100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Why do you believe what you believe? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I am lucky that I haven’t been brainwashed like most people from childhood to believe in such fantasies. Do you still believe in Santa too? If not, what finally made you realize it was make believe? People do harm with false claims. You are offering proof with a phony and trying to convince others that this **** is real. It was only 23 people because only 23 responded. “Dr. Nolen, in his book Healing, did long-term follow-ups on 23 of Kuhlman's claimed healings. There were no cures among these cases. One woman who was said to have been cured of spinal cancer threw away her brace and ran across the stage at Kuhlman's command; her spine collapsed the next day, according to Nolen, and she died four months later. (James Randi, The Faith Healers, 1989, p.201)” You do not think for yourself if you believe everything you have been told. You saw magic tricks and thought they were real. This woman was a magician and was able to live an extravagant lifestyle because she could easily fool people like you. It would be helpful for you to read a book like “why people believe weird things” by Michael Shermer. It will open your eyes a little. I stopped believing in Santa, because there was actually compelling PROOF of his non existence, in the way of human beings who could show receipts and chose to admit THEIR actual purchases. No one else has stepped up to prove creation or take credit for it though. There is no evidence for creation. there is no evidence against it, unlike Santa Claus, which was the point I was answering. Well if there’s no evidence of something, why believe in it? I choose to believe in what’s real and proven. I don’t believe in dragons or fairies but there’s no evidence against it. Do you? Dragons and fairies, as far as I know, have never been presented in a factual context, only in fantasy and storytelling. So I believe they are fictional topics from authors who clearly designate their writings as fictional. I do see evidence of life EXISTING, and therefore having come to be SOME KIND OF WAY. And I find enough of what I've read to fit LOGIC of creation and I've seen enough in my experience to fit the LOGIC of biblical teachings from centuries earlier, to believe in the integrity of the good book and the answer to existence being CREATION. There are hundreds of versions of the bible. The bible has had extensive editing. "The Bible was taken from hand written copies, much of which are only fragments. How can we trust that what we have is accurate?" The books of the New Testament were written centuries after the events they describe. According to the Bible, the earth is flat. The earliest New Testament manuscripts go back only to the fourth or fifth centuries AD. The Bible teaches that the earth is the center of the universe. The English Bible is a translation of a translation of a translation (etc.) of the original, and fresh errors were introduced in each stage of the proces How many of the above statements do you think are true? The answer is none; all of them are false. Yet these false impressions persist in the minds of many, and misinformation like this produces a skeptical attitude toward the Bible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am lucky that I haven’t been brainwashed like most people from childhood to believe in such fantasies. Do you still believe in Santa too? If not, what finally made you realize it was make believe? People do harm with false claims. You are offering proof with a phony and trying to convince others that this **** is real. It was only 23 people because only 23 responded. “Dr. Nolen, in his book Healing, did long-term follow-ups on 23 of Kuhlman's claimed healings. There were no cures among these cases. One woman who was said to have been cured of spinal cancer threw away her brace and ran across the stage at Kuhlman's command; her spine collapsed the next day, according to Nolen, and she died four months later. (James Randi, The Faith Healers, 1989, p.201)” You do not think for yourself if you believe everything you have been told. You saw magic tricks and thought they were real. This woman was a magician and was able to live an extravagant lifestyle because she could easily fool people like you. It would be helpful for you to read a book like “why people believe weird things” by Michael Shermer. It will open your eyes a little. I stopped believing in Santa, because there was actually compelling PROOF of his non existence, in the way of human beings who could show receipts and chose to admit THEIR actual purchases. No one else has stepped up to prove creation or take credit for it though. There is no evidence for creation. there is no evidence against it, unlike Santa Claus, which was the point I was answering. Well if there’s no evidence of something, why believe in it? I choose to believe in what’s real and proven. I don’t believe in dragons or fairies but there’s no evidence against it. Do you? Dragons and fairies, as far as I know, have never been presented in a factual context, only in fantasy and storytelling. So I believe they are fictional topics from authors who clearly designate their writings as fictional. I do see evidence of life EXISTING, and therefore having come to be SOME KIND OF WAY. And I find enough of what I've read to fit LOGIC of creation and I've seen enough in my experience to fit the LOGIC of biblical teachings from centuries earlier, to believe in the integrity of the good book and the answer to existence being CREATION. There are hundreds of versions of the bible. The bible has had extensive editing. "The Bible was taken from hand written copies, much of which are only fragments. How can we trust that what we have is accurate?" The books of the New Testament were written centuries after the events they describe. According to the Bible, the earth is flat. The earliest New Testament manuscripts go back only to the fourth or fifth centuries AD. The Bible teaches that the earth is the center of the universe. The English Bible is a translation of a translation of a translation (etc.) of the original, and fresh errors were introduced in each stage of the proces How many of the above statements do you think are true? The answer is none; all of them are false. Yet these false impressions persist in the minds of many, and misinformation like this produces a skeptical attitude toward the Bible. I agree. Which is why I research things to decide logically if they are accurate or not, or whether they follow some applicable logic based on what little we do know and experience about the world. And why I believe in the creation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I won’t quote because it’s getting too long.
