Talk:Rational Media Board of Director and RationalWiki Moderater User: Spud and ultra-processed/unhealthy/junk food

Silly attack

Unhealthy food in moderation is not seriously detrimental, and you cited Spud saying, "I would never suggest that anyone should eat large quantities of it or eat it regularly. But indulging once a year on 30 April isn't going to do anybody much harm." IOWs, this "essay" is a pointless swipe at RW over a nothingburger when there are actually legitimate reasons to criticize them that you completely ignore. —LT ^{(Matthew 26:52)} Monday, 11:23, May 1, 2023 (EDT)

User: Conservative's response

User:Spud admits eating processed food is not a healthy practice and claims that he did not engage in science denialism

See also: Atheist hypocrisy

Drawing depicting Hippocrates

In 2020, the medical journal The Lancet published the article The cost of preventable disease in the USA:

“

A substantial proportion of poor health in populations is preventable. Previous work from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study suggests that nearly half of all health burden in the USA is attributable to a list of 84 modifiable risk factors. Globally, it is also generally accepted that a quarter, or perhaps up to half, of all deaths fall into the category of preventable deaths, making illness that can at least theoretically be avoided an accepted part of our health accounting.

”

On May 1, 2023, User: Spud wrote about his post advocating that people eat processed/ultra-processed food: "...there was no science denial involved. When did I say processed food was healthy? I'll tell you when. Never. That's when. Of course, it's bad for you. Every nudnik knows that. I would never suggest that anyone should eat large quantities of it or eat it regularly. But indulging once a year on 30 April isn't going to do anybody much harm."

According to the National Institutes of Health website:

“

The Hippocratic Oath (Ορκος) is perhaps the most widely known of Greek medical texts. It requires a new physician to swear upon a number of healing gods that he will uphold a number of professional ethical standards. It also strongly binds the student to his teacher and the greater community of physicians with responsibilities similar to that of a family member. In fact, the creation of the Oath may have marked the early stages of medical training to those outside the first families of Hippocratic medicine, the Asclepiads of Kos, by requiring strict loyalty. Over the centuries, it has been rewritten often in order to suit the values of different cultures influenced by Greek medicine. Contrary to popular belief, the Hippocratic Oath is not required by most modern medical schools, although some have adopted modern versions that suit many in the profession in the 21st century. It also does not explicitly contain the phrase, "First, do no harm," which is commonly attributed to it."

”

The Hippocratic Oath is widely known for its advocacy of "Do no harm". The oath does not advocate the much weaker and morally inferior position of not doing "much harm" which User: Spud uses in his rationalization of his bad behavior. In addition, when people eat unhealthy food, there is an opportunity cost in such an instance because they are not eating nutritious food that would nourish their body in such an instance.

User: Spud is an atheist. Not possessing a religious basis for morality, which can provide a basis for objective morality, atheism is fundamentally incapable of providing a coherent system of morality. See also: Atheism and ethics and Atheism and the problem of evil

The Greek philosopher Aristotle wrote: “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.” Before User: Spud made his post advocating eating ultra-processed/processed/junk food, his user page prominently featured the junk food of french fries atop its page. And his user page still prominently displays french fries which is a type of junk food.

And of course, every bad habit such as the eating of ultra-processed/processed/junk food begins with its first act. Young and impressionable viewers of the User: Spud's post could begin a lifelong habit of eating ultra-processed/processed/junk food due to his low-quality web content relative to this unhealthy food.

Furthermore, it is inappropriate and nonsensical for User: Spud to ask people to engage in eating ultra-processed/processed/junk food, which is a type of food that has caused many people to die prematurely (heart attacks, cancer, diabetes, etc.) as an act of remembrance for his sister who died suddenly 5 years ago at the age of 42. This would be especially true if she was a regular eater of ultra-processed foods (Other than mentioning that she "absolutely loved the hot food and ice cream from Dairy Queen", User: Spud does not mention how much of ultra-processed/processed/junk food she ate as a proportion of her diet). Conservative (talk) 20:12, May 1, 2023 (EDT)

