Jump to content

Krowb

◊ Platinum Patron ◊
  • Content Count

    223
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by Krowb

  1. That's a cool way of looking at it. I haven't read anything regarding the founders' views on religion, just know that most considered themselves deists. Do you recommend?
  2. But back on the ex-christian theme. How odd of it for an all-loving god to create rules around sexual conduct and genders, then create some people on "hard mode" where they, for whatever reason, have extra difficulty abiding by this all-loving god's rules. The one who knit them in their mother's wombs chose them, to have an extra hurdle in an already difficult experience called "life". Threw them to the world, gave some commandments, and absolutely no manual or assistance when their god-knitted brains have difficulty getting with the god-given program regarding sexuality and identity.
  3. Everyone does not know what "race" means. Try telling a Han Chinese (Han ren) they are the same race as a Korean (Han Guo ren) and they'll flip their shit on you. It's even worse between Koreans and Japanese. I've made that mistake before. Everyone knows that Korea is backwards, inbred and, dirty (according to the Chinese). - Until the Chinese travel there, then they're like awww...."it's a like a cute mini-China with more Western brands". So no, people do not agree on what constitutes "race" not even within the US - which has a zealous preoccupation with the term.
  4. I may regret wading into this minefield, but I must quibble with the Dolezal position. Blackness is a cultural thing. Sure there are extremely slight genetic differences between the races, but those differences do not naturally manifest as cultural differences. Because these genetic differences manifest themselves as fairly visually distinct, we've chosen to create identities around them and these "racial" identities are always shifting. I have fraternity brothers who are African, African-American, Pakistani, Indian, Chinese, and Taiwanese (there's a fun nugget to chew on). They are all a
  5. I tend to agree with @pantheory's latest post on this one. A civilization advanced enough to solve the time and energy requirements for intersteller travel combined with avoiding our ever increasing detection capabilities aren't likely to be accidentally spotted out on a joyride. While it's certainly possible, I find it less likely than the alternatives.
  6. @TABA is correct. There is no reason to wade into or re-instigate the atheist, hard atheist, soft atheist, agnostic, agnostic-atheist debates. Withheld affirmative belief is sufficient.
  7. Well, that's an interesting definition. If All present doesn't mean All then what is excluded? And following, what term would be used to encompass "All of All"? Methinks Ed is playing "hide the ball".
  8. I would like to add that Josh is not claiming to "know" it in the sense of knowledge, but that he has a very strong belief that your conception of hell as a literal place of eternal punishment most likely not true. There is strong evidence (-in the legal sense Walter) the claims made in favor of such a Hell are incorrect and not be relied on. There is also evidence against a place because it contradicts at least two of gods generally accepted attributes - love and omnipresence. Hope this helps!
  9. That's a good question and one I'm sure Josh and others are happy to walk you through as many here are former pastors. A quick though experiment is Judaism doesn't believe in Hell. Jewish people are supposedly god's chosen people. Doesn't that strike you as strange? Many of our visuals about hell come from Revelations, which spent ~200 years (many generations) outside the Bible as non-canon. Revelations was treated the same way by the early church as we treat the Book of Judas today. Another interesting point is since god is light and hell is complete separation fro
  10. @tiredofwork, I can certainly see the indecisiveness part. In my end, I need to be less of a pushover. It doesn't mean I'm not nice, just need to learn to say "no" more and not feel like I'm letting people down.
  11. None of the above. God'll just start over again - look at Venus & Mars. As they say, third time's a charm!
  12. Good to have you back! Your absence did not go unnoticed.
  13. Topic under discussion is the Fermi Paradox, not a free ranging inquiry into ancient aliens, secret organizations, and global cabals. If the claim is there is no Fermi Paradox because aliens have visited, made their presence known, and the evidence is ancient aliens, Baalbeck, etc... then that's topical. That is a claim that must be supported and withstand scrutiny. If you want to engage in a discussion of specific ancient aliens and their current influence/control of the planet - a new thread (which you can start) would be more appropriate. We were all snookered by t
  14. I am totally confused on what we're discussing right now. The discussion of the Fermi Paradox was interesting, but somehow we've veered into 9/11, freemasons, and Lucifer. If a civilization is advanced enough to solve the faster than light issue and both travel and communicate through interstellar space, I am inclined to agree these beings are more interested in observing us than interacting with us. As as far as ancient civilizations, do not discount what huge amounts of manpower, lack of safety/casualty concerns, long timescales, and loads of free time can accomplish
  15. @Extant, While you definitely fit the description of ex-christian, you seem to still believe the god described in the bible as a real entity, though not necessarily what it claims to be. Would you agree with this statement? I'm curious because eastern religions don't seem to have a direct correlation to this being and even have their own, entirely different constellation structure and zodiac.
  16. Whether or not we have free will is interesting think on, but appears to only have meaningful relevance if one of the participants takes the position we should simultaneously hold free will + some being has omniscience, as opposed to belief, but actual knowledge, as though those future events are as unalterable as the past. Those two positions are mutually exclusive.
  17. Ed is in an interesting spot and one that I doubled down on several times at least a decade before I became an apostate. The explicit claim of free will contains an implicit claim that the future is unknowable. For if the future is capable of being known, not just believed, but known, then your will has 0 effect on what will be as it has already been in the known future state. For when the future is the present, then the present is already the past. Given that typical biblical christianity accords god with omniscience, meaning the future is already known, whatever "wi
  18. Please support your "complete story" Do I need the Book of Mormon or the Quran to complete it? Or perhaps I have the wrong translation.
  19. So I guess in answer to my question, Ed does not believe in the omniscience of god. His god is something less than all-knowing - hence the requirement for contingency plans.
  20. What I feel and what is are not always in agreement. Just ask any teenager. To me, if the Bible's account of creation is true, then it's becoming clear that god placed two mice in a terrarium with existence's most dangerous snake and failed to warn them of the danger. At least mice naturally fear snakes. Adam and Eve were more like dodo birds.
  21. Ed, Just to understand your theology a little better, are you saying that the creation of the Word, prior to the creation of the world, was just a contingency plan in case Adam and Eve chose incorrectly? God, knowing all things, did not know what choice Eve would make when she would inevitably encounter The deceiver? Or am I misunderstanding your position?
  22. Only if we do not grant god omnipotence, then no, they stood no chance against being deceived, being entirely unable to comprehend deceit. If we grant god omnipotence, then Adam and Eve did exactly what god planned as the Word/Jesus predates even the creation of the world.
  23. This weekend I've been thinking on something that this thread brought up. If the purpose of Jesus as part of the trinity was to save mankind and free us from the law, and Jesus is part of the trinity referred to in the "like us" part of Genesis, then this entire existence and chain of events was intentionally created prior to the creation of Adam and Eve. They were designed to fail, god knew they would fail, and if we follow the typical trinitarian view, Jesus (as savior of mankind) was created from time eternal, prior to the creation of the world, specifically for the mess god knew he was cr
  24. Welcome! Always a good thing to have knowledgeable folks around.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.