Jump to content

Skankboy

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    1,284
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

24 Neutral

About Skankboy

  • Rank
    Supreme Groove-monkey
  • Birthday 05/31/1975

Contact Methods

  • MSN
    GIR
  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    South Portland, Maine
  • Interests
    Reading, writing, video games, anime/godzilla movies, UFC, music, etc.

Previous Fields

  • Still have any Gods? If so, who or what?
    "Fake, Western-Style" Buddhist :)
  1. What's a "fake, Western style" Buddhist?

  2. Thanks for answering my question. To recap, it was "how can you tell a true christian?" The problem I have with this is that no one knows what's on the inside of another. To say that any of weren't "true christians" would imply that you know we weren't sincere. Believe me, some of us were VERY sincere in our faith. As for the friend analogy, for us, it was like having a friendship and then finding out they didn't exist in the first place. It's a HUGE blow to the psyche when something you held so dear is seen as, essentially, a form of deception. I know you don't see it that way, but if you aren't able to accept that we were truly christians, just like you in many ways, and now aren't, I don't know if we'll truly be able to find a common ground for discussion... IMOHO,
  3. I know you've got alot going on Inspecto, but I'd really like to hear how you can tell a "true" christian from a "religious person" this side of the grave...
  4. The problem with this logic is that there is no way to define who is a Christian except in the negative. That means there's no way to know who actually is, because if at any point they fall away, you can just say they weren't to begin with. Let me ask you this: How do you know you're a true christian? If, for some reason, you stopped believing, were YOU ever a christian at all?
  5. That's great! So we don't need christianity at all! God will bless us either way. So you must believe that those "who never heard the word" will go to heaven?
  6. This is a very good point NBTB. Millions upon millions of people have had experiences like she's describing and only a very small fraction of them were Christians. How do you reconcile the exclusivity of christianity with the wealth of non-christian religious experiences?
  7. I would say I'm an ex-christian in the same way other people are recovering alcoholic. Certainly, I don't call myself such in the "real world" but this is a support site and as such, I accept this label as a way to show I am part of this community... IMOHO
  8. But Dario, we aren't ignorant of the christian arguments in favor of the existence of god...we USED to BE christians! I don't believe in evolution so that I don't have to believe in god. The two have NOTHING to do with each other. You said so yourself, god could have used evolution to create the diversity we see today. They are not mutually exclusive. That being said, many of here know as much or more about biblical scholarship and evolution than you have expressed so far (I could be wrong, but I'm going w/what I've seen so far). Why then do we believe the way we do? Ignorance? I don't believe so... IMOHO,
  9. On another note dario, you say that the world is too complex to have "just happened" and then ascribe it to an even more complex creator to have started it. This doesn't actually answer anything. It only adds the question of "who created this complex creator?" If you say that god is "uncreated" than it's just as easy (and a step less complicated) to just say the universe is "uncreated" and leave it at that... (see, no evolution mentioned, because this is cosmology, not biology...)
  10. Careful dario, you're confusing a bilogical process w/the creation of the cosmos. Evolution doesn't have anything to do w/cosmology. When you are able to get an accurate definition of evolution in your head, you'll see that it's nothing like the "junkyard" analogy you gave. The quest for truth is the most noble one a person can undertake, for that, I applaud you. But please keep in mind that truth cannot be reached from a point of certainty. If you stick around long enough, and actually listen, I'm sure you'll find something of the truth you seek. Just don't blame us if it isn't the one you were looking for in the first place... IMOHO,
  11. Looks like "incest" is the front runner for universal taboo... I guess, "incest" might need some clarification in that case. Is sex between family member incest, or is the production of offspring from such a union incest? How closely related would two people have to be? Mother/father - son/daughter? Uncles/aunts - nephews/neices? Cousins? In many ancient royal families (esp Egypt) it was not uncommon at all for brothers and sisters to marry as a way to consolidate power. I've also heard of (sorry looking for ref on this one) tribes where the male children have sex w/the elder males (no distinction for parentage) as a right of passage into manhood. While I certainly agree that from a medical point of view, reproduction via incest is a bad idea in the long run (just look at the Russian royal family for examples), that evalution only comes from our current knowledge of genetics. Again, it seems to me, that under certain social conditions, even incest can be considered "acceptable" if not "moral" to a society.
  12. In my experience, what is considered "moral" is strongly connected to the society in which it is judged. Here's a thought experiment: try to think of something that has been "taboo" (ie immoral) in every society throughout time. So far, I've never been able to find one. There are always social institutions of some kind that will validate the act in question w/in the context of their culuture...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.