I read all the time as a child and my father and mother both read other things to me too. There was plenty of time for all of it. Some of the Bible stories were full of mystery and intrigue – and so were the movies that were based on them. (Biblical epics were a big draw back then.)
Bertrand Russell was way over my head when I was a kid, but I did recommend him to Badchad a few months ago.
I did eventually teach Mark Twain (and a little Aldous Huxley in the early years.) Mark Twain eventually became a believer in reincarnation. He was much more complex than any one selection from his work can represent. And he wrote an enormous amount over a long period of time.
I hope that you are not assuming that I have the same beliefs that I had as a child. My father and I both grew to be accepting of many things other than Christianity – and neither of us knew at the time that the other had grown in that direction.
And we both had experiences that took away our fear of death although we never talked about it with each other. I learned about it from my mother after his death.
You must think that I live in a very tiny world. Where is that coming from? I’ve had an extraordinary life that many people would envy. And I’m not through yet!
Smug atheists are incapable of conceiving that people can arrive at a choice to include spirituality in their lives of their own accord, after having spent time educating themselves and reflecting on what they’ve learned and experienced. These anti-theists are too busy being oh-so-proud of themselves for being soooo smart. :rolleyes:
There certainly is some truth to this as a generalization. Like most generalizations it doesn’t really cover all the details.
I’ve come to think that many people who may have had real spiritual experiences wind up accepting a particular church out of association, or upbringing. I’ve known more than a couple of people who had gotten away from the church of their youth only to later embrace it or some other form of spirituality later in life.
A Church can be a comforting social organization and a pseudo family. Lot’s of people don’t really examine the details of doctrine because they like how they feel about a particular church or denomination. They’ve accepted what was taught them by people they see as authorities {as the quote says} without really examining it, because they like being there. I’m also pretty sure that many people who enjoy a certain congregation don’t feel the need to accept every detail of doctrine. My father, in studying the Bible independently, came to different conclusions than his pastor, but he still loved the church and enjoyed going.
In most cases I think it’s unfortunate that people don’t question their beliefs. People put staying on good terms with their church ahead of their own spiritual journey and don’t heed the little voice in their head that says “I don’t get that” Still, it’s very human and understandable. I do think it’s good that the discussion seems to be up a notch or two recently.
I was a priest in what is now the Community of Christ and what was then the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. When Joseph Smith was killed the church broke into several factions, with one being led to Utah by Brigham Young. One was reorganized years later under Joseph Smith’s son.
Eckankar was started here in the US by Paul Twitchel in 1965. I was introduced to it by a good friend and he and it helped awaken my spiritual journey although I never became a member. Here are their basic beliefs The basic principle that attracted me was this
In recent years I’ve come to believe that both Joseph Smith and Paul Twitchel were charlatans who borrowed spiritual ideas from some place else to “create” their own religion. Twitchel borrowed his from a little known Indian sect and I’m still not sure where Smith and cohorts got theirs. I also believe that spirit can use the kernels of truth within these types of religions to speak to the individual regardless of the route truth took along the way.
I recently went to a Baha’i meeting and it was pretty interesting. They stress the unity of all religions. I don’t consider myself a membership kind of guy but there is something nice about people coming together to worship and share their hope for a better more united world.
As I used to tease my Baha’i buddy, the Baha’i are the 137th religion to announce that all religions are one.
(All whom I’ve met have been good people, though.)
The Baha’is are such peacemakers. I believe that noranew is a Bahai. I used to go to their meetings before their center was built. The last of my Bahai friends moved to California about a year ago, but you might have known her. She is originally from Iran and is well-known for her excellent photography.
I think I told you that last December I returned to the small denomination that I grew up in. I was pleased to find that I don’t have to hide my books on Buddhism when other members of my Sunday School class are around. Apparently I haven’t been on this journey by myself after all.
I was very interested in reading The Confession of Faith which is the essential doctrine of this denomination before I rejoined. I knew the basics, but I wanted to see the details. I was told that the doctrine had been rewritten from scratch in the 1980’s and that two of my old friends from the 1960’s, whose acquaintance I had just renewed, had been on the committee that had rewritten it. Ha! This will curtail my enjoyment of debates on doctrine with them, dammit! They wrote the book!
Some things I agree with and other things I don’t. But the things I don’t agree with seem to be acceptable and no one tries to mini-manage.
So far I’ve had the same experience. I get the feeling they’d laugh with you on that one. {good one btw}
If we could get all the gigantic religions that claim “WE"RE THE ONE!!” “NO YOU’RE NOT WE ARE!” “GET THEE BEHIND US ALL THOSE WHO DON’T SEE WE’RE RIGHT!” to sing the same song as the 137 we’d be getting somewhere.
I understand. I’m glad you’re enjoying it. I think I mentioned when you told me about going back to church that I sometimes miss the worship service. I went to the local Community of Christ and they are nice people but it didn’t move me enough to keep going.
One thing my sense of spiritual freedom has fostered is the ability to go to different services and appreciate them. When people gather together in a spirit of hope and common community it’s a wonderful thing. When spirits are united for those minutes all the details of doctrine fall away.
When I checked into my old denomination I was pleased to see they had made some changes. From their mission statement
It’s the same spirit that calls to everyone through the veils of our own unique illusions whatever they may be. Each person or group is a work* in progress* It’s perfectly okay to walk different paths. It’s not okay to allow those paths to create an us vs. them mentality. It isn’t easy though.
