home
RSS
October 13th, 2010
09:51 AM ET

Songwriter not done telling "The Story of Your Life"

Matthew West wrote more than 40 songs when fans sent in the stories of their lives

When Matthew West asked fans to submit their stories for his new project "The Story of Your Life," he never imagined he would get 10,000 stories.

The stories came from every state and 20 countries, West said. He spent most of two months reading each one and writing songs based on the ones that stood out.

"I wrote 40 songs and started about 150 others," he told CNN recently during an interview at a restaurant in downtown Franklin, Tennessee.
"I feel like I have only scratched the surface here. I really do feel like it is Volume 1."

There are 11 songs on the album, on topics like sexual abuse, divorce, abortion and surviving cancer.

"I feel like if we had left the door open for people to send in stories, we'd still be getting them," he said.

Joel West, Matthew's brother and manager, said that in selecting the songs for the album there were eight that were sure things, and others that were good enough but just didn't make the cut.

West said he was on a Christian music cruise in July when he talked about the project. Dozens of people went back to their rooms, got out the cruise line stationary and came back with their stories. It convinced him that there are so many stories to tell that he shouldn't stop with just this CD.

West is writing a book based on the stories. He hopes it will be published in the spring. He and Joel said a TV show is a possibility. The deluxe CD comes with a DVD with the stories behind the stories. There have been meetings with reality show TV producers but there is nothing concrete at this time.

As for the next album, there is a wait-and-see attitude. But with the album getting good reviews and a strong sales start (as far as downloads go), it seems like a pretty sure thing that this story hasn't ended yet.

- Producer/Writer

Filed under: Christianity • Music

soundoff (88 Responses)
  1. Laura

    @DavidJohnson

    Well, you did ask..so here it is. I am with Frank. I think you should not have accused him of trying to impress another poster, since you have no "proof" of that, and it is really just your opinion, if not sarcasm?
    If we look at some of the above posts where you are praised...one could draw the same "conclusions". But thats all they would be in reality is ones opinion.

    I also was gonna comment more, but I thing Frogist did a pretty good job of what I would have said, no sense in being repet-i-tous, so hats off to her!

    October 14, 2010 at 9:21 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Laura

      I thank you for taking the time to comment. Cheers!

      October 14, 2010 at 11:15 pm |
    • Frank

      Thanks for the comment, Laura.

      October 15, 2010 at 11:00 pm |
  2. Laura

    @Frogist Thats a good response you did regarding Frank and David Johson. Very well presented!

    October 14, 2010 at 9:16 pm |
  3. Awakening

    Mayby you all should read this http://www.thewatcherfiles.com/bluebeam.html Project Blue Beam

    What is important to understand in the first step is that those earthquakes will hit at different parts of the world where scientific and archeological teachings have indicated that arcane mysteries have been buried. By those types of earthquakes, it will possible for scientists to re-discover those arcane mysteries which will be used to discredit all fundamental religious doctrines. This is the first preparation for the plan for humanity because what they want to do is destroy the beliefs of all Christians and Muslims on the planet. To do that, they need some false "proof" from the far past that will prove to all nations that their religions have all been misinterpreted and misunderstoodhe first step concerns the breakdown of all archeological
    knowledge. It deals with the setup with artificially created earthquakes at certain precise locations on the planet where, supposedly, new discoveries will finally explain to all people the error of all fundamental religious doctrines. The falsification of this information will be used to make all nations believe that their religious doctrines have been misunderstood for centuries and misinterpreted. Psychological preparations for that first step have already been implemented with the film, "2001: A Space Oddessy;" the StarTrek series, and "Star Wars;" all of which deal with invasions from space and the coming together of all nations to repel the invaders. The last films, "Jurrassic Park," deals with the theories of evolution, and claim God's words are lies.

    Now figure out when we hear that voice from the new world messiah who would be speaking from space to all of the sane people of the earth who might give instructions to zealots and religious fanatics, we would see hysteria and social mayhem on a scale never witnessed before on this planet. No police forces in the world, even as a combined front, could deal with the disorder that will follow!

    October 14, 2010 at 8:37 pm |
    • Muneef

      Well already have made several earthquakes to other countries among which was the Sonmi and Iran and Haiti and latest the floods in Pakistan. Politics are so dirty and inconsiderate.

      October 14, 2010 at 8:54 pm |
    • Frank

      Awakening, I've read about Project Blue Beam. It is very interesting.

      October 15, 2010 at 1:17 am |
    • Muneef

      Science will be used to deceive and mislead God believers in to the denial of God existence?
      As understand that what will be done by Aldijjal claiming that he is God and that he is who we should worship? And that what is already happening worshiping science rather than God.
      We learnt that with all his capabilities given to him to delusion faithfuls into believing him and who would ever believe him will find the opposite for example if he promises you paradise for believing in him you end up in hell and if promised greens and water you get dryness and drought? So you see those disbelievers are no one but his army and since they say AlDaijjal would come riding a Donkey? Well I guess the Democ Donkey is already on the rule paving the road for him if he is not already here? Well here maybe NASA is the Gassasa meaning the spy of AlDijjal since she has all those communication
      And spy satellites? God only knows the truth of things!

      October 15, 2010 at 2:05 pm |
  4. Raison

    @David Johnson

    God, David, did you have to feed this Muslim troll? He talks to himself so often I don't know why anyone would want to "butt-in" and disturb him...!!!

    Just chastizin'

    October 14, 2010 at 4:56 pm |
    • David Johnson

      Well, I just wanted to understand him. I think he called me the Devil. LOL.

      October 14, 2010 at 5:37 pm |
    • Muneef

      @David Johnson.

      Find other example in these verses and don't listen to devils telling you what to do and you will be alright.
      In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
      And (remember) when Shaitân (Satan) made their (evil) deeds seem fair to them and said, "No one of mankind can overcome you this Day (of the battle of Badr) and verily, I am your neighbour (for each and every help)." But when the two forces came in sight of each other, he ran away and said "Verily, I have nothing to do with you. Verily! I see what you see not. Verily! I fear Allâh for Allâh is Severe in punishment." (48) When the hypocrites and those in whose hearts was a disease (of disbelief) said: "These people (Muslims) are deceived by their religion." But whoever puts his trust in Allâh, then surely, Allâh is All-Mighty, All-Wise (49) And if you could see when the angels take away the souls of those who disbelieve (at death), they smite their faces and their backs, (saying): "Taste the punishment of the blazing Fire." (50) "This is because of that which your hands had forwarded. And verily, Allâh is not unjust to His slaves." (51)
      Sura 08:47 to 51  

      October 14, 2010 at 7:38 pm |
  5. Muneef

    Means that few deceive others as to not believe in God as does Satan but when those are believed that no existence of God then the deceivers or Satan say we are free from them those do not believe in God we believe in God the Creator and Lord of every creation.
    But of course means they say it in their heart and not in front those they deceived.

