Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 1/25/2025 at 10:03 PM, gsoda3 said:

I've never read it cover to cover like a novel so I started doing that last year from page 1. I'm using the MacArthur Study Bible, all the notes are helpful.  Really helps to reinforce the gulf there is between the holiness of God and the sinfulness of man (and myself).

Actually, the Old Testament God is really an asshole. A murdering genocidal, kill kids type of asshole.  

The Gnostic folks tried to resolve this dilemma of God is Holy, while being a true asshole, by concluding that there was a different Old Testament God than the New Testament God of love who cares for man.   They theorized that the New Testament God was superior to the lower status sorta evil Old Testament deity.     It might’ve been a tad simplistic, but it certainly helped to resolve issues with God slaughtering so many innocents.   And  really, what type of supposed Supreme Being is hung up on smelling the barbecue goodness of an animal offering to him?  

That dichotomy is also a nifty way to side step the band on eating shrimp, poor boys and the refusal to adhere to menstruation tents. I had a conversation with my minister on this subject, and I asked him how seminary education dealt with that vengeful Old Testament God thing.   He replied that they were far more important things to focus on, like the salvation of man.

Has anyone had a similar discussion with their pastor?

  • Like 1
Posted
10 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

build his church 

peter is a leader 

it will stand against all evil 

A leader or The leader?

Posted
1 hour ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

jesus is the rock / foundation of the church

peter was the living leader / pope to be 

 

image.gif.1b9b1fa7c3a5f763bc7bf5c107ad0af9.gif

 

Posted
On 2/7/2025 at 11:43 PM, F250 said:

For the Christ followers, I am curious as to your thoughts on this verse.

Matthew 16:18
New Revised Standard Version


18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[a] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.

From L. Michael White (Professor of Classics and Director of the Religious Studies Program University of Texas at Austin):

Quote

 

Matthew's gospel is clearly written for a Jewish Christian audience living within the immediate proximity of the homeland itself. Matthew's is the most Jewish of all the gospels. The community for which Matthew was written was a Jewish Christian community that was encountering some new tensions in the period of reconstruction after the first revolt. It would appear that they've been there for quite some time. They actually show a consciousness of an older legacy of Jesus' tradition, going back to before the war. But now they're experiencing new tensions and new problems in the aftermath of the revolt as a political and social reconstruction is taking place.

Matthew was written with what appears to be a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians located probably in Syria. Matthew's prime concern was that the Jewish tradition should not be lost in a church that was increasingly becoming gentile.He frequently cites Jewish scripture, the portrays Jesus as the new Moses along with other events from Jewish history, and the concern to present Jesus as fulfilling, not destroying, the Law

The Gospel of Mark is a New Testament book written for Gentile converts and Roman believers.

Mark appears to target a more classically Roman audience. He often tends to portray Jesus as the "suffering servant," using language like in Mark 10:45, "For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many. " Instead, Mark chooses to focus on the actions and sacrifices made by Christ. For a Roman audience this would have been a rather compelling picture; many of the Roman lower class were slaves or servants by trade, and could have identified with this representation. Its presumption that readers will be unfamiliar with Jewish customs , Aramaic terms, and Palestinian geography suggests an origin beyond Palestine.

Latinisms and Mark's tendency to translate Aramaic sources indicate that his audience was highly roman and did not understand Aramaic. This tends towards indicating a date after the destruction of Jerusalem, as Mark seems to be writing in diaspora.

In Acts, we find that Simon was the first to hear Yhwhs message and say 'hey the Gentiles are people too, believing in jesus saves us and them.' More gospel verses later Simon Peter tells Paul to go out and mentor more twards Gentiles and that he would take care of the Jews for Jesus.

Paul's audience (whom Mark is written for) argues that Gentiles don't have to get circumcised but Jewish sons did. He seems to make it quite clear that Gentiles arnt bound by the strict Jewish laws.

The Gentile church eventually wins out but Matthew's laws are still firm in the gospel and Bible.

There is some thought, though certainly in the minority, that the name "Peter" might be ironic (like calling a 6'7" 310 lbs guy Tiny) given how often Peter is admonished in gMark and how often he appears to be clueless.

