from Christendom. To fracture Joyce, all I have seen is a part of me. It is impossible for me to reconcile my life experience with anything recognizable as Christian theology, no matter how creatively applied. It is a pretty big universe, and we are too small and insignificant for a God to take a personal interest in us; only hubris and fear prevent us from accepting that fact.

This photograph ( http://s641.photobucket.com/albums/uu131/Karl_Roves_Consci ence/scottshot.jpg )is a poignant symbol of your god's love for us.

Not really on my radar screen
OldProf: "I'm posting a sonnet of mine separately for your delectation and probable constructive criticism."

"The work force is disgusted downs tools and walks
innocence is injured experience just talks
everyone seeks damages and everyone agrees
that these are 'classic symptoms of a monetary squeeze'
on ITV and BBC they talk about the curse
philosophy is useless theology is worse
history boils over there's an economics freeze
sociologists invent words that mean 'Industrial Disease'"

-- Dire Straits

I don't worry overmuch about theology any more -- a pointless endeavor.

Don and Old Prof
For many, the problem of evil in a Christian Universe tips the balance. I recommend a Tom Waits'tune, Georgia Lee, as a great treatment of the topic.

The song can be found here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtUCaUBwqCM

And a quick analysis here.

http://www.celestialmonochord.org/2007/02/georgia_lee.html

Lyrics are below.

Cold was the night, hard was the ground
They found her in a small grove of trees
Lonesome was the place where Georgia was found
She's too young to be out
On the street.
Why wasn't God watching?
Why wasn't God listening?
Why wasn't God there for
Georgia Lee?
Ida said she couldn't keep Georgia
From dropping out of school
I was doing the best that I could
But she kept runnin away from this world
These children are so hard to raise good
Why wasn't God watching?
Why wasn't God listening?
Why wasn't God there for
Georgia Lee?
Close your eyes and count to ten
I will go and hide by then
Be sure to find me. I want you to find me
And we'll play all over
We will play all over again
There's a toad in the witch grass
There's a crow in the corn
Wild flowers on a cross by the road
And somewhere a baby is crying
For her mom
As the hills turn from green back
To gold
Why wasn't God watching?
Why wasn't God listening?
Why wasn't God there for
Georgia Lee?


William Blake wrote

Mock on, mock on, Voltaire, Rousseau;
Mock on, mock on; 'tis all in vain!
You throw the sand against the wind,
And the wind blows it back again.
And every sand becomes a gem
Reflected in the beams divine;
Blown back they blind the mocking eye,
But still in Israel's paths they shine.

The Atoms of Democritus
And Newton's Particles of Light
Are sands upon the Red Sea shore,
Where Israel's tents do shine so bright.

However high (and weird) the intellect, it appears that faith, like life, will find a way.

Don
I think you meant Tennyson's short poem "Ulysses," not Joyce's monumental novel:

I am a part of all that I have met,
Yet all experience is an arch wherethrough
Gleams that untraveled world whose margin fades
Forever and forever when I move.

I only mention it b/c I love the poem. Tennyson also struggled with faith, most memorably in the "In Memoriam" poems.

The God Who Wasn't There
John: "Why wasn't God there for Georgia Lee?"

Or, that soon-to-be-vulture-food child in the photograph. A "disposable person." A cosmic sex-toy to your god, OldProf.

The God who wasn't there. The God who didn't care. (Yes, the allusion is intentional.)

And I'm sure you're right on the attribution; it's been thirty years, and I'd sooner trust even an old professor of English Lit on that than my own failing memory. :)

James Dickey in Deliverance
writes memorably of what he calls "the true horrors of biology."

CSL asks us to reflect on the obvious fact that all the major faiths originated in a world without anesthetics.

Every theism asserts that the evil in the world is real and horrifying, and so does every major form of atheism, like Theravada Buddhism, which, if we can believe the documents, was begun, partly, because Prince Siddhartha beheld a rotting corpse.

Evil?
OldProf: "CSL asks us to reflect on the obvious fact that all the major faiths originated in a world without anesthetics."

Religion doesn't appear to hold up too well in the face of hard science. Life is still nasty, brutish, and short -- though it isn't nearly as bad if you are a son of privilege.

OP: "Every theism asserts that the evil in the world is real and horrifying, and so does every major form of atheism"

I'm not sure I agree with this; atheism takes more of a Dale Carnegie approach (people do what they believe is in their best interests which, more often than not, is not in others' best interests). Carnegie demonstrated in one of his books that even altruism is rooted in self-interest.