    October 14, 2010 at 2:57 pm |
    • Muneef

      Means that the Devil and his followers who are well aware of God existence go misleading people although they know of God existence but when mankind disbelieved then those evil ones say we are free from you we do believe that God exists.

      October 14, 2010 at 3:07 pm |
    • Muneef

      It could else mean that although those Allies or evil ones know the truth about things but they deceive people misleading them and when people buy what they have convinced them with then they say among them we are free from those deceived Ones we believe what we told them not to believe.
      So that verse can apply to all sort of deceive mislead and not only about God.
      For example how Israel is deceiving misleading the USA but when the thing happen they would give their back and say no we believe otherwise.

      October 14, 2010 at 3:16 pm |
    • Muneef

      Have addressed it to Frank because I feel he is religous and strong in faith with a clear vision as to rights and wrongs, so that was only to remind him not to be deceived by who speaks satanic about God existence.
      Although he is Christian and am a Muslem but have lot of respects to religious ones and God fearing.
      Now thank you for asking and bye.

      October 14, 2010 at 3:45 pm |
    • Frank

      Muneef, I understand what you're saying. Thank you and God bless.

      October 15, 2010 at 1:13 am |
  6. Muneef

    @Frank.
    In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
    16. (Their allies deceived them) like Shaitân (Satan), when he says to man: "Disbelieve in Allâh." But when (man) disbelieves in Allâh, Shaitân (Satan) says: "I am free of you, I fear Allâh, the Lord of the ‘Âlamîn (mankind, jinn and all that exists)!"
    Sura 59:16 QuranComplexDotCom

    October 14, 2010 at 1:12 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Muneef

      You posted to Frank, but I am not sure what you mean?

      October 14, 2010 at 1:27 pm |
    • Selfish Gene

      Your cut and paste is getting old Mustaffa.

      October 14, 2010 at 5:13 pm |
    • Muneef

      Because I am not SelFish as some may appear.

      @Frank. Add this to your information please.
      In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
      And (remember) when Shaitân (Satan) made their (evil) deeds seem fair to them and said, "No one of mankind can overcome you this Day (of the battle of Badr) and verily, I am your neighbour (for each and every help)." But when the two forces came in sight of each other, he ran away and said "Verily, I have nothing to do with you. Verily! I see what you see not. Verily! I fear Allâh for Allâh is Severe in punishment." (48) When the hypocrites and those in whose hearts was a disease (of disbelief) said: "These people (Muslims) are deceived by their religion." But whoever puts his trust in Allâh, then surely, Allâh is All-Mighty, All-Wise (49) And if you could see when the angels take away the souls of those who disbelieve (at death), they smite their faces and their backs, (saying): "Taste the punishment of the blazing Fire." (50) "This is because of that which your hands had forwarded. And verily, Allâh is not unjust to His slaves." (51)
      Sura 08:47 to 51  

      October 14, 2010 at 8:06 pm |
  7. David Johnson

    @StemcellResearch

    Thanks for your comment. Cheers!

    October 14, 2010 at 12:58 pm |
  8. Selfish Gene

    Agree to disagree. You cannot mix logic and religion.
    -Stuart Chase "For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible."

    October 14, 2010 at 12:55 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Selfish Gene

      Thanks for your comment. Cheers!

      October 14, 2010 at 12:57 pm |
    • Raison

      @Selfish Gene

      I would have said, "you cannot mix rational thought and delusional thought, unless you really want to..." 😀

      That proof is somehow impossible to accept to those who doubt in disbelief, is a fallacy often used by religious debaters to make a pointless "point". If proof is possible, where is it? Please bring it forth or let us work together to discover where it may be found!!!
      Just commenting. Don't worry, I am a fan of your postings...just not this one.. 😀

      October 14, 2010 at 4:53 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Raison

      I'm not attacking Selfish Gene in any way.

      But, I really liked what you posted. You gave me an education. Thank you!

      October 14, 2010 at 5:41 pm |
  9. David Johnson

    @SideLines
    @Jonah of arkansas

    I appreciate you comments. Cheers to you both!

    October 14, 2010 at 12:51 pm |
  10. FromTheSideLines

    My Conclusion: David Johnson complete whipped Frank. Sorry no contest, and no I don't know either one of them.

    October 14, 2010 at 12:40 pm |
    • jonah of arkansas

      david johnson should be very proud of himself.

      October 14, 2010 at 12:43 pm |
    • StemcellResearch

      Yeah, I agree. I think he did a good job defending his position.

      October 14, 2010 at 12:52 pm |
    • Frank

      I didn't even bother to reply to what he said. And he didn't bother to reply to what I asked him. So who cares?
      And of course you'll all agree with him because you all hold the same views. Like a bunch of schoolchildren.

      October 15, 2010 at 1:10 am |
  11. religions are a pile of dung

    Who gives a fakk about religion, but sheep! But purrrlease keep it to yourself and rid of, "in god we trust, under one god, so help me god" crap!

    Until we get rid of this "in god we trust, under one god, so help me god" crap, it begs peeing on religious materials left in hotels!

    October 14, 2010 at 12:34 pm |
    • StemcellResearch

      LOL, too funny.

      October 14, 2010 at 12:50 pm |
  12. Frogist

    Oh and personally, I think the song thing is a great idea. I had heard of an artist on NPR who created songs for people based on their life story, but I don't think he specialised in christian themes. Just taking the life story of someone and turning it into a song. And heck you'd never run out of material!

    October 14, 2010 at 12:10 pm |
  13. Frogist

    @Frank & David Johnson: I have added my notes in = ... =
    Here is another time, that I failed to understand Frank's argument. I think he failed to address my argument.
    The "debate" started when Frank made the statement: ""Suffering and pain are a part of the human experience and will likely remain so on into the foreseeable future."
    I responded: "If god has the will to remove evil and cannot, then He is not omnipotent. If He can, but will not, then He is not benevolent. If He is neither able nor willing, then He is neither omnipotent nor benevolent. So why call Him God?"

