Why Should Jesus Love Me?
mike

AOL

#485156 Feb 7, 2013
Why would a person observe the actions of another person and say that must be a "christian"?

Christian or no christian is always in reference to those claiming to be a "christian".

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#485157 Feb 7, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
I was specifically referencing the god of the bible.
OK. That is easily disproven.

Care to disprove the Tao or Spinoza's God ? <smile>

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#485158 Feb 7, 2013
Henry wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps the best way for the Bible belt would be to import there more science. Get rid off the phony Bibles! This is poison for the children instead science!
Based on that post's grammar, you need a dose of education yourself.

“BE BRAVE ENOUGH ”

Since: Oct 09

TO STEP IN MUD PUDDLES

#485159 Feb 7, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
*
==========
These are the kinds of things that eroded away at my faith.
*
Where are you with all of that?
A little background info to help explain the path of my faith.

I was raised in a God fearing home one that most would describe as "evangelical". My father dedicated himself to his faith...even to the point of being a part time minister. When he was not preaching he was teaching.

I always knew for some reason that I saw life differently than my family. I was 12 though when I realized that even my faith was different. When I realized that is when I began to question...to have doubts. Not doubts about if God existed but doubts as to how he had been described to me.

It was all triggered by an event.

My parents always wanted more children but after my birth no matter how hard they tried they just couldn't have one. I was supposed to have been that son that dad always wanted. I think that is why I tried so hard to make up for it...I was instead this girly girl that worked the fields...crawled under houses...climbed ladders.

When I turned 12 my mother finally after all of those years got pregnant. Their prayers had been answered...so they thought. After nine months my mother gave birth to a still born little boy. They were devastated...heart broken...

To make a long story a little shorter...

My father and I ended up that morning sitting at a drugstore counter waiting for the pharmacists to fill a prescription. As we were sitting there not talking...just waiting...I looked at his face...I had never seen such pain.

I asked him why would God take his son...my little brother...

He looked at me with tears running down his face and said..."I don't know". I was the first time that I had never seen my father cry...not have the answer to my questions.

That is when my doubts began to surface. Here was a man that had tried to live his life for God and God had taken from him something that he wanted so desperately. How could that be?

I still believe that there is a higher power...I call him God because that is the term that I grew up with. Is it the same God as the Christian God...I believe so...I just see him differently.

I am willing to go where ever my path leads me...it just has not lead me back to Christianity.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#485160 Feb 7, 2013
Qu_innocence wrote:
Concerning evolution I view that more cynicism.
What are your views on thermodynamics, optics, and astrophysics? Do you view them with cynicism as well? If not, why not? What's the difference?
Qu_innocence wrote:
I had initially asked for Atheists to prove that God does not exist using the scientific method because Atheists quite confidently say that God does not exist.
Actually, most say that they don't believe that gods exist. I add that Jehovah-Jesus definitely does not exist. My argument for that is logical, not empirical. It's very similar to the proof that married bachelors don't exist, which also does not employ the scientific method.

There are other arguments that do use the results of science, such as the argument that science rules out the Genesis creation story, which rules out Jehovah-Jesus. So no god wrote that myth, nor allowed it to appear in a divine message to man.

Who did then, and why not the god? The answer seems obvious to me. Since I'm not moved by the opinions of ancient believers any more than I am those of believers today, I can reject the claim

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#485161 Feb 7, 2013
s of such men. They have no more access to any gods than I do.
Qu_innocence wrote:
Sometimes the assertion is also made, "there is no evidence of God", well... it depends on who's worldview we are talking about. I look at God's "creation" everyday and wonder at the amazement of it all.
I look at the world and am amazed as well.
Qu_innocence wrote:
Science, being neutral, shows us the precision and ingenuity of what God has made.
Science shows us how the natural world operates.
Qu_innocence wrote:
Christians have always been assertive in the fact that we believe "by faith" that God exists
Then what objection could you possibly have to somebody believing anything else by faith? If a person were to say that he rejects Christianity on faith, his argument would be as good as yours.
mike

AOL

#485163 Feb 7, 2013
In this life "Hope" is necessary for survival those who believe in a GOD are saying to others,"please help, I'm hanging onto a thread of hope". Somebody anybody please help, that cry is to those who are in a position to help. You're not suppose to tell that person to "just keep believing a GOD is on the way".

