Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The fact that I have to be "allowed" in only if I keep a civil tongue in my head. Oh, my. Bit I'm not the one who decided I must be an atheist.
That was a figurative statement statement with a grin. I suppose I had better make my point more explicitly: It is an absolute tragedy when people are taught that they must turn away from Christ if they turn away from literal inerrancy. Literal inerrancy is a doctrine about the Bible, one of many. It is not an objective truth or enduring tradition of the Christian faith. A person who denounces Christians who accept evolution as "watering down the Scriptures" or anything of that kind--especially if he is hostile about it, as so often happens, needs to be 'spoke to' by his brothers and sisters in Christ, even if he does not recognize them as such.You can certainly write whatever you want. The worse that can happen is that the thread is blocked and you hurt feelings. I have had many atheists tell me that they don’t need the Bible to know how to do right. Does that include being polite to a person you are not face-to-face with? It is not right to take advantage of anonymity, and a bit of politeness will go a long way in getting people to consider your arguments. The person you are writing to is not the only person reading your post.
Okay, but I don't know what a "New Atheist" is. I look forward to learning what it is , but it is time for bed.
And the other side has harnessed themselves to the Trump wagon which is why this forum has grown so dull. Poor 1tonne thought we were piling on, but there was really no one else around. If you want to argue with a Fundamentlaist these days, you have to go to Politics.Nah. Don't worry about the "New Atheist." They're no longer 'new,' are considered old hash.
What we have here now (still) are the "other," more political activist group of atheists who sit on the wayside, more inclined to talk about the newest in fashionable socialist attire. They were here already when yesterday's 'new atheists' showed up years ago. They're still here now, riding out the political waves and making sure they're heard.
It's a video trying to make the case for "genetic entropy", an idea from creationist geneticist John Sanford.This was recommended by Amo2 on another thread:
You might find it interesting.
And the other side has harnessed themselves to the Trump wagon which is why this forum has grown so dull. Poor 1tonne thought we were piling on, but there was really no one else around. If you want to argue with a Fundamentlaist these days, you have to go to Politics.
Forums where political issues are discussed. But Biblical Creationism has always been political anyway. I'm not blaming Whitcomb and Morris, I think they were sincerely trying to let Christians be "intellectually fulfilled Creationists" (to steal a line from Dawkins) but activists immediately began to use "Creation Science" as a wedge to get Fundamentalist prayer and Bible study into the public schools again. That's when it became political.Oh, I don't know. Maybe you haven't seen my current conversations over in other sections of CF?
I mean, I'm a Christian, but even I find it irritating when I hear it being used by another Christian, especially when it's used upon a former Christian.
One friend of mine rejected God when his young wife died a horrible death from cancer.
Ah, good ol' Pascal's Wager...how's that work out for you?I've asked here more than once what made a person reject all of God's benefits to embrace the benefits of atheism.
I think it's a valid question.
For me it was the obviously human nature and unrealistic claims of scripture that lead me to realize that Christianity was literally unbelievable.
Ah, good ol' Pascal's Wager...how's that work out for you?
Pascal's wager isn't about fence sitting, it's a comparison of personal benefit. As for those who have left, I am reminded of LutheranSatire's Tyler the Ex-Evangelical and his swimming skills.That is not Pascal's Wager.
Pascal's Wager is for those sitting on the fence, wondering which way to go.
I'm talking about someone who has been on the inside, then left the building, claiming it isn't there.
Pascal's wager isn't about fence sitting, it's a comparison of personal benefit. As for those who have left, I am reminded of LutheranSatire's Tyler the Ex-Evangelical and his swimming skills.
Some people are born into it, some are evangelized by Christian witness rather than doctrine. When they find out what's under the hood they walk away.Excuse me, but it was those "unrealistic claims" that led you to become a Christian in the first place, were they not?
I was fortunate that I was secure in my faith before I ever heard of literal inerrancy.To wit, Jesus dying on the cross, then coming back alive after three days?
What [specifically] changed your mind?
I suspect science had something to do with it.
Forums where political issues are discussed. But Biblical Creationism has always been political anyway. I'm not blaming Whitcomb and Morris, I think they were sincerely trying to let Christians be "intellectually fulfilled Creationists" (to steal a line from Dawkins) but activists immediately began to use "Creation Science" as a wedge to get Fundamentalist prayer and Bible study into the public schools again. That's when it became political.
When they find out what's under the hood they walk away.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?