It's also famous for being part of the basis of the Catholic Church claiming primacy over all other churches via their claim that Peter was the first "Pope". Of course this is a rather anachronistic claim since early churches didn't seem to have a single "leader" but a council of presbyters, along with the fact that no single church was viewed as "Primary" over the others until centuries later when when the Roman Empire would be split between Rome and Constantinople. Peter Brown, in The Rise of Western Christendom says that while churches of the West might think of the bishops of Rome as successors of Peter and Paul and heirs of Roman order, it would "be a serious anachronism to see the bishops of Rome as central to the Latin churches of the West."

The succession from Peter is an idea that first appears around 180 CE, in Irenaeus' Against Heresies, where he compares the many "heretical" groups at the time to the "universally known church founded and organized by the two most glorious apostles Peter and Paul.". One problem with this idea is that, according Paul's own letter to the Romans, there is an already existing Roman church which he did not found. There is additionally no early information that Peter founded a church in Rome. Even Peter's early alleged successor, Pope Clement does not make that claim in 1 Clement. Irenaeus' assertions about the "apostolic church" with a continuous lineage of "bishops" dating from Peter's time to his own, looks to be a device to contrast against the illegitimacy of all groups who did not recognize episcopal authority like his own as Bishop of Lyons. He was describing the kind of church he would like to see, not the church as it was in his time. His idea of a Roman episcopal genealogy begotten by Peter and Paul naturally appealed to bishops of Rome in later times, but it has no verifiable basis in history. The very "heretics" he was writing against were acting freely in Rome itself, showing any supposed supreme leader lacked control over dissenters.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Posted
3 hours ago, Viper said:

From L. Michael White (Professor of Classics and Director of the Religious Studies Program University of Texas at Austin):

There is some thought, though certainly in the minority, that the name "Peter" might be ironic (like calling a 6'7" 310 lbs guy Tiny) given how often Peter is admonished in gMark and how often he appears to be clueless.

It's also famous for being part of the basis of the Catholic Church claiming primacy over all other churches via their claim that Peter was the first "Pope". Of course this is a rather anachronistic claim since early churches didn't seem to have a single "leader" but a council of presbyters, along with the fact that no single church was viewed as "Primary" over the others until centuries later when when the Roman Empire would be split between Rome and Constantinople. Peter Brown, in The Rise of Western Christendom says that while churches of the West might think of the bishops of Rome as successors of Peter and Paul and heirs of Roman order, it would "be a serious anachronism to see the bishops of Rome as central to the Latin churches of the West."

The succession from Peter is an idea that first appears around 180 CE, in Irenaeus' Against Heresies, where he compares the many "heretical" groups at the time to the "universally known church founded and organized by the two most glorious apostles Peter and Paul.". One problem with this idea is that, according Paul's own letter to the Romans, there is an already existing Roman church which he did not found. There is additionally no early information that Peter founded a church in Rome. Even Peter's early alleged successor, Pope Clement does not make that claim in 1 Clement. Irenaeus' assertions about the "apostolic church" with a continuous lineage of "bishops" dating from Peter's time to his own, looks to be a device to contrast against the illegitimacy of all groups who did not recognize episcopal authority like his own as Bishop of Lyons. He was describing the kind of church he would like to see, not the church as it was in his time. His idea of a Roman episcopal genealogy begotten by Peter and Paul naturally appealed to bishops of Rome in later times, but it has no verifiable basis in history. The very "heretics" he was writing against were acting freely in Rome itself, showing any supposed supreme leader lacked control over dissenters.

Solid post.

 

Posted

A couple of disjointed comments @F250 on that verse: "And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

  • I have heard it said that the "rock" that Jesus says he will build his church on, is the rock of confession-- that we confess Jesus is the Messiah (which is what Peter had just done and 16:18 was in response to that confession/posture). Matthew 16:16-17 Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.

 

  • That said, I have also heard it said that Jesus was one for nicknames. He nicknamed James and John "Sons of Thunder" and more famously Simon was renamed as Peter (Greek Petros means Rock) in what I have heard would be a modern day equivilent of giving your buddy the nickname "Rocky" or someone bull-headed, strong, stubbon but also heart of gold, underdog and loveable....like the eponymously named boxing movie.

