Check out topic: The End of the World, but with USSR National Anthem
An Open Letter to Author “The Da Vinci Code,” Dan Brown New Book "Origin" Sparks Dialogue.
Nov 5, 2017 16:01:12 #
11/03/2017 An Open Letter to Author “The Da Vinci Code,” Dan Brown New Book "Origin" Sparks Dialogue. Michael Brown challenges famous author to practice what he preaches about 'dialogue'
Dr. Michael Brown
http://www.wnd.com/2017/11/an-open-letter-to-dan-brown/
Dear Dan,
Before getting into the heart of this letter, as a non-fiction author myself, I am amazed at your gift for writing fiction.
It’s incredible to see how you get the reader involved, how you hold the reader’s interest, how you paint such detailed word pictures, how you build to such intense, page-turning climaxes.
And, as one who appreciates careful research, I love the work you put into your books.
As you once explained, your publisher wants good books, not fast books.
I remember in the days when “The Da Vinci Code” took off that, on every flight I took, I saw a good number of people reading your book, after which people would ask me if what you wrote was true.
That’s what I call powerful fiction writing!
I myself could not put the book down, even though I knew biblically and historically that the central thesis was false.
Again, kudos to your literary skills.
But, to the point of this open letter.
I saw your recent TV interview where you expressed hope that your new book, “Origin,” would lead to dialogue between creationists and evolutionists.
Dan Brown Hopes New Book "Origin" Sparks Dialogue
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FScv_3HWBQg
Noting that “there is an enormous rift now between creationism and evolutionary science, a rift that needs to be bridged through dialogue.”
You even expressed the hope that your book could help spark such dialogue.
More broadly, you stated, “I hope they [meaning, readers of your new book] take away a desire to have a dialogue with people whose ideas are not their own.”
a. If I may be so bold as to ask: Are you willing to help lead the way in that dialogue?
b. Are you willing to have your own views challenged and your own beliefs examined as you challenge and examine the beliefs of others?
c. While reading “Origin,” I kept asking myself, “What happened to Dan Brown as a child?
d. There was something that took place that profoundly influenced him against ‘traditional religious faith.’ What was it?”
A few days later, a friend (who had no idea I was reading your book) pointed me to your interview on “CBS Sunday Morning” (Oct. 1), and it answered my question loudly and clearly.
The evolution of Dan Brown
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TEfnncv-nU
In fact, after a few seconds of Internet research, I found this was not the first time you told your story.
An AP article from May 18, 2012, recounted a talk you had just given in
New Hampshire, containing these salient lines:
“I owe everything to my parents,” said Brown, whose father was a math teacher and mother was a church organist and piano teacher.
Brown says he was encouraged to ask questions at home as a child.
He believed both his mother’s religion and his father’s science, but became confused when the two conflicted.
He told the crowd that one day, at age 13, he asked a priest how to go about reconciling those differences.
He said the priest replied, “Nice boys don’t ask questions like that.”
And, as you explained in the CBS interview, this was the beginning of your journey to find “your truth.”
How unfortunate it was that the priest responded as he did.
He should have said, “What an excellent question! I’m so glad you asked. Let’s explore it together.”
Perhaps your life would have taken a very different direction had the priest encouraged honest inquiry and welcomed questions exploring apparent contradictions between religion and science.
a. To be sure, I imagine you’re quite satisfied with your life so far, much of it, since “The Da Vinci Code,” must seem like a dream come true.
b. But what if you could have a beautiful relationship with your Creator, the Father of all fathers?
c. What if you could do more than raise questions for your millions of readers?
d. What if you could point them to solid, redemptive, life-changing answers?
How amazing would that be?
I truly appreciate that you’re calling for dialogue between creationists and evolutionists.
At the same time, you state that historically, “God does not survive science,” perhaps unaware that, to this day, many scientific discoveries are made by people of great faith and perhaps unaware that religious faith worldwide is growing, not declining.
And, while claiming that religion has an important part to play in the world, you have stated clearly that you think eventually, religious faith will disappear, which you see as a positive, not a negative.
Of course, you’re quite free to have these views and express them.
My concern is that you seem to pick the worst of those you differ with compared to the best of those you agree with. In other words, when it comes to the so-called “brights.”
Theists like Richard Dawkins – you write of them in “Origin” with esteem.
When it comes to those who question Darwinian evolution, you point to a website you feel you can easily disparage.
Are you genuinely unaware of the large number of highly educated scientists and researchers.
Revolution Against Evolution. A revolution of God’s Love. 3000 Darwin Skeptics A Select List of Science Academics, Scientists, and Scholars Who are Skeptical of Darwinism
https://www.rae.org/essay-links/darwinskeptics/
a. From physicists to biologists to astronomers to geologists and others – who reject Darwin’s naturalism?
b. Have you ever read a scholarly tome on intelligent design (written with no reference to religious belief at all) that makes the intellectual case for a creator?
c. Have you spent a day with someone like John Lennox, a committed Christian who has debated men like Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens ?
d. And who has served as professor of mathematics at the University of Oxford and fellow in mathematics and the philosophy of science at Green Templeton College, Oxford, with Ph.D.s from Oxford and Cambridge in mathematics and in science?
Or have you worked your way through an academic study of miracles, such as professor Craig Keener’s two-volume work, “Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts,” which also discusses documented miracles today?
Miracles : 2 volumes: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts.
https://www.amazon.com/Miracles-volumes-Credibility-Testament-Accounts-ebook/dp/B007KOI2PY/ref=sr_1_2?
Or have you visited countries in the developing world where Christian missionaries are the primary reason why some communities have running water and electricity, not to mention schools, hospitals and eternal hope?
I’m quite aware that the hero of your recent books, Robert Langdon, is not an aggressive atheist, and even in the lengthy climax to “Origin.”
You raise the question of where the laws of physics came from (apparently not even E-Wave figured that out yet!).
At the same time, I genuinely wonder what kind of dialogue you’re looking for and, more importantly, if you’re open to the possibility of the existence of a benevolent, omnipotent Creator.
So, rather than revile you as a heretic and an anti-Christ figure, I reach out to you as a fellow lover of truth, inviting you to have some genuine interaction.
Why not lead the way?
Dr. Michael Brown
http://www.wnd.com/2017/11/an-open-letter-to-dan-brown/
Dear Dan,
Before getting into the heart of this letter, as a non-fiction author myself, I am amazed at your gift for writing fiction.
It’s incredible to see how you get the reader involved, how you hold the reader’s interest, how you paint such detailed word pictures, how you build to such intense, page-turning climaxes.
And, as one who appreciates careful research, I love the work you put into your books.
As you once explained, your publisher wants good books, not fast books.
I remember in the days when “The Da Vinci Code” took off that, on every flight I took, I saw a good number of people reading your book, after which people would ask me if what you wrote was true.
