A personal note to Glatlol: I apologize to you for the hardness of my words to you on this blog. I meant what I said to you, however, I regret that I was a bit harsh. Or maybe a lot harsh. My sincere apology to you. Sometimes I'm like a bull crashing through a china shop, as my mother would say.
Glatlol, you criticize Serendipity for stating biblical content as fact and yet you expect everyone else to allow you to state the opposite as a truth. You are being a hypocrite. While I often grin and very much appreciate your candor in general, in this instance you are being entirely unfair.
Neither you nor Serendipity were around at the time the world was created (came to be) so your statement that God is not real bears no proof. Serendipty on the other hand has taken the time to provide information of historical facts to substantiate his claims. What have you given? Only your opinion.
How about providing some factual information that disproves the reality of God? It isn't enough for you to just say so.
Serendipity, I enjoyed reading your blog. I always do. While your blogs do not provide the mindless entertainment that I sometimes crave, they have a positive effect on me. Especially at work where I am greatly challenged. Your subjects are thought provoking and hard-hitting. Such is life, no?
Clearly I'm not the only one touched by the information you share.
Please don't be discouraged, but instead be heartened to continue.
Glatlol, where does it state in the blog rules that one must add a disclaimer stating that all blog contents are the blogger's opinion?
Serendipity has done nothing wrong to anyone on this site, including you. Somehow I don't think your hostility originates with Serendipity. Maybe you're not really so sure that there is no God as I've seen you say often enough. You know, no matter how many times you deny the existence of God, that will not make him any less real.
Glatlol, I see you are as outspoken and abrupt as usual. No surprise there. But let me fill you in on a few things dear woman.
1) You cuttingly accuse Serendipity of copying and pasting text in order to compose a blog. He doesn't. This is a subject of great interest to him. He studies the topics he posts about. When he quotes someone, he names the source. Apart from that, this is his own writing.
2) If posting a blog is considered to be "forcing someone's religion on another" then I doubt blogging would have been made available on this site because each and every blogger would be guilty of doing the same. That claim is just BS and you know it.
3) Who are you to say that Serendipity's blogs are wasting space? Who made you queen of the blogs madam? Oh wait, do you personally finance this website? No, I didn't think so.
Rather than be blatantly ignorant and disrespectful of someone on his own blog(yes, he is a real person just like you), go start your own blog and then you may rant and rave to your heart's content.
Regarding the quote. I've heard this so many times. Worded differently, but essentially the same.
So I have a question. Who is to say that we are happy enough in ourselves to deserve to be with someone else? Is there a happiness test somewhere that I've overlooked? Is Tom Robbins a happiness guru?
Oh, and why is it that practically ALL people who are in love - whether recently or for a lifetime, tell others that they are the luckiest of people because they have found the one that makes them happy?
Would seem a contradiction, don't ya'll think? If we are supposed to be so happy and content as a single person, then why do couples say it's the other person that brings them to fulfillment? Hmm. Maybe that book of myths and fables is correct after all... that it "is not good for man to be alone".
Both. Sometimes I want to comment on the blog and sometimes I want to comment on a comment. Whether its a great topic or not, group dynamics play a role in how many comments a blog receives.
Nightfury, if he's already said that he might leave you, then he will leave you. Sorry, but he's given you warning and in his mind, that is all he's required to do.
I beg to differ. If humans were not given free will, then how is it that man daily makes choices as to how he lives and behaves? But surely the fact that humans actually do makes such choices is proof that man has that ability and if man has that ability, then how could he have that ability unless given to him by God?
Also, Rahul, the whole point of my blog was the freedom of choice that God gave to humans. People often chose to do the wrong thing and not to protect and care about each other. How is this God's fault?
Reminds me of a little story. A dentist was telling another a patient that he doesn't believe in God because of all the poor people in the world. The patient told the dentist that he doesn't believe in dentists. The dentist was shocked and asked how his patient could say such a thing. The patient told him, well there are so many people in this world with bad teeth. If there were really dentists that there would be nobody with bad teeth.
Rahul, we know that Jesus left this world once because he was put to death, and we know that he briefly returned. Also we know that the spirit of God came to be with us until his second coming. But many times?
RE: Who Is The Holy Spirit?
Geez louise, fieldir, that's a lot of name-calling and accusations. I guess you failed charm school too, eh?