 

  • Lastly I've heard that verse used as an invitation for Christians to take up their cross and not be fearful, but be on the attack-- be on the offensive. For Gates are a defensive barriers. A lot of folks get it backwards in their minds that the Christianity and faith (and evangelism) is something to hide behind like gates, as the forces of evil push against it. But it's quite the opposite. We are called to push against the wicked and sinful and storm those gates with the righteousness and steadfastness of faith, etc. etc.

Or so that's how I've heard it said.

Posted

I agree, the OT can be wild to read through, and the sanitized stories we learn growing up don’t quite do it justice. Also, @Brisketexan, I’ve definitely made peace with God on the porcelain throne a time or two after an Allsup’s burrito! 😂

  • 1 month later...
Posted

anyone have any favorite YouTube channels or podcasts? 

ReligionforBreakfast is great- 

 

 

I also like Useful Charts - 

 

 

Also there's probably the easiest to look at Bible Scholar, Robyn Walsh who has been posting videos on Bart Ehrman's YouTube channel recently

 

  • 3 months later...
Posted

This post is prompted by Greg Abbott telling the people of Texas that prayer works in a tragedy and that today should be a day of prayer, but it could apply generally to many situations in life. I posted my frustration and anger over this in one of the flood threads, but those threads are very active with multiple random discussions, and this seems like a better place to pose these questions. I know these are not novel ideas or concerns, but I'm honestly curious what the posters in this thread think. 

For what it's worth, I was raised in a Christian household, read the Bible cover to cover at one point, attended a bible study throughout my time at UT, and then grew up and started to see a lot of cracks in the beliefs I was given, eventually deciding that none of it really works for me. So that's my starting point in these questions and I mean no disrespect towards anyone's beliefs.

How can a person (elected official or otherwise) say that prayer works in response to the Kerrville floods? There are people with dead children. Did prayer work for those families?

If you are someone that believes that prayer can produce actual results in this life, how do you explain a family that is praying about a missing young daughter who was attending a Christian camp of all things, and not having their prayers answered with their daughter returned safely to them?

Did God only hear the prayers of certain families? Did he not love the other families? Was it simply in his plan that those families would suffer losses, prayers be damned?

Assume that 2 families have very similar religious beliefs and both believe in the power of prayer. Family A gets their child home safe. They would likely say that God answered their prayers. Family B loses their child. What would family B say? The Lord works in mysterious ways? 

This obviously goes far beyond the tragedy in Texas this weekend. It could be applied to any horrible situation in life. If your child is killed in a school shooting, did you not pray enough? If your spouse dies of cancer, were you not praying enough?

It seems like a magic 8 ball to me with completely random outcomes. Or possibly a fortune cookie where you can read into it however you want.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)

Adding onto my previous post because my thoughts shift somewhat...

I'm assuming any attempt to explain this will go back to the concept of original sin, that Adam and Eve are responsible for the fall of mankind, we all deserve to die and spend eternity in hell for our sins, and anyone who isn't dead (yet) or is part of the small minority that makes it into heaven has been spared by the grace of God. So all the kids that died this weekend deserve it, their families deserve their devestation, and the others live to fight another day. The kid that dies in a school shooting deserves it. The mother that dies of cancer deserves it.

That part really doesn't work for me, and likely one of the primary reasons I turned away from Christianity. If you are willing to believe that God is almighty enough to save people (especially that he can be motivated by prayer), then his unwillingness to save people is cruel. The Bible says something like "wide is the gate that leads to death and narrow is the path that leads to life." Okay cool, so his own user manual for the world he created informs us that most people will die and spend eternity in hell. But he created this, all of it. It's his game that we are forced to play. And every moment that this world continues spinning on its axis, millions more people are born who he will ultimately condemn to hell. Why allow that to continue? It's saddistic.

Perhaps a willingness to accept that is an entry level requirement to being a Christian. I guess my brain isn't wired that way. It defies all logic.

Edited by wild_turkey
Posted

I think its simpler than that. We have a lot of people in the United States that say they are Christians, but dont follow the basic tenants of Christ's message ( love your neighbor, let he who is without sin cast the first stone, etc..), and maybe God is just sick of their shit, so God has gone back to the wrathful God of the OT.

  • Like 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted

I consider myself a believer, and I’m still in search of where I want to land so to speak.