    = Why not call him god? He might be a cruel @-h0le god. That doesn't make him any less of a god. =

    Frank responded: "David, we did it to ourselves. Humanity is very much like a small child. We must learn from our mistakes and strive to make this reality a better one. God is not going to do it for us, for we will not learn anything that way. You don't reach transcendence (or salvation or redemption) the easy way. You must lose yourself, humble yourself, experience deep pain, suffer greatly, be defeated and broken in order to find yourself and truly rise above. As they say: you cannot know the sweetness of victory without first knowing the agony of defeat.

    = I agree that humanity must learn from mistakes but there is no proof that it was god who set up this situation as you describe it. You have only your belief for that. And I find it distasteful that a truly caring god would perpetrate the suffering we see from which, more often than not, very few deep lessons can be taken. Also if the final point in suffering is to drive us into the arms of a god who created that suffering, that makes him a selfish, petty, arrogant god. And no god that I would want. =

    Our struggles – and if we allow them to consume us or if we triumph over them – define us as human beings. This world is basically a spiritual battleground/classroom that we apparently have created in order to learn from, after all.
    Suffering can be a path towards growth and learning. Sometimes we must fall so far that we cannot fall anymore in order to be truly humbled, be reminded of what's really important and turn to others and the One who will help you.
    You can't blame God. We did it to ourselves for a reason, apparently. So, ultimately, by allowing us to suffer and learn from it, God is being benevolent. It's for our ultimate spiritual growth. Just as when a human parent tries to show their child the best way to live their life, but the child rebels and chooses a way that leads to self-destruction and suffering. The hope is that the child eventually will learn from it and take the parent's wisdom to heart.
    Sometimes you just have to let your children have their way. Same with God and us."
    My response, point by point: "Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge. So god created disease. He constructed the tick and the flea, and the tape worm and the mosquito. He caused the animals to prey on one another. God did this to teach...what lesson, to the subsequent generations? The desire for knowledge is evil? Just read your bible and believe? What lesson?

    = This does seem to be the lesson. And it's one the most confusing parts of the bible, IMO. Why would god set up this temptation trap? It was not the snake who put the tree in the garden. And it was not the snake who said you can eat from all the others but not this one. God seems to treat his creations like a spoilt child would mistreat his pets. =

    But you say man did it to ourselves. Really? Did these things spontaneously generate as the fruit was chewed? So when a person is placed under the lash or upon the rack, he brought it upon himself? No matter how hideous the penalty, the person applying the punishment bears no guilt? Did no one fashion the lash or devise the rack?
    You said, "This world is basically a spiritual battleground/classroom that we apparently have created in order to learn from, after all."
    So you are contending that God allows some evil because it builds positive character in the victims or in others which outweighs the negative value of the evil itself (e.g., John Hick).
    I don't think "we" created the classroom of pain. God would have had to create it. This is like the fundie claim, that god doesn't send you to hell, you send yourself to hell. Make no mistake. God sends people to hell.
    If God exists, we must have evidence that all of the evils we see are means to a higher purpose. All the pain and suffering should have the purpose of teaching. But even fundies admit there is no evidence. That is why they must resort to talking about the mysterious ways in which God works. There's no evidence at all, that 300 to 500 million people dying from Smallpox in the 20th century, is for a greater good.
    Even if, as you say, evil and suffering is a teaching tool, God would only allow as much evil or suffering as is absolutely necessary in order to achieve a greater purpose. Any suffering above that necessary to learn, would be overkill. But when we look at the world around us, we find prevalent instances of apparently gratuitous evil—pointless suffering from which no greater purpose seems to result.
    As William Rowe points out, when a fawn burns to death in a forest fire and no human being ever knows about it, this apparently unnecessary evil does nothing to build the character of human beings. It is just suffering.
    Again I ask, how would this scenario look different if there was no god? Would there be suffering for no apparent reason? Would there be more evil than could ever be necessary to preserve either free will or for soul making?
    The answer once again, is: The scenario would look exactly the same.
    If there is no difference between god and no god, then what good is god?"

    = Again, who said god must be good to exist? =

    Frank's response to this: "David, all actions have a consequence. You are greatly underestimating the toll that the Fall took on all of creation (in this reality). Disease is a part of this broken world, as all suffering is. This reality is not as it should be.
    And like I said: You can't blame God. He gave us paradise and we threw it away. Now we just have to work our way back Home. This is apparently something that humanity needed to experience in order to learn and grow as spiritual beings. We still have so far to go. This may take eons. But it will happen."

    = Yes, we can blame god. If all we have is our limited perception, and god is the creator of all, we have every right to judge him according to othe limited perception he gave us. =

    My response: You say I greatly underestimated the toll the fall took. So, why did the fall take such a toll? Who set up the magnitude?
    Adam and Eve had no point of reference. They did not know what a bite of fruit would cost. There was no way they could.
    Are you making an argument for an unreasonable and evil god? You have succeeded.
    Your argument did not address the over-abundance of suffering. You just restated what you said in your first post. It is as unsatisfactory now, as it was then. If I kill a fly, I do not need a hammer."
    Frank's final response: David, it wasn't necessarily a 'bite of fruit'. That's a metaphor.

    = If it is a metaphor, what is it a metaphor for? =

    Didn't know? The Bible says clearly that they knew the consequences: "The Lord God took the man and him put in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it. And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, 'You may freely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die." – Genesis 2:15-17
    They were warned very clearly. And death is what they got.
    I already explained why there's an 'overabundence' of suffering. I had to restate it because you didn't understand what I was saying.
    I leave it whoever would judge to decide. Did I fail to understand, or did Frank fail to address my arguments?