Take Newt Gingrich, dumping his second wife on her death-bed. Or, John Edwards' affair. Both acted in what they believed to be their self-interest.

It's not "evil." It simply is.

Why wasn't God watching?
Listening? There?

Why won't men do what God commands?

And what DOES God say?
David S.: "Why won't men do what God commands?"

What DOES God -- as opposed to men who presume to speak for him/her/it/they, and who usually ask that you send checks to benefit Him/Her/It/They in their care -- say?

I've never refused a direct order from God, and doubt that I ever will. Indirect "orders" will always be ignored.

Don from Nevada wrote:
"When your god starts acting in such a way as to actually deserve my reverence and worship, I'll be happy to change my position."


-- You're going to wait a long, long, long time. He's in no hurry to earn your approval.

It's very possible, too, that a lot of your waiting will one day be done in a place far, far worse than the one where you spent six years for a crime you say you did not commit. (Assuming you were writing autobiographically.) And your waiting in this other place will be very much for things you HAVE done and said and written and thought.

That is to say, it will be just.


Don from Nevada wrote:
"[R]ight now, there are not the words to express my disgust at your child-molesting ancient tribal sky-daddy."


-- Well, don't bother changing your "position," Don.

Stay as you are.

He does not need your "reverence" or "worship."

You rant about "the rule of law."

What law? What rule? You have no claim on these things, because you recognize no authority but your own pride. You reject the God of heaven, Who is the source of "rule of law," and thus you consign yourself to the only thing left to you: the mercies of men.

Good luck with that.

You have what you asked for. Stop crying.

But the God you hate and insult has also given you much that you don't even deserve. Next time, you may not even have a 1970 Impala.

What DOES God say, demands Don!
What does He say, Don?

What does He command?

That very thing that you absolutely refuse to do -- that very thing. That thing you continue to suppress, defy, resist and rebel against in your own dark and unhappy heart.

THAT is His command to YOU. And no man is in your way. No man.

And here now you have no one "presuming" to "speak" for Him. He speaks for Himself. The very voice of plain truth that you keep suppressing in your ever-hardening conscience is what He is saying. Do with it what you will. You are the man.

And you need not send any checks. Your filthy money is not needed.

Ah, yes, 'hard science' …
Don Nevada wrote:
"Religion doesn't appear to hold up too well in the face of hard science. Life is still nasty, brutish, and short. …"


-- Well, then, if "life" is, as you and Hobbes say, so "nasty, brutish, and short," then it's actually "life" that's not holding up too well "in the face of hard science," right?

Religion's doing just great.

"Hard science," on the other hand, does seem to be a bit worse for wear, I'm afraid. I mean, for such an awesome, postmodern deity, Hard Science appears to be turning in a pitiful performance against all those "nasty, brutish, and short" elements that remain in the world as thorns in our side.

Maybe Hard Science is in need of a nap, do you think? Or perhaps some vitamins?

I'm trying to be helpful, Don. Work with me here.


Don wrote:
" … though it isn't nearly as bad if you are a son of privilege."


-- Not sure what you mean there. Are you suggesting that those who possess substantial financial means somehow have it over lesser mortals? That money somehow eases their tribulations in this world relative to poorer folk?

Want to try telling that to poor John Travolta, who has plenty in the way of money, fame, possessions and prestige, and still wound up mourning the loss of his 16-year-old son?

I assure you, Travolta would give it all away -- every penny, property and position -- in less time than it takes to sneeze, if he could thereby bring his son back from death.

He cannot.

And no billionaire will leave this world with a U-Haul truck following close behind his hearse.

Privileged or not, everybody dies. And everybody hurts while they live.

Difficult bowel movements don't count
David S: "What does He command?

That very thing that you absolutely refuse to do -- that very thing. That thing you continue to suppress, defy, resist and rebel against in your own dark and unhappy heart.

THAT is His command to YOU. And no man is in your way. No man."

Prove it.

On self-interest and evil
Don from Nevada wrote:
"Take Newt Gingrich, dumping his second wife on her death-bed. Or, John Edwards' affair. Both acted in what they believed to be their self-interest.
It's not 'evil.' It simply is."


-- Not "evil," you say?

I agree that those are actions motivated by self-interest.

I would be interested to find out how you know that these actions are not "evil."

