Jump to content


Regular Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by sdelsolray

  1. I could be wrong, but I think only one poster suggested you seek professional counseling. Add me to the list, provided she/he is a qualified secular professional. That makes two. Many here are "arm-chair" advisors in various topics, including your current topic. They are not professionals. You stated you appreciated their thoughts and suggestions and indicated they mean well. Imagine what a professional could do.
  2. I suggest you spend meaningful time composing music on the guitar, enjoying nature in the outdoors and perhaps a few other activities that will help you get away from this emotional struggle you have created for yourself.
  3. "Am I committing a crime?" No, you are not committing a crime. That being said, you may be in breach of your contract with Spotify, which, if true, is a civil wrong, unless you have a viable contractual defense for your actions.
  4. An interesting stream of consciousness, SB. I appreciate the "digressions", but don't consider them as that. Instead, I see them as a mixture of (i) religious claims you previously believed but no longer do with (ii) scientific/reality-based claims you currently believe as correct. Do I have that part right? Transition from one world view to another often takes many years, even decades. Education never ends.
  5. You list music and nature as interests you have. Do you play music, listen and/or compose? As to nature, is there any scientific discipline you like more than others, e.g., biology, physics, chemistry?
  6. What evidence to you have that this woman is an "ordinary sane intelligent" person? Being infected with certain virulent strains of the Christian God Virus often results in serious emotional, psychological and mental dysfunctions.
  7. She's a religious nutter. You're not. You should strongly consider using intellect, reason, practicality and simplicity over emotional tugs, hormonal urges, wanting to get laid and wishful thinking. Move on. Really, move on.
  8. Well, I suggest you investigate this because I think you skipped an important step. In an earlier post you wrote (emphasis added): Following that, in another post, you wrote: I asked you, "How many "things in common" exist between ancient Rome (say from 100 BCE through 400 CE) and the Orthodox/Catholic Church (say from 100 CE through 500 CE)?" It seems to me that most, if not all of your list of six similarities already were part of Roman civilization. Perhaps the Orthodox/Catholic Church, having been declared the official religion of Rome, simply adopted and/or developed the same descriptors from the Romans. Any similarities between the whore of babylon literature and the Vatican may be simply explained by the original Roman influence on that religion. A parsimonious explanation would be the whore of babylon literature simply referred to Rome as it existed when the literature was first written. Bonus question: How many similarities between the whore of babylon literature and Rome are not found as similarities between the whore of babylon literature and the Vatican?
  9. How many "things in common" exist between ancient Rome (say from 100 BCE through 400 CE) and the Orthodox/Catholic Church (say from 100 CE through 500 CE)?
  10. I don't know and I suspect no one else does either. It would certainly be difficult to quantify, measure, poll or analyze without significant rigor in the analytical methodology. For example, one person's coincidence may be another person's correlation, or another person may claim actual causation. I have spent some time attempting to learn to distinguish the differences among and between non sequitur, coincidence, correlation and causation. I've noticed that many folks tend to elevate the two events at issue to a level above what they actually are, and that tendency to elevate is correlated with (perhaps caused by) the person's infection with confirmation, expectation or other biases. Conversely, other folks tend to do the opposite.
  11. I cannot say with any certainty what you can/should do. That being said, I would suggest you strongly consider not getting involved with a Christian nutter, regardless of whether you knew her before, are attracted to her now, have an opportunity to get involved, are having issues with your wife, wanting to relive a lost past that never was, or for any other reason. You have more than two choices...many more.
  12. Well, much of what biblical historians deal with is not truth, but probabilities, possibilities and uncertainties, and for Biblical scholars such as Ehrman, who uses textual criticism methodology coupled with internal bias mitigation, the result is certainly interesting as well as refreshing. Have you read his book I referenced, Jesus Before the Gospels: How the Earliest Christian Remembered, Changed and Invented Their Stories of the Savior?
  13. Bart Ehrman wrote about oral traditions and focused, somewhat scientifically, on human memory in a few chapters. He was surprised when he had found very little written about the accuracy and fallibility of the human memory as applied to oral traditions. The book is: Jesus Before the Gospels: How the Earliest Christian Remembered, Changed and Invented Their Stories of the Savior It's a rather good read and a bit more accessible than many of his other books.
  14. I'm not sure what country you are in, but you might want to investigate its bankruptcy laws. Often, they can help immensely in getting that debt behind you.
  15. Notre Dame is owned by the French Government, which is likely self-insured for the structure. Some artifacts may have commercial insurance. Two of the main contractors (who may be held responsible for the fire) are insured by AXA Insurance.
