And for that reason alone, it would be an utter waste of time responding to you intelligibly at all.For me denying evidence is essential for well being.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
And for that reason alone, it would be an utter waste of time responding to you intelligibly at all.For me denying evidence is essential for well being.
Are you saying I should reconsider my position on self-immolation?As any gambler will tell you, anything rejected by the majority is certainly worth a closer look.
I accept the possibility that we could all be wrong. I have doubts about the possibility that no one is wrong. Some answers are logically incompatible with others. Young earth creationists reject alternatives to timelines determined based on sources other than the Bible and without due consideration of the evidence.It is possible that everyone is wrong. It is possible that no one is wrong. It is possible that some (or all or none) are partially right.
Lets take an argument about the age of the earth. Theists might claim that the earth is 6,000 years old. Astrophysicists might claim that the earth is 13.4 billion years old. Both might be right because the theory of relativity says that time changes in intense gravitational fields and at very high speeds. So, our time is not necessarily God's time. Also, the definition of the time span might have meant epochs, not years (translation error?).
I reject the 7 day proposal in the Bible but rather embrace what I like to call the blink of an eye scenario regarding creation.
I don’t think it’s intent is to teach timeless truths about our nature I think it’s more about introducing people to a more spiritual way of understanding creation which is a rather unparalleled idea and unmatched in its scope and fruition in my opinion.
If I made such a bold statement as "[the Genesis "story"] is symbolic", as though I am stating a fact, I would expect people would want me to back up or support my statement with some solid evidence. How do you know the Genesis account is symbol?
die hard believers in the ToE try to make their belief out as something special, as though their belief alone has evidence.
They don't accept that their belief actually requires faith... when in fact it does.
Scientific conclusions are based on basal assumptions, reasoning and evidence. New evidence in light of the former are the basis for modifying or replacing theories.Many scientists assert that science isn't based on proof, but based on current theories. They are willing to change their theories if facts and reasoning change.
I have beaten a dead horse, but it still follows me around.I'll keep riding my horse, ignoring the fact that he's dead.
Are you saying I should reconsider my position on self-immolation?
No kidding, even with moderators. I made a comment that Jimmy's belief about evolution is incorrect and they deleted it for preaching.And for that reason alone, it would be an utter waste of time responding to you intelligibly at all.
Some psychics predict future events with amazing accuracy.
I am not a fan.Depends what your position is
I predict future events all the time. My predictions about going to work are incredibly reliable.This may shock you, but some non- psychics also predict future events with amazing accuracy. None of that tells us how any of these people are able to make accurate predictions.
But that's not really relevant to this thread, either.
Do you apply that same reasoning when you see a stop sign on the road while driving your car? I do not believe you actually believe what you just said, as the fact you are still alive today shows otherwise.For me denying evidence is essential for well being.
That's not self-explanatory. Do you believe everything that exists as it is today, abruptly came into being as it is without evolution? Were you born at the same age you are today? Were you never an infant, then a toddler, then a young child, then an adolescent, then a young adult, and so forth? Were you born mature?I reject the 7 day proposal in the Bible but rather embrace what I like to call the blink of an eye scenario regarding creation. I think it’s self explanatory.
Teaching timeless truths is introducing people to a spiritual understanding of creation. Why do humans struggle between wishing to connect with the Divine, while also being pulled towards destruction? That is the spiritual struggle between the urges of the flesh and the egoic mind, and the heart of the Divine within all of us, being "made in the image of God", which the story tells.I don’t think it’s intent is to teach timeless truths about our nature I think it’s more about introducing people to a more spiritual way of understanding creation which is a rather unparalleled idea and unmatched in its scope and fruition in my opinion.
You dont have to.And for that reason alone, it would be an utter waste of time responding to you intelligibly at all.
Rightly so.No kidding, even with moderators. I made a comment that Jimmy's belief about evolution is incorrect and they deleted it for preaching.
I did not state that as a 'fact". You ommitted this sentence: "I do not read Genesis as a scientific account. It is symbolic and its intent is timeless truths about our human nature, not a teaching to compete with modern scientific and historical information."If I made such a bold statement as "[the Genesis "story"] is symbolic", as though I am stating a fact, I would expect people would want me to back up or support my statement with some solid evidence.
It is symbolic because people reference it all the time as telling different truths. That is what the nature of symbolism is all about. Symbols are, "a thing that represents or stands for something else, especially a material object representing something abstract."How do you know the Genesis account is symbol?
It’s a pretty simple thread that doesn’t need much defending. You should reread the initial post and then maybe my motive will become apparent.What I keep thinking about as I read this thread is what is the motive of the OP? It's an incorrect position on the matter of what we know about how living organisms evolved over time. It's not defendable, the poster didn't even attempt to defend the position. Was the intention to get attention or ruffle feather of those who accept science? A lot work went into how the OP is incorrect while the OP was not even defended beyond "it's what I believe".
Thanks for elaborating on the vagueness of timeless truths. Spirituality to me is life really.Teaching timeless truths is introducing people to a spiritual understanding of creation. Why do humans struggle between wishing to connect with the Divine, while also being pulled towards destruction? That is the spiritual struggle between the urges of the flesh and the egoic mind, and the heart of the Divine within all of us, being "made in the image of God", which the story tells.
What do you consider spirituality to mean?
Of course I agree that life is a spiritual matter. I very much embrace that. But in order to try to speak to that, we talk about timeless truths, such as love is stronger than hate, peace is better than war. Those are timeless truths, that apply to all of us, as a couple quick examples.Thanks for elaborating on the vagueness of timeless truths. Spirituality to me is life really.