About Psalm 137

[Kelp(p)]

Kings meaning world leaders.

Ehhhhh, I dunno about that. Every time I see an eschatology writer make the breezy comparison between an ancient king and a modern head of state, my internal bullcrap-o-meter goes off. What makes you think they're comparable? A king or emperor is supposed to represent his people in a comprehensive way (hence the "royal we," in Anglo culture) that modern Presidents, Prime Ministers, and even Dictators don't quite touch (except maybe in the case of North Korea).

I don't see where those verses say anything about that, it's more about everyone having no choice but to acknowledge the reality of God. Which hasn't happened yet.

You said it was about kings worshiping God. Ask the average Englishman how important it is to him that the Queen is a Christian.

[JohnnyP]

Ehhhhh, I dunno about that. Every time I see an eschatology writer make the breezy comparison between an ancient king and a modern head of state, my internal bullcrap-o-meter goes off. What makes you think they're comparable? A king or emperor is supposed to represent his people in a comprehensive way (hence the "royal we," in Anglo culture) that modern Presidents, Prime Ministers, and even Dictators don't quite touch (except maybe in the case of North Korea).

That doesn't hold up, even Israelite kings like David were accountable to priests and prophets. It just means leaders of nations.

You said it was about kings worshiping God. Ask the average Englishman how important it is to him that the Queen is a Christian.

I said it was about all leaders of nations recognizing God. Those who don't as well as their subjects probably aren't going to be around by then, they'll be dead, Revelation confirms that.

[Tassman]

Saying something works well is not the same as endorsing it.

The same countries were vastly superior to the rest of the planet before even though they were overtly Christian. Comparing different populations and pointing out that one is better because of X is stupid. You want to control variables as much as possible, which is why comparing Europe today with Europe 200 years ago and seeing how it fares relative to the rest of the world in each instance is a vastly superior measurement. Since liberals have hijacked educational institutions it's not surprising that their deranged offshoots are more popular among the more educated. The reason why they got hijacked in the first place is because Christianity acquired the abnormal degree of tolerance that you preach, probably as a product of economic success. They allowed outgroups into their institutions in good faith and those outgroups used their power to wreck them. Of course, that philosophy is now biting you in the behind since other outgroups (like fundamentalist muslims) are benefitting from your own abnormal degree of tolerance.

and

They're stagnating at a high point built on the bones of better men. And that's just financially. Culturally and socially they are at the worst they've ever been.

Yes, thanks to particular minorities with grossly disproportionate crime rates. And while those minorities may be Christian (at least nominally), most pledge fealty to the atheist progressive machine, so the blame for their failure falls on people like you.

No! The comparatively more religious USA has more gun violence, the highest rates of incarceration and greatest wealth inequity of any developed nation and this can only be attributed to poor governance not or the

Love is a modern invention. My charity certainly is vast though, thanks for noticing.

You seem to have missed the sarcasm. Why aren't I surprised?

[Cow Poke]

Nope that was referring to you, instead of discussing the topic you just want to whine that I gave sources -- same as you did. Lame.

[Kelp(p)]

No! The comparatively more religious USA has more gun violence, the highest rates of incarceration and greatest wealth inequity of any developed nation and this can only be attributed to poor governance not “particular minorities” or the “atheist progressive machine” – whatever that is. Or any other bogey man you care to blame. Certainly the US being comparatively more religious than the other developed nations seems to make very little difference to its extensive social problems.

Bold and underlinning are mine italics yours.

So much for "less religion as necessary by-product of higher IHDI."

[Tassman]

Bold and underlinning are mine italics yours.

So much for "less religion as necessary by-product of higher IHDI."

I don't understand your point. Less religion tends to be a by-product of higher IHDI, not a "necessary by-product". But how about addressing the whole post, not just one paragraph in isolation.

[Kelp(p)]

I don't understand your point. Less religion tends to be a by-product of higher IHDI, not a "necessary by-product". But how about addressing the whole post, not just one paragraph in isolation.

You said the US has the most gun violence, highest rates of incarceration, and (most importantly) greatest income inequality in the developed world and that this can only be attributed to bad governance. In other words, we have a low IHDI despite being a bunch of uneducated Christians, not because of it. Just pointing out your self-contradiction.

And if you didn't think less religion is a necessary or nearly necessary consequence of higher IHDI, you wouldn't keep bringing it up as if it were some antitheist trump card to wipe all our noses in.

[Tassman]

You said the US has the most gun violence, highest rates of incarceration, and (most importantly) greatest income inequality in the developed world and that this can only be attributed to bad governance. In other words, we have a low IHDI despite being a bunch of uneducated Christians, not because of it. Just pointing out your self-contradiction.