If your intent is to bash RW, perhaps you should focus more on their KiwiFarms connections rather than grasping at imaginary straws. —LT ^{(Matthew 26:52)} Monday, 11:32, May 1, 2023 (EDT)

Also, you should remove the link to Winter Watch, a fringe conspiratorial cesspool filled with white nationalist, anti-Jewish canards. —LT ^{(Matthew 26:52)} Monday, 11:38, May 1, 2023 (EDT)

I stand by what I wrote above. Conservative (talk) 11:42, May 1, 2023 (EDT)

The NIH isn't much of an authorative site, given Anthony Fauci headed it for 40 years. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 13:48, May 1, 2023 (EDT)

Two points: 1) Nothing the NIH said about the Hippocratic Oath was errant. 2) In the past, Andy pointed out that the majority of Conservapedia's audience was left of center. People politically left of center do consider the NIH to be a good source. Conservative (talk) 14:31, May 1, 2023 (EDT)

You're not going to rehab Fauci's reputation even among leftists. before it's all over. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 06:40, May 2, 2023 (EDT)

User: Conservative is paying tribute to his sister and niece

God designed cheetahs who are able to run at blazing fast speeds.

Cheetahs eat gazelles and other prey. They do not eat cheetos! If they ate cheetos they would not be able to run very fast

I derisively laught at User: Spud who foolishly told others to eat cheetos and doubles down on his foolishness. To this day, he still has the junk food french fries atop his user page!

I woke up in the middle of the night. I wasn't particularly sleepy so I took a stroll to the local convenience store. Although I was surrounded by a large quantity of processed food in the convenience store which was supported by large marketing budgets, I made a rational choice and purchased the Sunbird Snacks product called Health Mix which was a raisin and nut mix with no added sugar or salt.

Research shows that a person's social network has an influence on them in various matters such as eating/health choices. As a tribute to my vegetarian sister and niece who are not smokers (They also do not smoke unlike a certain New Zealand atheist), if you want to join me in eating some high nutrient dense foods this week, that would be great and it would be quite rational.

It's a pity that there are wikis that engage in science denialism in both word and deed. Conservative (talk) 05:07, May 2, 2023 (EDT)

Yuk. That sounds like the school lunches Michelle Obama forced kids to eat. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 06:35, May 2, 2023 (EDT)

For thousands of years mankind did not eat ultra-processed/processed/junk food and many of them came up with delicious food that their cultures are known for. And most of them ate the food close to the table because they were not portly from eating ultra-processed/processed/junk food.

My sister, who is quite slim and not a roly-poly mess like one the founders of a secular leftist wiki, is a great cook and she does not fill the dinner table with ultra-processed/processed/junk food.

Long live nutritious food! Death to the secular leftist wiki that promotes the eating of ultra-processed/processed/junk food and whose web traffic is dying! If only one of the key founders of the secular leftist wiki ate highly nutritious food and engaged in regular exercise! If he did, he could look like the Christian Chuck Norris instead of a rotund, secular leftist clown!

Question: Who is slimmer? Trent Toulouse or Andrew Schlafly? I think we all know the answer to this question!

I laugh at the calamitious obesity of the godless eaters of ultra-processed/processed/junk food and the needless bad health outcomes they endure! Because they are stiff-necked fools who spurned knowledge and wisdom! I mock their science denialism in both words and deeds! Conservative (talk) 10:39, May 2, 2023 (EDT)

By the way, I am so glad that I am not a weak willed slave to corporate indoctrination achieved through large marketing campaigns. I pity the inferior thinking of the so-called "super atheist intellect" User: Spud and his talk page New Zealand, atheist side kick who is enslaved to his unhealthy smoking habit! They are both science deniers in both words and deeds!

