Actually, hunting has it’s ups and downs, but the downs, I believe, outweigh the ups. Personally, I’d like to see culling, by professionals, instead of hunting, by drunk, goofy hicks (yeah, I know, I’m just ribbing). And bow hunting is just cruel. I know many hunters, and most are just nice, regular guys. So the balance of ups and downs is close. But pro-culling would almost always be better all in all. Let me give you an example: In New Jersey, back in the colonial days, it was well known that the local deer were commonly huge and 8+ points was the norm. Now, the deer are all small and sickly. Part of that, of course, is the feeding on private gardens that are sprayed with poisons (I never eat venicin from the burbs, or exubian - it’s disgusting), but a larger part of the reason is that hunters don’t go out of their way to kill small sickly deer. They want points and big heads and meat. So they have weakened the gene pool of the local deer, and the deer numbers problem continues. I’d call that a failed policy. I do know about hunting. Though I prefer to fish. (Don’t even get me started on water pollution!)

I get your point about “cushy.” Well taken. But your point about my understanding of faith, and why Americans are so much more religious than our peers misses the boat. Why are Americans so religious? Why is it so non-demoninational, personallized, and lacking in grounded theology? I believe it is because we lead very isolated, individualistic, hyper-competitive, stressful, lonely lives. That was the point I was making. The “imaginary friend” was a figure of speech - a metaphor of the lonely, only child for the American adult. I wasn’t mocking you, but rather asserting why I believe Americans in general are so religious, and so intrapersonal in their faith, as opposed to our peers. Again, though, these are intellectual generalities for the sake of debate. I would not even attempt to assert the reasoning of your personal faith, especially if it is “personal” and non-demoninational. I haven’t the hubris to attempt such a thing.

As for Bringiton.org, it was created by a personal friend of mine, and yes it does have a liberal bent, but many conservatives post there. It gets a lot of hits, though, so I will occasionally cross-post there so that my site and sites like Eric’s get more hits too. It is far more raucus than this forum, true. But the mockery is all in fun. We dis each other endlessly. Think of it as more like “bar talk.” We cus, call each other morons, etc. It’s all in fun though. Quite a few of the posters personally know each other, so it’s not as abusive as it seems.

JMJ

I didn’t post the above thing on that other blog. I’m pretty confident in your ability to discuss things with a level head. Some of those other people I’ve read on there…not so sure. Not that I mind rebuttal or criticism. But if I want to be mocked, I’ll just dress myself for work without my wife’s approval.

G’night.

Heh, heh. Fascinating character, as in having something to say, or fascinating character like Wolf Boy at the carnival freak show? Hmmmm.

I’m warning you now, this is going to sound kind of disjointed and rambling. It’s been a long day, it’s dinner time and my blood sugar is low. But here goes.

The WMD thing was just a joke. Interestingly, though, in his book, Gen. Schwarzkopf defended Bush 41’s decision not to take out Saddam, and it was essentially the same thing Cheney said.

Now, then. Let me get one thing out of the way quickly. When I said Americans lives are cush, I wasn’t really thinking of our “peers.” I was thinking more along the lines of the Sudanese I mentioned. If I want to go to sleep, I lay down on a 14″ thick mattress. If I want to stuff myself silly, I jump in my GMC pickup and drive on down to All-You-Can-Eat Shrimp Night at the local surf and turf. If my tooth hurts, I go to a dentist’s office, plunk down my co-pay and get worked on in novocained, laughing gassed, smooth jazz in the headphones comfort. And I don’t worry that government militiamen are going to bust down my door, rape my wife, send my children into slave labor and shoot me through the head. That’s the sense I meant it in. And I think the miseries you mention are mostly self-inflicted. We can choose to connect with other people. And I don’t see us lacking love compared to our peers at all. It’s everywhere, but it’s not the kind of thing that makes the evening news.

Listening to your latest comments reminds me of a debate on Townhall regarding hunting. This one loopy liberal lady who shows up regularly for intellectual beat-downs decided to chime in. It was painfully obvious that she knew about as much on the subject as she does about the tactical deployment of the M203 infantry weapons system, but that didn’t stop her from categorically stating that all of the so-called wildlife-management benefits of hunting are just hooey, and that hunters hunt because they enjoy killing and kill. Huh? Come again? Holy crap, lady, where do I even begin?

In this case, you’re reminding me of that lady, Jersey. You’re a knowledgeable guy, but when it comes to why I believe in God, you don’t know Jack. I know, maybe it’s tongue-in-cheek, but us people believe in God because we need an imaginary friend? On the simple-mindedness and ignorance scale, that’s like saying we invaded Iraq because the Army had spent all this money on boot laces and didn’t want them to go to waste. You think you have it all figured out, and you haven’t figured anything out. (Hope I’m not sounding agitated here).

