Yikes! This was me???

October 13, 1996

I'm in one of those moods. One of those...moods. One of those...I feel, I have a purpose and i'm willing to find and acheive it. One of those goals. Goals to be a leader academically, athletically and spiritually. I believe I have a purpose. I just wish I knew what it was.

October 31, 1996

I hate Ebonee. She thinks she knows everything. I love Ebonee. She is like a sister to me and she's very outspoken. She's my best friend. I will mark this day Oct. 31, 1996. I will keep this best friend for a while.


January 29, 1997

My parents don't know jack sh** about being a teenager in the 90's. My mom thinks she knows everything about everything. Why should I keep my hair done if i'm gonna stay in this house under lock and key. I can't wait to get the hell outta here. 2 more years of this bullsh**.


Whoah! Talk about an emotionally unstable teenager. Good thing I got through that stage. Sorry Mom...Sorry Dad. You must be special people.

A Conversation Continued: The Atheists and Me Part II

Je comprende un petite. "Isms" are interesting things. Determining which form of ism one may fall under is a difficult task. Well, for those of us on the outside at least. An ism can be a doctrine or a theory. Or an ism can be a characteristic or a state. You my friend, are rather unique in your self-defenition, in protesting your "state" of atheism. Okay.
Albeit, most isms are doctrine and theory. And if religion begins with a doctrine or theory and thus extends from that point, why then question the religion of the ism?
signed, Me

And, so, taking this line of thought to it's logical end, every individual person has their own personal religion.

The religion of attracting other people.
The religion of not wearing white after labor day.
The religion of only buying used cars.
The religion of manners.
The religion of obsessive compulsiveness.

What have we gained by generalizing religion this way? Would you prefer "the dogma of deity worship"? How cumbersome. When the first definition in M-W is:

1 a : the state of a religious (a nun in her 20th year of religion) b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance

and when you are discussing ideas within the confines of a site named The Question of God, is it not reasonable to assume the specific origins of the word apply? If we were on Jacques Cousteau's website, and I said sponge, would you argue that any creature that absorbs information around it could be considered a sponge?signed, Ungainly Fool

Silly rabbit, the absorbtion of sponges has nothing to do with our venture onto Mr. Cousteau's website or Sponge Bob's website, with the exception of the mere topic of coincedence. Neither would I say that I am arguing a point or perspective rather than a reality. Does Advocatus argue that their atheism is an argument of perspective or an argument of reality? An argument of reality of course. If not then his/her (not sure) case would be subjective. So what i'm saying is that if this (&$&^$*^%*%)*&) is what defines religion, then why exclude it from the law of metaphysics? It is, what it is. Period. signed, Me

I am no longer certain what you are arguing, Mademoiselle. As far as reality goes, I don't think any of us has access to anything other than his own subjection impression of what is real. So perhaps it is a matter of perspective.
And who's trying to exclude religion from anything? I'm just saying (as UF is) that if you insist on broadening the definition of religion to the point that anything and everything is included, the word becomes meaningless. signed, advocatus

okay. signed, Me

A Conversation Continued: The Atheists and Me Part I

Indeed, it's a difficult position...not having all the answers. It is a hard thing to do to look out and see how finite man is and how finite our ability to comprehend. It is a struggle to look backward in time and forward into the future with empty holes in our understanding. But we make progress. Slowly we find a piece that seems to fit and many more times we force a fit when it's just our hope that it does.

But personally, as an atheist, I find more substance in the holes of my understanding than in a universal filler in which I don't believe. I live because it is the search and discovery that gives me happiness. One answer that solves all problems is no answer at all. Substance? I find no substance in "because" and likewise none in "god". signed, Ungainley Fool

So then, if search and discovery gives you a sense of happiness, then my friend you must be sad. Because if search + discovery= happiness, and you find no discovery then it won't equal happiness. Maybe I've misquoted. Accept my deepest apologies if this is true. I've also fallen in love with your pun of "substance in holes", because as a Christian, I too, find something similar in the likes of this phrase. The substance in the answers that I can not answer, but the assurance that there is one beholder of these great answers that we seek for.

And although you may see empty holes as you look back in time and foward to the present, slowly we force more pieces that would make more sense to us mortals just so that we can hide behind our books from the reality that maybe, just maybe we don't have the control that we though we had. It's a shame that death has had to be the greatest teacher of man as he spends his entire lifetime "progressing" towards these "answers" and substantial holes, and then in the end, he comes to the self-actualization that something else will decide his fate. What then has he worked so hard for, just to die a death beyond personal jurisdiction? Why can't man just die with all the control? I guess then, man would probably never die, if it was up to him. But, you see...it isn't. signed, Me

I don't think so. To me, "atheist" is just a label -- one of many that I wear -- which describes only one thing about my worldview. It is certainly not something I pursue with devotion. In fact, very few people actually define religion this way (only people who want to convert atheists into "religious" people by changing the definition of the word). An "activity pursued with devotion"; that seems to describe organized sports better than atheism! Think of the tax-exemption possibilities! signed, Advocatus

Quote:
In fact, very few people actually define religion this way (only people who want to convert atheists into "religious" people by changing the definition of the word).

Okay then! You've just proven it: Merriam-Webster is a nothing but a covert religious manuscript, secretly attempting to convert atheists through words of pun. You've either done that, or you've done nothing but expose my unintended plaigarism because i did forget to site that source. My bad dog!

Quote:
Think of the tax-exemption possibilities!