    = No, you did not fail to understand, and no Frank did not fail to address your arguments. The problem is you both do not like the answers or questions you are given. The christian argument will always be "I don't know. But I trust god has a plan that I must be obedient to." The atheist argument will always be, "I don't know, therefore there is no god." As an agnostic I have to disagree with both of you. Just because you don't know what more of the universe there is, doesn't mean that a god being is or isn't existent. And if he is, doesn't mean you know what his purpose is or his relation to you. So any plan that you follow may not be god's. It is more likely your plan that you created was because of your personal experiences and ideas. And that's fine to have your plan that relates to you. But you cannot then force others to follow your plan in the name of your perception of god. Just as it would be unfair for atheists to force their plan in the name of no god. We only have the history of our laws that are clearly and easily available in a tangible format which we must all follow or challenge out in the realm of society. But that is a whole other discussion. =

    October 14, 2010 at 11:52 am |
    • Frank

      Frogist, you made some interesting points. I love it when a post makes me think. I would reply but I am not in a particulary sober state (I think the Internet is better and definitely more fun when you're drunk off your a$$), so maybe I'll give it a try later. Maybe. I'm just trying to encourage people to think for themselves. I've studied so many different things during my very short time here. There's value in everything, is the most important thing I've learned.
      Peace,
      Frank

      October 15, 2010 at 10:53 pm |
    • erasmus

      If there is a God then I can only conclude that he is one egotistical, malicious and sadistic SOB! I know of no parent who would knowingly bestow all the suffering, hardships etc on any of their own children!

      October 16, 2010 at 9:02 pm |
  14. Frogist

    = test =

    October 14, 2010 at 11:49 am |
  15. Frogist
    October 14, 2010 at 11:47 am |
  16. Frogist

    <>

    October 14, 2010 at 11:47 am |
  17. pete

    Again and again people post messages on here "if you believe in religion you must not be as smart as i am". You know, you are doing exactly what conservatives are doing any politics right now.

    I'm not lazy. I'm well educated. I believe in God.

    October 13, 2010 at 3:23 pm |
    • pete

      "in politics" not any politics

      October 13, 2010 at 3:24 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Pete

      If I have ever "pretended" to be smarter than you, I apologize.

      I am lazy. I have a decent education. I don't believe in god.
      Cheers!

      October 13, 2010 at 9:15 pm |
    • pete

      David Johnson-
      Maybe not you directly, but i see it all over this board. If it is fine with you not to believe, than it is fine with me that you don't believe.

      I should say it needs to go both ways. I'm not a better person because i believe, and you're not a worse person because you don't.

      October 14, 2010 at 12:03 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @pete

      Then, let us call each other "friend" Yes?

      October 14, 2010 at 1:29 pm |
  18. jb2112

    I think religion is the shortcut to the unknowns of life. If you don't like to work at it, or think for yourself, or seek more logical conclusions, there is someone who will do it for you. They have ALL the answers, why we are here, who we are, how we should behave... This, unfortunately, comes at a huge price in money and human suffering. People (well at least Americans) have the right to believe whatever they wish. This does not mean that these beliefs have any value or substance. Not every thought or idea is equal, some are just fairy tales.
    Quoting from the Bible will not convince Atheists, anymore than quoting Darwin will convince true-believers.

    October 13, 2010 at 2:25 pm |
    • Frank

      My my my! Aren't we high and mighty today, Mr. You Don't Believe The Same As I Do So Your Beliefs Are S#!t And Meaningless!

      Life is a struggle and it's hard to find truth in this world of lies and fakeness. Religion has it's problems, yes. Everyone knows that, even the most devout believers. But at least religion and spirituality in general are trying to answer the questions that have plague humanity's heart since the beginning. It's a product of the search for truth. Science cannot give us meaning and modern humanity's epidemic emptiness is a symptom of that. Science can give us a 'how' but it can never give us a 'why'. To find the 'why', we must delve deep into our souls as we struggle back to the Arms of the Creator.

      What you would call 'myth' has very deep meaning. It is all true and real on a deeper level than most wish to explore. Myth springs from the right brain, which is our connection to our souls, the artist within us, the collective unconscious and the un/real. There is no such thing as 'fantasy' or a boundary between real and unreal. All things are real on some level. If you imagine something, that something has been pulled from the ether into reality, whether you realize it our not. Myth is a way of transmitting deep truths through allegory, metaphor, numerology, symbolism and other means. If you take it at face value, you have missed the whole point and might as well start over.

      "Quoting from the Bible will not convince Atheists, anymore than quoting Darwin will convince true-believers."

      Than practice what you preach and...well..stop preaching.

      October 13, 2010 at 6:05 pm |
    • Frank

      *plagued
      *or

      October 13, 2010 at 6:06 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Frank

      LOL! LOL 'till my sides ache.

      You try to make yourself sound so spiritual.

      You said, "Life is a struggle and it's hard to find truth in this world of lies and fakeness. Religion has it's problems, yes. Everyone knows that, even the most devout believers. But at least religion and spirituality in general are trying to answer the questions that have plague humanity's heart since the beginning. It's a product of the search for truth. "

      Religion does not deal in truth. Religion requires you to have faith. Faith is accepting something for which you have no proof.

      Science deals in truth through the scientific method.
      The steps of the scientific method are to:
      • Ask a Question
      • Do Background Research
      • Construct a Hypothesis
      • Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment
      • Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion
      • Communicate Your Results

      The steps to religion are to open wide and swallow the dogma!

      Tell me, Frank are you on the verge of finding a solution to some deep mystery?

      The Catholics don't even seem to be able to solve the problem of priests attacking children. LOL

      You said, "Science cannot give us meaning and modern humanity's epidemic emptiness is a symptom of that. Science can give us a 'how' but it can never give us a 'why'. To find the 'why', we must delve deep into our souls as we struggle back to the Arms of the Creator."

      Science is making new discoveries on an almost daily basis. None of their discoveries include god.

      To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature, and it remains premature today. – Assimov

      Evolution has replaced the creation story, to explain the diversity of creatures on earth.

      Carry this to its logical conclusion: If there was no creation, there is no original sin, there was no need for a redeemer...

      New theories are being developed that do not require god for the creation of the universe.

      The why of anything cannot be found in the arms of the creator. The why you discover will always be tainted with your views and beliefs. A why is only useful if is true. The Muslim why will differ from the Hindu and the Buddhist and the 2000 different denominations of Christianity's why.

      Lame argument, Frank.

      You said, "What you would call 'myth' has very deep meaning. It is all true and real on a deeper level than most wish to explore. Myth springs from the right brain, which is our connection to our souls, the artist within us, the collective unconscious and the un/real. There is no such thing as 'fantasy' or a boundary between real and unreal.

      There is no such thing as fantasy? So, anything I conceive is real? Pink unicorns? Satyrs? Monsters under the bed?
      So these things that spring from the right side of your brain, can you prove they exist? Otherwise, you are just babbling.