Neither creation nor evolution fulfills the criteria of a scientific theory. There were no human observers to the origin of the universe, the origin of life, or to the origin of a single living thing. These events occurred in the unobservable past and are not repeatable in the present. Creation and evolution are inferences based on circumstantial evidence. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Mon 01/14/19 08:17 PM
|
|
okay. Like jury trials and most things we learn throughout life that are defined only because man gave them a definition and agreed to agree.
There so many true things that have yet to be 'proven' true. so many things in the past which were also true long before they were proven true, and many which were first 'inferences based on circumstantial evidence." For instance, before gravity was named by man and 'proven' as scientific theory, it was still 'a fact'. So life is so much more truth than just what is 'scientific theory." I believe, for instance, that my dad was my dad, based only on the 'hearsay' of my mom, and the 'circumstantial evidence' of his raising me and agreeing to that version of events and his name on a birth certificate. I was not there at my conception. But I still have a 'truth' based in the belief that my Dad was my Dad. If there were ever a DNA test requested, that 'proved' it true. I still would be no less correct in my belief after that proof than I was before.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gravity may have Existed before it became scientific theory but it wasn’t a fact.
I also know someone who believed his Dad was his Dad based on everything you said. But years later it turned out his Dad wasn’t his real Dad. So his belief was not based on fact but circumstantial evidence which proved to be wrong. So his beliefs were incorrect once there was proof. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gravity may have Existed before it became scientific theory but it wasn’t a fact. I also know someone who believed his Dad was his Dad based on everything you said. But years later it turned out his Dad wasn’t his real Dad. So his belief was not based on fact but circumstantial evidence which proved to be wrong. So his beliefs were incorrect once there was proof. and we could all be living in the matrix, or maybe just some of us, the possibilities are endless. but what is is not just because someone proves it, but it is even before anyone cares to try. But when it comes to belief, the original question, I have good reasons for my belief, as good as anyone else's for the things they believe but didn't personally experience, that is belief in the integrity of what is written and shared and how well it aligns with what is experienced. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gravity may have Existed before it became scientific theory but it wasn’t a fact. I also know someone who believed his Dad was his Dad based on everything you said. But years later it turned out his Dad wasn’t his real Dad. So his belief was not based on fact but circumstantial evidence which proved to be wrong. So his beliefs were incorrect once there was proof. But when it comes to belief, the original question, I have good reasons for my belief, as good as anyone else's for the things they believe but didn't personally experience, that is belief in the integrity of what is written and shared and how well it aligns with what is experienced. The question was why you believe. So your reasons are based on circumstantial evidence and what is written in the Bible which is unreliable. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gravity may have Existed before it became scientific theory but it wasn’t a fact. I also know someone who believed his Dad was his Dad based on everything you said. But years later it turned out his Dad wasn’t his real Dad. So his belief was not based on fact but circumstantial evidence which proved to be wrong. So his beliefs were incorrect once there was proof. But when it comes to belief, the original question, I have good reasons for my belief, as good as anyone else's for the things they believe but didn't personally experience, that is belief in the integrity of what is written and shared and how well it aligns with what is experienced. The question was why you believe. So your reasons are based on circumstantial evidence and what is written in the Bible which is unreliable. my beliefs are based on what is written, called a book, where most people get information from(books), the integrity with which I hold the authors of the book, the logic of the book and how it applies to what I do know and have experienced, which is just as reliable as any other thing people believe that they got from books. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ok I think I understand. Your beliefs are based on what you’ve read in numerous books, not just the bible.
