There is no “psychological manipulation.” But term it what you will. It isn’t that I don’t want to think about “ifs.” I just don’t see the point in going forward with a conversation built on a presupposition that I do not even hold. We can can construct our own universe and write our own rules, but that doesn’t necessarily conform to reality just because we like it better. You are leading me down a bunny trail and I have better things to do with my time, as I’m sure you do as well.

Because you find my reading of scripture and understanding thereof “psychological manipulation” I find rather disturbing. Does that mean that I need to be freed from it? And to what lengths are you willing to go so that I don’t continue in my “delusion?” Or teach my kids in it?

Who has the power over my mind? Just those who agree with you? Or am I allowed to make my own decision?

You are looking for monsters that aren’t there. You are afraid of something you know only a little about. That isn’t meant as an insult. It is the way most of us function. But be careful about the strength of your language and what you are willing to go to to rid the world of this “psychological manipulation.”

You find my voluntary belief in a religion that is based on voluntary submission frightening.

I find these people frightening:

http://principleddiscovery.com/?p=340

These “modern” views have resulted in the murder of millions. For religious faith which went against state imposed atheism.

This line of reasoning isn’t really going to go anywhere because you are making presuppositions that I disagree with at their basis.

I agree: You disagree. And you you don’t want to think about “ifs.” I can only say I think you should because those “ifs” are probably true.

You have no problem with someone telling you: “It’s no longer your life; you’ve signed it over.”

I will continue to think that is a nasty form of psychological manipulation and very revealing of Huckabee’s psyche (and apparently your’s too) while you won’t.

I could ask the same questions about whatever it is you hold as true and wherever it is you learned it from.

There are too many “ifs” for rational discussion.

Are those arguing for a “vaccination” for this “cultural virus” of religion promoting “liberty?” Or mind control?

If we are answerable to Christ and He doesn’t exist, then we are answerable to our own idea of Christ.

And your own idea of Christ comes from where? Is it really your own, or the one your parents gave you — or what you read or what some other authority figure gave you?

I had a long old comment typed out here several hours ago but got distracted and a few other things and when I came back to review it I realized that what you are saying, about feeling bad when people are like that to you, is not necessarily a bad thing. I think that it would be a bad thing if you weren’t sad that those who are your brothers & sisters in Christ, or who claim to be, treat you, therefore most likely others, with disdain simply because they don’t agree with you on a topic.

I guess I just think that as long as you aren’t allowing that feeling to change your opinion on something, i.e. just to be liked, then it’s the right feeling to have. It is wrong to treat others with contempt simply because we don’t agree with them and we only do it because of our sinfulness. Sin is wrong therefore, being sinned against is painful. Your feelings aren’t wrong, they are human and they are a good part of being human.

As for how long to carry on a “conversation” with people like that, it’s really up to you. For me, if a person was completely belligerent or obviously not listening to a thing I’m saying, I would end it. If they are truly trying to understand what I’m saying, then I would carry on.

Sara (d-b mom)

If we are answerable to Christ and He doesn’t exist, then we are answerable to our own idea of Christ. Which leads us where? The same place as anyone with a partial understanding of the workings of the universe. Which is all of us.

It is between the individual and God.

Not the state nor even the church but to Christ.

And if Christ doesn’t exist and if the spiritual is merely the psychological, then to whoever is interpreting, defining and inducing whatever Christ is to you.

Not the state nor even the church but to Christ. That is pretty basic Christian teaching.

The difference between what a fundamentalist believes and what evangelical or mainline denominations believe probably does hinge on the understanding of this…I don’t know. I haven’t thought about it that much…that is why it can get confusing.

Some will pervert these kinds of statements to try to prove that you have to follow their brand of Christianity without questions, effectively turning reason in the believer off. That is what I was talking about more in my entry.

2Co 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

We have liberty of conscience, and the practical outworkings of faith are between the individual and God.

I’m not defending Huckabee. I don’t know enough about his religious beliefs to know more than what you quoted. But Christian teaching is no more dangerous to you than someone handing you a tract or conversing with you.