How do you define evil, Don, and by what standard do you measure its dimensions?

Who told you the actions you recall there are not evil?

"It simply is," you say. Well, you certainly do let these guys off easy. They've got to love you. Don't ever become a criminal court judge, please. We've got enough troubles.

Don, you curse God, but you acquit these fellows?

Dude, you are warped.

Evil: An illusory concept
David: "How do you define evil, Don,"

I don't have to. It is meaningless outside of a religious belief system.

We have agreed as a society that certain acts are prohibited, and that they carry with it a certain punishment. For instance, torture is against the law, and no exigent circumstance will excuse it. Is torture "evil?" It seems that quite a few people on this board excuse it ... as long as Republicans are doing it to Muslims. Some would allege that it is "evil" even when our guys do it.

David: "'It simply is,' you say. Well, you certainly do let these guys off easy. They've got to love you. Don't ever become a criminal court judge, please. We've got enough troubles.

Don, you curse God, but you acquit these fellows?"

They haven't broken any of our laws. What can I charge them with? Hypocrisy? Gingrich surely deserves that sobriquet, but the more libertine Edwards? I don't know that he has ever taken a position on infidelity. I have only the law and their own statements of personal character to work with.

As for your bizarre psychotic ancient tribal sky-daddy, I can only judge him by "his" published standards, and by those standards, he has demonstrated a character so foul and execrable that little can be said to recommend him.

Your god makes cosmic sex-toys
Don wrote:" … though it isn't nearly as bad if you are a son of privilege."

David: "-- Not sure what you mean there. Are you suggesting that those who possess substantial financial means somehow have it over lesser mortals? That money somehow eases their tribulations in this world relative to poorer folk?

Want to try telling that to poor John Travolta, who has plenty in the way of money, fame, possessions and prestige, and still wound up mourning the loss of his 16-year-old son?

I assure you, Travolta would give it all away -- every penny, property and position -- in less time than it takes to sneeze, if he could thereby bring his son back from death.

He cannot."

All things being equal, having money helps. Just ask the mother of the soon-to-become-vulture-food child in the photo. Their fate is even more tragic, because it could easily have been prevented. But as long as your god is too busy sodomizing young boys on the golf course or otherwise being dead to come to the kid's aid, he deserves nothing but opprobrium.

Your god makes cosmic sex-toys to torture for his amusement. And you want me to love him?

Pick a god. Any god.
David: "And here now you have no one "presuming" to "speak" for Him. He speaks for Himself. The very voice of plain truth that you keep suppressing in your ever-hardening conscience is what He is saying. Do with it what you will. You are the man."

There is no god but Al'lah, and Mohammed(pbuh) is his Prophet. Everyone knows that. And you would be well-advised to attend The Most Holy-n-High Church of the Blinding Light of the Holy Glowing™ Form of the One Toupeed and Gloriously Bloated Shatner! http://www.shatnerology.com/ Don't forget the Church of the Sub-Genius ... you are a David, not a Bob, so that might not interest you.

Even if my conscience was hardened, who was applying the cement? [Hint: Rom. 8:28, et seq.] If your god is who you say he is, I have precisely no free will in the matter, anyway. (For "Cafeteria Xians" who pick and choose which Scriptures they will follow, YMMV.)

If your god wants to speak to me, he would presumably know where to find me.

Cosmic sex toys?
I can hear Colonel "Bat" Guano in Dr. Strangelove now: "That fella sounds like a deviated pree-vert to me. If he tries any pree-versions in that phone booth, I'll blow his head off." This in reference to all those postings about kids as sex toys for God.

I'm reminded of Brownng's "Caliban Upon Setebos," which anyone may find by googling the titile, and Rupert Brooke's "Heaven," accessible by the same means. Both poems are utterly hilarious, once fully understood, and both poems illustrate the old saw, "God made man in his image, and man returned the favor."

Even when we don't believe in God, the question of what sort of God it is that we don't believe in. "Are you a Jewish atheist, a Catholic atheist, a Protestant atheist, or an Islamic atheist?" is far more than a joke.

It conveys the point
Oldprof: "This in reference to all those postings about kids as sex toys for God."

It's a great way to make a point. If your god exists, he makes "disposable people" -- people whose sole purpose is to serve as cannon fodder for the Elect.

Take the child of David and Bath'sheba. His sole purpose was to serve as an object lesson for David, if we are to believe your Book o' Blood.