It doesn’t come from anything concrete, just what you believe to be true. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Tue 01/15/19 02:01 PM
|
|
Ok I think I understand. Your beliefs are based on what you’ve read in numerous books, not just the bible. It doesn’t come from anything concrete, just what you believe to be true. technically, the bible is numerous books by several authors, so yeah, many books that were INCLUDED in the Bible. and yes, it comes from what is 'concrete' as 'concrete' as anything else learned from books ..  I read in books that slavery was a thing. I wasnt there. But it aligns with logic of what I have experienced about humans and human history of how we treat each other. it also aligns with the histories of other authors and people who have integrity that I trust. or, i read that Newton discovered gravity. I wasnt there. It could just as easily be someone else discovered it and he took the credit. But I believe in the integrity of those who have recorded and repeated the history. Just like almost EVERYTHING people come to believe about life and history or everything non science or math related that is learned in our life and our 'educations' Some may only live a life of math and science, but I live one that is so much more. and I dont limit it to the miniscule 'knowledge' that math and science explains (science has also been wrong before). What we call "Truth" is not perfect. its a foundation that comes from a combination of agreement, experience, and applying logic, which is at the core of any 'belief'. Maybe Newton didnt discover gravity, but I would not go so far as to say all those who were taught and believe that he did are believing a 'fantasy'. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
BigD9832
on
Wed 01/16/19 06:43 AM
|
|
From JustBeHonest There are hundreds of versions of the bible. The bible has had extensive editing. "The Bible was taken from hand written copies, much of which are only fragments. How can we trust that what we have is accurate?" The books of the New Testament were written centuries after the events they describe. According to the Bible, the earth is flat. The earliest New Testament manuscripts go back only to the fourth or fifth centuries AD. The Bible teaches that the earth is the center of the universe. The English Bible is a translation of a translation of a translation (etc.) of the original, and fresh errors were introduced in each stage of the proces How many of the above statements do you think are true? The answer is none; all of them are false. Yet these false impressions persist in the minds of many, and misinformation like this produces a skeptical attitude toward the Bible. This is typical of someone who doesn't know the Bible and has never read it. For someone who is promoting "think for yourself," this poster has yet to come up with any original thinking, Pretty much most of what she has posted is untrue. It may be true that many of the Modern Greek versions have been edited. However, the Ancient Greek text consist of 4 manuscripts are the oldest and most complete text and represented in the CLV. No editing. They have been translated, as these manuscripts were written about 1000 years before English existed. Any and all "books" written during that time were handwritten. This includes any history collected from this era, including the philosophies of Socrates, Plato, and other philosophical disciplines. "The books of the New Testament were written centuries after the events they describe. " The fact is, we don't know this for sure because we don't have the original manuscripts of the NT. There are about 100 years of Christian history missing. This statement is nothing more than an assumption. "According to the Bible, the earth is flat. The Bible teaches that the earth is the center of the universe." Neither of these statements is true. I have noticed that this poster has not presented any Scripture to back up this claim. "The earliest New Testament manuscripts go back only to the fourth or fifth" Again, as we do not have the original manuscripts we do not know when the NT was written. This poster is working off of assumption as wh jumps to conclusions. "The English Bible is a translation of a translation of a translation (etc.) of the original, and fresh errors were introduced in each stage of the proces " This poster fails to mention that every single piece of literature contained such errors. As this was over 1000 years before the printing press, all literature was handwritten. The only way to have a copy was to borrow it from someone and copy it yourself. It is these errors that tell us that these manuscripts are authentic. Of course, this individual is trying to sit in judgment of anyone who doesn't believe the say way she does. This type of thinking assumes that she knows all things and has divided all information between what is right and what is wrong. What a monumental task she has accomplished. This activity is outside of the parameter of this thread. The question we are asked to deal with is "Why do you believe what you believe?" Now, what one person thinks is wrong with Christianity. CLV Matt 22:29 Now, answering, Jesus said to them, "You are deceived, not being acquainted with the scriptures, nor yet with the power of God. If you are going to talk about the Bible, then you need to read it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From JustBeHonest There are hundreds of versions of the bible. The bible has had extensive