Well, we have members named Yahweh who posts frequently and Jesus Christ who posts now and then. They are effectively saying "I am God" and "I am the Messiah," are they not?
Leave them alone! All three of them!!!
@achaeopteryx, thanks for the kind words.
Professionally and personally I just go by "Bob"; we university faculty are a pretty laid back bunch. However my undergrad students seem to like calling me "Dr. Bob" for some reason, so I sometimes use that as a handle. The registration form here seemed to want a first and last name so I jotted "Professor Robert" just to get through it because it was sort of long. No pretense intended, and I'm sorry it came across that way. "Bob" is just fine.
It seems clear from a post in the parallel thread that some here view this as a place to be around like-minded friends and felt my presence was an intrusion, so this will be my last set of posts. I wish you all well.
No Prof, you're not unwelcome at all. It's kind of interesting to hear from the occasional polite theist, as long as you aren't taking offense at posts in response to yourself.
Single names are just fine: Strega, archaeopteryx, Yahweh, Unseen.
Dr. Bob - I know what you mean, when I filled mine out, I put, "arche"/"opteryx"
Please don't tell me you're so thin-skinned you're going to let a couple of rude comments run you off the board - that would be like allowing students' comments to run you off the campus! If Unseen felt that way, I'd have run him off long ago, fortunately, he didn't, and I still have a playmate to harass when I get bored.
I believe your contributions are valuable. Whether I agree with all of them or not, they are at least thought-provoking and challenging - now you have positive comments counterbalancing any negative ones, so now that the balance is restored, the only issue in question is your preference.
Nicely said, Arch.
I have my occasional lucid moments --
Yes. Don't go. You're not an intrusion AT ALL. It's refreshing to hear from a theist who doesn't claim the ability to prove God exists using science (although there have multiple hints at God "revealing Himself through science" - which I wouldn't mind hearing more about).
I don’t think “molestation” is the best word to explain the behaviour of hundreds of Catholic priests or monks. I think “child rape” is more accurate. What exactly is the difference between a regular Catholic and a Fundamentalist Catholic? Is it their degree of submission to their leader?
I think it depends what it consists of. If it is just mussing the hair in a lascivious and lecherous way it can bear being described as molestation. If it's rogering the bum of some boy or girl, that's definitely rape.
Yes, I agree to a point. However any time I hear a Catholic speak they never speak of the worst of what was done by the clergy. They tone down their wording and speak of the Church going through “challenging times”. The Catholic Church still has a problem facing up to its responsibilities and needs to go a lot further to make amends. It took long enough to get the institution to accept that what hundreds of it clergy did to young children was accountable to Criminal Law as opposed to its own Canon Law.
Hands up those who think the Catholic Church has made contrition for its crimes and put in place procedures to ensure it less likely to happen again. I don’t. I openly accuse it of crimes against humanity. I am not interested in any mealy mouthed apologies from them or by any rationalisations from any of the flock that seek their salvation through them. So I will accept that it is not always "child rape". Sometimes it is just "child abuse".
Reg, they didn't admit until 1998, that they'd maybe made a mistake about Galileo, I would look to a similar time frame for any further admissions. Of course, in another 400 years, such admissions will be irrelevant, as it will no longer exist.