snare&racket I’m most interested to hear about who you and Cofty think I am. Also I don’t agree with your point about new people who come along. To some theists would present a stumbling block to where they are and where they are going, and to other it would be atheists present the problem. As regards your point about language, you should know that it evolves in a way very similar to biological evolution.
Musings about different types of atheist!
by Seraphim23 304 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Seraphim23
paranoia agent I base the assumption on the view that Genesis as a book has obviously large sections that are not literally true. Man evolved and didn’t come from Eden according to the evidence from DNA and other sources. The archaeological history of the Jews is at odds with biblical record in some instances and so on. On top of this the picture of God himself is not consistent on many levels when these things are taken as literal. Plus there are other sources of spiritual insight about God that happen today that contradict the traditional picture of God of old times. Even Paul says we see through a glass darkly. Where light does shine, as with strong scientific evidence, I tend to go with it, because if truth does exist, then it doesn’t contradict itself!
Adamah as time goes by I’m sure you will ample opportunity to pick my views and ideas to shreds. At least I know you are capable of logical discussion which I do appreciate when you do so.
-
latinthunder
you don't want to find answers you are looking for questions, though they have no meaning.
What in blazes does that mean?
It is like trying to converse with people in a a lauguage they don't speak or understand whilst they try to denounce the rules of the language.
That's a fitting description of how I feel when I speak to you and people like you. My language is not something you can understand so you just denounce it as foolish (btw I don't think you or Science are foolish, I just see you as different). You don't seem willing to spend the mental resources it takes to bridge the gap. I call that intellectual laziness. It's just like how Dawkins in his special left the psychic. He took him for a fool or a fraud, but never proved he was. He's just hoping that his watchers will agree with him. I call that groupthink.
go away and do a course in science, seriously, if it means so much to you both, to question it. Go put hard cash on the table and pay for an education, argue with your tutors all day about observing the unobservable and accomplishing things never seen before such as raising the dead with your mind.
Why would I break the bank to argue with scientists when I can do it for free online? Are you saying that I shouldn't be allowed to question science without spending money? That's a strange notion, maybe it's just your exasperation speaking.
-
cofty
Sab - You want to play tennis without a net. No thanks.
-
Seraphim23
Who is Sab?
-
latinthunder
Sab - You want to play tennis without a net. No thanks.
Correction, I wan to play tennis ON the net, and you are walking off the court. Tennis elbow or something?
-
adamah
LT said-
You don't seem willing to spend the mental resources it takes to bridge the gap. I call that intellectual laziness.
You don't seem willing to take the effort to bridge the knowledge gap via learning; I call that bog-standard laziness laziness. In the "real World", no one spoon-feeds knowledge to you, as if you're entitled to it: that approach largely doesn't exist (outside of cults).
BTW, you can't even be bothered to direct your mental resources to learn the basics of the beliefs you profess to live by, speaking of which: did you ever publicly apologize for misleading readers by falsely claiming how you found the Talmud to be particularly helpful to use in combination with the Torah (to help you build your faith as a Unitarian), when it later became obvious that you didn't even actually KNOW what the Talmud is?
Adam
-
Seraphim23
Come on guys, calm down. Incidentally I’m still waiting for an acknowledgement or reply to my point about atoms and other exotic particles that cannot be directly seen when the theories were accepted.
-
latinthunder
You don't seem willing to take the effort to bridge the knowledge gap via learning; I call that bog-standard laziness laziness. In the "real World", no one spoon-feeds knowledge to you, as if you're entitled to it: that approach largely doesn't exist (outside of cults).
I am constantly studying and learning, your accusation is spurious. I am desperately trying to bridge the gap, but I am only one man. How much time do you spend learning about the supernatural? Oh, that's right you've already concluded it doesn't exist which stops your research cold.
BTW, you can't even be bothered to direct your mental resources to learn the basics of the beliefs you profess to live by, speaking of which: did you ever publicly apologize for misleading readers by falsely claiming how you found the Talmud to be particularly helpful to use in combination with the Torah (to help you build your faith as a Unitarian), when it later became obvious that you didn't even actually KNOW what the Talmud is?
I was accidently switching concepts, which I tend to do. When I said "Talmud" I meant "Hebrew Scriptures." All of my points still stand with that correction in terminology. I apologized to you in PM, I don't need to apologize to anyone else.
-
adamah
LT (Sab) said-
I am constantly studying and learning, your accusation is spurious. I am desperately trying to bridge the gap, but I am only one man. How much time do you spend learning about the supernatural? Oh, that's right you've already concluded it doesn't exist which stops your research cold.
I saw the movie 'Ghostbusters'. Does that count?
BTW, you can't even be bothered to direct your mental resources to learn the basics of the beliefs you profess to live by, speaking of which: did you ever publicly apologize for misleading readers by falsely claiming how you found the Talmud to be particularly helpful to use in combination with the Torah (to help you build your faith as a Unitarian), when it later became obvious that you didn't even actually KNOW what the Talmud is?
I was accidently switching concepts, which I tend to do. When I said "Talmud" I meant "Hebrew Scriptures." All of my points still stand with that correction in terminology. I apologized to you in PM, I don't need to apologize to anyone else.
Well, that thread is still live, and is available for anyone to witness the depths of your wisdom and knowledge. Here it is, where you said the following:
Sab (LT) said-
The Torah and the Talmud still hold lasting value even for people today. They have stood the test of time and should rightly be considered God-breathed. You can confirm this yourself if you choose to put in the work.
You admitted above that you thought 'the Talmud' was the 'Hebrew scriptures'. Which only begs the question: so what in the World did you think 'the Torah' was, then?
How could ANY advice you have to offer be taken seriously, if you don't even know the NAMES of the books you claim to find helpful? You seem to be just another dude willing to make up crapola, just to act like you know stuff that you really don't?
Adam