      You said, "All things are real on some level. If you imagine something, that something has been pulled from the ether into reality, whether you realize it our not."

      Dude! I think you pulled this from somewhere – but not the ether. On what level are fairies real?
      It's no wonder you can believe the dogma.

      If I give you water that exists only in my mind, I bet you would get mighty thirsty. LOL!

      Myth is a way of transmitting deep truths through allegory, metaphor, numerology, symbolism and other means. If you take it at face value, you have missed the whole point and might as well start over."

      Yes, sometimes myth is used to explain a natural phenomenon or cultural practice. But sometimes a myth is just a cigar.
      Synonyms for myth: legend, fable, saga, fairy story, fairy tale

      Just because the myth says or implies something, it does not mean it is true. Or even good advice. You still need to subject it to critical thinking. Fairy tales have a moral.

      The problem with the "this part is an allegory " defense, is that it requires someone to decide what is allegorical and what is literal.

      Whatever gives a problem, is deemed allegorical and we must seek a deeper meaning.

      At least the fundies declare the entire bible is literal. No picking and choosing for them.

      October 13, 2010 at 8:18 pm |
    • Frank

      David, I'd like to hear your answer to the great 'why'. I'm betting it'll be rather nihilistic.
      Oh, and you completely missed the point of my post. You will not find the 'why' in matter.
      Oh, and you need to study psychology a bit more, especially about how the brain perceives reality. The brain doesn't tell the difference between 'real' or 'unreal', that's why vivid nightmares scare us so much. The brain is just a computer, a switchboard. And DNA is just a code.
      You really need to read more.

      October 13, 2010 at 9:13 pm |
    • Frank

      Oh, and David, even your beloved science understands it more than you do:
      http://news.discovery.com/animals/animals-spiritual-brain.html

      October 13, 2010 at 9:26 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Frank

      I always seem to miss your points, Frank. LOL

      But you never seem to address my points. You just ignore them. You also did this when I replied to your "god is grooming our souls through suffering" argument.

      You said, "religion and spirituality in general are trying to answer the questions that have plague humanity's heart since the beginning. It's a product of the search for truth. "

      Religion does not deal in truth. Religion requires you to have faith. Faith is accepting something for which you have no proof.
      Am I not right? Have you somehow proven that there is a god? Isn't all of your religion based on faith? Or do you have proof?
      Answer this.

      You said, "Science can give us a 'how' but it can never give us a 'why'. To find the 'why', we must delve deep into our souls as we struggle back to the Arms of the Creator."

      You are just trying to sound deep and spiritual.

      The why of anything cannot be found in the arms of the creator. The why you discover will always be tainted with your views and beliefs. A why is only useful if is true. The Muslim why will differ from the Hindu and the Buddhist and the 2000 different denominations of Christianity's why. All the whys are subjective. And since the whys are not collectively exhaustive, they could all be wrong.

      Do you deny this? Do you think the why will be the same for every religion? Why would it be. Each has a different creator. Answer the question.

      You said, "The brain doesn't tell the difference between 'real' or 'unreal'" Yes, which explains why people can "feel" the spirit and I can think about the sunbathing neighbor next door. But fantasy is not real Frank. Not on any level. Even a nightmare is not real.

      If I give you water that exists only in my mind, I bet you would get mighty thirsty.
      Tell me why this is not true? I bet in a couple of days you'd be asking for real water.

      Tell me why it isn't a problem to call some passages in the bible allegorical and others literal?
      Who decides?

      I think I got your points. I think your points are lame.

      I think you were trying to impress jb2112. You were answering his comment. Why all the I'm so deep crap? LOL

      jb2112 said, "This does not mean that these beliefs have any value or substance. Not every thought or idea is equal, some are just fairy tales."

      He is exactly right. I posted to you, "Just because the myth says or implies something, it does not mean it is true. Or even good advice. You still need to subject it to critical thinking. Fairy tales have a moral."

      Explain to me why this is not true. I could care less if something is true in your mind. If you have no proof for its existence, then it does not exist. Prove me wrong, Frank.

      October 13, 2010 at 10:15 pm |
    • Frank

      I don't bother dissecting your posts point by point anymore because it is not possible at this point to have an intelligent reasonable congenial conversation with you. I know a waste of time when I see one. All you do is ridicule people for having differing viewpoints than your own. You do not bother to think about what the person is trying to say at all. You do not even understand the psychological topics I am bringing up. That is why I suggested to you to read up on these things. Did you even look at the link I posted?
      I have said before that I am not interesting in 'proving' anything to you. Just as you cannot 'prove' anything to me – have not, will not and never will. It's a dead end conversation used to stifle honest inqueries and people like you fall right into it.
      It is not really worth replying to you as you do not understand, nor even seek to understand, the rudimentary aims and meanings of spirituality. You don't even understand some basic psychology and how the brain perceives things...
      Quite frankly, you haven't bothered to do enough studying. You will not get anything from what I may tell you. There are certain people who you just cannot share certain things with because they chose to be willfully ignorant and not even open to hearing them with the aim to understand.
      And don't tell me to 'answer' you. I am not your dog nor your child.
      Now go read some books and think deeply about things that matter.

      October 13, 2010 at 10:55 pm |
    • Frank

      I believe as John Lennon believed: I believe in everything until it is disproven. It is not my place to draw the line on what is possible and what is not. I am just a simple little creature who lives in a vast universe that is far more magnificent than anything I, nor anyone else, can dream of. (And this is just one universe among many.) "All things are possible in the vastness of time." No one can say what the limits of reality are. We cannot even perceive 1% of the light spectrum. It blows my mind to ponder what could be right infront of my face and I just cannot see it. 99% of an atom is 'empty space', as well.
      That's all I have to say, really. You can make fun of me. I don't really care.

      October 13, 2010 at 11:02 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Frank

      You know what Frank? You should change your name to Spiritual Guy.

      If you weren't just trying to impress jb2112, why all the "into the arms of your creator crap?

      Your are a joke. bye!

      October 13, 2010 at 11:59 pm |
    • Frank

      I'm surprised the troll has nothing to say. I hope you're fleeing to go read a book. Or least listen to some music. You know, something constructive instead of tearing people down.
      Only an idiot would try to 'impress' words on a screen. Give me a break.