And to be clear, if I am doing any dancing, it is not grave dancing, it is dancing on the foolishness of User: Spud and his New Zealand smoking side kick. To this day, their user pages are total disgraces! One user page features the junk food french fries and the other has a talk page that has a picture with a cigarette on it. Liberals and lefists always double down on their folly! Conservative (talk) 10:59, May 2, 2023 (EDT)

I've had this debate with the Europhiles and scientismists over there - How come The Science^TM in Europe says genetically modified foods are dangerous and banned in Europe whereas The Science^TM in America says genetically modified foods in America are healthy and should be encouraged? And why is government regulation holy when it can't make up its mind what The Science^TM is in leftist-domunated Europe or leftist-dominated America? RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 11:12, May 2, 2023 (EDT)

The consensus of the scientific establishment more often than not produces a load of garbage. A century ago, they glowingly extolled eugenics, inspiring a certain ugly-mustached gay pinko in Germany to set up extermination camps genociding millions. And now under the same banner of scientism, we see eugenics propagated in godless neo-Marxist Europe where Down syndrome babies are mass-murdered in the womb; Mengele would sure be proud of them! Oh, and did I even mention fasci- er, I mean, Faucism? It's all the same logic: "tRuSt tHe sCieNcE!1!" —LT ^{(Matthew 26:52)} Tuesday, 11:21, May 2, 2023 (EDT)

A pastor thought he was older than me. He was shocked to find out that I was older than him. I often have people tell me that I look much younger than I am. I know that a nutritious diet and exercise slows down aging and gives one more energy. The Japanese live longer than most Westerners because their diet is superior and they exercise more. It's not rocket science. The proof is in the low-fat, sugar-free banana pudding that is not highly processed food - not in the Dairy Queen sundaes that User: Spud encouraged people to eat! Conservative (talk) 12:46, May 2, 2023 (EDT)

I dunno; we already got Big Tech and Big Pharma breathing down our necks; can we afford to have Big Ag, too? RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 15:33, May 2, 2023 (EDT)

According to medical journal Lancet, about 40% of illnesses are preventable via diet, nutrition and preventative medicine.[1] The citizens in the USA and Western nations are going to spend a fortune on healthcare due to aging baby boomers. Those big bills are going to breathe down the necks of Western nations which already have a lot of sovereign/private debt. Conservative (talk) 16:44, May 2, 2023 (EDT)

That's the way Big Pharma wants it. They don't want people eating healthy; they want people to take a pill for all their ailments. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 16:58, May 2, 2023 (EDT)

And they sure as hell don't want people making individual, private choices about their own health and wellbeing. RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 16:59, May 2, 2023 (EDT)

It not hard to develop the habit of healthy eating. Somewhat after I became a Christian, I had dinner at the home of a fellow church member who was a plumber. His wife prepared a nutritious meal. For example, instead of white bread rolls, she had tasty whole wheat bread rolls.

The problem with User: Spud and his sidekick Ace is that they have weak wills. One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is self-control and obviously User: Spud is enslaved to junk food and Ace is enslaved to cigarettes. They lack the machismo that comes with self-control. One of the definitions of machismo is an "exhilarating sense of power or strength."[2]

When I walk near the junk food section at the grocery store, I feel a sense of mastery because I know I am not going to purchase any junk food. On the other hand, User: Spud feels like a totally defeated science denier who is powerless against "crisps". He furtively purchases his junk food at the grocery store - lest the slim, healthy and energetic creationists Andrew Schlafly or Ken Ham catch him red-handed. Every week, I look forward to going to church on Sunday. Unfortunately for User: Spud, he looks forward to sundaes and not Sundays! Conservative (talk) 19:58, May 2, 2023 (EDT)

For information related to attending church and on what day, please see: Debate: Are Christians required to attend church weekly? If so, what day of the week?. Conservative (talk) 17:34, May 4, 2023 (EDT)

Darth Dietician: RationalWikians, I find your lack of trust in nutritional science disturbing.

See also: Darth Dietician: RationalWikians, I find your lack of trust in nutritional science disturbing.

Darth Dietician: "RationalWikians, I find your lack of trust in nutritional science disturbing."

For more information, please see: Rational Media Board of Director and RationalWiki Moderater User: Spud and ultra-processed/unhealthy/junk food

If one follows the general spirit of RationalWiki's dietary advice, one will shave years off of one's life

See: If one follows the general spirit of RationalWiki's dietary advice and other advice, one will shave years off of one's life

RationalWiki is a politically left-leaning website that skews towards atheism/agnosticism in terms of its worldview.