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#485164 Feb 7, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>I knew your background but didnt want to speak out of turn but yeah. And I have yet to meet anyone within their own circles so-to-speak that dont have terms for what I would call 'moral dividers'. I know as a white guy I have terms I use based simply on perceived morality among other white men and how I view them. It has nothing to do with race, just obviously we are able to speak more freely when talking about our own demographic.(T) PEACE
.. you don't see other races as members of the same tribe ??..

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#485165 Feb 7, 2013
Rider on the Storm wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm confused..........
.. me too. Who isn't ??..

.. sometimes we change our prospective ..
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#485166 Feb 7, 2013
AnnieJ wrote:
<quoted text>
A little background info to help explain the path of my faith.
I was raised in a God fearing home one that most...
Thanks for sharing that.
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#485167 Feb 7, 2013
Thanks for sharing your story. Interesting post.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#485168 Feb 7, 2013
Qu_innocence wrote:
The only proof we need is the belief in the greatest love ever.
That's fine for those that choose to believe that. I still don't see what your rebuttal could be to those that choose to believe any other thing possible.
Qu_innocence wrote:
I guess this would be what you would call irrational skepticism from your own understanding and worldview.
Yes, I would call skepticism for the parts of science that contradict an irrational belief irrational skepticism, and even that is with misgivings, since skepticism implies doubt, not rejection out of hand.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#485169 Feb 7, 2013
Qu_innocence wrote:
From my viewpoint, I just don't see where the neutrality of the sciences makes atheism a valid choice
It's not the neutrality of science that makes atheism a valid choice. It's the empirical validity of rational skepticism and the absence of evidence for a god that does.
Qu_innocence wrote:
unless of course, it is in the natural sciences in which evolution is still theorized.
The theory of evolution is confirmed. It cannot be overturned with anything less radical than a discovery that everything is an illusion - a Matrix hypothesis, for example - or a deception, such as a Last Thursdayism scenario, or the existence of a deceptive god that seeded the world it created with red herrings.

All of those possibilities pretty much rule out a perfect and omnibenevolent god, don't they.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#485170 Feb 7, 2013
Qu_innocence wrote:
Now, the dissemination of evolution in schools and other spheres of influence does not mean true legitamcy imho... it just means that they have a politcal stronghold.
How can you tell the difference?

The attempt to disseminate creationism, and then its deceptively repackaged incarnation, intelligent design, appears to be what you just described.

You might ask me the same question - how can I tell? The answer is in the material that the ID have put out - it's pseudoscience. And the courts have been convinced by the scientists that testified that it was, and that the apparatus to develop and propagate it was motivated by a political agenda.

Do you know about the Wedge Document leaked out of the most prominent creationist/ID think tank, the Discovery Institute? It's smoking gun evidence supporting the claim that ID is politically motivated to undermine science and promote Christianity.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#485171 Feb 7, 2013
Qu_innocence wrote:
Hey, just for fun... Job is the oldest book in the bible and in Job 38:16 and Genesis 7:11, these verses allude to underwater springs deep in the seas or oceans. Now how would they have known about these underwater springs were only discovered in the 19th or 20th century?(I forget which century)
What makes you think that they knew of underground springs just because they mentioned something similar? They also thought that the earth was flat, had edges, was unmoving, was firmly fixed from below, and had water both under it and above the dome of the sky. They also thought that that earth was inhabited by giants, witches, dragons, satyrs, leviathans, unicorns, and cockatrices.

The bible gets a hundred scientific claims wrong, and you aren't phased. It gets one that can be called right and you see as evidence confirming your faith. That's called a confirmation bias.

The most famous example of confirmation bias is that of Christians claiming that cosmologists have confirmed their bible with a theory of the history of the universe that suggests a first moment. No matter that the two versions of reality have absolutely nothing else in common. The Genesis version completely overlooked the singularity, the continuous expansion of the universe, an inflationary epoch, symmetry breaking, particle condensation, and nucleosynthsis.

A confirmation bias filters out whatever it doesn't like, and keeps the rest as its proof. The biblical myth got one point out of thousands right, so it's proof that a god spoke to the world.

Incidentally, the myth is in a nine-thousand way tie with every other creation myth for getting that one point and that one point alone correct. The Babylonians nailed it when Marduk created the world. So did the vikings, when Odin dis the same. Too bad none of them are around to bask in the glory of that success.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#485172 Feb 7, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I appreciate it when you think out loud like that.
You seem to think that "atheophobia, homophobia, sexual prudery and guilt, hatred of science, the demeaning of mankind" are things of the past like internment camps and slavery. They're not. If you don't see them yet, you won't.
<quoted text>
Sorry, but no. If you want to show good faith about your desire to learn, review the last week of this thread for some antiscientism from "insidesecret":
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...
And derek4 puts on quite an assault on science beginning about here in another thread:
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...
This thread has contained many fine examples of the deep Christian misanthropy and pessimism for mankind. You may recall that it's what I criticized Lil Wispers for reinforcing.
Your request for official policies is absurd.
Why is it absurd?