No contradiction! The USA has a relatively low (and descending) rank on the Human Development Index because it doesn't do as well as many other countries in its composite, interrelated statistic of overall life expectancy, broad higher education opportunities and reliable, sufficient income for all. This failure can only be the result of poor governance. What else could it be, bad luck? Come now!

And if you didn't think less religion is a necessary or nearly necessary consequence of higher IHDI, you wouldn't keep bringing it up as if it were some antitheist trump card to wipe all our noses in.

But that’s not what I said. Once again and try to focus: Less religion tends to be a by-product, NOT that it is a "necessary” by-product, of the higher education which is a key component of Human Development Index.

[Kelp(p)]

No contradiction! The USA has a relatively low (and descending) rank on the Human Development Index because it doesn't do as well as many other countries in its composite, interrelated statistic of overall life expectancy, broad higher education opportunities and reliable, sufficient income for all. This failure can only be the result of poor governance. What else could it be, bad luck? Come now!

Why do you start off so many of your posts with an exclamation? It makes you read like a raving loon.

You said the US' problems stem from bad government and not from religion. Norway et al's increasing atheism thus cannot be an argument for the truth of atheism, which is what this entire thing has been about, hasn't it? It's all just the same old snide insinuations that religion is holding the planet back. That seems to be your entire purpose on this forum.

All I'm doing is pointing out that by your own admission, the IHDI is really irrelevant to your larger purpose.

So go back to pointing out all the "seeming correlations and by-products" that you like. It still doesn't imply causation or usefulness of the correlation.

[Tassman]

Why do you start off so many of your posts with an exclamation? It makes you read like a raving loon.

You said the US' problems stem from bad government and not from religion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index

Norway et al's increasing atheism thus cannot be an argument for the truth of atheism, which is what this entire thing has been about, hasn't it? It's all just the same old snide insinuations that religion is holding the planet back. That seems to be your entire purpose on this forum.

http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_atheist.html

All I'm doing is pointing out that by your own admission, the IHDI is really irrelevant to your larger purpose.

So go back to pointing out all the "seeming correlations and by-products" that you like. It still doesn't imply causation or usefulness of the correlation.

[Kelp(p)]

I was answering your question. You claimed (erroneously) that I was “self-contradicting” and I responded with: “No contradiction!” In what way does this make me a “read like a raving loon”? Next you’ll be picking me up on misplaced apostrophes.

It's not just this one, it's a good deal of posts I've seen from you.

Not just the US. Most social problems in any country can be attributable to bad governance. E.g. there is gross wealth inequality in the USA. This removes the possibility of quality education for many people. It also creates an underclass which creates its own problems – as we’re seeing in Ferguson today.

Hence, although the US ranks 5th in the Human Development Index, it only ranks 28th (and falling) when adjusted for inequality. By comparison Norway ranks first in both the Inequality-adjusted AND the non-adjusted HDI thus indicating a much more egalitarian and peaceful society than the USA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index



The argument is not about the “truth” or otherwise of atheism per se. The argument is that given higher education and its concomitant critical thinking skills, religion tends to be discarded as irrelevant. This can be seen in Norway, which tops the IHDI and, as well, is 72% Atheist/Agnostic compared to the USA with its overall lower education levels remaining more religious with only 9% Atheism/Agnosticism.

http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_atheist.html



The “larger purpose”, your words, is to point out that religion apparently can’t bear close scrutiny and tends to fare poorly in countries with high quality overall education – as can be seen by the figures.

And I'm saying that if the US had better governance, there is little reason to think our social problems wouldn't get better regardless of how religious we are (as you tacitly admit). Thus the fact that Norway is 76% atheist is not relevant to its higher IHDI. The explanation for the high levels of atheism must lie some place else.

[Cow Poke]

The Jews are hanging up their harps again -- way too much contention here to sing the songs of Zion.

[Kelp(p)]

The Jews are hanging up their harps again -- way too much contention here to sing the songs of Zion.

Why so sanctimonious all of a sudden? It isn't like you haven't been participating in the contention.

[Cow Poke]

Why so sanctimonious all of a sudden? It isn't like you haven't been participating in the contention.

What do you mean "all of a sudden"?

Relax, K, it was a poke at me, too. Sometimes I ALSO get caught up in the "back and forth", and there never seems to be a "disengagement".

It did, however, strike me as odd that WE (me too) are "going at it" in a thread where the original topic was the frustration of the Jews with their captors mocking and harassing them.

[Kelp(p)]

What do you mean "all of a sudden"?

Relax, K, it was a poke at me, too. Sometimes I ALSO get caught up in the "back and forth", and there never seems to be a "disengagement".

It did, however, strike me as odd that WE (me too) are "going at it" in a thread where the original topic was the frustration of the Jews with their captors mocking and harassing them.

Ok.

I didn't mean to insult, either. Just trying to help.