      October 14, 2010 at 12:22 am |
    • jonah of arkansas

      cat fight! meeeeeeeeeow!

      October 14, 2010 at 12:24 am |
    • Frank

      RAWR.

      October 14, 2010 at 12:29 am |
    • jonah of arkansas

      RRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      October 14, 2010 at 12:30 am |
    • Frank

      Oh, my. :O Don't make me bare my fangs up in here! Get my claws out...

      October 14, 2010 at 12:33 am |
    • jonah of arkansas

      wow frank. way to be weird. peace.

      October 14, 2010 at 12:35 am |
    • Frank

      Lol. Bye. ~

      October 14, 2010 at 12:39 am |
    • David Johnson

      @Frank

      You are sad.

      I invite anyone to first read jb2112's comment and then read your response to his comment. Your comment was meant to impress jb2112 with how spiritual you are. It was a pretentious, lame comment.

      They can then read my response. I think I had many good points. But others can decide.

      October 14, 2010 at 8:34 am |
    • David Johnson

      @Frank

      You said, "Only an idiot would try to 'impress' words on a screen. Give me a break."

      Yeah, Frank. That's my point. Only an idiot would try to impress.

      You said, "To find the 'why', we must delve deep into our souls as we struggle back to the Arms of the Creator."

      You said, "What you would call 'myth' has very deep meaning. It is all true and real on a deeper level than most wish to explore."

      If you weren't trying to impress Jb2112, then what were you doing?

      You also told Jb2112 to stop preaching. What a hypocrite!

      October 14, 2010 at 8:49 am |
    • David Johnson

      @Frank

      Here is another time, that I failed to understand Frank's argument. I think he failed to address my argument.

      The "debate" started when Frank made the statement: ""Suffering and pain are a part of the human experience and will likely remain so on into the foreseeable future."

      I responded: "If god has the will to remove evil and cannot, then He is not omnipotent. If He can, but will not, then He is not benevolent. If He is neither able nor willing, then He is neither omnipotent nor benevolent. So why call Him God?"

      Frank responded: "David, we did it to ourselves. Humanity is very much like a small child. We must learn from our mistakes and strive to make this reality a better one. God is not going to do it for us, for we will not learn anything that way. You don't reach transcendence (or salvation or redemption) the easy way. You must lose yourself, humble yourself, experience deep pain, suffer greatly, be defeated and broken in order to find yourself and truly rise above. As they say: you cannot know the sweetness of victory without first knowing the agony of defeat.
      Our struggles – and if we allow them to consume us or if we triumph over them – define us as human beings. This world is basically a spiritual battleground/classroom that we apparently have created in order to learn from, after all.
      Suffering can be a path towards growth and learning. Sometimes we must fall so far that we cannot fall anymore in order to be truly humbled, be reminded of what's really important and turn to others and the One who will help you.
      You can't blame God. We did it to ourselves for a reason, apparently. So, ultimately, by allowing us to suffer and learn from it, God is being benevolent. It's for our ultimate spiritual growth. Just as when a human parent tries to show their child the best way to live their life, but the child rebels and chooses a way that leads to self-destruction and suffering. The hope is that the child eventually will learn from it and take the parent's wisdom to heart.
      Sometimes you just have to let your children have their way. Same with God and us."

      My response, point by point: "Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge. So god created disease. He constructed the tick and the flea, and the tape worm and the mosquito. He caused the animals to prey on one another. God did this to teach...what lesson, to the subsequent generations? The desire for knowledge is evil? Just read your bible and believe? What lesson?

      But you say man did it to ourselves. Really? Did these things spontaneously generate as the fruit was chewed? So when a person is placed under the lash or upon the rack, he brought it upon himself? No matter how hideous the penalty, the person applying the punishment bears no guilt? Did no one fashion the lash or devise the rack?

      You said, "This world is basically a spiritual battleground/classroom that we apparently have created in order to learn from, after all."
      So you are contending that God allows some evil because it builds positive character in the victims or in others which outweighs the negative value of the evil itself (e.g., John Hick).

      I don't think "we" created the classroom of pain. God would have had to create it. This is like the fundie claim, that god doesn't send you to hell, you send yourself to hell. Make no mistake. God sends people to hell.

      If God exists, we must have evidence that all of the evils we see are means to a higher purpose. All the pain and suffering should have the purpose of teaching. But even fundies admit there is no evidence. That is why they must resort to talking about the mysterious ways in which God works. There's no evidence at all, that 300 to 500 million people dying from Smallpox in the 20th century, is for a greater good.

      Even if, as you say, evil and suffering is a teaching tool, God would only allow as much evil or suffering as is absolutely necessary in order to achieve a greater purpose. Any suffering above that necessary to learn, would be overkill. But when we look at the world around us, we find prevalent instances of apparently gratuitous evil—pointless suffering from which no greater purpose seems to result.

      As William Rowe points out, when a fawn burns to death in a forest fire and no human being ever knows about it, this apparently unnecessary evil does nothing to build the character of human beings. It is just suffering.

      Again I ask, how would this scenario look different if there was no god? Would there be suffering for no apparent reason? Would there be more evil than could ever be necessary to preserve either free will or for soul making?
      The answer once again, is: The scenario would look exactly the same.
      If there is no difference between god and no god, then what good is god?"

      Frank's response to this: "David, all actions have a consequence. You are greatly underestimating the toll that the Fall took on all of creation (in this reality). Disease is a part of this broken world, as all suffering is. This reality is not as it should be.
      And like I said: You can't blame God. He gave us paradise and we threw it away. Now we just have to work our way back Home. This is apparently something that humanity needed to experience in order to learn and grow as spiritual beings. We still have so far to go. This may take eons. But it will happen."

      My response: You say I greatly underestimated the toll the fall took. So, why did the fall take such a toll? Who set up the magnitude?
      Adam and Eve had no point of reference. They did not know what a bite of fruit would cost. There was no way they could.
      Are you making an argument for an unreasonable and evil god? You have succeeded.

      Your argument did not address the over-abundance of suffering. You just restated what you said in your first post. It is as unsatisfactory now, as it was then. If I kill a fly, I do not need a hammer."

      Frank's final response: David, it wasn't necessarily a 'bite of fruit'. That's a metaphor.
      Didn't know? The Bible says clearly that they knew the consequences: "The Lord God took the man and him put in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it. And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, 'You may freely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die." – Genesis 2:15-17
      They were warned very clearly. And death is what they got.
      I already explained why there's an 'overabundence' of suffering. I had to restate it because you didn't understand what I was saying.