That’s what I call powerful fiction writing!
I myself could not put the book down, even though I knew biblically and historically that the central thesis was false.
Again, kudos to your literary skills.
But, to the point of this open letter.
I saw your recent TV interview where you expressed hope that your new book, “Origin,” would lead to dialogue between creationists and evolutionists.
Dan Brown Hopes New Book "Origin" Sparks Dialogue
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FScv_3HWBQg
Noting that “there is an enormous rift now between creationism and evolutionary science, a rift that needs to be bridged through dialogue.”
You even expressed the hope that your book could help spark such dialogue.
More broadly, you stated, “I hope they [meaning, readers of your new book] take away a desire to have a dialogue with people whose ideas are not their own.”
a. If I may be so bold as to ask: Are you willing to help lead the way in that dialogue?
b. Are you willing to have your own views challenged and your own beliefs examined as you challenge and examine the beliefs of others?
c. While reading “Origin,” I kept asking myself, “What happened to Dan Brown as a child?
d. There was something that took place that profoundly influenced him against ‘traditional religious faith.’ What was it?”
A few days later, a friend (who had no idea I was reading your book) pointed me to your interview on “CBS Sunday Morning” (Oct. 1), and it answered my question loudly and clearly.
The evolution of Dan Brown
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TEfnncv-nU
In fact, after a few seconds of Internet research, I found this was not the first time you told your story.
An AP article from May 18, 2012, recounted a talk you had just given in
New Hampshire, containing these salient lines:
“I owe everything to my parents,” said Brown, whose father was a math teacher and mother was a church organist and piano teacher.
Brown says he was encouraged to ask questions at home as a child.
He believed both his mother’s religion and his father’s science, but became confused when the two conflicted.
He told the crowd that one day, at age 13, he asked a priest how to go about reconciling those differences.
He said the priest replied, “Nice boys don’t ask questions like that.”
And, as you explained in the CBS interview, this was the beginning of your journey to find “your truth.”
How unfortunate it was that the priest responded as he did.
He should have said, “What an excellent question! I’m so glad you asked. Let’s explore it together.”
Perhaps your life would have taken a very different direction had the priest encouraged honest inquiry and welcomed questions exploring apparent contradictions between religion and science.
a. To be sure, I imagine you’re quite satisfied with your life so far, much of it, since “The Da Vinci Code,” must seem like a dream come true.
b. But what if you could have a beautiful relationship with your Creator, the Father of all fathers?
c. What if you could do more than raise questions for your millions of readers?
d. What if you could point them to solid, redemptive, life-changing answers?
How amazing would that be?
I truly appreciate that you’re calling for dialogue between creationists and evolutionists.
At the same time, you state that historically, “God does not survive science,” perhaps unaware that, to this day, many scientific discoveries are made by people of great faith and perhaps unaware that religious faith worldwide is growing, not declining.
And, while claiming that religion has an important part to play in the world, you have stated clearly that you think eventually, religious faith will disappear, which you see as a positive, not a negative.
Of course, you’re quite free to have these views and express them.
My concern is that you seem to pick the worst of those you differ with compared to the best of those you agree with. In other words, when it comes to the so-called “brights.”
Theists like Richard Dawkins – you write of them in “Origin” with esteem.
When it comes to those who question Darwinian evolution, you point to a website you feel you can easily disparage.
Are you genuinely unaware of the large number of highly educated scientists and researchers.
Revolution Against Evolution. A revolution of God’s Love. 3000 Darwin Skeptics A Select List of Science Academics, Scientists, and Scholars Who are Skeptical of Darwinism
https://www.rae.org/essay-links/darwinskeptics/
a. From physicists to biologists to astronomers to geologists and others – who reject Darwin’s naturalism?
b. Have you ever read a scholarly tome on intelligent design (written with no reference to religious belief at all) that makes the intellectual case for a creator?
c. Have you spent a day with someone like John Lennox, a committed Christian who has debated men like Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens ?
d. And who has served as professor of mathematics at the University of Oxford and fellow in mathematics and the philosophy of science at Green Templeton College, Oxford, with Ph.D.s from Oxford and Cambridge in mathematics and in science?
Or have you worked your way through an academic study of miracles, such as professor Craig Keener’s two-volume work, “Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts,” which also discusses documented miracles today?
Miracles : 2 volumes: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts.
https://www.amazon.com/Miracles-volumes-Credibility-Testament-Accounts-ebook/dp/B007KOI2PY/ref=sr_1_2?
Or have you visited countries in the developing world where Christian missionaries are the primary reason why some communities have running water and electricity, not to mention schools, hospitals and eternal hope?
I’m quite aware that the hero of your recent books, Robert Langdon, is not an aggressive atheist, and even in the lengthy climax to “Origin.”
You raise the question of where the laws of physics came from (apparently not even E-Wave figured that out yet!).
At the same time, I genuinely wonder what kind of dialogue you’re looking for and, more importantly, if you’re open to the possibility of the existence of a benevolent, omnipotent Creator.
So, rather than revile you as a heretic and an anti-Christ figure, I reach out to you as a fellow lover of truth, inviting you to have some genuine interaction.
Why not lead the way?
Nov 6, 2017 08:31:34 #
Doc110 wrote:
11/03/2017 An Open Letter to Author “The Da Vinci ... (show quote)
================
Dan Brown is a prolific writer, author of many books. One of that was the "Da Vinci Code.". This book earned Brown hundreds of millions of dollars, trying to disprove the divinity of Christ. If he had that PROOF, why did he not present it to the world to prove his point? His source may also be another product of human imagination. Though Browns book was well written, with his prolific imagination, the book was still a fiction.
I believe the Gospels of Apostles, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, the very people who were with Christ all the time. I believe in Saint Paul, originally Saul of Tarsus, who encountered Jesus on his way to Damascus. I believe on the Gospels of Saint Paul's 20 books (preaching) of the Gospel. He was the second most important in the history of Christianity. I believe their Holy Scriptures, instead of Dan Brown, and his mysterious sources from the Louvre Museum in France.
Dan Brown was bought by Satan for hundreds of millions of dollars. Atheists and Muslims love his book. Millions of Europeans were tempted, thus Europe's Christian churches suddenly became empty and abandoned after Browns book was released and read by the people.
Along with others like Atheists, Muslims, and other non-believers of the Holy Scriptures, Dan Brown has convinced tens of millions in Europe to abandon the Christian faith. After writing Da Vinci Code, Europe's Christian churches suddenly became empty and bankrupt. Those beautiful architectures of Christian churches ended up sold to Muslims, converted into Mosques.
What happened to Europe now? They are populated by tens of millions of Muslims they've invited. Many of them running the elected government, like the mayor of London under a Muslim, and Germany almost populated by majority Muslims. Angela Merkel loves Muslims. I think she read "Da Vinci Code" too. Most people in France, England, Germany, Sweden, are now populated by tens of millions of Muslims after Brown released that fiction "Da Vinci Code."