I’ve always believed that God lets things happen.  It’s just how I’ve always thought.  I believe mainly that prayer is for you and me to feel closer to God.
I don’t know if I believe that prayer has ever prevented or helped an outcome.
 

Posted

The Israelites were God’s chosen people. He loved them. He also let a lot of really bad stuff happen to them. Maybe when someone is praying for people in a tragedy, they are simply praying for peace and understanding.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
31 minutes ago, wild_turkey said:

Family B loses their child. What would family B say? The Lord works in mysterious ways? 

Lately it's more "God has a different plan for Family B"

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, Rip76 said:

I consider myself a believer, and I’m still in search of where I want to land so to speak.

I’ve always believed that God lets things happen.  It’s just how I’ve always thought.  I believe mainly that prayer is for you and me to feel closer to God.
I don’t know if I believe that prayer has ever prevented or helped an outcome.
 

Yeah, the concept of original sin isn't so much banal evil as being apart from God.  Which basically means God lets shit happen, and if you want divine help, you must seek it.  And that doesn't mean a new McMansion and a BMW in the driveway, but being able to deal with the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, which is often as simple and as complex as just doing the next right thing, whatever that may be.

So, prayer is often an after-the-fact thing in that something terrible has happened, how do I deal with it.  But if you are prayerful, or for the non-believer, spiritual, constant contact with your divinity, while it doesn't prevent disasters, seems to help avoid them somehow.

Posted

At some point I had to read a bunch of different early Christian takes on Job. It would be interesting to go read those again.

To the explicit question of how an elected official can say such a thing, it's purely a political move to manipulate voters into continuing to believe the opposite of what is true. They say it because it gives them power and that power has corrupted them such that they are no longer acting in service of a Christian God, if they were ever even trying to do that in the first place.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

I am not at all surprised to see this thread bumped after a weekend like this.  The why's are more than our mentalities can handle.  Thank goodness that is true.  I wouldn't want to know the why's at this point, but you can (still) put me firmly in the Christ followers group.  We all have questions we could get answers for after something like this happens.  We will never know in this lifetime.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Posted
1 hour ago, wild_turkey said:

Adding onto my previous post because my thoughts shift somewhat...

I'm assuming any attempt to explain this will go back to the concept of original sin, that Adam and Eve are responsible for the fall of mankind, we all deserve to die and spend eternity in hell for our sins, and anyone who isn't dead (yet) or is part of the small minority that makes it into heaven has been spared by the grace of God. So all the kids that died this weekend deserve it, their families deserve their devestation, and the others live to fight another day. The kid that dies in a school shooting deserves it. The mother that dies of cancer deserves it.

That part really doesn't work for me, and likely one of the primary reasons I turned away from Christianity. If you are willing to believe that God is almighty enough to save people (especially that he can be motivated by prayer), then his unwillingness to save people is cruel. The Bible says something like "wide is the gate that leads to death and narrow is the path that leads to life." Okay cool, so his own user manual for the world he created informs us that most people will die and spend eternity in hell. But he created this, all of it. It's his game that we are forced to play. And every moment that this world continues spinning on its axis, millions more people are born who he will ultimately condemn to hell. Why allow that to continue? It's saddistic.

Perhaps a willingness to accept that is an entry level requirement to being a Christian. I guess my brain isn't wired that way. It defies all logic.

 

2 hours ago, wild_turkey said:

This post is prompted by Greg Abbott telling the people of Texas that prayer works in a tragedy and that today should be a day of prayer, but it could apply generally to many situations in life. I posted my frustration and anger over this in one of the flood threads, but those threads are very active with multiple random discussions, and this seems like a better place to pose these questions. I know these are not novel ideas or concerns, but I'm honestly curious what the posters in this thread think. 

For what it's worth, I was raised in a Christian household, read the Bible cover to cover at one point, attended a bible study throughout my time at UT, and then grew up and started to see a lot of cracks in the beliefs I was given, eventually deciding that none of it really works for me. So that's my starting point in these questions and I mean no disrespect towards anyone's beliefs.

How can a person (elected official or otherwise) say that prayer works in response to the Kerrville floods? There are people with dead children. Did prayer work for those families?

If you are someone that believes that prayer can produce actual results in this life, how do you explain a family that is praying about a missing young daughter who was attending a Christian camp of all things, and not having their prayers answered with their daughter returned safely to them?