  16. Here's a handy evaluation list for cults: Source: http://www.neopagan.net/ABCDEF.html The Advanced Bonewits’ Cult Danger Evaluation Frame (version 2.6) Factors: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Low High 1 Internal Control: Amount of internal political and social power exercised by leader(s) over members; lack of clearly defined organizational rights for members. 1 _________________________ 2 External Control: Amount of external political and social influence desired or obtained; emphasis on directing members’ external political and social behavior. 2 _________________________ 3 Wisdom/Knowledge Claimed by leader(s); amount of infallibility declared or implied about decisions or doctrinal/scriptural interpretations; number and degree of unverified and/or unverifiable credentials claimed. 3 _________________________ 4 Wisdom/Knowledge Credited to leader(s) by members; amount of trust in decisions or doctrinal/scriptural interpretations made by leader(s); amount of hostility by members towards internal or external critics and/or towards verification efforts. 4 _________________________ 5 Dogma: Rigidity of reality concepts taught; amount of doctrinal inflexibility or “fundamentalism;” hostility towards relativism and situationalism. 5 _________________________ 6 Recruiting: Emphasis put on attracting new members; amount of proselytizing; requirement for all members to bring in new ones. 6 _________________________ 7 Front Groups: Number of subsidiary groups using different names from that of main group, especially when connections are hidden. 7 _________________________ 8 Wealth: Amount of money and/or property desired or obtained by group; emphasis on members’ donations; economic lifestyle of leader(s) compared to ordinary members. 8 _________________________ 9 Sexual Manipulation of members by leader(s) of non-tantric groups; amount of control exercised over sexuality of members in terms of sexual orientation, behavior, and/or choice of partners. 9 _________________________ 10 Sexual Favoritism: Advancement or preferential treatment dependent upon sexual activity with the leader(s) of non-tantric groups. 10 _________________________ 11 Censorship: Amount of control over members’ access to outside opinions on group, its doctrines or leader(s). 11 _________________________ 12 Isolation: Amount of effort to keep members from communicating with non-members, including family, friends and lovers. 12 _________________________ 13 Dropout Control: Intensity of efforts directed at preventing or returning dropouts. 13 _________________________ 14 Violence: Amount of approval when used by or for the group, its doctrines or leader(s). 14 _________________________ 15 Paranoia: Amount of fear concerning real or imagined enemies; exaggeration of perceived power of opponents; prevalence of conspiracy theories. 15 _________________________ 16 Grimness: Amount of disapproval concerning jokes about the group, its doctrines or its leader(s). 16 _________________________ 17 Surrender of Will: Amount of emphasis on members not having to be responsible for personal decisions; degree of individual disempowerment created by the group, its doctrines or its leader(s). 17 _________________________ 18 Hypocrisy: amount of approval for actions which the group officially considers immoral or unethical, when done by or for the group, its doctrines or leader(s); willingness to violate the group’s declared principles for political, psychological, social, economic, military, or other gain. 18 _________________________
  17. Welcome. Pull up a chair, relax and feel free to write many substantive posts about topics of your won choosing. There are many intelligent, kind and interesting folks here that enjoy listening/reading.
  18. Here's the link to the Nature article, the original written source of this news: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01019-7
  19. The Tower of Babble story in the Bible is simply a myth. Yes, you and I can ask questions about it, by assuming the story is true and correct in the first place and for the purposes of discourse. Such questions are based on that assumption/premise and are best directed to those that actually believe that the myth is a true account of what occurred. Asking those question to those who already believe the story is myth/fiction/nonsense is akin to preaching to the choir.
  20. @LostinParis One thing you should consider doing is to have your future ex-husband move out of the house so you and your children can move back in. I don't know what the domestic relations laws are in Australia, but here in the states any judge will order those living arrangements except in extreme cases because the welfare of the children come first. I can't imagine the law in Australia is any different.
  21. You appear angry. Do you have any personal responsibility, at least in part, for the devastation of your mind of which you speak?
  22. Again, thanks for the response. I suspect you and I have a different understanding of what being a "good scientist" entails. Earlier in this thread I responded to one of your posts and asked some followup questions. I have not heard back from you about them. Below is that response and those questions (in a different font). I would appreciate it if you would address them. Thank you for your response. Let me repeat what I hear you saying because communication and understanding are important: Spirit is an immaterial reality which will continue after we die. You equate "Spirit" with "Soul" (I note your proper capitalization of these two words). You believe you have a Spirit/Soul. If my interpretations of your prior writings are more or less correct, you are a dualist, primarily in Rene Descartes/Christianity vein, at least for the narrow topic that I raised in my first post in this thread. To takes things a bit further, I have a few questions: 1) Do other species of life on Earth have a "Spirit" or "Soul" like you do? 2) What is the composition of this spirit or soul (please excuse my reversion to non-proper capitalization)? Does it contain your personal memories, beliefs, virtues and/or flaws? Does it sense its environment in real time? Does it exist in real time? 3) Does your spirit or soul have a metabolism requiring something to continue to exist after physical death, such as energy or something else? 4) As a hypothetical, assuming you die, what does your surviving spirit/soul do afterwards? What is its purpose?
  23. Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Silver Rule: Do not do unto others what you would not have them do unto you. Brazen (Brass) Rule: Do unto others as they do unto you. Iron Rule: Do unto others as you like, before they do it unto you. Nepotism Rule: Give precedence in all things to close relatives, and do as you like to others. Tin Rule: Suck up to those above you, and abuse those below. Tit-for-Tat Rule: Cooperate with others first, then do unto them as they do unto you. - Carl Sagan from Billions and Billions
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.