Atheist Turned Believer

Now that I've figured out how to open up comments, most of what folks have asked me about centers on my post of August 21, "Does God Exist?"  Obviously, I need to do a bit of fleshing out here. In my post, I do not approach the question as a theological one, nor even a scientific one, but rather a grammatical one.  In a freshman creative writing class lecture, the professor reminded us students that words have two meanings; the definition and the connotation.  The definition is the meaning assigned the word by a dictionary, the connotation is what we think the word means, or, more often, how we feel about the word.  In this lecture, the professor stated that authors are responsible to know a word's definition, but not necessarily responsible for knowing or even guessing at any given reader's connotation for that word. By way of example, let us consider the word "chauvinism."  The word is derived from Nicholas Chauvin, a veteran of the Napoleonic Wars, ...

So, my last post lamented the fact that I have received no comments to this blog.  Well, a few minutes ago, I received a text from a good friend who was apparently trying to leave a comment but was unable.  It seems that leaving comments on Google Blogspot is rather complicated.  She promised to keep trying, but implored me to not be dismayed from lack of comments as this is likely the reason.   I'm so sorry, everyone.  As I said, I'm new to  this blogging thing and I had no idea this was going on.  As soon as I post this, I will attempt to go into my settings and see if there's anything I can do to simplify comments for you.  I have no idea how successful these efforts will be.  I'd ask for advice, but, since you can't comment, I suppose that could be problematic. Again, apologies. Pax P.S. About 5 minutes later - Okay, I think I fixed it.  If a few of you will send a couple of comments so I can tell for sure, I'd appreciate it.

Hello, everyone! I was just checking on the blog stats this morning.  Apparently, so far, this blog has been viewed by 201 people, which is amazing (although a few of them, I fear, were probably me)!  And 20 of you aren't even in the United States.  I have one hit from Sweden.  I'm not sure if I know anyone in Sweden. So far, though, I have zero comments.  I can think of two possible reasons for this: (1) I'm such a brilliant wordsmith that no one reading this blog can think of anything to add to or subtract from it, or (2) everyone finds the topic and my presentation thereof too boring to comment on.  I'm rather doubtful of the former. 😊 I was rather hoping that the first 7 posts would start a dialog on the subject, but my disappointment is rather mild.  If they have had some meaning for any of you, then I am completely satisfied that my work here is done. Pax P.S.  Apparently, if I'm being viewed in Europe, I need to include a statement about c...

Note: If you haven't already, you should read over all previous posts before proceeding.  These posts build upon previous information; they do not stand alone.  Starting at the end is like criticizing the selection of a hip v. gable roof without knowing anything about the walls and foundation. So, here we are.  We've so far established a logical basis for a belief in God.  We've determined that if we can prove that Jesus of Nazareth was the human incarnation of God, then we can learn the nature of God by studying the nature of Jesus.  We've found that legal proof should by all rights be sufficient for our needs and we've examined the historical accuracy of New Testament Scripture.  One question still remains, then: can we legally prove that Jesus of Nazareth was/is the human incarnation of God? Let us examine a passage from the Gospel of Mark that has never been questioned by anyone, either Christian, atheist, agnostic or other.  I refer specifical...