Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Three two, and blissfully childless if you were wondering. My inner child takes enough tending.Ummm, care to share your age?
So don't you think it's a little disrespectful to, and irreverent of, the universe we've landed ourselves in to ignore what its actually taught us so far, and belittle its depths to a contra-indicated book of claims that dont match up in any way with what it's shown us? It seems pretty rude, in a big way, to me.You either think I am stupid or that I never taught science to little kids. So what.
I don't believe I am but if you need to believe that about me to try to make it personal because what I say upsets you, go for it.It seems you're a Concordist.
I can live without your envy. It's not so bad.I don't envy you, really.
That's nice that you believe you know that about them. I hope feeling superior to them gives you pleasure and comfort. But I was made for more than pleasure and comfort.Concordist christians tend to struggle a lot with balancing their naturally logical and often intelligent thinking styles with the trap of theism that they're stuck in.
Actually it makes me happy to discover truth. I don't see how anyone who has half a brain would choose to read accounts literally that were clearly written in an allegorical fashion. Which is why you probably abandoned your faith. You read them literally. I wouldn't have believed them either if I read them like you did.If it helps you to free yourself even a little, think about how exhausting these elaborate interpretations have to be to make these texts say something other than what they literally say, and how the simple explanation for the Bible's literal incorrectness is just that these are only stories, and they've snared your clearly quite bright, critically-thinking-inclined mind and hampered it.
That's interesting. I've probably forgotten more science than you ever knew. I'm a degreed engineer who practiced engineering for 37 years. What's your background in science?Think about what you might be capable of if you put the story book back on the shelf, and looked at the universe anew, did some scientific research with a fresh mind?
Exactly what has the universe taught you? Because it taught me that it popped into existence - being created from nothing - being hardwired to produce life and intelligence.Three two, and blissfully childless if you were wondering. My inner child takes enough tending.
So don't you think it's a little disrespectful to, and irreverent of, the universe we've landed ourselves in to ignore what its actually taught us so far, and belittle its depths to a contra-indicated book of claims that dont match up in any way with what it's shown us? It seems pretty rude, in a big way, to me.
www.timesofisrael.com
Jesus did not preach or intend that any adult remain as a child. The Apostle Paul who did his utmost to represent the teachings of Jesus accurately would write: "11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things." In those verses I quoted, Jesus admonished those he was teaching to not think they were better than or more important than a child. And that was amplified by Luke who wrote: "“Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.”To the contrary, I'm not disagreeing really with Jesus's underlying message, that to be Christian is to remain a child. That is quite literally what he just said. It's an offer that says, "Halt your critical thought, stem your more mature questions and be content to live within the confines of this story book, as a child would." It's offering you a way to basically stay a child.
But at some point we have to grow up. The 'Peter Pan' pain that comes with letting go of childhood is hard, but that's why we're always welcome to cherish the Santa's and jesus's and sandmans of our youth, for the magic they gave us as children, while moving forward as adults and growing. It doesn't mean you have to get rid of Christianity or anything like that, just think of it like Christmas decorations that you keep in the attic for occasions when you celebrate on nostalgic holidays and delight the kids with the magic of your own youth.
What I stand in awe of is our ancient ancestors, the lessons they taught, the stories they told. Their advice is solid, especially when seeking God.So don't you think it's a little disrespectful to, and irreverent of, the universe we've landed ourselves in to ignore what its actually taught us so far
I'm still scratching my head about his belief the universe can be disrespected by explaining its origin or believing in a Creator. I think he was expecting a young earth argument or something. It's almost as if he is disappointed he didn't get one. Because he keeps arguing we shouldn't have these beliefs based upon scripture. When the more obvious explanation is that he was reading it literally to confirm his bias rather than allegorically to discover what the authors intended to convey.What I stand in awe of is our ancient ancestors, the lessons they taught, the stories they told. Their advice is solid, especially when seeking God.
WHY teach kids fairytales of imaginary characters in the first place?
If you read them a story, make SURE they understand it isn't real and its all made up falsehoods.
Teaching kids to believe in non-existant beings and creatures is detrimental to their psyche and mental aptitude.
Especially when they can weaponize it against others for their own personal gains, like religion does.
Kids should be taught the TRUTH from the beginning, not LIES.
If you're going to let them make up their own minds, then do it from the start. Not after they've been mentally warped by decades of lies and falsehoods.
I can't stop shaking my head about describing God as a sad mother, and seeking Him as the child's game of hide and go seek. I am better used to some seemingly comparing God to a genie.I'm still scratching my head about his belief the universe can be disrespected by explaining its origin or believing in a Creator. I think he was expecting a young earth argument or something. It's almost as if he is disappointed he didn't get one. Because he keeps arguing we shouldn't have these beliefs based upon scripture. When the more obvious explanation is that he was reading it literally to confirm his bias rather than allegorically to discover what the authors intended to convey.
Yes, that too.I can't stop shaking my head about describing God as a sad mother, and seeking Him as the child's game of hide and go seek. I am better used to some seemingly comparing God to a genie.
I don't believe I am but if you need to believe that about me to try to make it personal because what I say upsets you, go for it.
That's interesting. I've probably forgotten more science than you ever knew. I'm a degreed engineer who practiced engineering for 37 years. What's your background in science?
Actually it makes me happy to discover truth. I don't see how anyone who has half a brain would choose to read accounts literally that were clearly written in an allegorical fashion. Which is why you probably abandoned your faith. You read them literally. I wouldn't have believed them either if I read them like you did.
Now it's my turn, john54 ....
Atheism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of atheism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Atheism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Atheism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Atheists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Atheism is a religion. The religious nature of atheism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.
It drives atheists crazy when Christians know more about science than they do.
There are an infinite number of combinations of structure of matter to produce a lifeless universes. There's only one structure of matter that is capable of producing a universe that is capable of producing life and intelligence. So we live in an unnatural universe that just so happened to be created in an unnatural way; nearly equal amounts of matter and anti-matter. It can't be an accident. It had to be intentional.
The physical world is entirely abstract and without ‘actuality’ apart from its linkage to consciousness. It is physicists who have expressed most clearly this pervasive relationship between mind and matter, and indeed at times the primacy of mind. Arthur Eddington wrote, “the stuff of the world is mind‑stuff. The mind‑stuff is not spread in space and time." Von Weizsacker stated what he called his “Identity Hypothesis; that consciousness and matter are different aspects of the same reality. In 1952 Wolfgang Pauli said, "the only acceptable point of view appears to be the one that recognizes both sides of reality -- the quantitative and the qualitative, the physical and the psychical -- as compatible with each other, and can embrace them simultaneously . . . It would be most satisfactory of all if physis and psyche (i.e., matter and mind) could be seen as complementary aspects of the same reality." If I say, with Eddington, “the stuff of the world is mind‑stuff,” that has a metaphysical ring. But if I say that ultimate reality is expressed in the solutions of the equations of quantum mechanics, quantum electrodynamics, and quantum field theory -- that sounds like good, modern physics. Yet what are those equations, indeed what is mathematics, but mind‑stuff? -- virtually the ultimate in mind‑stuff and for that reason deeply mysterious. Mind, rather than being a late development in the evolution of organisms, had existed always: that this is a life‑breeding universe because the constant presence of mind made it so.
Atheism is an intellectual dead end.
As it is, atheists have no interest in being christians ...
... There is a cognitive dissonance at work which is necessary to be a Christian, or a theist in general, ...
I'll give you that Christianity preaches immaterialism ...
