Comments on: Counterparties A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 By: TFF Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:20:44 +0000 David, I am unabashedly Catholic (by choice, as an adult, not by upbringing).

One of the pieces that set me along this path was “The Great Divorce” by CS Lewis. Even to an agnostic (at least to one of Christian background), there was visible truth in the attitudes and principles expressed in this book.

Naturally much of the rest depends on faith and faith alone.

By: DavidMerkel Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:36:13 +0000 walt9316 — I know many bright people of different religions — I don’t question their intelligence, but your statement quoted from TED (intellectual lightweights, in my opinion) would not be true for them. I rarely question the wisdom of those who disagree with me, but I disagree with their presuppositions, and all philosophy has presuppositions.

People who are anti-religion have an axe to grind. They know judgment is coming against them when they die, and so they spit against it, while God laughs in Heaven (Psalm 2). It’s the only way to keep an even disposition on the road to Hell. I say this with a smile, because I appreciate anyone willing to make a statement about religion/God publicly.

But what will you do in the end, when you face Jesus at the Last Judgment, and he says to you, “Go, stand with the goats who are going to Hell.” This isn’t a mere question of philosophy, where people may easily differ. God revealed himself through over 40 men who wrote the Bible, agreeing with each other over a 2000 year stretch, culminating with his Son, who died for the sins of his elect people.

Now this is a real story. Tight, fascinating. Not like Islam, where you have to take the word of one man as truth. God doesn’t work that way, lest any mere man receive undue honor.

Sorry for being prolix. If you need, you can reach me at

By: walt9316 Mon, 25 Apr 2011 13:22:35 +0000 “The proper effect of philosophy is to make people exquisitely alert to their assumptions, sensitive to the rigor of their analyses, and—truth be told—permanently uncomfortable about the validity of their conclusions.”

That would be the end of religion, the Republican Party et al.