Aha!
I have found you out, Don. I was wondering what sort of atheist you are: Catholic, Lutheran, Jewish, Islamic, etc. But your last post narrows it down to two possibilities, one too obsolete to be at all likely but the other still viable in some theological circles.

I have concluded that you must be a Jansenist or a Calvinist atheist. Since Jansenism is as dead as the English literary style called Euphuism (after john Lyly's famously unreadable novel Euphues), I conclude that you follow John Calvin.

I have an elderly friend who is a Calvinist. Very good man, a tremendously productive scholar, but a little weird in his views:

Total Depravity
?Unconditional Election
?Limited Atonement
?Irresistible Grace
?Perseverance of the Saints

Welcome to the club. It's small, exclusive, and scholarly, and its members are rarely annoyed by people pounding on the door to get in. They really don't mind if you're an atheist as long as you are getting with the program.

The computer, which is obviously
possessed by the devil, added the extra ? marks to my last post.

Not even within sight of the harbor
OldProf: "I have concluded that you must be a Jansenist or a Calvinist atheist."

Wrong. Very wrong. Sorry to disappoint. Do you need slides?

A wonderfully whimsical poem
about unknown metaphysical realities is this sonnet by X.J. Kennedy:

Nothing in Heaven functions as it ought:
Peter's bifocals, blindly sat on, crack;
His gates lurch wide with the cackle of a c--k,
Not turn with a hush of gold as Milton had thought;
Gangs of the slaughtered innocents keep huffing
The nimbus off the Venerable Bede
Like that of an old dandelion gone to seed;
And the beatific choir keep breaking up, coughing.
 
But Hell, sleek Hell, hath no freewheeling part:
None takes his own sweet time, none quickens pace.
Ask anyone, "How come you here, poor heart?"—
And he will slot a quarter through his face.
You'll hear an instant click, a tear will start
Imprinted with an abstract of his case.
 




How amusing that a common word for
rooster was nixed by the TH automatic censor. TH appears to partake a little of X.J. Kennedy's vision of hell!

Don--not a Calvinist? Sorry.
Oh well, it was a try. I used to be Methodist atheist, but I couldn't maintain it. Too many of John Wesley's 18th century sermons to argue with. And they were a litte dry and repetitious.

I think the easiest atheism to stay with is Theravada Buddhism because there is an organized support system, and you get to wear a saffron robe if you're good.

Cafeteria Christians, making goulash
Oldprof: "I have an elderly friend who is a Calvinist. Very good man, a tremendously productive scholar, but a little weird in his views:

* Total Depravity
* Unconditional Election
* Limited Atonement
* Irresistible Grace
* Perseverance of the Saints

Welcome to the club. It's small, exclusive, and scholarly, and its members are rarely annoyed by people pounding on the door to get in. They really don't mind if you're an atheist as long as you are getting with the program."

You sound more like a judge than a professor, OP. If you don't like the facts or law, you simply make up your own.

I find the Calvinist argument compelling, in the sense that if you get to pick and choose which portions of Scripture you will and will not abide by, the result may be many things, but it will not be Christianity.

Sky-daddy. You are childish, Don.
And as for a foul character, that would be you, son. No one else.

Certainly not the Almighty.

You seem to enjoy blaspheming Him, apparently because you think you are doing me and other Christian posters here some harm or some such.

We are just fine, son. Guess who all the harm is accruing to? With compound interest, boyo.

You play this game because you really have yourself deceived that there will be no consequences.

You sad, miserable little soul.

Atheism?
Oldprof: "I think the easiest atheism to stay with is Theravada Buddhism because there is an organized support system, and you get to wear a saffron robe if you're good."

Let me just say that I agree with Dr. Franklin -- the notion of a personal god simply does not comport with the facts at hand. However, that does not preclude existence of a Creator. Just your religion's bizarre version.

You have a seriously sick god there
David S.: "Sky-daddy. You are childish, Don. And as for a foul character, that would be you, son. No one else.

Certainly not the Almighty.

You seem to enjoy blaspheming Him"

Sorry if you can't handle the truth, David. Your mentally unbalanced god makes Hitler look like a freakin' humanitarian; sure, he was indisputably cruel, but at least his victims eventually died.

Explain to me if you can why it is and should be that an omnipotent god would regard silver and gold as "sacred," and why genocide is a good thing (Jos. 6:16-21). And why would the master of the Universe ever have cause to be "jealous" (Deut. 4:25).

