So why not take it the other way? Why has no one bashed Cishek for believing that the Bible verse he had laminated, carries in his back pocket,and reads before he goes out there, while fully believing it has something to do with his success?

 

If you are going to bash someone's religious beliefs, bash them all. Not just the ones that are slumping. Bell has a history of showing he does not suck. He's just got to get it together again. He will. The stats most put so much emphasis on say so. Or are some ignoring the stats that don't fit their arguments again?

 

No one is bashing religion. He is getting "bashed" for sucking and then appears to pass the blame to god. Instead, he should start doing something different because god isn't making him suck and staying the same is only going to produce the same results.

Also, the stats are indeed troubling, and it's been well-documented on ESPN, Fangraphs, and other places -- not just here. He has a great career record, but his strikeouts took an extreme dip last year. There are other things to be concerned with, as well, but that's the most glaring concern, and it has continued into this year. There's no distortion there; I don't know why you insist on creating a straw man, broncobob.

 

I'm creating a straw man? The guy isn't passing the blame to anyone but himself. There are plenty of quotes from him saying just that. Like I said before...The guy is religious and this is one of the things religous folks say. No different that Cishek reading the scripture before every appearance. But I guess it's pretty normal around here to ignore everything and anything that dosen't back the opinions of some.

My post was about the "stats" part of your post, not the religion part. You are creating a straw man regarding the treatment of Heath Bell and his stats.

So why not take it the other way? Why has no one bashed Cishek for believing that the Bible verse he had laminated, carries in his back pocket,and reads before he goes out there, while fully believing it has something to do with his success?

 

If you are going to bash someone's religious beliefs, bash them all. Not just the ones that are slumping. Bell has a history of showing he does not suck. He's just got to get it together again. He will. The stats most put so much emphasis on say so. Or are some ignoring the stats that don't fit their arguments again?

 

 

I don't think no one is bashing his religion aren't 95+% athletes in MLB christian anyway same with the other leagues here NF,NBA ect...

I haven't read any of this thread except for the original post, which I think was most likely created with the intention of stirring a debate. The bottom line is, Bell is a human being, which means he is imperfect and is going to go through failure in life, and he believes the adversity that he is going through right now (the mental anguish, pressure, etc.) is God's way of testing his faith. He's not linking the failure of his physical performance to God at all. What he is referring to is his mentality and psyche.

I've been willing to cut Bell some slack, in the sense that I'm not willing to hate him just because he's going through a (very) rough patch, but he's not making it easy with this type of thing:

 

 

“I’ve got to keep believing in myself and keep going. God’s testing me right now, I know that. I just got to keep staying positive.

 

“If I could get a lucky rabbit’s foot or something and start getting the job done, look how much better we’re going to be.

 

“I’ve got the confidence I’ve got the ability. I don’t know why the lord is testing me right now. He’s breaking me right now. Maybe he’s molding me into a better man or a better person.�

 

 

Now I know being a ball player doesn't necessarily mean you're a smart guy, but this type of logic is just idiotic. Is God (assuming he even exists for the moment) really making the ball stay up in the zone or connect with the fat part of the bat just to "test" Bell? How does he know that those hits in the 9th weren't a reward for something the Padres' batters have done? And does God want to punish the entire Marlins organization, and their fans, along with Bell, or did God arrange it so that in the last two games Bell suffered just enough to throw the game away, but allowed the Marlins to win anyway, meaning that when Ozzie didn't pull Bell in the 9th last night, he had to help Bell get out of the inning without allowing more runs?

 

As for the "molding" to make him a "better person" -- this is baseball Heath, not the Book of Job. You've got a big fat $27 million coming your way, even if you don't throw another pitch in your life -- not exactly high in the suffering stakes. Try keeping some perspective will ya?

 

There is nothing wrong with him having faith, he is basically saying God is testing him to see if he will remain close to God even when he has really hard trials, such as not being able to pitch well.

 

I'm not happy with how he's pitched but as a person I appreciate him and his faith. He knows there is more important things in life obviously as well which is good to see.

 

Bingo

Has Bell ever looked into stand up comedy?

I would just like to point out (and this isn't directed at Heath Bell or anyone in particular here) that I find it funny that often the most aggressive, mean people have such strong faith. Not to say that there aren't those who are nice and polite with faith as well, but generally speaking there's just an abundance of rotten, 'faithful' fellows. I wonder if they think their faith justifies everything they say?

I would just like to point out (and this isn't directed at Heath Bell or anyone in particular here) that I find it funny that often the most aggressive, mean people have such strong faith. Not to say that there aren't those who are nice and polite with faith as well, but generally speaking there's just an abundance of rotten, 'faithful' fellows. I wonder if they think their faith justifies everything they say?

 

You, sir, are the most moronic person I have ever met and I hope you never get a job. It is God's will.

[sarcasms]

Why isnt my GIF working anymore. Thats beat up.

I would just like to point out (and this isn't directed at Heath Bell or anyone in particular here) that I find it funny that often the most aggressive, mean people have such strong faith. Not to say that there aren't those who are nice and polite with faith as well, but generally speaking there's just an abundance of rotten, 'faithful' fellows. I wonder if they think their faith justifies everything they say?

 

I think that people with certain "traits" are also likely to have strong faith.

I would just like to point out (and this isn't directed at Heath Bell or anyone in particular here) that I find it funny that often the most aggressive, mean people have such strong faith. Not to say that there aren't those who are nice and polite with faith as well, but generally speaking there's just an abundance of rotten, 'faithful' fellows. I wonder if they think their faith justifies everything they say?