Europe used to be the cradle of Christian civilization. Now, when the people read Brown's Da Vinci Code", they left the Christian faith and shifted to Mohammad, the Muslim founder of Islam during the 7th century in Mecca. Most of the people there are now Mohammedans.
That will never happen in America, as long as USA is under GOP Conservatives whose faith in Christ could not be challenged.
Only terrorist will try to destroy, but won't succeed.
I thank God, Obama is gone, and Hillary did not win. Otherwise like Europe, our faith may have been sold to Satan.
Nov 7, 2017 04:17:19 #
Alicia
Loc: NYC
Doc110 wrote:
11/03/2017 An Open Letter to Author “The Da Vinci Code,” Dan Brown New Book "Origin" Sparks Dialogue. Michael Brown challenges famous author to practice what he preaches about 'dialogue'
Dr. Michael Brown
http://www.wnd.com/2017/11/an-open-letter-to-dan-brown/
Dear Dan,
Before getting into the heart of this letter, as a non-fiction author myself, I am amazed at your gift for writing fiction.
Dr. Michael Brown
http://www.wnd.com/2017/11/an-open-letter-to-dan-brown/
Dear Dan,
Before getting into the heart of this letter, as a non-fiction author myself, I am amazed at your gift for writing fiction.
******************************
I read that book quite a while ago and even checked out a few of the things that Brown states. I especially went to the library to locate the painting of the Last Supper. And do you know? --he's right!
Richard Dawkins is not a theist. He is anti-theist which translates to atheist.
I began questioning at about the same age as he (or perhaps younger) but it was my talk with a priest that solidified my decision to leave the church. I also was told not to question. Had I wished to get into a discussion I might have taken the time but it wasn’t important enough for me as I had reached my own conclusion anyway.
Dr. Brown was simply in an argumentative mood, else why would he ask such a stupid question as “if you had the opportunity to sit . . . etc.” Personally, if there existed such an essence as the Creator, I’m sure D. Brown, as well as R. Dawkins would be happy to have the conversation. But the thing is that essence can’t be proved, regardless how much you like the idea. In addition, the last census proved that more people are leaving the church(es) than joining them. Considering all the “nones” to be atheists as they claim to belong to no church, the number of atheists has risen to 24%. The percentage is higher in Europe.
You’re correct in pointing out that there are a number of scientists who embrace religion but they express that as their own personal faith and NOT to be brought into the laboratory.
What does having running water to do with religion. Missionaries are told to do good in order to gain converts. I’m sure you’ll see that those natives were more interested in the water than in the god. Ex.: Hawaii. I did read the original version of “Hawaii” written by a Hawaiian and found that the American author (can’t recall his name right now) lifted the book in its entirety. This reading was suggested by a professor at U of H - beautiful architecture at that school.
One of the things that stuck in my mind was that the missionaries to Hawaii changed to winter wear with the onset of October – they never considered the climate there! Shows you how forward thinking they were. Imagine wearing wool near the equator. When I worked there I discovered that there is a rather large segment of the Hawaiian population who would enjoy secession from the U.S.A. They were never asked to vote on statehood but were forced by the Marines who were sent to “protect” the plantation owners who were the descendants of the missionaries. Similar to Native Americans, the Hawaiians never thought of “owning” land. It was to be shared by all. That thinking could avoid many wars.
The laws of physics and other sciences come from observation. Hear that? – “observation”!
This entire letter is ridiculous and had to be written by someone who has a closed mind because that is what comes from the Creation theory. And note – it is only a “theory.”
Thanks for the mention of Origin, Brown’s latest book. I’ll have to visit the library.
Check out topic: Chiefs kicker takes no shortcuts...in football or his faith!
Nov 7, 2017 06:38:56 #
Alicia,
Didn't write the reply, but enjoyed the article. I'm only the posted messenger of the article.
Nice to meet you.
As far as I can see, Dan Brown is a divider, he prey's off of the ill-informed and the uneducated naïveté of people.
The “The Da Vinci Code,” was a fictional written book produced in Hollywood.
Never read the book, only saw parts of the movie. Don't know about the Last Supper referenced by Dan Brown ?
Dan brown uses symbolism for facts to tell and peddle his books on religion.
Myself I went in the opposite direction in religion, read, asked questions and read some more.
The more I was introduced to other religions I was able to understand God purpose, as a Christian Roman Catholic.
How unfortunate it was that the priest responded as he did.
He should have said, “What an excellent question! I’m so glad you asked. Let’s explore it together.”
Perhaps your life would have taken a very different direction had the priest encouraged honest inquiry and welcomed questions exploring apparent contradictions between religion and science.
Faith is not a question, . . . It's a belief, . . . You say, can you prove it ? I say, can you unproven it ?
It's probably the end of the discussion, I don't care one way or the other Alicia.
But you do sound that you have an AX to grind about God, Religion and people of the Christian faith and this article post.
A sense of Anger ?
Hummm, Did you know that the Scientist that revealed the secrets of the "Dead Sea Scrolls" all atheist's pretty much converted to Christianity and Judaism. NOT to be brought into the laboratory ? It's a religious conundrum, don't you think ?
Science does not mean anti-religion.
Running water has no relationship to religious faith, either ? by the way. So what's your straw-man point ?
The last two times I went to Hawaii, I returned to a little Presbyterian church to listen to Christian Hawaiians's sing Religious Hymnals.
It moved my soul.
Christianity is not dead yet, Alicia, not by a long shot.
So you've done it again Alicia ! Hawaii and land ownership rights ? Another Red-Herring and Straw-Man fallacy argument.
Man Alicia, your all over the board in your latest ranting ? What's in the name of God are you talking about ? “Observation” ?
You really do have an AX to grind about God, Religion, people of the Christian faith and this Article.
Your all pent-up with frustration ? Why is that ?
My sincerer take on the Article post, to Dan Brown is to be fair, and don't ridicule and exploit Christianity as in in his other books and movie's such as the “The Da Vinci Code.”
Dan Brown is a divider, he prey's off of the ill-informed and the uneducated naïveté of people.
The Article author at the same time, asked a few simple questions to Dan Brown, "I genuinely wonder what kind of dialogue you’re looking for and, more importantly, if you’re open to the possibility of the existence of a benevolent, omnipotent Creator."
So, rather than revile you as a heretic and an anti-Christ figure, I reach out to you as a fellow lover of truth, inviting you to have some genuine interaction.
Why not lead the way?
Didn't write the reply, but enjoyed the article. I'm only the posted messenger of the article.
Nice to meet you.
As far as I can see, Dan Brown is a divider, he prey's off of the ill-informed and the uneducated naïveté of people.