You’re wrong about why I believe. My own struggle is that my “personal relationship with God” is not personal enough. I’ve got plenty of intellectual assent, but it has a hard time reaching my heart. My faith is a matter of assent to the propositions set forth in the Bible. Do they make sense? Are they consistent? Do they ring true? Do they challenge my actions and make demands on me that make me uncomfortable? You would answer no. I say yes. Different presuppositions. I wonder if you’ve ever sat down with someone who has made a lifetime of studying the Bible and asking for help in understanding all those things that you find objectionable? Because it’s not easy to understand, and there is a definite spiritual component. If you go through the Bible convinced it is awful and genocidal and mean and rife with error and contradictions, then guess what? That’s exactly what you’ll find.

You’re glad I’ve found an imaginary friend for company? Good. I’m glad that you’re able to avoid any claims or demands on your life, your heart, your behavior, your thoughts, your holiness, by a God who is not what you’d like him to be, by deciding he simply doesn’t exist. Presto!

Allow me to share my variant opinions.

You asked, “I’m not sure what you consider evidence. Do you mean that the same way the Left means evidence of WMD - e.g., a big red and white candy-striped nuclear missle with “Destination: The Great Satan,” “Washington or Bust,” and “Death to the Infidel” stenciled on the side?”

Some on “the Left” may perhaps think that way, but I don’t. I do not doubt that the Saddamists had some nasty weapons or at least some of the parts. I don’t doubt that we do. I don’t doubt that dozens of wacky nations have such things. If anything, I fretted at the onset of the invasion that perhaps the RG might use some sort of nasty device against our soldiers as they inevitibly blitzed into Baghdad like a big, muscular drunk plunging fist first into the center of an angry crowd.

What concerned me about Iraq was the matters of intent and reality. Wesley Clark commented recently that he’d a conversation with Paul Wolfowitz toward the end of the formal hostilities of the Gulf War. Wolf, like many, was disappointed that we didn’t ‘finish the job’ and didn’t drive into Baghdad. He was already contemplating ‘remaking the Middle East,’ into some sort of new democratic model. Years later, he got the chance - and then reality set in. Cheney was right, back then in 1992, when he said…

“…I think we got it right, both when we decided to expel him from Kuwait, but also when the president made the decision that we’d achieved our objectives and we were not going to go get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq. … All of a sudden you’ve got a battle you’re fighting in a major built-up city, a lot of civilians are around, significant limitations on our ability to use our most effective technologies and techniques,… Once we had rounded him up and gotten rid of his government, then the question is what do you put in its place? You know, you then have accepted the responsibility for governing Iraq. … Now what kind of government are you going to establish? Is it going to be a Kurdish government, or a Shi’ia government, or a Sunni government, or maybe a government based on the old Baathist Party, or some mixture thereof? You will have, I think by that time, lost the support of the Arab coalition that was so crucial to our operations over there, … I would guess if we had gone in there, I would still have forces in Baghdad today, we’d be running the country. We would not have been able to get everybody out and bring everybody home.”

That’s what concerned me too. It looks like Cheney and I fretted for the same reasons. And if Cheney knew this then why’d we eventually go in? Endless money for contractors and big oil? Power through fear? Nah. Couldn’t be.

You said, “The biblical doctrine of grace is pretty radical, and is a pretty big stumbling block to the intellect. This phenomenon, along with the others you mention, seem to be most prevalent in America, where life is mostly cush, and we have lots of distractions.”

I beg to differ. I think the reason Americans are so prone to Faith is that our lives are not “cush.” I think our lives are actually miserable - cruelly competitive, exhaustingly rigorous, painfully lonely. Compared to our international peers, we work more and spend less time with family. We die younger. We suffer more social ills. We dislike each other more. They drink and take drugs for fun. We drink and take drugs to escape. They eat and stay slender. We get fat. They enjoy life. We just live it. In God we find solace, comfort, unconditional love, company. That’s why the “personal relationship with God.” In a life with so few personal relationships, we, like an only child, turn to an imaginary friend for company. Sure, we have more things. We have TVs and computers and cars and excercize bikes, and PS3s, and microwaves, and beepers and pagers and phones that make toast. But what we lack, more than any of our peers, is love. And that’s the thing we need the most.

Ciao, JMJ

“Well, I suppose if Jesus really did come back and perform miracles and such, we’d ALL convert! Even atheists like me!”

Funny you should say that. I suppose maybe you’re being facetious here, and maybe have even read some of the passages that address that claim (If he showed me a sign, THEN I’d believe!), such as Matt. 12:38-42, Luke 16:20-31, Luke 23:8-9, John 20:24-29.

Heck, if I could have just one iota of evidence of God, of course I’d consider faith in Him.”

I’m not sure what you consider evidence. Do you mean that the same way the Left means evidence of WMD - e.g., a big red and white candy-striped nuclear missle with “Destination: The Great Satan,” “Washington or Bust,” and “Death to the Infidel” stenciled on the side? Sorry, topic for a different day.

