Chet Steadman 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 Daniel (and all),If you liked "A Case For Christ" and are in for an equally thought-provoking book that addresses a lot of the same issues, I recommend "The Reason For God" by Timothy Keller. It's a bit more of a philosophical approach that doesn't come across as preachy or condescending as some Christian literature has been known to do. I used to be a staunch anti-theist, and now find myself more open to the subject. It didn't turn me into a bible thumper or anything, but a good, thought-provoking read nonetheless. Link to post Share on other sites
copernicus 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 Daniel (and all),If you liked "A Case For Christ" and are in for an equally thought-provoking book that addresses a lot of the same issues, I recommend "The Reason For God" by Timothy Keller. It's a bit more of a philosophical approach that doesn't come across as preachy or condescending as some Christian literature has been known to do. I used to be a staunch anti-theist, and now find myself more open to the subject. It didn't turn me into a bible thumper or anything, but a good, thought-provoking read nonetheless.take it to the religion board. Link to post Share on other sites
DanielNegreanu 141 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 take it to the religion board. LOL, you don't make the rules copernicus :-) He was referring to my blog so he found the right place... that's why we allow you to defend the GOP so aggressively here in this forum, because I find politics interesting too... Link to post Share on other sites
Pdiddydog 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 I can't say I heard of the book or the guy who wrote it but I definately dun thought about those questions myself. We're you also anti-religious before you read this book DN? Link to post Share on other sites
copernicus 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 LOL, you don't make the rules copernicus :-) He was referring to my blog so he found the right place... that's why we allow you to defend the GOP so aggressively here in this forum, because I find politics interesting too...you wouldnt want to appear unbalanced, now, would you.BTW just saw a replay of the five diamonds wingg sir Link to post Share on other sites
Chet Steadman 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Author Share Posted September 6, 2008 A link to the book's website is provided below. Believe you me, I didn't join this board to promote/refute religion AT ALL but just read the most recent blog and found it to be a relevant posting. I'll learn my place soon enough, Copernicus. I'm just a lowly FCP-n00b, but I play pokers too.www.thereasonforgod.com Link to post Share on other sites
copernicus 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 hey the boss said it was the right place who am i to argue?besides, he needs to be right once in this forum, so it might as well be now (you set yourself up for that one at Commerce, Daniel. ) Link to post Share on other sites
vbnautilus 48 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 Two points for Daniel... Have you ever read what is pretty much the opposite of 'case for christ' in sam harris's Letter to a Christian Nation? Also, re: The thing is, I also feel like the opinion of the president is only slightly more relevant since they don't have the power to overturn Roe vs Wade.The president is probably the one person who comes closest to actually having the power to overturn RvW since he can nominate supreme court justices who oppose it. The court is currently split with a bare majority in favor of RvW but two of the supporters are very old. Appoint a couple of pro-life justices for lifetime terms and you are pretty much guaranteed to get it overturned. Link to post Share on other sites
copernicus 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 Two points for Daniel... Have you ever read what is pretty much the opposite of 'case for christ' in sam harris's Letter to a Christian Nation? Also, re:The thing is, I also feel like the opinion of the president is only slightly more relevant since they don't have the power to overturn Roe vs Wade.The president is probably the one person who comes closest to actually having the power to overturn RvW since he can nominate supreme court justices who oppose it. The court is currently split with a bare majority in favor of RvW but two of the supporters are very old. Appoint a couple of pro-life justices for lifetime terms and you are pretty much guaranteed to get it overturned.So what. It goes back to the states where it belongs. Link to post Share on other sites
JustDoIt 10 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 So what. It goes back to the states where it belongs.That would be terrible to return it to the states where it belongs.........Planned Parenthood would lose a nice chunk of money.That would be a shame.I don't think that many people understand the over turning of Roe v Wade would not end legal abortion. Link to post Share on other sites