The “The Da Vinci Code,” was a fictional written book produced in Hollywood.
Never read the book, only saw parts of the movie. Don't know about the Last Supper referenced by Dan Brown ?
Dan brown uses symbolism for facts to tell and peddle his books on religion.
Myself I went in the opposite direction in religion, read, asked questions and read some more.
The more I was introduced to other religions I was able to understand God purpose, as a Christian Roman Catholic.
How unfortunate it was that the priest responded as he did.
He should have said, “What an excellent question! I’m so glad you asked. Let’s explore it together.”
Perhaps your life would have taken a very different direction had the priest encouraged honest inquiry and welcomed questions exploring apparent contradictions between religion and science.
Faith is not a question, . . . It's a belief, . . . You say, can you prove it ? I say, can you unproven it ?
It's probably the end of the discussion, I don't care one way or the other Alicia.
But you do sound that you have an AX to grind about God, Religion and people of the Christian faith and this article post.
A sense of Anger ?
Hummm, Did you know that the Scientist that revealed the secrets of the "Dead Sea Scrolls" all atheist's pretty much converted to Christianity and Judaism. NOT to be brought into the laboratory ? It's a religious conundrum, don't you think ?
Science does not mean anti-religion.
Running water has no relationship to religious faith, either ? by the way. So what's your straw-man point ?
The last two times I went to Hawaii, I returned to a little Presbyterian church to listen to Christian Hawaiians's sing Religious Hymnals.
It moved my soul.
Christianity is not dead yet, Alicia, not by a long shot.
So you've done it again Alicia ! Hawaii and land ownership rights ? Another Red-Herring and Straw-Man fallacy argument.
Man Alicia, your all over the board in your latest ranting ? What's in the name of God are you talking about ? “Observation” ?
You really do have an AX to grind about God, Religion, people of the Christian faith and this Article.
Your all pent-up with frustration ? Why is that ?
My sincerer take on the Article post, to Dan Brown is to be fair, and don't ridicule and exploit Christianity as in in his other books and movie's such as the “The Da Vinci Code.”
Dan Brown is a divider, he prey's off of the ill-informed and the uneducated naïveté of people.
The Article author at the same time, asked a few simple questions to Dan Brown, "I genuinely wonder what kind of dialogue you’re looking for and, more importantly, if you’re open to the possibility of the existence of a benevolent, omnipotent Creator."
So, rather than revile you as a heretic and an anti-Christ figure, I reach out to you as a fellow lover of truth, inviting you to have some genuine interaction.
Why not lead the way?
Alicia wrote:
****************************** br I read that book... (show quote)
Nov 7, 2017 19:36:43 #
Alicia
Loc: NYC
Doc110 wrote:
Alicia, br br Didn't write the reply, but enjoyed... (show quote)
************
Just for openers, you can't prove the unprovable. I prefer to live in a world in which I might learn things. Religion - all religion is a separator. Each group (cult) believes that they, only, have the "right" answer. My zeroing in on Christians is that they are the most prevalent of the separators - even within their own religion. How many Protestant cults exist - and they are all competing even when they all claim to be followers of Christ. Additionally, it has been my experience that they never include Catholicism in the group of Christian faiths. Buddhists and Jews do not attempt to change others into their own faith. It is evident to them that various people will be drawn to their own faith.
I am not superstitious and I firmly believe that the questioning man will attempt to look for the cause and reason for everything. When he finally gets to the point where he can not find an answer, he ascribes that to something that must be greater than himself; ergo a supernatural being. This is superstition!
But look at this present time in which man is uncovering so much more and has many answers to his questions and is doing so much better because his "science" has allowed him to search farther. Religions are comfortable with leaving unanswered questions to the supernatural.
I also question how anyone can believe that s/he can depend on a man-made creature, sitting on a cloud somewhere, that s/he is being cared for by this supernatural being. If there is a god, as you describe, why would s/he/it be concerned with "his" people? How do you justify that in a war, both sides are praying to their own god and truly believe"it" is on their side. As Hitchens stated (paraphrased I believe) "to get a good person to create an evil action, one needs religion." He will never act on an evil thought unless he is convinced that there is a good reason behind it - such as a god or an ideal.
The point of religions being created is for the sake of power over the masses which are kept in line through fear; fear of an infinity of pain or hope of a magical afterlife. My neighbor informed me a few weeks ago that there is a stratum in heaven, just like in the armed forces. Who created the rules for men to follow? The answer is . . . wait for it now . . . men. The old tribes respected all life but as they developed toward a level of "civilization," what was considered lesser creatures could have no soul. Which species
arrived at these conclusions? There you go again . . . man. This gives him the right to kill for any other reason besides food. Another separation - and man, or those in the power positions, decided to create a book of stories with fantasy parables to back up his book of power.
Now, being a liberal, I certainly appreciate the philosophy if Jesus and respect any who actually do the same. But I find that those that do follow Jesus' teachings are few and far between. According to his teachings, Christians should be living a life that others would, of their own volition, wish to copy.
I grew up in NYC and am so happy that I was surrounded by people of various faiths and ethnicities which everyone respected. When I asked Mom, why do those men wear woolen suits and funny hats all year, her answer was "because that's part of their religion." I learned to accept that and will note that none of the men in funny hats ever approached me. I grew up with a father who used the slang nomenclature for various ethnicities but I believe he used them only as a reference point because that's what he heard. The only word that was used negatively was "kyke." And it was always used as a degrading term - even by the Jews. The kykes were the lowest level and were referred to in shame.
So now you know a bit of my background and why I refuse superstition. I consider myself as one with all people and creatures. I was never taught separation but acceptance.
I am certainly not frustrated with my own life but saddened to see so many others living a lie.
Must leave now. It's time to check my cats' food and water supplies.
Nov 8, 2017 06:01:13 #
Alicia,
Again Good morning, too you.
Quoting your opening reply, "Just for openers, you still can't prove the unprovable."
My response is, "Then how can you not prove the un-Explainable" ? Miracles, and religious and biblical events that can-not be explained.
To the sceptic or an atheist, there is no-explanation that will suffice, for your unbelief.
That's why we need to keep an open-mind and learn as much as we can. I for one do-not and can-not know everything, except that I believe in a higher power, God. . . . That's what "Faith" is all about. The only faith that you have, is your un-belief. . . . But it's your belief.
I also agree with your worldly preference. "To live in a world in which I might learn things.
So Alicia, you really do have an AX to grind about God !!!, . . . Religion !!!, . . . People of the Christian faith ! ! !, . . . and this post article ?
Your all so pent-up with frustration ? Why is that ? You have yet to explain your anti-Godly, Anti-Christian frustration ?
There are about 51,000 Protestant denominations. As a Christian Roman Catholic, I've remained faithful to the true tenants and origins of Jesus Christ's teachings of 1985 years. I can-not vouch or explain for Protestantism and Independent Christians separations and divisions.