Did God only hear the prayers of certain families? Did he not love the other families? Was it simply in his plan that those families would suffer losses, prayers be damned?

Assume that 2 families have very similar religious beliefs and both believe in the power of prayer. Family A gets their child home safe. They would likely say that God answered their prayers. Family B loses their child. What would family B say? The Lord works in mysterious ways? 

This obviously goes far beyond the tragedy in Texas this weekend. It could be applied to any horrible situation in life. If your child is killed in a school shooting, did you not pray enough? If your spouse dies of cancer, were you not praying enough?

It seems like a magic 8 ball to me with completely random outcomes. Or possibly a fortune cookie where you can read into it however you want.

Let me help you. You’ll get a lot of some version of “you can’t fathom God’s plan. But he has a plan.”

Posted

I have been struggling with the prayer issue as I have been battling cancer for 3 years. At this point whenever someone says “I’m praying for you”, I just want to yell “it’s been 3 years, what’s the fucking point? It ain’t working”

To me, these are the options:
1. There is no higher power
2. There is a higher power but is unable to effect anything
3. I have been abandoned by said higher power

Any way you slice it, what’s the point of the prayer? Is there a jar with my name on it, with a line and when the prayer count goes over that line, I am cured?

I have basically ceased going to church outside of some things for my kids and since I explained the above to my wife, she kind of stopped asking me to go.

I can’t imagine losing a daughter (I have an 8 YO going to Longhorn this summer) at summer camp and not feeling the same.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 6
Posted
29 minutes ago, Stringer said:

I have been struggling with the prayer issue as I have been battling cancer for 3 years. At this point whenever someone says “I’m praying for you”, I just want to yell “it’s been 3 years, what’s the fucking point? It ain’t working”

To me, these are the options:
1. There is no higher power
2. There is a higher power but is unable to effect anything
3. I have been abandoned by said higher power

Any way you slice it, what’s the point of the prayer? Is there a jar with my name on it, with a line and when the prayer count goes over that line, I am cured?

I have basically ceased going to church outside of some things for my kids and since I explained the above to my wife, she kind of stopped asking me to go.

I can’t imagine losing a daughter (I have an 8 YO going to Longhorn this summer) at summer camp and not feeling the same.

sorry to hear about your struggle, man. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
On 2/8/2025 at 12:29 PM, Gatorubet said:

They theorized that the New Testament God was superior to the lower status sorta evil Old Testament deity.     It might’ve been a tad simplistic, but it certainly helped to resolve issues with God slaughtering so many innocents.   And  really, what type of supposed Supreme Being is hung up on smelling the barbecue goodness of an animal offering?

 

Suspicious Monkey GIF by MOODMAN

Edited by Ten Bears
  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Posted
3 hours ago, wild_turkey said:

How can a person (elected official or otherwise) say that prayer works in response to the Kerrville floods? There are people with dead children. Did prayer work for those families?

A friend worked as a hospice nurse. She claimed that religious patients generally had an easier passing than non-religious types. I think calls for prayers are meant to assuage, not to affect change.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted

Seeing social media posts related to dead girls in a river that somehow still find a way to end with, "We still know God is good" is a sickening reminder of how demented all this bullshit really is.  For most of my life I was in the "I don't believe it but I respect your beliefs" camp.  That respect is harder and harder to find these days.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Your Mom said:

Seeing social media posts related to dead girls in a river that somehow still find a way to end with, "We still know God is good" is a sickening reminder of how demented all this bullshit really is.  For most of my life I was in the "I don't believe it but I respect your beliefs" camp.  That respect is harder and harder to find these days.  

I was right there with you, now, I'm way ahead of you. I have no more tolerance for this bullshit, including family.

Edited by Ten Bears
  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

A friend worked as a hospice nurse. She claimed that religious patients generally had an easier passing than non-religious types. I think calls for prayers are meant to assuage, not to affect change.

I recall a study a few years ago that showed hospital patients tended to fare worse when they knew people were praying for them. If I remember correctly, they hypothesized that it made patients feel stressed and/or have “performance anxiety” about their recovery. Of course, these weren’t hospice patients being questioned about their belief in a god.