 

I think that people with certain "traits" are also likely to have strong faith.

 

Size 11 shoes. I see it all the time.

I would just like to point out (and this isn't directed at Heath Bell or anyone in particular here) that I find it funny that often the most aggressive, mean people have such strong faith. Not to say that there aren't those who are nice and polite with faith as well, but generally speaking there's just an abundance of rotten, 'faithful' fellows. I wonder if they think their faith justifies everything they say?

 

 

Meh.

 

 

There are simply more people of faith than otherwise, so they will appear to make up the majority of most groups, when selected randomly.

 

There are plenty of douchebag atheists: Christopher Hitchens, Bill Maher and Myself, to name but three.

I would just like to point out (and this isn't directed at Heath Bell or anyone in particular here) that I find it funny that often the most aggressive, mean people have such strong faith. Not to say that there aren't those who are nice and polite with faith as well, but generally speaking there's just an abundance of rotten, 'faithful' fellows. I wonder if they think their faith justifies everything they say?

 

 

Meh.

 

 

There are simply more people of faith than otherwise, so they will appear to make up the majority of most groups, when selected randomly.

 

There are plenty of douchebag atheists: Christopher Hitchens, Bill Maher and Myself, to name but three.

F*** you for leaving me out, you pr**k. You can join Hitchens for all the s**ts I don't give about you.

Hitchens died about 5 months ago. He may have been a bit of a douche on some topics, but he certainly doesn't deserve inclusion in the same sentence with the vacuous Maher, that's the equivalent of equating Chateaubriand in any respect with dog food.

I would just like to point out (and this isn't directed at Heath Bell or anyone in particular here) that I find it funny that often the most aggressive, mean people have such strong faith. Not to say that there aren't those who are nice and polite with faith as well, but generally speaking there's just an abundance of rotten, 'faithful' fellows. I wonder if they think their faith justifies everything they say?

 

 

Meh.

 

 

There are simply more people of faith than otherwise, so they will appear to make up the majority of most groups, when selected randomly.

 

There are plenty of douchebag atheists: Christopher Hitchens, Bill Maher and Myself, to name but three.

 

I know there's douchebag everyones. I'm just saying it's a certain type of douchebag that's contradictory to their preaching, really. Kinda like that f***up North Carolina preacherguy who was telling parents to punch their gay sons and crack their limp wrists and stuff.

 

Yeah, because that's what your bible says. Beat the sh*t out of them.

Hitchens died about 5 months ago. He may have been a bit of a douche on some topics, but he certainly doesn't deserve inclusion in the same sentence with the vacuous Maher, that's the equivalent of equating Chateaubriand in any respect with dog food.

 

 

You'll have trouble finding a bigger fan of Christopher Hitchens than me. I'm well aware of when he died, I was very upset.

 

He was most certainly a massive douchebag. It's part of why I loved him. He was even more condescending and prickly than Maher, and was incredibly stubborn and short-sighted in many ways.

I only mentioned it because you referred to him in the present tense: "There are plenty of douchebag atheists: Christopher Hitchens..."

 

Hitchens was somewhere between 10 and 100 times as educated and erudite as the slovenly Maher could ever hope to be even if Maher spent the rest of his life attempting to educate his ignorant a$$. Hitchens was routinely and unintentionally funnier than Maher could ever hope to be on his best day. And I say that even though Hitchens was, for most of his life a Trotskyite communist/socialist, although he sort of figured things out in his last 15 years.

 

His "friends" on the left never forgave him. Which is sad, because I always appreciated his flaying of Mother Teresa.

I think it was mostly over the Iraq invasion personally. I still loved his stuff.

Prior to his support of action in Iraq and generally against AQ and jihadism, his totally unforgivable faux pas was his condemnation of Slick Willy for his lies under oath about his dalliance with Maid Monica. He no longer got invitations to all the best (or any) leftist cocktail parties after that deviation from the party line.

 

:lol

Hitchens died about 5 months ago. He may have been a bit of a douche on some topics, but he certainly doesn't deserve inclusion in the same sentence with the vacuous Maher, that's the equivalent of equating Chateaubriand in any respect with dog food.

 

 

You'll have trouble finding a bigger fan of Christopher Hitchens than me. I'm well aware of when he died, I was very upset.

 

He was most certainly a massive douchebag. It's part of why I loved him. He was even more condescending and prickly than Maher, and was incredibly stubborn and short-sighted in many ways.

 

'God is Not Great' was such a good book, thinking of reading it again.

YOU'RE ALL GOING TO HELL.

YOU'RE ALL GOING TO HELL.

 

EXCEPT FOR YOU.

SINCE YOU ARE SUPERIOR.

Like a 5 star hotel that's better than your ordinary 5 star hotel, yes.

YOU'RE ALL GOING TO HELL.

 

Hell will have some real good company.

While he might have been more intellectually competent than Maher is, I wouldn't really call Hitchens "erudite." His works are clearly the handiwork of a journalist (what he is) in terms of their scope of argumentation. He never really delves into intellectual history or philosophy (when he tried to, he did so poorly); he pretty much just marketed his books for mass consumption.

 

Now there's nothing inherently wrong with doing that if his intent is to simply be polemical and be accessible to the common reader. But that's basically the work of a journalist rather than an erudite. For those reasons I think he's overrated or at least mislabeled.

I didn't call him erudite, just that "Hitchens was somewhere between 10 and 100 times as educated and erudite as the slovenly Maher."

 

We have no disagreement, it's all relative. He was certainly a good polemicist, not to mention highly entertaining.