That's your personal opinion and interpretation, on how other Protestant churches view the Christian Catholic Church. Another fallacy, division and separation-innuendos that your making and applying in your opinions. Please provide facts that proves this opinion of your ?
No one said that you were superstitious. But are you scientifically superstitious? Explaining the scientifically religiously un-explainable ?
Another Red-Herring, Straw-Man argumentative fallacy idiom. "He ascribes that to something that must be greater than himself.
Who is "He," man-wonn ? Please give a reference, as to who and what "He is ? This is an incomplete statement and a generality that your making ?
Here is the crux, error and central point that your implying and making, ergo a supernatural being. This is superstition!
Please explain the explain the biblical prophesies, Jesus Christ, God's miracles, and the continued apparition and present day miracles that have occurred ? Ergo a supernatural being? This is superstition ?
Alicia, you have no explanation? Thus your belief and scientific answer is, . . . Human Superstition ?
Now that's a purely rational under-satement, . . . or fallacy argument.
In my humble opinion, the more science the better, to explain the unexplained, which I have no problem with science explaining the supernatural as with most peoples and with all religions. ergo another generalized fallacy statement.
Where do you come up with these wild outrageous anti-religious "Machination's-Machinated" generalized statements and outlandish cliché critique opinions ?
e.g. To invent; contrive skillfully; devise artfully; crafty schemes; to plot; intrigues; stratagem; device; conspiracy.
Here is a scientific question to you ? There is a biblical question thought about for eternity from all the Philosophers and throughout the ages.
What is the spark of life, or the Breath of life ? The phrase in Hebrew is נִשְׁמַת חַיִּים (nishmat chayyim). The Hebrew word typically translated as "spirit" in English.
The Holy Spirit is the breath of life - Cardinal Roger Etchegaray
www.vatican.va/jubilee_2000/magazine/documents/ju_mag_01021998_p-1_en.html
The Holy Spirit is the breath of life. By Cardinal Roger Echegaray, vatican archives.
“Soul” and “Spirit”—What Do These Terms Really Mean. https://wol.jw.org/da/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102005156
When writing about the soul, the Bible writers used the Hebrew word ... Sometimes the word “soul” means the life of a person. ... to destroy from under the heavens all flesh that has the breath [ruʹach] of life.” (Genesis 6:17; 7:15, 22) “Spirit” thus refers to an invisible force (the spark of life) that animates all living creatures.
In Genesis 7:21-22, where the narrative is speaking about all those who died on the face of the earth in the flood (viz. "And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man..."), regarding them it says, "...all in whose nostrils was the breath of life..." (A.V.). Here, the phrase "breath of life" is translated from the Hebrew phrase נִשְׁמַת־רוּחַ חַיִּים (nishmat ruach chayyim), which is like saying "the nishmah of the ruach chayyim."
The breath of the Soul. “Neshama” is derived from the verb “nasham” (נשם) which means “to breathe. ... This divine breath is the spark that elevated us from the purely physical to the spiritual.
http://library.eteacherbiblical.com/content/lp_biblical_hebrew_neshama-en?pid=3029
Biblical Resurrection Hope: Yahweh God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath [Hebrew neshamah, Strong's Hebrew #5397] of life; and man became a living soul [Hebrew, nephesh, Strong's Hebrew #5315]. -- Genesis 2:7.
http://bible-hope.blogspot.com/2016/09/neshamah.html
So Alicia, in your opinion, "There is this mythical man-made creature, sitting on a cloud somewhere, that She/He is being cared for by this supernatural being." If there is a god, as you describe, why would She/He/It be concerned with "his" people ?
He/She/It does care for you, God gave you "The breath of Life." You have free-will, you can do what-ever you wish in your life. After you pass, "Your soul, The Spark of Life -- The Breath of life." Your Soul is in a different dimension that defiantly can-not be explained by science.
Prayer and Faith go hand and hand, they are not opposed to one another. I don't have to justify God, all I have to do is believe and trust in his benevolence to his creation. "Your human soul, The Spark of Life -- The Breath of life."
The old and new tribes all had religion.
Christopher Hitchens is also a militant atheist, or as he prefers to term it "anti-theist." A religious cynic.
Hitchens is a paradox, hence his first name begins with Christ. . . . opher.
The only position that leaves me with no cognitive dissonance is atheism. It is not a creed. Death is certain, replacing both the siren-song of Paradise and the dread of Hell. Life on this earth, with all its mystery and beauty and pain, is then to be lived far more intensely: we stumble and get up, we are sad, confident, insecure, feel loneliness and joy and love. There is nothing more; but I want nothing more.
The 20 Best Christopher Hitchens Quotes
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unreasonablefaith/2011/12/the-20-best-christopher-hitchens-quotes/
Alicia, you say "Fear," I say "Love."
There you go again Alicia, your AX to grind about God !!!, . . . Religion !!!, . . . People of the Christian faith ! ! ! . . . and this post article ?You really rant and rave, an un-cesing diatribe in your utopian liberal belief of all the ills in the world is the cause by religion.
Wow, such vehemence and apathy. . . . According to his teachings Jesus Christ, "Christians should be living a life that others would, of their own volition, wish to copy.
Matthew 7:12 ESV - The Golden Rule, Ephesians 5:22- 33; James 2:1-9; Romans 13:8-10).
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7%3A12&version=ESV
The Golden Rule - “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.
Something to read.
http://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-117781-1.html
[quote=Alicia
Just for openers, you can't prove the unprovable. I prefer to live in a world in which I might learn things.
Religion - all religion is a separator.
Each group (cult) believes that they, only, have the "right" answer.
My zeroing in on Christians is that they are the most prevalent of the separators - even within their own religion.
How many Protestant cults exist - and they are all competing even when they all claim to be followers of Christ.
Additionally, it has been my experience that they never include Catholicism in the group of Christian faiths.
Buddhists and Jews do not attempt to change others into their own faith. It is evident to them that various people will be drawn to their own faith.
I am not superstitious and I firmly believe that the questioning man will attempt to look for the cause and reason for everything. When he finally gets to the point where he can not find an answer, he ascribes that to something that must be greater than himself;
Ergo a supernatural being. This is superstition!
But look at this present time in which man is uncovering so much more and has many answers to his questions and is doing so much better because his "science" has allowed him to search farther.
Religions are comfortable with leaving unanswered questions to the supernatural.
I also question how anyone can believe that s/he can depend on a man-made creature, sitting on a cloud somewhere, that She/He is being cared for by this supernatural being.
If there is a god, as you describe, why would She/He/It be concerned with "his" people?
How do you justify that in a war, both sides are praying to their own god and truly believe"it" is on their side.
As Hitchens stated (paraphrased I believe) "To get a good person to create an evil action, one needs religion."