copernicus 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 That would be terrible to return it to the states where it belongs.........Planned Parenthood would lose a nice chunk of money.That would be a shame.I don't think that many people understand the over turning of Roe v Wade would not end legal abortion.The Democrat party understands it but dont want their voters to realize what a non-issue it is at the POTUS level. 1) Get the judges in 2) get them to actually overturn it despite stare decisis 3) states decide 4) NY, Ca, Ma and Il keep it legal 5) all but about 3 states follow suit Hope you put the flight time to Sweden to good use...like reading the Constitution. Link to post Share on other sites
vbnautilus 48 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 The Democrat party understands it but dont want their voters to realize what a non-issue it is at the POTUS level. 1) Get the judges in 2) get them to actually overturn it despite stare decisis 3) states decide 4) NY, Ca, Ma and Il keep it legal 5) all but about 3 states follow suit Hope you put the flight time to Sweden to good use...like reading the Constitution.Stare decisis is basically a non-issue for RvW; several of the current judges have already voted for cases that would have overturned it.. according to Scalia, Clarence Thomas simply does not believe in stare decisis. I agree it would revert to the states, a federal ban is not likely to get passed. Link to post Share on other sites
copernicus 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 Stare decisis is basically a non-issue for RvW; several of the current judges have already voted for cases that would have overturned it.. according to Scalia, Clarence Thomas simply does not believe in stare decisis.Its still a hurdle, even if not a huge one. You need at least two judges who are both anti-abortion and willing to overturn it. Of course it should be overturned. It was a convoluted decision by a liberal court legislating from the bench. Link to post Share on other sites
Potomophobia 17 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 I will not go into God. I've stated my beliefs in other posts.Daniel, it is a free country and you may say whatever you wish.I just posted to say that last night I saw an old ESPN broadcast of a 2001 tournament at Tunica that John Juanda won. At the end there was a camera shot that had you and Allen Cunningham in the background. I must say, you look better now, at least you lost the medallion.LOL..... take care Sir. Link to post Share on other sites
nutzbuster 7 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 A Case for Christ is a pretty interesting read. Free copies for the asking btw (religion forum). My Nephew asked for a copy and it was sent out immediately. He really appreciated the book.Also, I chatted to JC about Yellowtail. He said it was just horrible. Such a shame too....Shintaro was the nuts. Sounds like a Bellagio fumble.I honestly wish the elections were already over. I get fired up,,,then burned out...then fired up....(repeat)It's getting exhausting. Link to post Share on other sites
copernicus 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 I will not go into God. I've stated my beliefs in other posts.Daniel, it is a free country and you may say whatever you wish.I just posted to say that last night I saw an old ESPN broadcast of a 2001 tournament at Tunica that John Juanda won. At the end there was a camera shot that had you and Allen Cunningham in the background. I must say, you look better now, at least you lost the medallion.LOL..... take care Sir.was that a medallion? I thought it was ballast Link to post Share on other sites
getarealjob 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 Go straight to the source. Red highlighted sections in the New Testament.Leading a spiritual life is not complicated. You don't have to defend it to anyone. You either get it or you don't. You either keep your eyes and heart open or you don't. You either turn your will over to the care of God or you don't. Faith is not an intellectualizing act. It is what it is, much like God and Jesus Christ. Incidentally, Negreanu, you've probably already read this, but Richard Dawkin's God Delusion supports Jesus' ethical views from NT. God Delusion is a good read as well--ultimately it reinforces your faith and guides you on how to speak to spiritual matters vis a vis the atheist perspective:http://richarddawkins.net/article,20,Athei...Richard-Dawkins Link to post Share on other sites
Sheiky 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 I'm an atheist, but I don't see how anyone could write enough meaningful content to fill any kind of book arguing for or against the existence of god. If the author think she does exist, what evidence does he have to prove that? AFAICS, no one has any apart from vague questions like 'Where did the universe come from' and anecdotal 'miracles'. If the author is an atheist, then what can he argue beyond 'There's no proof that god exists'? It's a matter of faith whether you believe in god and religion or not. People can try and persuade other people by pretending that they actually have some evidence on either side of the fence, but I can't see how anything said in a book would change anyone's mind because A) It's obviously going to be biased on way or another and B ) Because there's no evidence of either side being true. Link to post Share on other sites