That's cute. You're sarcasm beguiles me.

However, any one person that labels themselves anything automatically draws themself into a category, group or sect. The pragmatist is just a pragmatist among pragmatists. And I do recall the definition stating "a cause, principle or activity". They're not all the same. Now a Sunday morning church service would probably fall under the activity category, which would in turn reason its tax-exempt status. But to say that atheists don't fall into the principle category...well, what then would you say? signed, Me

I would say that "atheism" isn't a principle, either. It's just a word that describes me. I don't believe that God exists, so this word applies to me. I happen to be exactly six feet tall, neither tall nor short, but average in height. The word "average" describes me. Does that mean that "average" is a principle or cause that I actively pursue?

I do see what you're getting at, though. Perhaps "materialism" comes closer to being a principle that I do pursue, but even then I would hesitate to use the word "religion". It (materialism) just seems like such a common sense notion to me.
signed, Advocatus

Non-Bias huh?

DID ANYONE SEE THE PBS SPECIAL ON THE LIVES OF C.S. LEWIS AND SIGMUND FREUD???

AND WHAT ABOUT THAT ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION? I couldn't see the difference than if the CS Lewis/Freud roundtable consisted of a bunch of Bishops and Archbishops of the the Roman Catholic Church. It was completley bias. I can see why it could have deceived a large mass into believing it was so. But, to discuss the life of CS Lewis and then not include at a roundtable discussion a SINGLE Christian academician, is devastating! It was like someone actually put some thought into not including one. "How about including some die-hard athesists to represent the view of Freud and some Borderline God believers to kinda represent Clive Staples." It was a crime! I feel like I was robbed of the opportunity to finally experience an impartial conversation among rational thinkers and then KA-PLUMP...dissapointment slaps me in the face.
Well, let me rephrase a bit. I would have liked to see some seminary professors and theologians who have done studies and reasearch and who could simply share experiences. Were there thesists being represented? I couldn't tell in the midst of the atheistic eclipse of intellectualism. I'm simply saying that modern day Freud's were amply being represented, but modern day Lewis's were watching from home. They weren't at that table.
I enjoy good conversation and if that's all that those Wednesday nights were to consist of then I would be satisfied. However, to call it a roundtable discussion of the lives of these unique individuals with unique philosophy's and not have proper representation from both sides...that's absurd. Let's not forget the moderator randomly shooting out topics. They might as well been set up in a boxing ring!

The Doctrine of Doctrine

Doctrine. What an interesting ideology that causes divisions so gargantuan that it has the ability to destroy marriages and friendships. Doctrine. Clever little tactic used by the Fallen himself in all of his perversion, especially against the Body and especially within this last century.
The Doctrine of eternal security.
The Doctrine of the passing away of spiritual gifts with the "last apostle".
The Doctrine of infant baptism.
The Doctrine of women preachers.
The Doctrine of speaking in tongues.
The Doctrine of tithing.
The Doctrine of pews vs. chairs.
The Doctrine of church hats and wave caps.

What are we to make of these things? I supposed this idea of the doctrine of doctrine.Colossians 3:1-3
"Therefore if you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth. For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God."

note: Khristi's personal doctrinal stance on these issues not available for public viewing.

Father, in the midst of the Body there's a right and a wrong.
I, too, long to know the right from the wrong.
I long for the yes as apart from the no,
for the way to the kingdom is through the narrow.
My heart is now weary, my judgement made leary,
for the doctrine of theory is plaguing my soul.
Your word was sent to diminish the faction,
but Your words have been bent to fraction.
Lead me to glory. Lead me to You.
Lead me not to temptation or dazed and confused.
The Word is my light and the Spirit my guide,
the prayer in my closet,
In You I Confide.

The Passion of the Church

passion 

I used to feel like I had so much to offer. Almost like one day, the world would experience this theatrical unveiling of myself coming "out of the box" as Tonex would put it. I would sit in my dorm room and htink to myself, " 'all of creation is waiting with earnest expectation for the revealing of the sins of God'...hey that's me!" I never knew when it was or what it was, and now I wonder if there ever was a was. What is it now that I have to look foward to: The average life of a female Christian layperson? Is it the annual church conference that TD Jakes is going to be at? The hopes that one day I may get lucky enough to marry above average? What was it that kept me going all those years, standing in the face of adverse situations and laughing at its' folly? What drives those of us who wake up in the morning with tears still in our eyes from the night before, but saying, "THIS IS THE DAY THAT THE LORD HAS MADE!" It's hope. It's the hope that has us consider that there is more to our lives than our present circumstances. Where is this hope that I once treasured? It's buried in the sea of dissapointment of times past. Was supposed to happen, but never happened. "This is the day that the Lord has made!!" Happened, but slapped you in the face when it did. "This...is...the...day that the Lord." Came but left. "This...is...the...day." Transpired but failed. "This...is...(KA-PLUMP). Hope: The one ingredient it takes to create drive. What then was Christ's Passion? Us. A heightened hope and anticipation that we would be free and take our rightful places as heurs to the kingdom. An expectation that one day Khristi's hpe would be in Him. How sad that I have thus far managed to rob Him of even that. So what I hope now is not that i'll be standing on that platform in my 5-inches having the congregation all up on their feet shouting "Amen!" It's not that i'll travel the world one country at a time with ante rage of armor bearers. It's not even that my pastor husband will one day make it on TBN set. My hope is that the same passion passion Christ had for me, I would have for Him in return.