He will never act on an evil thought unless he is convinced that there is a good reason behind it - such as a god or an ideal.
The point of religions being created is for the sake of power over the masses which are kept in line through fear;
Fear of an infinity of pain or hope of a magical afterlife. My neighbor informed me a few weeks ago that there is a stratum in heaven, just like in the armed forces. Who created the rules for men to follow? The answer is. . . . wait for it now . . . men.
The old tribes respected all life but as they developed toward a level of "civilization," what was considered lesser creatures could have no soul. Which species arrived at these conclusions? There you go again . . . man.
This gives him the right to kill for any other reason besides food. Another separation - and man, or those in the power positions, decided to create a book of stories with fantasy parables to back up his book of power.
Now, being a liberal, I certainly appreciate the philosophy if Jesus and respect any who actually do the same. But I find that those that do follow Jesus' teachings are few and far between.
According to his teachings, Christians should be living a life that others would, of their own volition, wish to copy.
I grew up in NYC and am so happy that I was surrounded by people of various faiths and ethnicities which everyone respected. When I asked Mom, why do those men wear woolen suits and funny hats all year, her answer was "because that's part of their religion." I learned to accept that and will note that none of the men in funny hats ever approached me.
I grew up with a father who used the slang nomenclature for various ethnicities but I believe he used them only as a reference point because that's what he heard. The only word that was used negatively was "kyke." And it was always used as a degrading term - even by the Jews. The kykes were the lowest level and were referred to in shame.
So now you know a bit of my background and why I refuse superstition.
I consider myself as one with all people and creatures. I was never taught separation but acceptance.
I am certainly not frustrated with my own life but saddened to see so many others living a lie.
Must leave now. It's time to check my cats' food and water supplies.[/quote]
Again Good morning, too you.
Quoting your opening reply, "Just for openers, you still can't prove the unprovable."
My response is, "Then how can you not prove the un-Explainable" ? Miracles, and religious and biblical events that can-not be explained.
To the sceptic or an atheist, there is no-explanation that will suffice, for your unbelief.
That's why we need to keep an open-mind and learn as much as we can. I for one do-not and can-not know everything, except that I believe in a higher power, God. . . . That's what "Faith" is all about. The only faith that you have, is your un-belief. . . . But it's your belief.
I also agree with your worldly preference. "To live in a world in which I might learn things.
So Alicia, you really do have an AX to grind about God !!!, . . . Religion !!!, . . . People of the Christian faith ! ! !, . . . and this post article ?
Your all so pent-up with frustration ? Why is that ? You have yet to explain your anti-Godly, Anti-Christian frustration ?
There are about 51,000 Protestant denominations. As a Christian Roman Catholic, I've remained faithful to the true tenants and origins of Jesus Christ's teachings of 1985 years. I can-not vouch or explain for Protestantism and Independent Christians separations and divisions.
That's your personal opinion and interpretation, on how other Protestant churches view the Christian Catholic Church. Another fallacy, division and separation-innuendos that your making and applying in your opinions. Please provide facts that proves this opinion of your ?
No one said that you were superstitious. But are you scientifically superstitious? Explaining the scientifically religiously un-explainable ?
Another Red-Herring, Straw-Man argumentative fallacy idiom. "He ascribes that to something that must be greater than himself.
Who is "He," man-wonn ? Please give a reference, as to who and what "He is ? This is an incomplete statement and a generality that your making ?
Here is the crux, error and central point that your implying and making, ergo a supernatural being. This is superstition!
Please explain the explain the biblical prophesies, Jesus Christ, God's miracles, and the continued apparition and present day miracles that have occurred ? Ergo a supernatural being? This is superstition ?
Alicia, you have no explanation? Thus your belief and scientific answer is, . . . Human Superstition ?
Now that's a purely rational under-satement, . . . or fallacy argument.
In my humble opinion, the more science the better, to explain the unexplained, which I have no problem with science explaining the supernatural as with most peoples and with all religions. ergo another generalized fallacy statement.
Where do you come up with these wild outrageous anti-religious "Machination's-Machinated" generalized statements and outlandish cliché critique opinions ?
e.g. To invent; contrive skillfully; devise artfully; crafty schemes; to plot; intrigues; stratagem; device; conspiracy.
Here is a scientific question to you ? There is a biblical question thought about for eternity from all the Philosophers and throughout the ages.
What is the spark of life, or the Breath of life ? The phrase in Hebrew is נִשְׁמַת חַיִּים (nishmat chayyim). The Hebrew word typically translated as "spirit" in English.
The Holy Spirit is the breath of life - Cardinal Roger Etchegaray
www.vatican.va/jubilee_2000/magazine/documents/ju_mag_01021998_p-1_en.html
The Holy Spirit is the breath of life. By Cardinal Roger Echegaray, vatican archives.
“Soul” and “Spirit”—What Do These Terms Really Mean. https://wol.jw.org/da/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102005156
When writing about the soul, the Bible writers used the Hebrew word ... Sometimes the word “soul” means the life of a person. ... to destroy from under the heavens all flesh that has the breath [ruʹach] of life.” (Genesis 6:17; 7:15, 22) “Spirit” thus refers to an invisible force (the spark of life) that animates all living creatures.
In Genesis 7:21-22, where the narrative is speaking about all those who died on the face of the earth in the flood (viz. "And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man..."), regarding them it says, "...all in whose nostrils was the breath of life..." (A.V.). Here, the phrase "breath of life" is translated from the Hebrew phrase נִשְׁמַת־רוּחַ חַיִּים (nishmat ruach chayyim), which is like saying "the nishmah of the ruach chayyim."
The breath of the Soul. “Neshama” is derived from the verb “nasham” (נשם) which means “to breathe. ... This divine breath is the spark that elevated us from the purely physical to the spiritual.
http://library.eteacherbiblical.com/content/lp_biblical_hebrew_neshama-en?pid=3029
Biblical Resurrection Hope: Yahweh God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath [Hebrew neshamah, Strong's Hebrew #5397] of life; and man became a living soul [Hebrew, nephesh, Strong's Hebrew #5315]. -- Genesis 2:7.
http://bible-hope.blogspot.com/2016/09/neshamah.html
So Alicia, in your opinion, "There is this mythical man-made creature, sitting on a cloud somewhere, that She/He is being cared for by this supernatural being." If there is a god, as you describe, why would She/He/It be concerned with "his" people ?
He/She/It does care for you, God gave you "The breath of Life." You have free-will, you can do what-ever you wish in your life. After you pass, "Your soul, The Spark of Life -- The Breath of life." Your Soul is in a different dimension that defiantly can-not be explained by science.
Prayer and Faith go hand and hand, they are not opposed to one another. I don't have to justify God, all I have to do is believe and trust in his benevolence to his creation. "Your human soul, The Spark of Life -- The Breath of life."
The old and new tribes all had religion.
