homersapien 11,357 Posted May 25, 2017 Author Share Posted May 25, 2017 34 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said: ^^^^^^^^^ Interesting reading. I will admit to not praying for Homer. Now if Homer chooses to be placed on my prayer list I charge $25 per month................. To Christians credit (assuming they aren't lying), my experience tells me the market for prayers is free. And I appreciate every one of them. But I do admire your entrepreneurialism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltyTiger 7,777 Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 Just now, homersapien said: To Christians credit (assuming they aren't lying), my experience tells me the market for prayers to be "zero". And I appreciate every one of them. But I do admire your entrepreneurialism. Guaranteed results or your money refunded........ eventually Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,357 Posted May 25, 2017 Author Share Posted May 25, 2017 58 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said: Guaranteed results or your money refunded........ eventually Somehow, I get the feeling my money will be worthless by then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumps 3,704 Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 On 5/24/2017 at 8:08 AM, homersapien said: Science informs us generally about how the first people came into being and I accept that. While I can certainly understand how a scientifically literate person who is religiously inclined might see a message or allegory in a creation myth, I don't understand how anyone could accept it literally, for obvious reasons. And of course my beliefs don't determine what you believe. But if you are willing to accept the myth as literally true then you either 1) don't understand the science or 2) understand science but reject it, by definition. Good luck with explaining the latter to anyone. I will be the first to admit I didn't get the "God gene". I found I didn't have the capacity to believe from about the age of 12. That's not to say I have definitive feelings one way or the other about God, I just don't "know". I think people who think they do "know" have a natural proclivity to believe. I am OK with not knowing. I don't feel any compulsion or need to fill ignorance with superstition. The mystery intrigues me but it doesn't frighten me. (As an aside, I feel I should mention that talking about creation of the "first woman" - especially as related in the bible myth - is inherently sexist.) I know what you meant, but a scientist referring to the "God gene" is pretty funny! I agree with you that many people who think that they "know" have a natural proclivity to believe. But, surely you can see that if God is real, He could easily make even a skeptic believe if He chose to reveal Himself to him/her. As hard as it may be for you to believe, my knowledge is based on what the Creator revealed to me, not superstition. I am apparently one of the millions who "coincidentally" suffer from the same mental illness, right? I would LOVE to understand how think that the creation of the "first woman" is sexist! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumps 3,704 Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 On 5/24/2017 at 8:23 AM, homersapien said: Sorry but you seem to be confusing the unknown with the supernatural. Science deals with the unknown by studying it. Even if a scientist believes in the supernatural, science does not consider it. It is not a scientific option. Science cannot test the supernatural by definition. And no one can "comprehend" the supernatural, also by definition. You are now confusing the terms "comprehend" with "belief". But you are right in that I don't really understand belief in the supernatural. Like I said, I apparently didn't inherent that part of human psychology (along with a lot of other people). Finally, I am agnostic when it comes to the proposition of a supernatural creator, while you are the one insisting that the supernatural (God) is fact. I'd say that makes me more open minded than you, not to mention less threatening. You are probably right that I am confusing comprehension with belief and am confused about many other things. Either way, whether I am a scientist or not or whether I am a crazy person or not, once I have experienced the supernatural then it would be completely illogical not to believe in the supernatural whether I comprehend it or not! I admire your ability to contort your beliefs to make yourself seem to be more open minded! I am open to a Creator and you are not. I am open to the supernatural and you are not. I am also open to science. Lastly, I apologize for being more threatening than you are! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strychnine 1,802 Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 49 minutes ago, Grumps said: You are probably right that I am confusing comprehension with belief and am confused about many other things. Either way, whether I am a scientist or not or whether I am a crazy person or not, once I have experienced the supernatural then it would be completely illogical not to believe in the supernatural whether I comprehend it or not! I admire your ability to contort your beliefs to make yourself seem to be more open minded! I am open to a Creator and you are not. I am open to the supernatural and you are not. I am also open to science. Lastly, I apologize for being more threatening than you are! He said he was agnostic on the proposition of a supernatural creator, which means he is open to the possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumps 3,704 Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 2 minutes ago, Strychnine said: He said he was agnostic on the proposition of a supernatural creator, which means he is open to the possibility. Thank you for correcting me. My statement was wrong on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU4life1 5 Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 Argo I am just wondering how many of these kids have you been associated with. Have you been a foster parent or taught orphaned kids?These kids really do not care who loves them just that someone does. Isn't that what the bible teaches is love Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumps 3,704 Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 9 minutes ago, AU4life1 said: Argo I am just wondering how many of these kids have you been associated with. Have you been a foster parent or taught orphaned kids?These kids really do not care who loves them just that someone does. Isn't that what the bible teaches is love Thanks for getting things back on target. I am not trying to answer for Argo, but I don't think the point of the Christian organizations trying to help couples adopt children is to keep the children from having same sex parents. I think that the point of the organizations is to help kids find parents and help couples who want to be parents find kids. Helping kids find parents and helping couples adopt certainly can be seen as showing love for them. It certainly don't think it would be doing much good to shut down organizations who are trying to help orphans and couples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArgoEagle 1,771 Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 4 minutes ago, AU4life1 said: Argo I am just wondering how many of these kids have you been associated with. Have you been a foster parent or taught orphaned kids?These kids really do not care who loves them just that someone does. Isn't that what the bible teaches is love Yes, the Bible does teach love. The Bible also teaches other things, which is again a man and a woman make a marital unity, and they produce a child naturally. The child is raised with Christian values, which homosexuality is not. These children which we are speaking of will be taken care of by God somehow, someway in which I can't explain to you step by step, but I do know the way it's not supposed to be. I am extremely sorry for children who are orphaned; my brother and his wife were unable to have children and adopted my nephew so I am not unsympathetic to the issue. As much as some people want to change the teachings of the Bible, it's not going to change. God inspired it to be perfect just like it is, and in Revelation it explicitly tells us that whomever changes the meaning of the Bible by adding to it, or taking away from it will face dire consequences. I have been called by God to teach and preach his word. It is not always popular by people who don't understand it b/c they are lost and do not have the Holy Spirit to help them interpret it. It is my responsibility to teach it, and it is everyone else's responsibility to believe it or not. I hope what I have said helps, if it doesn't I'm sorry they don't understand. I say all this sincerely, respectfully, and without malice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,357 Posted May 25, 2017 Author Share Posted May 25, 2017 3 hours ago, Grumps said: I know what you meant, but a scientist referring to the "God gene" is pretty funny! I agree with you that many people who think that they "know" have a natural proclivity to believe. But, surely you can see that if God is real, He could easily make even a skeptic believe if He chose to reveal Himself to him/her. As hard as it may be for you to believe, my knowledge is based on what the Creator revealed to me, not superstition. I am apparently one of the millions who "coincidentally" suffer from the same mental illness, right? I would LOVE to understand how think that the creation of the "first woman" is sexist! 1. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/02/health/in-search-of-the-god-gene.html?_r=0 2. I am sure He could. And I would be totally receptive if He shows up. 3. What "mental illness"? I never implied having the "God gene" was a pathology. 4. Seriously? You don't see how describing the creation of woman as following that of man, as a derivative of man (using one of his ribs) and as a helper to man (Genesis 2) is inherently sexist? Likewise, the use of masculine pronouns of "He", "Him" and "His" is also sexist. I used to use "It" to describe God, but didn't want to make a issue of it so I stick to convention. I just point it out since we started with the question of "woman's creation" as if it was actually different process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,357 Posted May 25, 2017 Author Share Posted May 25, 2017 2 hours ago, Grumps said: Thank you for correcting me. My statement was wrong on that. It was wrong on everything else also. I am not "contorting" my beliefs to achieve anything. They are perfectly logical. If you don't think so, please point out the error. If you were homosexual, you might better understand what I meant by "threatening". I don't mean every religious person is inherently threatening which is obviously not true, but this thread is essentially based on that very example. After all, one poster called homosexuals "wicked" based on his scriptural beliefs. I would find that threatening as a homosexual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.