Well, it’s good that you are not challenging that theists are irrational. Cause that would be an interesting debate between us. However, back to the more mundane stuff, if you compare my threads, there are those who it seems like me and those who don’t, (the latter group tends to accuse me of this that and whatever). When comparing these two groups it is pretty obvious to me that the disparaging group is disproportionately superstitious (by that I mean Christian/theist) as compared to the other group. If you think this is factually incorrect I encourage you to poll everyone and prove me wrong. If you don’t know this to be factually incorrect, well, thanks for arguing against my belief. If I were lying, I’d know it.
Thanks for recommending one of my already favorite philosophers to me. I’m pretty familiar to his work, having read several of his books. I would recommend him to you again as an adult. He’s as good a writer as I have ever read, and I can’t imagine any educated person saying he talks over peoples heads.
Well, I’ve read the bible cover to cover. I have always tested with well above average reading comprehension. As for speaking Greek, nope I can’t do that, but I can count on one hand the topics where original texts have been challenged, so I really don’t think it’s that consequential. Now if your comparing me to DtC I think he holds in his mind the hammer of Thor with regards to biblical knowledge. The only problem is he swings it like a Miss Nancy. While my hammer may not be as big as his, I swing mine like a man.
Actually, as I recall in our past debate, I didn’t ask you about heaven in particular but rather the various afterlife scenarios. If I know myself, I was more interested in what you thought of hell, who went there, and how what you believed, was different than what Jesus taught.
I really can’t imagine that is the case. I’m pretty proud of how well read I am, so I can’t imagine myself implying I’m less so than I am. Also since my later years in college I have kept an excel file of all the books I have read, the date I finished them and my rating on a 1-10 point scale. Due to competing responsibilities my number of books read in the last year has been below my norm.
Nope, but have you read Russell, On God and Religion, Shermer’s The Science of Good and Evil, Durant’s On the Meaning of Life or Hemmingway’s The Green Hills of Africa? I read those, and a lot more, all in the last year.
A dull debater, lacking in both flair and passion, or more likely, just a lurker.
I’ve never met anyone who loved Hemingway and Russell who was dull and lacking in flair and passion. I taught American lit for all those years and I’m not even familiar with that particular book! That is to my shame. I must compensate.
If someone really liked Hemingway, you would think he would read A Moveable Feast which is also non-fiction and about his years in Paris. Someone might even end up going there to retrace his steps.
Reading the Bible cover to cover is great but it’s a long way from real Biblical knowledge. Perhaps you might explain what you mean by original text. There are thousands of copies of the books of the NT and no two of them are alike. Not long ago you were still using the KJV even though it’s been regarded as a poor translation for quite some time. I’ve said this to you before. Real Biblical knowledge goes far beyond knowing what words are in the Bible. We don’t have to look all the way to DtC to find people who know as much or more than you do.
BTW when it comes to manliness in debate technique, shall we take a poll of who has more respect for DtC in that regard than they have for you? Want to guess who’ll win?
Whatever text people are appealing to when they say the English part doesn’t mean what it says.
I recall a thread on that very topic. “KJV” is too short of the search function but the concensus seemed to be that the KJV was a pretty darn good translation. As for me, I also have the NIV and the NLV, and when I occasionally look up passages between them they pretty much say the same thing.
Go on. Are you invoking the holy spirit?
Well, let’s just say I know enough to support my arguments.
Why don’t you just ask DtC himself if he gives, less than his all, in the fight against this particular superstition. IIRC, years ago he told me himself that he just does not care that much about it. His current GD discussion on the resurrection is a bit of an aberration for him and I was surprised to see it. Still, it seems he is going more out of his way to avoid offending anyone in that debate, than he would if he were discussing the psychic abilities of Jon Edward.
I’ll take that to mean “You’re right but I can’t admit it”
Meaning whenever they disagree with your non interpretation.
Pretty darn good compared to what? Is “pretty much” close enough for you? I’ve done the same comparison you have. A different word here and there can make a big difference when it comes to trying to discern the meaning of the passage.
If you’re going to swing your tiny little hammer at people about Bible verses you might want to consider what versions they consider good, better, or best.
Not at all. Biblical knowledge has to do with knowing about the Bible as much as the words in the Bible. It’s history, the culture and traditions it came from. Who wrote the books? When did they write them? It would include some knowledge of what leading Biblical scholars believe and why.
Well thats a little more humble and and closer to the truth at least. Tenacity is not Biblical knowledge either. I’ve seen you continue to support your arguments even after you’ve been shown to be in error.
Thats not the point. DtC can give as much or as little as he has time or interest for. You implied that your methods are more manly while his are Nancy. I’m not interested in *your * definition of manliness. I’ve seen and experienced your style and personally I think you’re confused about what manliness is. Since I know you won’t place much stock in my opinion I thought it might be interesting to see what others members think. I’m thinking you already know.
It is not my job to poll anyone to discover just how wrong you are. You made the false claim, you provide support for it.
Failing that, your silly claim that the number irrational posters who oppose you is disproportionate to the number of posters, (or however you wish to twist your statement with the desire to save face), is nothing more than a personal belief, and, since you hold it without any evidence, it is clearly an irrational belief.
It is good to see you align yourself with those you accuse of irrationality. Perhaps you should be more respectful of the persons among whom you number yourself.