Christopher Hitchens is also a militant atheist, or as he prefers to term it "anti-theist." A religious cynic.
Hitchens is a paradox, hence his first name begins with Christ. . . . opher.
The only position that leaves me with no cognitive dissonance is atheism. It is not a creed. Death is certain, replacing both the siren-song of Paradise and the dread of Hell. Life on this earth, with all its mystery and beauty and pain, is then to be lived far more intensely: we stumble and get up, we are sad, confident, insecure, feel loneliness and joy and love. There is nothing more; but I want nothing more.
The 20 Best Christopher Hitchens Quotes
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unreasonablefaith/2011/12/the-20-best-christopher-hitchens-quotes/
Alicia, you say "Fear," I say "Love."
There you go again Alicia, your AX to grind about God !!!, . . . Religion !!!, . . . People of the Christian faith ! ! ! . . . and this post article ?You really rant and rave, an un-cesing diatribe in your utopian liberal belief of all the ills in the world is the cause by religion.
Wow, such vehemence and apathy. . . . According to his teachings Jesus Christ, "Christians should be living a life that others would, of their own volition, wish to copy.
Matthew 7:12 ESV - The Golden Rule, Ephesians 5:22- 33; James 2:1-9; Romans 13:8-10).
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7%3A12&version=ESV
The Golden Rule - “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.
Something to read.
http://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-117781-1.html
[quote=Alicia
Just for openers, you can't prove the unprovable. I prefer to live in a world in which I might learn things.
Religion - all religion is a separator.
Each group (cult) believes that they, only, have the "right" answer.
My zeroing in on Christians is that they are the most prevalent of the separators - even within their own religion.
How many Protestant cults exist - and they are all competing even when they all claim to be followers of Christ.
Additionally, it has been my experience that they never include Catholicism in the group of Christian faiths.
Buddhists and Jews do not attempt to change others into their own faith. It is evident to them that various people will be drawn to their own faith.
I am not superstitious and I firmly believe that the questioning man will attempt to look for the cause and reason for everything. When he finally gets to the point where he can not find an answer, he ascribes that to something that must be greater than himself;
Ergo a supernatural being. This is superstition!
But look at this present time in which man is uncovering so much more and has many answers to his questions and is doing so much better because his "science" has allowed him to search farther.
Religions are comfortable with leaving unanswered questions to the supernatural.
I also question how anyone can believe that s/he can depend on a man-made creature, sitting on a cloud somewhere, that She/He is being cared for by this supernatural being.
If there is a god, as you describe, why would She/He/It be concerned with "his" people?
How do you justify that in a war, both sides are praying to their own god and truly believe"it" is on their side.
As Hitchens stated (paraphrased I believe) "To get a good person to create an evil action, one needs religion."
He will never act on an evil thought unless he is convinced that there is a good reason behind it - such as a god or an ideal.
The point of religions being created is for the sake of power over the masses which are kept in line through fear;
Fear of an infinity of pain or hope of a magical afterlife. My neighbor informed me a few weeks ago that there is a stratum in heaven, just like in the armed forces. Who created the rules for men to follow? The answer is. . . . wait for it now . . . men.
The old tribes respected all life but as they developed toward a level of "civilization," what was considered lesser creatures could have no soul. Which species arrived at these conclusions? There you go again . . . man.
This gives him the right to kill for any other reason besides food. Another separation - and man, or those in the power positions, decided to create a book of stories with fantasy parables to back up his book of power.
Now, being a liberal, I certainly appreciate the philosophy if Jesus and respect any who actually do the same. But I find that those that do follow Jesus' teachings are few and far between.
According to his teachings, Christians should be living a life that others would, of their own volition, wish to copy.
I grew up in NYC and am so happy that I was surrounded by people of various faiths and ethnicities which everyone respected. When I asked Mom, why do those men wear woolen suits and funny hats all year, her answer was "because that's part of their religion." I learned to accept that and will note that none of the men in funny hats ever approached me.
I grew up with a father who used the slang nomenclature for various ethnicities but I believe he used them only as a reference point because that's what he heard. The only word that was used negatively was "kyke." And it was always used as a degrading term - even by the Jews. The kykes were the lowest level and were referred to in shame.
So now you know a bit of my background and why I refuse superstition.
I consider myself as one with all people and creatures. I was never taught separation but acceptance.
I am certainly not frustrated with my own life but saddened to see so many others living a lie.
Must leave now. It's time to check my cats' food and water supplies.[/quote]
Nov 23, 2017 13:15:24 #
Alicia,
Atheist opponent of Catholic Christianity are quite willing to critique what they feel to be our glaring deficiencies, but quite unwilling (for some strange reason) to examine what we regard as the shortcomings in theirs.
People in all worldviews seem to be much better at levying charges and poking holes, than at scrutinizing their own beliefs, wouldn’t you agree? Just human nature, I would argue.
Either we reject both scenarios as misrepresentations of our views, or it seems to me that we must accept them both as representative, however distant or objectionable the “inclusion” may be. - David Armstrong
Atheists have this sense, put there by God, just as believers do, whether they acknowledge it or not (though it can, of course, be unlearned by intellectual conditioning or surroundings). And their behavior proves it.
That’s why (in our opinion) they are usually as moral and upright as a group as any other group of people.
But to the extent that they are moral and good, I argue that this is inevitably in conflict with their ultimate ground of ethics, however it is spelled-out, insofar as it excludes God. Without God it will always be relative and arbitrary and usually unable to be enforced except by brute force.
Atheists act far better than their ethics (in their ultimate reduction).
Something to read about.
08/28/2017 The “Problem of Good”: Great Dialogue With an Atheist
Dave Armstrong
a, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2017/08/problem-good-dialogue-atheist.html
b. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2017/08/problem-good-great-dialogue-atheist-part-two.html
(The Flip Side of the Problem of Evil Argument Against Christianity) + the Nature of Meaningfulness in Atheism (vs. Mike Hardie)
https://web.archive.org/web/19991009201912/http://members.home.net:80/veritate/
[quote=Alicia ************
Just for openers, you can't prove the unprovable. I prefer to live in a world in which I might learn things. Religion - all religion is a separator. Each group (cult) believes that they, only, have the "right" answer. My zeroing in on Christians is that they are the most prevalent of the separators - even within their own religion. How many Protestant cults exist - and they are all competing even when they all claim to be followers of Christ. Additionally, it has been my experience that they never include Catholicism in the group of Christian faiths. Buddhists and Jews do not attempt to change others into their own faith. It is evident to them that various people will be drawn to their own faith.
I am not superstitious and I firmly believe that the questioning man will attempt to look for the cause and reason for everything. When he finally gets to the point where he can not find an answer, he ascribes that to something that must be greater than himself; ergo a supernatural being. This is superstition!