As far as RationalWiki, I do find it ironic that if one follows the general spirit of their website in terms of one's diet, one will shave years off of their life and they will have a less environmentally friendly diet. For example, while not completely a pescatarian or vegetarian and merely one who is rapidly weaning myself off of eating meat in order to become a pescatarian (A pescatarian is a person who does not eat meat, but does eat plant-based food and seafood), I do recognize the health benefits of a pescatarian diet that is somewhat between a pescatarian and vegetarian diet (For social reasons and personal dietary preferences, I may make a one or two day exception and eat meat on Thanksgiving and possibly Christmas). For example, PubMed has over 12,000 articles on a plant-based diet and the vast majority of them are very positive in terms of the health benefits and environmental benefits of following a plant-based diet or a more plant-based diet.

On the other hand, RationalWiki article on vegetarianism states: "Vegetarianism has been central to a great many fad diets over the years, as well as numerous religious and ethical dietary principles. While not woo in and of itself, vegetarianism has long been considered an eccentricity (or at the least non-normative, as vegetarians are a minority) and is closely associated with a number of forms of quackery."[3] This is not exactly a ringing endorsement of vegetarianism or of eating a more plant-based diet!

For more information, please read: Rational Media Board of Director and RationalWiki Moderater User: Spud and ultra-processed/unhealthy/junk food

Consider this other data

Pescatarian/vegetarian diet and significantly lower coronavirus infections

"Add this to the long list of reasons to adopt a plant-based or pescatarian diet: New research has found that what you eat — and what you don’t — may lower your odds of developing moderate to severe COVID-19 infection. The study, which was published June 7 in the online journal BMJ Nutrition, Prevention & Health, is the first to report an association between dietary patterns and the severity of COVID-19."[4] (BMJ is the British Medical Journal).

After analyzing the survey data, researchers found that respondents who followed a plant-based diet had a 73 percent lower risk of developing moderate to severe COVID-19; for those who followed a pescatarian diet, the risk was 59 percent lower. “We also found that those who followed low carbohydrate/high protein diets had greater odds of moderate to severe COVID-19 compared with those who followed a plant-based diet,” says Sara Seidelmann, MD, an internal medicine doctor at Stamford Health in Stamford, Connecticut, and a coauthor of the study.[5]

Longevity: Plant-based diet and a Sabbath Day to reduce stress

In an attempt to “reverse engineer longevity,” Dan Buettner has spent years researching the parts of the world where people live much longer than average. Most of those locations are outside the United States — including Sardinia, Italy, and Okinawa, Japan — but there is one long-living group stateside. It’s the Seventh-day Adventists, who live an average of 10 years longer than the American life expectancy of about 79 years.

Buettner, whose work is part of the Blue Zones Project, joined HuffPost Live’s Caitlyn Becker on Wednesday to explain what Seventh-day Adventists do right. That includes eating a plant-based diet and having “a social network that reinforces the right behavior.” Their religious beliefs are also a big help, he said.

“They take this idea of Sabbath very seriously, so they’re decompressing the stress,” Buettner said. “About 84 percent of health care dollars are spent because of bad food choices, inactivity and unmanaged stress, and they have these cultural ways of managing stress through their Sabbath.”[6]

While I do recognize that the Seventh-day Adventists practice some good health behaviors, I disagree with their theology and have a great affinity towards Protestant churches that practice a form of Christianity that is closer to early Christianity and that practice sound Bible exegesis.

LT's reply to criticisms of SDAs

Understanding the Bible simply means to pray and let the Holy Spirit guide you to comprehending the true meanings. "Exegesis" is just an excuse to twist the actual meanings towards man-made interpretations. There is no biblical basis for Sunday observance, because references to the first day of the week in the New Testament do not emphasize it as a day of weekly holy convocation, which the Sabbath was instituted as. (Lev. 23:3) Furthermore, numerous references are made in the Torah towards the eighth day as carrying significance, yet nowhere does the Old Testament ever promote first-day observance. The most common argument, "we observe Sunday because Jesus rose on the first day," is not biblically valid because nowhere is the first day ever glorified as a day of rest.