editing. "The Bible was taken from hand written copies, much of which are only fragments. How can we trust that what we have is accurate?" The books of the New Testament were written centuries after the events they describe. According to the Bible, the earth is flat. The earliest New Testament manuscripts go back only to the fourth or fifth centuries AD. The Bible teaches that the earth is the center of the universe. The English Bible is a translation of a translation of a translation (etc.) of the original, and fresh errors were introduced in each stage of the proces How many of the above statements do you think are true? The answer is none; all of them are false. Yet these false impressions persist in the minds of many, and misinformation like this produces a skeptical attitude toward the Bible. This is typical of someone who doesn't know the Bible and has never read it. For someone who is promoting "think for yourself," this poster has yet to come up with any original thinking, Pretty much most of what she has posted is untrue. It may be true that many of the Modern Greek versions have been edited. However, the Ancient Greek text consist of 4 manuscripts are the oldest and most complete text and represented in the CLV. No editing. They have been translated, as these manuscripts were written about 1000 years before English existed. Any and all "books" written during that time were handwritten. This includes any history collected from this era, including the philosophies of Socrates, Plato, and other philosophical disciplines. "The books of the New Testament were written centuries after the events they describe. " The fact is, we don't know this for sure because we don't have the original manuscripts of the NT. There are about 100 years of Christian history missing. This statement is nothing more than an assumption. "According to the Bible, the earth is flat. The Bible teaches that the earth is the center of the universe." Neither of these statements is true. I have noticed that this poster has not presented any Scripture to back up this claim. "The earliest New Testament manuscripts go back only to the fourth or fifth" Again, as we do not have the original manuscripts we do not know when the NT was written. This poster is working off of assumption as wh jumps to conclusions. "The English Bible is a translation of a translation of a translation (etc.) of the original, and fresh errors were introduced in each stage of the proces " This poster fails to mention that every single piece of literature contained such errors. As this was over 1000 years before the printing press, all literature was handwritten. The only way to have a copy was to borrow it from someone and copy it yourself. It is these errors that tell us that these manuscripts are authentic. Of course, this individual is trying to sit in judgment of anyone who doesn't believe the say way she does. This type of thinking assumes that she knows all things and has divided all information between what is right and what is wrong. What a monumental task she has accomplished. This activity is outside of the parameter of this thread. The question we are asked to deal with is "Why do you believe what you believe?" Now, what one person thinks is wrong with Christianity. CLV Matt 22:29 Now, answering, Jesus said to them, "You are deceived, not being acquainted with the scriptures, nor yet with the power of God. If you are going to talk about the Bible, then you need to read it. I don’t quote scriptures because it has nothing to do with why I believe what I believe. That was the question. It didn’t ask why you believe in Christianity. You (***)umed that part. If you paid attention to what I said, I was asking questions about why msharmony believes what she believes. Basically, why do you believe in God when there’s no concrete proof that God exists. And don’t quote the scriptures, that’s not proof of anything. I have been discussing this very topic in many groups that focus only on Religion. From everything I have read, (and I’m still learning) there is NO proof, only a belief. Everyone is entitled to believe what they like, even ME. But don’t pretend that there is actual concrete proof that God exists. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don’t quote scriptures because it has nothing to do with why I believe what I believe. That was the question. It didn’t ask why you believe in Christianity. You (***)umed that part. If you are going to pontificate about what is in the Bible, then you are obligated to show where such feldergarbe is. You said the Bible tells us the earth is flat. That is just plain wrong, much like most of what you say. You said the Bible teaches that the Earth is the center of the universe. Again, more BS. And the reason you don't "quote scriptures" is because there is no Scripture that says the Earth is flat or that the Earth is the center of the universe. To put it plainly, you lied. Maybe it's time you start to JustBeHonest. As long as you cannot prove any of this, I feel no obligation to read any of it or follow any of the BS that you are spewing out. Put up or shut up. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IN fairness, she said NONE of those things were true to point out how repeating falsehoods can lead to false beliefs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is something that interests me and I’m trying to learn and educate myself. That’s why I joined several religious debate groups, so I could read and learn.