But look at this present time in which man is uncovering so much more and has many answers to his questions and is doing so much better because his "science" has allowed him to search farther. Religions are comfortable with leaving unanswered questions to the supernatural.
I also question how anyone can believe that s/he can depend on a man-made creature, sitting on a cloud somewhere, that s/he is being cared for by this supernatural being. If there is a god, as you describe, why would s/he/it be concerned with "his" people? How do you justify that in a war, both sides are praying to their own god and truly believe"it" is on their side. As Hitchens stated (paraphrased I believe) "to get a good person to create an evil action, one needs religion." He will never act on an evil thought unless he is convinced that there is a good reason behind it - such as a god or an ideal.
The point of religions being created is for the sake of power over the masses which are kept in line through fear; fear of an infinity of pain or hope of a magical afterlife. My neighbor informed me a few weeks ago that there is a stratum in heaven, just like in the armed forces. Who created the rules for men to follow? The answer is . . . wait for it now . . . men. The old tribes respected all life but as they developed toward a level of "civilization," what was considered lesser creatures could have no soul. Which species
arrived at these conclusions? There you go again . . . man. This gives him the right to kill for any other reason besides food. Another separation - and man, or those in the power positions, decided to create a book of stories with fantasy parables to back up his book of power.
Now, being a liberal, I certainly appreciate the philosophy if Jesus and respect any who actually do the same. But I find that those that do follow Jesus' teachings are few and far between. According to his teachings, Christians should be living a life that others would, of their own volition, wish to copy.
I grew up in NYC and am so happy that I was surrounded by people of various faiths and ethnicities which everyone respected. When I asked Mom, why do those men wear woolen suits and funny hats all year, her answer was "because that's part of their religion." I learned to accept that and will note that none of the men in funny hats ever approached me. I grew up with a father who used the slang nomenclature for various ethnicities but I believe he used them only as a reference point because that's what he heard. The only word that was used negatively was "kyke." And it was always used as a degrading term - even by the Jews. The kykes were the lowest level and were referred to in shame.
So now you know a bit of my background and why I refuse superstition. I consider myself as one with all people and creatures. I was never taught separation but acceptance.
I am certainly not frustrated with my own life but saddened to see so many others living a lie.
Must leave now. It's time to check my cats' food and water supplies.[/quote]
Atheist opponent of Catholic Christianity are quite willing to critique what they feel to be our glaring deficiencies, but quite unwilling (for some strange reason) to examine what we regard as the shortcomings in theirs.
People in all worldviews seem to be much better at levying charges and poking holes, than at scrutinizing their own beliefs, wouldn’t you agree? Just human nature, I would argue.
Either we reject both scenarios as misrepresentations of our views, or it seems to me that we must accept them both as representative, however distant or objectionable the “inclusion” may be. - David Armstrong
Atheists have this sense, put there by God, just as believers do, whether they acknowledge it or not (though it can, of course, be unlearned by intellectual conditioning or surroundings). And their behavior proves it.
That’s why (in our opinion) they are usually as moral and upright as a group as any other group of people.
But to the extent that they are moral and good, I argue that this is inevitably in conflict with their ultimate ground of ethics, however it is spelled-out, insofar as it excludes God. Without God it will always be relative and arbitrary and usually unable to be enforced except by brute force.
Atheists act far better than their ethics (in their ultimate reduction).
Something to read about.
08/28/2017 The “Problem of Good”: Great Dialogue With an Atheist
Dave Armstrong
a, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2017/08/problem-good-dialogue-atheist.html
b. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2017/08/problem-good-great-dialogue-atheist-part-two.html
(The Flip Side of the Problem of Evil Argument Against Christianity) + the Nature of Meaningfulness in Atheism (vs. Mike Hardie)
https://web.archive.org/web/19991009201912/http://members.home.net:80/veritate/
[quote=Alicia ************
Just for openers, you can't prove the unprovable. I prefer to live in a world in which I might learn things. Religion - all religion is a separator. Each group (cult) believes that they, only, have the "right" answer. My zeroing in on Christians is that they are the most prevalent of the separators - even within their own religion. How many Protestant cults exist - and they are all competing even when they all claim to be followers of Christ. Additionally, it has been my experience that they never include Catholicism in the group of Christian faiths. Buddhists and Jews do not attempt to change others into their own faith. It is evident to them that various people will be drawn to their own faith.
I am not superstitious and I firmly believe that the questioning man will attempt to look for the cause and reason for everything. When he finally gets to the point where he can not find an answer, he ascribes that to something that must be greater than himself; ergo a supernatural being. This is superstition!
But look at this present time in which man is uncovering so much more and has many answers to his questions and is doing so much better because his "science" has allowed him to search farther. Religions are comfortable with leaving unanswered questions to the supernatural.
I also question how anyone can believe that s/he can depend on a man-made creature, sitting on a cloud somewhere, that s/he is being cared for by this supernatural being. If there is a god, as you describe, why would s/he/it be concerned with "his" people? How do you justify that in a war, both sides are praying to their own god and truly believe"it" is on their side. As Hitchens stated (paraphrased I believe) "to get a good person to create an evil action, one needs religion." He will never act on an evil thought unless he is convinced that there is a good reason behind it - such as a god or an ideal.
The point of religions being created is for the sake of power over the masses which are kept in line through fear; fear of an infinity of pain or hope of a magical afterlife. My neighbor informed me a few weeks ago that there is a stratum in heaven, just like in the armed forces. Who created the rules for men to follow? The answer is . . . wait for it now . . . men. The old tribes respected all life but as they developed toward a level of "civilization," what was considered lesser creatures could have no soul. Which species
arrived at these conclusions? There you go again . . . man. This gives him the right to kill for any other reason besides food. Another separation - and man, or those in the power positions, decided to create a book of stories with fantasy parables to back up his book of power.
Now, being a liberal, I certainly appreciate the philosophy if Jesus and respect any who actually do the same. But I find that those that do follow Jesus' teachings are few and far between. According to his teachings, Christians should be living a life that others would, of their own volition, wish to copy.
I grew up in NYC and am so happy that I was surrounded by people of various faiths and ethnicities which everyone respected. When I asked Mom, why do those men wear woolen suits and funny hats all year, her answer was "because that's part of their religion." I learned to accept that and will note that none of the men in funny hats ever approached me. I grew up with a father who used the slang nomenclature for various ethnicities but I believe he used them only as a reference point because that's what he heard. The only word that was used negatively was "kyke." And it was always used as a degrading term - even by the Jews. The kykes were the lowest level and were referred to in shame.
So now you know a bit of my background and why I refuse superstition. I consider myself as one with all people and creatures. I was never taught separation but acceptance.
I am certainly not frustrated with my own life but saddened to see so many others living a lie.
Must leave now. It's time to check my cats' food and water supplies.[/quote]
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out topic: Pretending It All Works