You want to rid society of it? I see in a last post you it it is abstract? So who exactly are you targeting? Anyone with free speech that you disagree with that also happens to believe in God?

What's absurd it to think I said anything of the sort like equality issues with women are all in the past. But i don't see you fighting for women's suffrage. In fact what you seem not to realize it by your own standard it is you that is equally guilty for slavery and internment camps

I really don't think I need to read your last 45,000 posts. That seems much more of a demand then you providing official policies.

So let's compromise

Just tell me who you are targeting in this abstract concept of the church you have?

You want to eliminate the "church's" influence in politics and society in the ways you don't agree with correct? Just tell who your target is? How does someone eliminate the influence of how some individuals incorporate their religious beliefs into their personal life? Would you eliminate all universities and schools if some teachers taught things you didn't agree with? I am not saying as of yet you said you want to eliminate all churches. In fact as of yet I have not heard how you would go about your plan at all and who gets targeted.

Just if you don't mind in as short or long of an explanation as you want to give just tell me how you eliminate the influence in society and politics and who do you target to do this? What you seem to be suggesting sounds impossible to me as how do you stop people from thinking what they do or how do you stop some individuals for promoting what they do even if you were to punish everyone around them...if that is the case?

“BE BRAVE ENOUGH ”

Since: Oct 09

TO STEP IN MUD PUDDLES

#485173 Feb 7, 2013
Adam wrote:
Thanks for sharing your story. Interesting post.
You are welcome.
:-)

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#485174 Feb 7, 2013
Dr Shrink wrote:
fart
No hot tub for you.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#485175 Feb 7, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Let Christians speak. And let non-Christians speak. It's all good. I'm not a staunch supporter of the church exerting political or social influence. I don't propose to silence it - just to promote its atrophy and with that, its loss of social influence.
Does that meet with your approval?
Yeah I would have no problem with someone who isn't against free speech

And sure you would have a right to speak out against whatever you chose

Ok what you are suggesting here seems much more reasonable then what I thought you were promoting

But again who is being targeted as you promote its atrophy? The church itself doesn't promote these ideas just some people in it so who are you speaking against and how do you prevent individuals from incorporating their own ideas in the political and cultural sphere?

So long as there is a bible and free speech and so long as people will behind things to promote their own agenda isn't your chance of the the influence from the "church" facing atrophy stand about as much success as bigotry itself suffering atrophy?

I mean while some people may use certain teachings for justification and while some people within may promote things that aren't biblical you can't believe any of that would really change with no church do you? People going to mass on Sunday didn't make them bigoted or decide not to help the poor or racist or whatever other problems may exist.

And again who do you speak out against?

I really am not trying to be difficult. Some of your goals I would agree with. I just see them as a little naive. Even if every church was to get broad-brushed how is their any remedy that changes what other people promote and since you aren't against free-speech, everything stays the same the way I see it

If you want to change hearts and minds that is one thing and you do what you can to try to get thru to people. But thinking some sort of abstract existence of a church to be targeted can change that is what I am not following as of yet
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#485179 Feb 7, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
You want to eliminate the "church's" influence in politics and society in the ways you don't agree with correct? Just tell who your target is?
Thats some good logic, and I see your point. Is participating in this forum going to change the world. I dont see how weakening the faith of a handful of Christians on topix is going to achieve IANS goals. I'm not saying we shouldnt have these debates. Just question if it actually produces any results.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 1 min Bongo 52,160
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 27 min Rider on the Storm 992,009
How many MILLIONS of MEXICAN MEN R N in U.S. IL... 42 min Doctor REALITY 10
My girlfriend’s vegan. Need some tips and insi... 56 min michaelv2 1
Those in the twin towers who saw the jets coming 59 min Doctor REALITY 35
THANK YOU, Pastor Charles CAPPS of England, Ark... 1 hr Doctor REALITY 2
I want my girlfriend back. How do I win her back? 1 hr Doctor REALITY 4
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 1 hr Peter Ross 445,994
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 2 hr Chuck 693,272
More from around the web