From the experience I gained taking care of my mom for a few months when she was getting hospice care, I think her devout belief did give her some comfort, knowing that she would soon pass and be with my dad.

So maybe the takeaway is don’t expect god or prayers to intercede in whether you get well or sick or live or die, except to make you feel more mentally prepared in the end. 

  • Like 1
Posted

Psalm 10 begins: Why, Lord, do you stand far off? Why do you hide yourself in times of trouble?

The rest of the Psalm bears closer resemblance to our current social order than a disaster such as this, but it seems like a pretty fair question in this case too. I don’t know how a compassionate person can look at this situation and not ask, where is God? The situation seems too cruel.

The already mentioned book of Job is the go-to biblical book on human suffering, but to my reading, it’s throughout the entire text. The writers of the Bible seemed to accept that suffering, often unjust, was a part of life, and it can be terrible and unfathomably cruel.

Unjust suffering is certainly depicted in the Gospels and Jesus does not respond with the trite responses that some of us try to self-sooth with. He responds with compassion for those who are suffering.

I can’t speak to what any particular blowhard with a microphone says about prayer — whether he’s just trying to comfort himself in the face of such suffering or if his words come from genuine compassion or just putting on a show. Often times the desire to stand in front of a microphone put on a show indicates the lack of qualification to do so.

I will say that for me personally, prayer does work. Meditating on the suffering of others and seeking to see them with the level of selfless compassion show by Jesus in the Gospels is a good first step to finding ways to help others in their suffering. I think this is probably the case for most believers, despite the compassionless performative show we all run across so often. Jesus didn’t like the show all that much either.

If prayer is communicating with the creator of the universe and God of the Bible, and if some of those prayers are raging against the cruelty of this event, I think a just God would agree with such a sentiment. If such a prayer doesn’t spur the person to ease human suffering, then it was nothing more than a vain repetition.

Townes Van Zandt sang, “If you needed me I would come to you; I’d swim the sea just to ease your pain.”

  • Like 2
Posted
2 hours ago, Stringer said:

I have been struggling with the prayer issue as I have been battling cancer for 3 years. At this point whenever someone says “I’m praying for you”, I just want to yell “it’s been 3 years, what’s the fucking point? It ain’t working”

To me, these are the options:
1. There is no higher power
2. There is a higher power but is unable to effect anything
3. I have been abandoned by said higher power

Any way you slice it, what’s the point of the prayer? Is there a jar with my name on it, with a line and when the prayer count goes over that line, I am cured?

I have basically ceased going to church outside of some things for my kids and since I explained the above to my wife, she kind of stopped asking me to go.

I can’t imagine losing a daughter (I have an 8 YO going to Longhorn this summer) at summer camp and not feeling the same.

 

hang in there man 

positive thoughts 

Posted
I was right there with you, now, I'm way ahead of you. I have no more tolerance for this bullshit, including family.

This is where I’m at. I tolerate it from my father because he’s 93 and isn’t an evangelical nut.
Posted
I have been struggling with the prayer issue as I have been battling cancer for 3 years. At this point whenever someone says “I’m praying for you”, I just want to yell “it’s been 3 years, what’s the fucking point? It ain’t working”

To me, these are the options:
1. There is no higher power
2. There is a higher power but is unable to effect anything
3. I have been abandoned by said higher power

Any way you slice it, what’s the point of the prayer? Is there a jar with my name on it, with a line and when the prayer count goes over that line, I am cured?

I have basically ceased going to church outside of some things for my kids and since I explained the above to my wife, she kind of stopped asking me to go.

I can’t imagine losing a daughter (I have an 8 YO going to Longhorn this summer) at summer camp and not feeling the same.

I’m sorry to hear about your situation. I don’t have any advice or prayers but I’m sorry you drew that card and hopefully there’s good news ahead for you.
Posted
1 hour ago, Your Mom said:

Seeing social media posts related to dead girls in a river that somehow still find a way to end with, "We still know God is good" is a sickening reminder of how demented all this bullshit really is.  For most of my life I was in the "I don't believe it but I respect your beliefs" camp.  That respect is harder and harder to find these days.  

It’s how they cope. It’s fine.  To me it feels disingenuous to paradoxical, but to those folks it’s helping them process and be ok with their world. 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...