      I leave it whoever would judge to decide. Did I fail to understand, or did Frank fail to address my arguments?

      October 14, 2010 at 9:26 am |
    • jonah of arkansas

      meow- david johnson

      October 14, 2010 at 10:09 am |
    • Frogist

      @David Johnson: Science does not answer the question of "why", just "how". We answer that question according to what feels right whatever our position. You still have not answered Frank's question of how does an atheist answer the why question. jb2112 is in fact correct when he states, "People...have the right to believe whatever they wish. This does not mean that these beliefs have any value or substance." But it is incorrect in assuming that no value is ever possible for a belief unless it is verified by scientific analysis. Otherwise we would not have literature or art. I can find personal upliftment in Harry Potter without knowing the precise coordinates of Platform 9 3/4. I can also value the morals of the story, even if it is widely varied in what those morals are.
      @Frank: Religion is a product of the search for meaning not truth, but some can class it as their truth according to personal perspective. So while you find your meaning in the arms of your creator, it is only a personal and subjective "truth" that is not necessarily transferrable to another person. David has a point in that religious myth cannot be verified as literally true. Yes, David is as tenacious as a jack terrier. But I think he will agree that you are allowed your beliefs as much as he is allowed his. I know we all understand the need for peaceful coexistence. I believe as you do that the universe is magnificent and our perception is limited. There are wonders we cannot fathom. But we will only be able to reach them through our limited perception and the advance of technology and innovative thought and creativity. We can fill in the gaps with god for now, but that belief cannot take the place of curiously and veraciously seeking more verifiable knowledge.

      I think a lot of the contention in arguments like this is based on misunderstanding due to terminology. When we speak of "truth", or "god" or "religion" or "faith", these are terms that mean different things to different people. A definition of terms, while not always possible, might help to clear up any points of dispute before we start attacking anyone's position.

      October 14, 2010 at 11:01 am |
    • David Johnson

      @Frogist

      Thank you for your time on this. You are always insightful.

      You might read the 2nd exchange and comment. If you have time.

      October 14, 2010 at 11:41 am |
    • Frogist

      @Frank & David Johnson: I have added my notes in <>
      Here is another time, that I failed to understand Frank's argument. I think he failed to address my argument.
      The "debate" started when Frank made the statement: ""Suffering and pain are a part of the human experience and will likely remain so on into the foreseeable future."
      I responded: "If god has the will to remove evil and cannot, then He is not omnipotent. If He can, but will not, then He is not benevolent. If He is neither able nor willing, then He is neither omnipotent nor benevolent. So why call Him God?"

      <>

      Frank responded: "David, we did it to ourselves. Humanity is very much like a small child. We must learn from our mistakes and strive to make this reality a better one. God is not going to do it for us, for we will not learn anything that way. You don't reach transcendence (or salvation or redemption) the easy way. You must lose yourself, humble yourself, experience deep pain, suffer greatly, be defeated and broken in order to find yourself and truly rise above. As they say: you cannot know the sweetness of victory without first knowing the agony of defeat.

      <>

      Our struggles – and if we allow them to consume us or if we triumph over them – define us as human beings. This world is basically a spiritual battleground/classroom that we apparently have created in order to learn from, after all.
      Suffering can be a path towards growth and learning. Sometimes we must fall so far that we cannot fall anymore in order to be truly humbled, be reminded of what's really important and turn to others and the One who will help you.
      You can't blame God. We did it to ourselves for a reason, apparently. So, ultimately, by allowing us to suffer and learn from it, God is being benevolent. It's for our ultimate spiritual growth. Just as when a human parent tries to show their child the best way to live their life, but the child rebels and chooses a way that leads to self-destruction and suffering. The hope is that the child eventually will learn from it and take the parent's wisdom to heart.
      Sometimes you just have to let your children have their way. Same with God and us."
      My response, point by point: "Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge. So god created disease. He constructed the tick and the flea, and the tape worm and the mosquito. He caused the animals to prey on one another. God did this to teach...what lesson, to the subsequent generations? The desire for knowledge is evil? Just read your bible and believe? What lesson?

      <>

      But you say man did it to ourselves. Really? Did these things spontaneously generate as the fruit was chewed? So when a person is placed under the lash or upon the rack, he brought it upon himself? No matter how hideous the penalty, the person applying the punishment bears no guilt? Did no one fashion the lash or devise the rack?
      You said, "This world is basically a spiritual battleground/classroom that we apparently have created in order to learn from, after all."
      So you are contending that God allows some evil because it builds positive character in the victims or in others which outweighs the negative value of the evil itself (e.g., John Hick).
      I don't think "we" created the classroom of pain. God would have had to create it. This is like the fundie claim, that god doesn't send you to hell, you send yourself to hell. Make no mistake. God sends people to hell.
      If God exists, we must have evidence that all of the evils we see are means to a higher purpose. All the pain and suffering should have the purpose of teaching. But even fundies admit there is no evidence. That is why they must resort to talking about the mysterious ways in which God works. There's no evidence at all, that 300 to 500 million people dying from Smallpox in the 20th century, is for a greater good.
      Even if, as you say, evil and suffering is a teaching tool, God would only allow as much evil or suffering as is absolutely necessary in order to achieve a greater purpose. Any suffering above that necessary to learn, would be overkill. But when we look at the world around us, we find prevalent instances of apparently gratuitous evil—pointless suffering from which no greater purpose seems to result.
      As William Rowe points out, when a fawn burns to death in a forest fire and no human being ever knows about it, this apparently unnecessary evil does nothing to build the character of human beings. It is just suffering.
      Again I ask, how would this scenario look different if there was no god? Would there be suffering for no apparent reason? Would there be more evil than could ever be necessary to preserve either free will or for soul making?
      The answer once again, is: The scenario would look exactly the same.
      If there is no difference between god and no god, then what good is god?"

      <>

      Frank's response to this: "David, all actions have a consequence. You are greatly underestimating the toll that the Fall took on all of creation (in this reality). Disease is a part of this broken world, as all suffering is. This reality is not as it should be.
      And like I said: You can't blame God. He gave us paradise and we threw it away. Now we just have to work our way back Home. This is apparently something that humanity needed to experience in order to learn and grow as spiritual beings. We still have so far to go. This may take eons. But it will happen."