copernicus 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 I'm an atheist, but I don't see how anyone could write enough meaningful content to fill any kind of book arguing for or against the existence of god. If the author think she does exist, what evidence does he have to prove that? AFAICS, no one has any apart from vague questions like 'Where did the universe come from' and anecdotal 'miracles'. If the author is an atheist, then what can he argue beyond 'There's no proof that god exists'?Then read "God Delusion". There is quite a bit more to atheism than simply not believing in god, at least if you are at all active in any religious/philosophical conversations or even just want to better articulate your non-belief for yourself. Many theist arguments ultimately lead to an attack on science, and if that at all concerns you...which at least in the US it should, then there s quite a bit more to it than "there is no proof that god exists". Link to post Share on other sites
Sheiky 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 The read "God Delusion". There is quite a bit more to it than "There is no proof...".Would you care to elaborate on what that quite a bit more is in brief?I'm tempted to read it, but being an atheist already I don't really see much point in reading it. Link to post Share on other sites
copernicus 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 Would you care to elaborate on what that quite a bit more is in brief?I'm tempted to read it, but being an atheist already I don't really see much point in reading it.Its been a while since I read it. If I can find it after my move Ill skim it. Essentially it is a refutation of the arguments of those who try and make pseudo-scientific claims for the existence of god, rebuts the complexity line of thinking and discusses the dangers of allowing faith based reasoning to impede science. Link to post Share on other sites
pokerwitch 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 Daniel darling. I was holding my breath waiting for ur new blog. When the title was The Reason for God and I started to read it,I thought OMG the man has lost his mind or smoking some really good stuff. Religion and Politics all in the same blog, my you are the bravest man I've yet to hear of. If you are brave enough to write what you write than you should run for mayor,gov and president. I for one would surely vote for you. If you walk on water and heal the sick hmmmmm I may half to change my beliefs. But, since so far this has not happened I still think you are the best thing since sliced bread. I truly love to hear of ur adventures. in poker ,golf, travel and the games you play. I hang on to every word on ur poker plays made. Religion and politics are best left to the Pharisees and Sadducee of this world. You have a pure heart Daniel. If you decide to take on the weight of the world than run for something. But, be prepared to carry ur cross. Waiting patiently for ur next blog. Tess. Link to post Share on other sites
vbnautilus 48 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 Its been a while since I read it. If I can find it after my move Ill skim it. Essentially it is a refutation of the arguments of those who try and make pseudo-scientific claims for the existence of god, rebuts the complexity line of thinking and discusses the dangers of allowing faith based reasoning to impede science.Trust copernicus on this one, he was around in the Pleistocene and doesn't need to read a book to know where life came from. Link to post Share on other sites
copernicus 0 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 Trust copernicus on this one, he was around in the Pleistocene and doesn't need to read a book to know where life came from. True, but anecdotal experience doesnt carry any credibility. Link to post Share on other sites
JustDoIt 10 Posted September 6, 2008 Share Posted September 6, 2008 Its still a hurdle, even if not a huge one. You need at least two judges who are both anti-abortion and willing to overturn it. Of course it should be overturned. It was a convoluted decision by a liberal court legislating from the bench.Correction, two judges that will Interpret the Constitution.Quote from Obama:"But it’s those five percent of the cases that really count. And inthose five percent of the cases, what you’ve got to look at is—what isin the justice’s heart. What’s their broader vision of what Americashould be. Justice Roberts said he saw himself just as an umpire butthe issues that come before the Court are not sport, they’re life anddeath. And we need somebody who’s got the heart—the empathy—torecognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy tounderstand what it’s like to be poor or African-American or gay ordisabled or old—and that’s the criteria by which I’ll be selecting myjudges. Alright? "It obvious that he believes justice's should make public policy.This is very scary, especially coming from somebody who was a constitutional law professor. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now