Perhaps you should go back and read Acts 13:14, 42, and 44. It's baffling that Sunday-keepers think Acts 20:7, a meeting of only the disciples, is absolutely significant and relevant in determining the day of observance while Acts 13:42–44 means nothing. Either their "exegesis" is terrible or they're full of double standards. After all, we also must take the Bible literally word-for-word until it says that death is a sleep. Dozens of verses illustrating that comparison? Only a metaphor. The parable of Lazarus and the rich man? Must be taken absolutely literally!! So according to these "exegesis" experts, God inspired over fifty bland metaphors. —LT ^{(Matthew 26:52)} Friday, 11:38, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

Atheism vs. theism and life expectancy

See also: Atheism and life expectancy

The prestigious Mayo Clinic found that that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life and other health outcomes.

The Independent reported:

“

Religious people live on average four years longer than their agnostic and atheist peers, new research has found. The difference between practising worshippers and those who were not part of a religious group could be down to a mix of social support, stress-relieving practices and abstaining from unhealthy habits, the authors suggest. For the study, a team of Ohio University academics, including associate professor of psychology Christian End, analysed more than 1,500 obituaries from across the US to piece together how the defining features of our lives affect our longevity. These records include religious affiliations and marriage details as well as information on activities, hobbies and habits, which can help or hinder our health, not otherwise captured in census data. The study, published in Social Psychological and Personality Science today, found that on average people whose obituary mentioned they were religious lived an extra 5.64 years. Life expectancy was still 3.82 years longer in religious people when they statistically controlled for marriage rates, a factor which has been shown to increase life expectancy and help stave off disease.

”

Christian apologist Michael Caputo wrote about atheism and marriage: "Recently the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life has published its mammoth study on Religion in America based on 35,000 interviews... According to the Pew Forum a whopping 37% of atheists never marry as opposed to 19% of the American population, 17% of Protestants and 17% of Catholics." See: Atheism and marriage

According to the 2001 American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS) over 50% of all atheists and agnostics don’t get married. The fertility rate is significantly lower in the atheist population (see: Atheism and fertility rates).

The Iona Institute reported: "A meta-analysis of all studies, both published and unpublished, relating to religious involvement and longevity was carried out in 2000. Forty-two studies were included, involving some 126,000 subjects. Active religious involvement increased the chance of living longer by some 29%, and participation in public religious practices, such as church attendance, increased the chance of living longer by 43%."

The journal article Religion, Spirituality, and Health: The Research and Clinical Implications published in the journal International Scholar Research Notes Psychiatry by Harold G. Koenig stated concerning religion/spirituality (R/S):

“

The most impressive research on the relationship between R/S and physical health is in the area of mortality. The cumulative effect of R/S, if it has any benefits to physical health, ought to reveal itself in an effect on mortality. The research suggests it does. At least 121 studies have examined relationships between R/S and mortality. Most of these are prospective cohort studies, where baseline R/S is assessed as a predictor of mortality during the observation period, controlling for confounders. Of those studies, 82 (68%) found that greater R/S predicted significantly greater longevity (three at a trend level), whereas six studies (5%) reported shorter longevity. Considering the 63 methodologically most rigorous studies (quality ratings of 8 or higher), 47 (75%) found R/S predicting greater longevity (two at trend level) [548–566], whereas three (5%) reported shorter longevity [567–569]. Another systematic review [570] and two meta-analyses [571, 572] have confirmed this relationship between R/S and longer survival. The effects have been particularly strong for frequency of attendance at religious services in these three reviews. Survival among frequent attendees was increased on average by 37%, 43%, and 30% (mean effect being 37% across these reviews). An increased survival of 37% is highly significant and equivalent to the effects of cholesterol lowering drugs or exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation after myocardial infarction on survival [573].