      <>

      My response: You say I greatly underestimated the toll the fall took. So, why did the fall take such a toll? Who set up the magnitude?
      Adam and Eve had no point of reference. They did not know what a bite of fruit would cost. There was no way they could.
      Are you making an argument for an unreasonable and evil god? You have succeeded.
      Your argument did not address the over-abundance of suffering. You just restated what you said in your first post. It is as unsatisfactory now, as it was then. If I kill a fly, I do not need a hammer."
      Frank's final response: David, it wasn't necessarily a 'bite of fruit'. That's a metaphor.

      <>

      Didn't know? The Bible says clearly that they knew the consequences: "The Lord God took the man and him put in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it. And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, 'You may freely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die." – Genesis 2:15-17
      They were warned very clearly. And death is what they got.
      I already explained why there's an 'overabundence' of suffering. I had to restate it because you didn't understand what I was saying.
      I leave it whoever would judge to decide. Did I fail to understand, or did Frank fail to address my arguments?

      <>

      October 14, 2010 at 11:44 am |
    • Frogist

      ah crud it didn't post... argh... maybe later.

      October 14, 2010 at 11:46 am |
    • claybigsby

      Fran – you said "I believe as John Lennon believed: I believe in everything until it is disproven. It is not my place to draw the line on what is possible and what is not. I am just a simple little creature who lives in a vast universe that is far more magnificent than anything I, nor anyone else, can dream of. (And this is just one universe among many.) "All things are possible in the vastness of time."

      so with this logic, then you must believe that every other religion could be possible, correct?

      October 14, 2010 at 1:14 pm |
    • claybigsby

      including this one: http://www.jedichurch.org/

      October 14, 2010 at 1:16 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @claybigsby

      I'm curious. What did you think about the 2 exchanges between Frank and myself?

      October 14, 2010 at 1:32 pm |
    • jonah of arkansas

      everybody's very proud of you david- you can have a cookie and then take a nap : )

      October 14, 2010 at 1:34 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @jonah of arkansas

      You said, "everybody's very proud of you david- you can have a cookie and then take a nap : )"

      Yeah, I'm sorry. I gotta let it go. I am acting childish. I just got really pis_sed.

      October 14, 2010 at 2:00 pm |
    • jonah of arkansas

      its all good david- i just had a cookie, and am going to take a nap in a few hours.

      October 14, 2010 at 2:02 pm |
    • Raison

      @David Johnson

      Whoooeeee! Boy, you completely blew Frank out of the water..no question...blew him away and stomped on the pieces...wow!

      I did notice where you got a bit snarky...but Frank may not have any cheeks left to turn...you may have blown them completely off his body (his spiritual "posting" body, that is)...but considering the good points you made, I forgive you freely.

      You should go out and buy some larger hats if my admiration swells your head to any great degree. Unless we're talking Goodyear blimp sizes....then we'll just have to deflate you a bit...LOL

      Damn good job. I won't point out the tiny spots on your shining examples...the light is too brite...(squints)...
      😀

      October 14, 2010 at 4:35 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Raison

      Thanks for your comments man! Cheers to you!

      I am going to try to curb my snarkiness. (spelling?).

      October 14, 2010 at 4:55 pm |
    • Raison

      @David Johnson

      Actually, I had to laugh alot at all the "catfight" comments...you really got a bit nasty actually. Snarky might not have been the right word....but blasting people out of anger is what makes this place such a wonderful playground.
      On a serious note, could you not make links asking for comments? I would rather just come up on these things in the natural course of wandering around in different threads and I tend not to trust links to other websites.
      Without Java, I cannot see YouTube links, just a pale square of ugly yellow color like barf. I never see what they are supposedly showing. Those people need to quit doing that, I think. If they cannot express themselves with real words they are in the wrong fucking place.
      When I was so viciously attacked by "Mark from Middle River" I wondered why no one commented or even appeared to notice what he had done to me. When "Frogist" did her usual i-don't-see-what-you-are-talking-about" shtick, I got angry and blasted her, too. But perhaps she didn't really see. I can dissemble enough to see what Mark was really doing, but many people do not even think about analyzing not only what someone has written, but the style and structure of the words, their possible meanings, the possible intent(s) of the author, or any of that.
      So I feel bad about calling names, but, dammit, when are people going to wake up and see that this is not a joke when there are people out there with truly evil intent against their fellow human beings?
      David, there are just some people out there who cannot or will not face honesty and truth, no matter how nice or nasty you are being about it. Just be thankful you didn't get accused of being a racist, hom-ophobic, n-word using hypocrite (among other things) by Frank.
      He was pretty mild compared to that.

      catfight LOL
      😀

      October 14, 2010 at 9:10 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Raison

      I did not know you being attacked. I'm sorry. Sometimes I kind of get caught up. I promise you, I would have/ will take up for you. If this is happening, get my attention, by posting something to me. I won't post YouTube videos again.

      Happy Trails!

      October 14, 2010 at 11:12 pm |
  19. Frank

    Sounds great. God bless him for bringing people's stories to the fore about such difficult issues. We need more music like this.

    October 13, 2010 at 1:38 pm |
  20. Reality

    All Christian songs are simply "mythatians" of those trapped in the bible box!!!!

    October 13, 2010 at 11:44 am |
    • Frank

      'Reality', that comment was really just unneed. You are really showing your true troll colors. The man is just writing songs about real people's stories that have greatly effected them. He's writing about life.

      October 13, 2010 at 1:37 pm |
    • Frank

      *unneeded

      October 13, 2010 at 1:38 pm |
    • Reality

      West at his "best mythationing"

      "Feeling all this life within
      Every single beat of my heart
      You are
      You are
      Jesus, You are
      You are everything"

      October 13, 2010 at 7:07 pm |
    • jouque

      it would make sense for christian music to pertain to christian content

      October 14, 2010 at 2:21 pm |
    • jouque

      I think atheists hate us because they see us as a stubburn lot, a stupid lot. To be 100% truthful the only stance someone can take withought saying they are not sure is agnosticism. I would like atheists to appreciate the fact that unbelief requires just as much of a jump of faith as belief. I can't prove God but you can't disprove. On a side note, the christians need to start living their faith not just reading it. be a force for good not a witness to evil

      October 14, 2010 at 2:32 pm |
1 2
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.