If I could have just one iota of evidence of the existence of love, maybe I’d believe in it. You see God nowhere, I see him everywhere. If you’re honest, you think that’s a delusion on my part, I am delusional.

“What I was driving at with my questions about who killed Jesus and why was two-fold: That Jesus, if he was crucified (I don’t know that he was), may well have gotten himself crucified quite intentionally”

He did. There was a pretty big overarching purpose to it, and it wasn’t as a martyr to Roman oppression.

“and that many people do put the onus on Jews or the Romans or both”

And have completely missed the point.

“and to this day distrust Jews and government because of that, even though Jesus was a Jew and the Romans were not of considerable interest to Him.”

And have completely missed the point. Yep, it’s baffling and sad that so many are so obtuse. Dunno what to tell you.

“It’s good to see that Carole and you are not crazy fundies”

And you’re glad that my psychological crutch helps me get through the night, too, right? I know you’re not trying to be patronizing, but by my beliefs I AM what you would call a fundy, and if I am a fundy, how can I not be crazy? (And if Jesus was a good teacher and a good man and not a pathological liar and nut job, how could he claim to be God?) Look, I’m breaking my own rule here by arguing the picayune with someone with completely different presuppositions as me. Sorry.

“but surely you know they’re out there, and surely you know that they tend to identify as conservatives.”

Oh, heck yeah, but every group has crazy representatives. I bet there are even crazy atheists and agnostics out there, too. I can’t make crazy people stop calling themselves Christians, but it’s a source of great consternation to me. Not the conservative part. I’m OK with conservatives, I are one.

Yep. Many Christians (I don’t believe it’s “most” by any stretch of the imagination. I think if most atheists were really honest, they would admit that what they “know” about Christians comes mainly from Hollywood and not first-hand knowledge) are uneducated, many are dense, many are bigoted. But it is the sick that most need a doctor, and it is the simple and the children who most readily respond to the gospel. Heck, it has been whispered by many that I’m no rocket scientist myself.

“Nothing you said was gobbledygook to me. It’s sounds like mainstream Catholicism or Protestantism to me.”

Well, good. I don’t expect you to agree, but I would prefer to not seem like a nut job to you.

“But remember, the number one Christian group in America are Born-Again Non-denoms, not exactly a bunch grounded in thorough theology.”

Yeah, it’s a major failing of the Evangelical church of which I am a part, and there’s a whole lot that can be said about that. The biblical doctrine of grace is pretty radical, and is a pretty big stumbling block to the intellect. This phenomenon, along with the others you mention, seem to be most prevalent in America, where life is mostly cush, and we have lots of distractions. Part of it is that salvation is a gift of God through a pretty simple faith, and doesn’t require a degree in theology. Look at my words here as an example - they’re pretty simple. Unfortunately, many make the mistake that free grace means easy grace or cheap grace, and many are turned off by doctrine or systematic theology and see no need to take an intellectual plunge into the mysteries of their own faith. Many are preoccupied with subjective experience. It’s too bad, but it doesn’t precude them from salvation, any more than my own not clapping my hands very much on Sunday mornings means my faith is dead.

I think our conversation would be a lot different were we having it in a country (I’m assuming you’re in the U.S) where people walk 20 miles to attend a Bible study, or where meeting in someone’s house to read a contraband Bible may mean a trip to get the crap beat out of you or to the jail or the executioner. Yes, it happens. I don’t imagine Chinese or Sudanese Christians, for example, believe in cheap or easy grace. I imagine their faith is a serious thing to them, and I imagine they treat it with real intellectual rigor. They humble me.

Good night.

JMJ

Oh, that whole “personal relationship with God” thing. Hey, whatever make ya’ happy! I have to say, I rarely meeet non-denoms who are seriously grounded in theology. Perhaps you are, perhaps you’re not, but when you make your religion purely a personal thing, it’s very hard to debate any aspect of it, because you could believe pretty much whatever you want. It’s different to debate a Catholic or a Methodist or a Mormon or a Reformed Jew, but the “personal relationship” faith is just to broad and individualized to make for discernable stands on the issues. But if it makes you happy, and you don’t hurt anyone with it, then I say, hey, good for you!

I can not get past the logical incongruities of the God of Abraham. And, to honest, though this is not the basis of my reasoning, I don’t really like “Him.”

And I do not “always… paint groups of people with one brush.” That’s just silly. When I’m generalizing, I’m generalizing. I can only hope that the reader can see what I mean. I’m not going to spend hours and hours commenting on blogs with a perfectionists specificity to everything I write. You guys don’t! Liberals this, Shillary that, Democ-rats this, Billary that. C’mon. I can follow what you’re saying. You can follow me.

You’re a good debator, Carole. Let’s critique the points of contention and not each other.

JMJ