”

RationalWiki admin Ace McWicked on flouting medical science and living an unhealthy lifestyle that could reduce his longevity

See also: Science denialism and Atheism and medicine and Atheism and health

RationalWiki admin Ace McWicked on flouting medical science by living an unhealthy lifestyle which could reduce his longevity and/or cause chronic diseases: "I'm in the office and fee like I am having a heart attack. Pretty sure I walked too quickly while doing an overview of the work-site and smoked too heavily in the process. Or maybe it was the lashings of Jagermeister and mac'n'cheese I had for dinner. Either way not much changes with ol' Ace. Being in my early 40's now I don't feel the need to make any lifestyle changes anymore. I'll just the age happen and see how long I last. I reckon I have another 20 years left." - RationalWiki admin Ace McWicked, May 8, 2023

LT's response

You also shave off a year's worth of free time if you spent years upon years chronically obsessed with RationalWiki. —LT ^{(Matthew 26:52)} Friday, 11:29, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

I don't visit the RationalWiki website anymore. I just wanted to finish off a previous essay I created with some pièce de résistance material. :) Conservative (talk) 11:32, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

By the way, internet atheism web traffic got hammered down during the coronavirus pandemic (See: Internet atheism and the coronavirus pandemic) and I expect it to get further hammered down during the next economic recession due to atheists apathy and poor fundraising as far as internet marketing budgets. On the other hand, I expect Christendom's internet traffic to continue to zoom upward for the foreseeable future. Atheists will be so far back in rearview mirror as far as information super highway race as far as internet marketing market share, I say to my fellow Christians: What's far, far behind us, is not important!. Olé! Olé! Olé! Conservative (talk) 11:46, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

[EC] Speaking of internet evangelism, perhaps you should promote websites which actually preach biblically truthful doctrines. Neo-Calvinists promulgating immediate judgment, eternal tormentism, and OSAS won't help individuals in the long run when the mark of the beast is enforced soon. Please see my other reply in a subsection above responding to your criticisms of SDA doctrines. —LT ^{(Matthew 26:52)} Friday, 11:48, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

I am not a Calvinist or neo-Calvinists and you don't know what websites I help promote because I have never told you which ones I have promoted. All you have is speculation! "Secret operations are essential in war; upon them the army relies to make its every move." - Sun Tzu. Conservative (talk) 11:53, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

You definitely promote Got Questions, and likely CARM as well. —LT ^{(Matthew 26:52)} Friday, 11:54, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

LT you wrote: "You definitely promote Got Questions, and likely CARM as well."

Proof? Don't think I didn't notice that you have offered zero and evidence proof because I definitely did! And again, I am not a Calvinist or neo-Calvinist and Got Questions Ministries advocates 4 point Calvinism. Conservative (talk) 11:59, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

I can't actually document any solid evidence, yet as a witness, I attest to recalling you boast of how you boosted Got Questions' web traffic. In the Got Questions Ministries article, you gloat of their rankings according to SEMRush, and given your own SEO work, it's not hard to connect the dots. —LT ^{(Matthew 26:52)} Friday, 12:02, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

I never told you that I boosted Got Questions Ministries web traffic. You tried to pry out of me what websites I have promoted, but due to your periodic nastiness towards me, I never trusted you enough to tell you which ones. Conservative (talk) 12:05, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

[EC] I am of great certainty that Got Questions is among them. Notwithstanding this particular organization, given your own views against Sabbath observance, soul sleep, and annihilationism, I wouldn't expect the sites you promote to advocate biblical theology anyways.

If you think I'm way too nasty, I wonder just how much harsher the Apostle Paul would be. —LT ^{(Matthew 26:52)} Friday, 12:09, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

Your "intellectual high bar" of "great certainty" that you feel that you must clear to achieve great certainty is way to low. That certainly explains your gullibility when it comes to Seventh-day Adventist Church theology! Please raise your bar! And please learn Bible exegesis. Conservative (talk) 13:43, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

Using SEMRush.com and Ahrefs.com, I see that the organic web traffic of the Got Questions Ministries website saw a pretty big fall in 2023. If that ministry were a SEO client of mine in 2023, given my current skill set, I don't believe their web traffic would have fallen. Better luck next time when it comes to clearing the bar of "great certainty", Sherlock! Conservative (talk) 14:40, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

All I truly need is the guidance of the Holy Spirit, not man-made "exegetical" methodologies. —LT ^{(Matthew 26:52)} Friday, 14:44, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

LT wrote: "All I truly need is the guidance of the Holy Spirit".

