Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 12/19/2020 in all areas

  1. Hi Robert, I don’t think I’ve ever commented on your posts before, but I’ve certainly been intrigued by your promotion of an atheistic, non-supernatural version of Christianity. Skeptical, I must admit, but interested nonetheless. I’m glad you posted this update as it gives me an opportunity to ask some questions I’ve been wanting to ask... First off, do you think that a version of Christianity is worth keeping alive on its own merits (e.g. a better way to live than other non-theistic philosophies) or do you think it’s more of a way to wean Christians away from unfounded supernat
    2 points
  2. Going back to this thread that I started three years ago when I joined Ex-Christian.net, I have just written this short outline of my current views. Christianity without a Historical Jesus The Gospel story of Jesus of Nazareth does not have to be historically true for any of the core ethical ideas of Christianity to remain valid. Jesus himself stated in a line repeated in all the synoptic gospels (Matt 13:11, Luke 8:10, Mark 4:11) that he speaks to the general public only in parables, while reserving the secrets of the kingdom for initiates. The historiog
    2 points
  3. If I may both revive and intrude on this discussion then please allow. If not, just let me know. Reading through this took a fair amount of time and given it was read in one span I've surely forgotten some areas of importance, but I'd like to quickly add onto two points: While in the preface I know that we are intentionally excluding a discussion on the theory of language, should we not at least acknowledge that part of our difficulties of expressing certain concepts or even correctly describing the ontological reality (reality as it is, not necessarily as we perceive i
    1 point
  4. Hi Taba, these are great questions. The essential theme of Christianity is that the world needs a messiah. The idea is that we are on a wide and easy path to destruction, and that a messianic paradigm shift is needed to find the hard and narrow way to salvation. Conventional Literal Christianity interprets this teaching from Matt 7:13 in supernatural terms of personal afterlife, with salvation defined as going to heaven and destruction as going to hell. By contrast, I read it in purely natural scientific terms, equating destruction with species extinction or societal collapse, and salvatio
    1 point
  5. Sounds good to me. Glad to hear there are alternatives to the religion-based AA. Hope it is also a no cost program with voluntary donations.
    1 point
  6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presuppositional_apologetics I'll address the last two posts later. But for now let's let everyone read through the issue we've been facing concerning presuppositional apologetic's. We have basically exhausted this avenue during the last five pages. And there's no good reason to continue exhausting it any further at this point. Because it boils down to either presupposing that the bible is correct and then treating everything else according to that apriori, presupposition, or disbelieving the presupposition. Not find
    1 point


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.