Don Nevada wrote:
"Sorry if you can't handle the truth, David."



-- There is no truth in you, Don.


"a judge"
English profs alway have to be "judging," mostly to separate good writing from bad. But not all of them make up the rules, and a lot of times their whimsical remarks get taken literally and treated as if they were meant seriously.

My students still get upset over Swift's "A Modest Proposal," which had me ROFL when I was in seventh grade. Some folk see the amusing side of all this political/religious talk--I think you do, Don, though here and there I've wondered--and some don't.

Humorlessness, unfortunately, has afflicted all sides of all the debates on TH.

To murder King Lear a little:

Let silly mockery thrive! The dog itself will smile
At a stick unthrown, and challenge you to fight
With her for fun, and even little jays
Will still pretend to fuss at other birds
And cackle with delight when they respond.

'Facts at hand,' huh?
Don Nevada said:
"Let me just say that I agree with Dr. Franklin -- the notion of a personal god simply does not comport with the facts at hand."


-- Well, it certainly seems to comport with your obsession with Him.

Don Nevada's 'illusory concept"
Me:
"How do you define evil, Don?"

Don:
"I don't have to."


-- Yeah, you do, jerk.


Don:
"It is meaningless outside of a religious belief system."


-- Yeah, of course it is. That's why you're always moaning about how "unjust" everything is, and how some child dies abandoned and alone in the wilderness, though "it could easily have been prevented."

Are you "outside of a religious belief system," you nincompoop?

You certainly like to think you are, and you pretend to be, and yet you rail and rail against everything you oviously consider "evil" and blame God for.

And then you think you can slither away from defining what you mean by "evil"?

It is YOU who are meaningless.

Have you got any manhood? Are you capable of taking a stand, you spineless dweeb?

What is "evil," David?
Don: "It is meaningless outside of a religious belief system."

David: "-- Yeah, of course it is. That's why you're always moaning about how "unjust" everything is, and how some child dies abandoned and alone in the wilderness, though "it could easily have been prevented."

Are you "outside of a religious belief system," you nincompoop?

You certainly like to think you are, and you pretend to be, and yet you rail and rail against everything you oviously consider "evil" and blame God for."

Remember plane geometry in high school? It is an excellent example of what van Til calls "spiral reasoning" (and what I call circular reasoning). Everything that happens within the plane can be true as long as we presume that existence is the plane, but when you add another dimension, all bets are off.

We can fairly evaluate your god's bona fides by comparing his "walk" (what happens in the real world) to his "talk" (representations in the Bible). On that score, Jesus is an EPIC FAIL, as was Ba'al. All that establishes is that Jesus is not God.

I honestly don't know what "evil" is, outside of a purely religious context. People act in accordance with what they believe to be their self-interest, and in many cases, it happens to not be in other people's interests. This may be seen as "good" or "evil," and it often comes down to where you sit. For instance, some Townhallers have no problem with Cheney ordering the torture of Gitmo detainees, but you can imagine the howl if someone did that to our guys!

I know of no objective, non-religious definition of "evil." By stark contrast, "injustice" is readily defined outside of a religious context, and can be discussed without making any religious assumptions.

Ya kinda got my number, Prof
OldProf: "My students still get upset over Swift's "A Modest Proposal," which had me ROFL when I was in seventh grade. Some folk see the amusing side of all this political/religious talk--I think you do, Don, though here and there I've wondered--and some don't."

Munch, munch, munch.... Care for a rib?

You're basically right; I ascribe to the notion (espoused by Patton) that if everyone in a room is in agreement, no one is thinking. I would be bored stiff if all I did was agree with everyone. I've been thrown off of dKos more than once, and I'm never sure whether they have thrown me off here (I usually forget my password, and the system kicks me off every now and again; the solution is a new nom de plume). I just wish folks wouldn't take discussion so seriously.

So. An agreement on one point.
I ask no more. The humor of all this talk.

Jefferson saw no point in metaphysical quarreling. People do it all the time, "but it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." (Notes on Virginia, 1782)

Unfortunately more than legs get broken, not by the opinions but by those who hold them.

I'm all for civilized behavior and uncivilized talk. Fierce competition in polite argument, as in Scrabble or Trivial Pursuit. But . . .

i once played Scrabble against the second-ranked tournament player in Texas. It was a "friendly" game at a friend's house.