According to Jesus, the most important commandment of God is "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment." (Matthew 22:36-38).

Ergo, if you don't want to use your mind to its potential when analyzing/interpreting the Bible that is a bad practice.

According to the Anchor Bible Dictionary, Bible exegesis is "the process of careful, analytical study of biblical passages undertaken in order to produce useful interpretations of those passages." A definition of analyze is "examine methodically and in detail the constitution or structure of (something, especially information), typically for purposes of explanation and interpretation."[7]

LT, based on a discussion we had, you don't have a method in order to methodically examine/analyze the Bible. If you do, you haven't told me it. That tells me that it is likely your feelings play an inordinately strong role and your mind is playing an inordinately weak role when it comes to studying/understanding the Bible.

Also, as far as the amount of Bible data you have in your head, have you read the Bible from front to cover? If so, how deeply have studied it? How many chapters of the Bible do you read a day? About how many verses of the Bible have you memorized?

Lastly, your periodic nastiness towards me, tells me that you have some "spiritual wax" in your ears. Hearing from God is more difficult with "spiritual wax" in your ears. Conservative (talk) 16:25, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

O the irony, that you, who closed your mind and heart for years at rebukes of your egregious behaviors, would lament of someone else's ears being "spiritually waxed"! You simply like to complain of how harsh others are without looking in the mirror and humbling yourself.

Understanding the Bible doesn't require a long list of man-made rigid rules. It's about having faith that God can guide us to the truth, and sure enough, the Holy Spirit will do the work in us. While it does not negate the need for basic critical thinking and connecting the dots, it's ultimately God who tells us the truth and not as if we, entirely on our own accord, can ever gain the proper full understanding.

I have not yet finished reading the Old Testament, though at the very least I understand much of what I've read and don't adhere to blatantly antibiblical doctrines like the notion that individuals face judgment immediately upon death. It's one thing to simply read, another to actually comprehend. —LT ^{(Matthew 26:52)} Friday, 18:21, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

Just as I suspected. You haven't read the whole Bible through. And yet, you are trying to teach me theology!

As far as my alleged aggregious behavior, my content at this wiki is factually correct. Just because some people moan and complain about my content doesn't mean I should pay attention to them. Conservative (talk) 19:13, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

You calling atheists and feminists "mutants" on MPR was unnecessarily vile, and you never apologized. I don't think I'll be weeping when the flames of Gehenna consume your unrepentant soul. —LT ^{(Matthew 26:52)} Friday, 19:21, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

If you don't have enough self-discipline to read the Bible all the way through, I highly doubt that you have enough discipline to carefully and rigorously analyze/study the Bible in order to have a sound theology. Your errant Seventh-day Adventist church theology is a symptom of this lack of self-discipline and rigor on your part.

Atheists appear to have a higher mutational load than theists (See: Atheists and genetic mutations). Right-wing/religious politicians appear to have more symmetrical faces than liberal/leftist politicians which might be due to a higher mutational load as far as secular leftists (See: Atheists and physical attractiveness).[8] Conservative (talk) 20:58, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

He still hasn't figured out Gehenna was the city dump outside Jerusalem at the time of Christ. Here, let me pray for LT: "Lord, grant our brother LT some scriptural wisdom and understanding so that he stops making a fool of himself and misquoting you. I pray this in Jesus' name. Amen." RobS^{Give Peace a chance} 21:16, June 2, 2023 (EDT)

RationalWikians, if you had ate more flavorful food that was nutritious, perhaps you would not eat so much ultra-processed food!

A food science laboratory

See also: Atheism and food science

RationalWikians, as far as I hate to say it, if you had ate more flavorful food that was nutritious, perhaps you would not eat so much ultra-processed food!

• Atheism and culinary science
• Atheism, culinary arts, inspiration, innovation and food science
• Atheism and food science

Humor:

• Atheism, food science and bland food
• God is smiting Britain. The godless land of fat, heavy drinkers! (Godless, British pubs have a long history of serving bland food!)
• Flavorful food is coming to New Zealand in the 21st century