The one thing I know for sure, the theists spend most of their time attacking and belittling the atheists. They get nasty and defensive because they cannot prove God exists. I watched a debate between an atheist and a theist who were actually civil and polite to each other. I learned from that. I will learn nothing from someone who is rude and defensive. I am repeating some of what I’ve learned with no intention to deceive anyone. I learned that most people are indoctrinated into religion at a very early age. Most don’t question their own beliefs. I’m a very curious person who wants to know why and how. I’ve also learned that critical thinking is extremely important as well as compassion. Most people do not use critical thinking. If you did, you would question things and not follow like a sheep. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Wed 01/16/19 06:37 PM
|
|
This is something that interests me and I’m trying to learn and educate myself. That’s why I joined several religious debate groups, so I could read and learn. The one thing I know for sure, the theists spend most of their time attacking and belittling the atheists. They get nasty and defensive because they cannot prove God exists. I watched a debate between an atheist and a theist who were actually civil and polite to each other. I learned from that. I will learn nothing from someone who is rude and defensive. I am repeating some of what I’ve learned with no intention to deceive anyone. I learned that most people are indoctrinated into religion at a very early age. Most don’t question their own beliefs. I’m a very curious person who wants to know why and how. I’ve also learned that critical thinking is extremely important as well as compassion. Most people do not use critical thinking. If you did, you would question things and not follow like a sheep. I totally agree. I think it is a misnomer that atheists often make to assume that theists who have beliefs are blindly following. It is kind of like assuming a relationship only worked because people didn't initially meet online. Each experience is some type of lesson, something is learned or at least planted in our mind. Even when people meet 'online' they dont necessarily end it there. They often have real time interaction after that initial event, just like anyone else, and those experiences which come after that INITIAL event, begin to accumulate and progress towards something else. The same happens with beliefs. They initiate somewhere, but then many things come after that INITIAL event which begin to accumulate in order to reinforce or weaken that belief. we learn, not in a vacuum, but collectively. So too, our beliefs don't form in a vacuum, but collectively and from many sources and experiences and factors. We go to 'formal education' and we follow 'like sheep' initially because there is common agreement as to the integrity of what is being taught. and then throughout life, when we apply and see that that teaching holds up, it becomes more true and real and foundational for us. This is true of all logic we learn as children, it starts with someone somewhere but it doesnt end there. Experience and application either continue to confirm or refute those teachings. any number of people can either come to the conclusion that those teachings are confirmed or valid or that they are not, but mere numbers believing the same does not make them 'sheep' , so much as people who have experienced what makes them agree on certain things. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is something that interests me and I’m trying to learn and educate myself. That’s why I joined several religious debate groups, so I could read and learn. The one thing I know for sure, the theists spend most of their time attacking and belittling the atheists. They get nasty and defensive because they cannot prove God exists. I watched a debate between an atheist and a theist who were actually civil and polite to each other. I learned from that. I will learn nothing from someone who is rude and defensive. I am repeating some of what I’ve learned with no intention to deceive anyone. I learned that most people are indoctrinated into religion at a very early age. Most don’t question their own beliefs. I’m a very curious person who wants to know why and how. I’ve also learned that critical thinking is extremely important as well as compassion. Most people do not use critical thinking. If you did, you would question things and not follow like a sheep. I totally agree. I think it is a misnomer that atheists often make to assume that theists who have beliefs are blindly following. It is kind of like assuming a relationship only worked because people didn't initially meet online. Each experience is some type of lesson, something is learned or at least planted in our mind. Even when people meet 'online' they dont necessarily end it there. They often have real time interaction after that initial event, just like anyone else, and those experiences which come after that INITIAL event, begin to accumulate and progress towards something else. The same happens with beliefs. They initiate somewhere, but then many things come after that INITIAL event which begin to accumulate in order to reinforce or weaken that belief. we learn, not in a vacuum, but collectively. So too, our beliefs don't form in a vacuum, but collectively and from many sources and experiences and factors. We go to 'formal education' and we follow 'like sheep' initially because there is common agreement as to the integrity of what is being taught. and