As soon as the game began and I bingoed (all 7 letters, 50 pt. bonus) on the first move, the whole atmosphere changed; he became a predatory animal. A week later, I learned that he had just pulled a knife on his wife and she sued for divorce. I guess I'm lucky to be alive.

Jefferson, Franklin, & healthy religion
Oldprof: "Jefferson saw no point in metaphysical quarreling. People do it all the time, "but it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." (Notes on Virginia, 1782)"

As a matter of policy, I agree with him.

One of the nice things about being a deist is in never needing to get entangled in debates over the existence of God. On the one hand, when the D'nesh D'screwys of the world claim that there is a God, I can shrug my shoulders and agree. On the other, when the Bertrand Russells of the world claim there is no God, I can agree that the question of his/her/its existence is irrelevant, as s/he/it/they does not interfere in human affairs.

The only time I have a problem with religion is where its proponents want to impose their peculiar view of morality onto society. The burden they must logically bear is to prove beyond cavil that not only A GOD exists, but THEIR god is the one true Supreme Being. It should come as no surprise to you that I have never had any takers.

As a dissenter, I tend to champion the right of the individual to not be oppressed by the majority. As it pertains to abortion, you are free to persuade and cajole, but not at liberty to engage in terrorism.

If you can't dazzle 'em …
… with brilliance, baffle 'em with …

Don writes:
"Remember plane geometry in high school?"


-- For crying out loud. Here we go.


Don writes:
"It is an excellent example of what van Til calls "spiral reasoning" (and what I call circular reasoning)."


-- Actually, what van Til calls it is "presuppositional." And there's nothing "circular" about it. I know that what postmodern "thinkers" demand is that I first deny my own positions before they'll allow me to defend them. This they call reasoning from "neutrality." If I decline this shell game, I'm falsely called "circular."


Don writes:
"Everything that happens within the plane can be true as long as we presume that existence is the plane, but when you add another dimension, all bets are off.

We can fairly evaluate your god's bona fides by comparing his "walk" (what happens in the real world) to his "talk" (representations in the Bible). On that score, Jesus is an EPIC FAIL, as was Ba'al. All that establishes is that Jesus is not God."


-- Don, cut the BS. I have no clue what you just said. And YOU have no clue what you just said.

What "happens in the real world" is YOUR walk, genius. Not His. But His ways aren't subject to YOUR judgment anyway -- and that's presuppositional. Deal with it.

The reason you think Jesus failed is that your mind is too dark to permit a straight thought. This is why you are so messed up. The Bible explains very clearly what Jesus' mission was and how things were to go. You have no interest in the facts.

That's your problem.

I don't give a fart about "Ba'al." And it's irrelevent anyhow. All that establishes is that you have read the book of Judges. But you obviously haven't learned anything from it.

On Deism and niceness
Don writes:
"One of the nice things about being a deist is in never needing to get entangled in debates over the existence of God."


-- Yeah, that does sound kinda nice.

But of course, you really needn't be a "deist" to avoid entanglements "in debates over the existence of God."

Why don't you just shut up about it?

Wouldn't that accomplish the same thing?

Not a "dissenter," Don -- a phony
Don writes:
"As a dissenter, I tend to champion the right of the individual to not be oppressed by the majority."


-- But only if the "individual" isn't a Judeo-Christian theist and moralist, right, champ? In that case, "all bets are off," yes? Though I'm sure you'll grant the right to practice religion privately, so long as it's kept out of the public square.

Thanks, Benefactor! Freedom from oppression!


Don writes:
"As it pertains to abortion, you are free to persuade and cajole … "


-- OK, so we're "free to persuade and cajole," just not to "impose" our "peculiar view of morality." Do I have that right?

Well, by crackie, THAT makes A LOT of sense! (I begin to suspect that consistency is not one of your gifts, though, just as sound reasoning is not.)


Don writes:
"The burden they must logically bear is to prove beyond cavil that not only A GOD exists, but THEIR god is the one true Supreme Being. It should come as no surprise to you that I have never had any takers."


-- I'd venture to say that you have had A TON of takers, but have chosen instead to disregard anything they've said. Apparently, the "evidence" you pretend to seek doesn't fit too well with your biases.

You write, too, that pro-lifers are "not at liberty to engage in terrorism." And of course, we already know this.

In Don's right-of-the-individual-to-not-be-oppressed world, only the hapless Islamofascist victims of Cheney's waterboard get permission to engage in terrorism.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.