then throughout life, when we apply and see that that teaching holds up, it becomes more true and real and foundational for us. This is true of all logic we learn as children, it starts with someone somewhere but it doesnt end there. Experience and application either continue to confirm or refute those teachings. any number of people can either come to the conclusion that those teachings are confirmed or valid or that they are not, but mere numbers believing the same does not make them 'sheep' , so much as people who have experienced what makes them agree on certain things. I agree with some of what you said. But I do think that a large majority do continue to follow like sheep without question. Peer pressure. Sometimes it’s out of fear of ridicule or not fitting in or not wanting to alienate family or friends. I’ve seen it happen in families when one member chooses to change faiths. I know people who were emotionally and even physically abused for questioning their faith. I’ve also heard christians who say they believe because they’re afraid of going to hell and believe for no other reason. Their faith is based on fear. This is why I question faith. The more I learn, the more questions I have, it’s a fascinating subject. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is something that interests me and I’m trying to learn and educate myself. That’s why I joined several religious debate groups, so I could read and learn. The one thing I know for sure, the theists spend most of their time attacking and belittling the atheists. They get nasty and defensive because they cannot prove God exists. I watched a debate between an atheist and a theist who were actually civil and polite to each other. I learned from that. I will learn nothing from someone who is rude and defensive. I am repeating some of what I’ve learned with no intention to deceive anyone. I learned that most people are indoctrinated into religion at a very early age. Most don’t question their own beliefs. I’m a very curious person who wants to know why and how. I’ve also learned that critical thinking is extremely important as well as compassion. Most people do not use critical thinking. If you did, you would question things and not follow like a sheep. I totally agree. I think it is a misnomer that atheists often make to assume that theists who have beliefs are blindly following. It is kind of like assuming a relationship only worked because people didn't initially meet online. Each experience is some type of lesson, something is learned or at least planted in our mind. Even when people meet 'online' they dont necessarily end it there. They often have real time interaction after that initial event, just like anyone else, and those experiences which come after that INITIAL event, begin to accumulate and progress towards something else. The same happens with beliefs. They initiate somewhere, but then many things come after that INITIAL event which begin to accumulate in order to reinforce or weaken that belief. we learn, not in a vacuum, but collectively. So too, our beliefs don't form in a vacuum, but collectively and from many sources and experiences and factors. We go to 'formal education' and we follow 'like sheep' initially because there is common agreement as to the integrity of what is being taught. and then throughout life, when we apply and see that that teaching holds up, it becomes more true and real and foundational for us. This is true of all logic we learn as children, it starts with someone somewhere but it doesnt end there. Experience and application either continue to confirm or refute those teachings. any number of people can either come to the conclusion that those teachings are confirmed or valid or that they are not, but mere numbers believing the same does not make them 'sheep' , so much as people who have experienced what makes them agree on certain things. I agree with some of what you said. But I do think that a large majority do continue to follow like sheep without question. Peer pressure. Sometimes it’s out of fear of ridicule or not fitting in or not wanting to alienate family or friends. I’ve seen it happen in families when one member chooses to change faiths. I know people who were emotionally and even physically abused for questioning their faith. I’ve also heard christians who say they believe because they’re afraid of going to hell and believe for no other reason. Their faith is based on fear. This is why I question faith. The more I learn, the more questions I have, it’s a fascinating subject. people do fear pressure towards a lot of things in life. I feel that lack of exposure plays a role in limited experience that makes it easier to go blindly. I was never in an environment that centered around a concept of Hell, at home or at church, really. its unfortunate when that happens. My faith has been reinforced through the experience I have had and watch others have. Even before church was something I understood, I already held somewhere inside most of the lessons and beliefs that were in the Bible, so that actually worked in reverse, the bible reaffirmed 'natural' leanings, and then experiences continued to reinforce those things. The amount of knowledge in the bible that aligned with knowledge not widely known for centuries later was only one of many things that compel me to trust in its integrity. The 'morals' about living and what Ive seen in both people who live in those ways and people who dont, also compel me to trust in its integrity. The similarity between the bible, other holy books, and other general morals that people dont ascribe to anything but their cultural traditions also compels me to trust in those basic foundations and principles/morals. I have heard a few stories of fanatics who teach theism through intimidation and fear of harm, but it is also happening that 'peer pressure' is used in the manner of promoting atheism through shaming and belittling people's intelligence. people will be people, regardless of their theistic foundation, and they will learn what holds true for them, regardless of theistic foundation. and some will be bullies and some will use logic and some will be emotional. just all conditions of the human family that I dont think any group has a clear monopoly on. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From msharmony IN fairness, she said NONE of those things were true to point out how repeating falsehoods can lead to false beliefs. From JustBeHonest The books of the New Testament were written centuries after the events they describe. According to the Bible, the earth is flat. The earliest New Testament manuscripts go back only to the fourth or fifth centuries AD. The Bible teaches that the earth is the center of the universe. The English Bible is a translation of a translation of a translation (etc.) of the original, and fresh errors were introduced in each stage of the proces That is a direct quote from her posts. This is some type of debating tactic. Yes, it is. No, it's not. It's designed to cast doubt. Some people help promote faith. Some promote doubt. It is obvious to me which one the dishonest "justbehonest" is. As I have said, most of what she promotes is not true. For example, I do not fall into her categories. I was NOT exposed to much religion as a child. I can count on one hand how many times I was taken to church. So, no indoctrination here. I went on a quest of my own choosing. I visited many churches when I was a teenager. Including some that were not Christian. I read the Bible when I was 14. Not because I had to. I read it because I heard so much about it from others that I thought it to be an important book. It is obvious that she has never read the Bible. So all of her information on the Bible comes to her second hand. That list of things that are supposed to be in the Bible she got off a web site. Copy and paste. No muss, no fuss. And no studying. I have run into many people like her. They have been blinded to the truth and try to ignore their own spirituality. All the time trying to fool others and probably herself that she is practicing "critical thinking." Proverbs 23:7 As a man thinkest, so shall it be... Such people have not learned the purpose of thinking. They have never learned how to use thought. Often times it is called prayer. I can understand someone trying to approach Christianity from a neutral standpoint. But this poster has obviously been swayed from the dark side. One-sided. Besides, as I have said before, she is greatly outnumbered. Christianity is represented by 2.3 billion people. That is about 32% of the population. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well thanks for confirming my thoughts on the sheep comments.
How dare you accuse me of being dishonest? All you are is a bible thumping brainwashed person who attacks anyone who has curiousity and questions which go against your beliefs. It doesn’t make you RIGHT when you insult me. It makes you intolerant and childish. Not good Christian qualities at all. I am open minded. I ask questions, I read, I listen and most importantly. I think for myself. And yes I DO have doubts. That’s what this post is about. It’s not about pushing your beliefs onto me. You definitely need to read about critical thinking. You have none. Critical thinking is the ability to think clearly and rationally about what to do or what to believe. It includes the ability to engage in reflective and independent thinking. Someone with critical thinking skills is able to do the following : understand the logical connections between ideas identify, construct and evaluate arguments detect inconsistencies and common mistakes in reasoning solve problems systematically identify the relevance and importance of ideas reflect on the justification of one's own beliefs and values Critical thinking is not a matter of accumulating information. A person with a good memory and who knows a lot of facts is not necessarily good at critical thinking. A critical thinker is able to deduce consequences from what he knows, and he knows how to make use of information to solve problems, and to seek relevant sources of information to inform himself. “”Critical thinking should not be confused with being argumentative or being critical of other people.”” Although critical thinking skills can be used in exposing fallacies and bad reasoning, critical thinking can also play an important role in cooperative reasoning and constructive tasks. Critical thinking can help us acquire knowledge, improve our theories, and strengthen arguments. We can use critical thinking to enhance work processes and improve social institutions. Some people believe that critical thinking hinders creativity because it requires following the rules of logic and rationality, but creativity might require breaking rules. This is a misconception. Critical thinking is quite compatible with thinking "out-of-the-box", challenging consensus and pursuing less popular approaches. If anything, critical thinking is an essential part of creativity because we need critical thinking to evaluate and improve our creative ideas. |
|
|
|
|
