Re: I am A Christian

[Sandra Craft]

What has impressed me about him is that he has embraced the idea of studying Mormonism in a brilliantly academic way. He has brought the rigour of his scientific background to the study of the religion. The basic problem he has found is that religion/faith is much more an individual emotional choice than a logical choice, and in my experience emotions trump logic almost every time. So he's having a hard time at the moment.

I wonder if your friend has ever read Stephen Jay Gould's Rocks of Ages?  

In his book Rocks of Ages (1999), Gould put forward what he described as "a blessedly simple and entirely conventional resolution to...the supposed conflict between science and religion." He defines the term magisterium as "a domain where one form of teaching holds the appropriate tools for meaningful discourse and resolution." The non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA) principle therefore divides the magisterium of science to cover "the empirical realm: what the Universe is made of (fact) and why does it work in this way (theory). The magisterium of religion extends over questions of ultimate meaning and moral value. These two magisteria do not overlap, nor do they encompass all inquiry." He suggests that "NOMA enjoys strong and fully explicit support, even from the primary cultural stereotypes of hard-line traditionalism" and that NOMA is "a sound position of general consensus, established by long struggle among people of goodwill in both magisteria." This view has not been without criticism, however. In his book The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins argues that this division is not quite as simple as it seems, as few religions exist without miracles impinging on the scientific magisterium, and that NOMA is an implicit endorsement that religion has a magisterium, which he strongly opposes.

Gould's approach has plenty of detractors but I thought it a very sensible solution to the problem of science and religion.

[Tank]

I've just messaged him to find out.

[Asmodean]

If you ask me, you are wasting your time and hatred. I don't hate religion or religious people. I dislike narrow minded people, who find it easier to not bother using their brains to solve real world problems, or don't see how much harm religion has done.

...And me, I don't give a fuck about being hated by the religious. In fact, I only care about how those in some ways important to my life feel about me, and that calls for an individual evaluation, not based on a general label.

As for us hating christianity... Well, I suppose some do. Despise would be the more appropriate word to describe my stance on it. I don't waste my time hating shit - shit is a part of life. However, shit is also very much unworthy of my interest.

[Egor]

Egor/Edward 

Have you ever read any of the Revelation Space series by Alistair Rynolds? I suspect you would find them interesting as there is always a strong theistic element in them. Have you read the Rama series by Arthur C Clark, in particular Rama II? One of the main characters is a Catholic who has some interesting moral dilemmas to cope with and it brings up Pascals Wager towards the end.

I agree with story telling as a great way of illustrating ideas. Terry Pratchett is very good at that sort of moral illustration in the Discworld series and of course the Bible stories do much the same thing. Humans tend to lean by experience (do you have any kids?) but one can't simply go out and murder somebody to show it's bad, but a story can place murder in its context and allow the reader to appreciate why it is wrong.

I intended to write a science fiction novel based on the limitations of the speed of light so I went out and got a serious cosmology course book and studied it. It took six months to work through it, I did all the relevent maths examples etc. Then I read my first Alistair Rynolds novel and realised he'd already written the book I wanted to right!!!

Egor, you can stay here as long as you like provided you don't piss everybody off. You can believe what you like, I don't care really, I just find it really annoying when somebody tries to force their beliefs on me. Nothing you say is going to change my mind. I've been a salesman and a product manager for a collective 12 years so I've used all the tricks of, and been subjected to, all the tricks of sales people. If you do want to get my attention and interest then you'll have to explain in detail not only what you believe but why you believe it. And if you can't make a case that will stand on its own without you there as part of it then I'm not interested. And I don't mean that in a nasty way. I've been lied to so often by sales people who I don't trust anybody and somebody trying to sell an idea even less. So you're trying to teach a pig to sing (ultimately futile and it annoys the pig) when it comes to telling my what you believe is true, unless you can support your beliefs with objective evidence, and so far no theist of any type has been able to do that I.E. creat a coherent case for the existence of God that does not include wild speculations about why a supernatural entity is the reason for existence.

I have a facebook friend that I have known for since 2006. He's a professional biologist and really knows his subject. The interesting thing is he recently (6 months ago) fell head-over-heels in love with a Mormon lady. He's moved to Utah and has started studying the CofLDS and going to church for the first time in decades with the intention of becoming a mormon. If he can resolve CotLDS doctrine with his knowledge of biology. Yesterday came a crunch moment. The CotLDS is ambivalent to evolution and doctrine is moving to making noises to the effect that accepting evolution is a personal choice. This is all very well, except for the fact that his future mother in law is a rabid anti-evolutionist. What has impressed me about him is that he has embraced the idea of studying Mormonism in a brilliantly academic way. He has brought the rigour of his scientific background to the study of the religion. The basic problem he has found is that religion/faith is much more an individual emotional choice than a logical choice, and in my experience emotions trump logic almost every time. So he's having a hard time at the moment.

So we have a lot to discuss and as long as people keep a cool head and appreciate they have no right to force their views on others then there will be no problem. But I invest a lot of time and effort to keep this place running peacefully and at the end of the day the forum is more important that any one member (atheist or not). So if the discussions are civil and impersonal they can continue as long as people are prepared to participate in them, but if they degenerate into a flame war then I'll do what is needed to put the fires out, without hesitation.

Chris

Well said. All of it. I will do my best to keep from starting any fires or bursting into spontaneous human combustion.

[xSilverPhinx]

Yeah...I'm another who finds your use of the word "hate" strong, and curious. What personal experiences have brought you to hate atheism? You do realise, first and foremost why people are atheists, right? I would suggest that you study that question with seriousness, if you want to gain any understanding.

(And please, if you're going to write a book depicting atheists and atheism (which is just the lack of belief in any deity)...good luck. I personally don't see how you can make blanket statements about a group as diverse and not sound ridiculous. Just a tip

If you ask me, you are wasting your time and hatred. I don't hate religion or religious people. I dislike narrow minded people, who find it easier to not bother using their brains to solve real world problems, or don't see how much harm religion has done.

...And me, I don't give a fuck about being hated by the religious. In fact, I only care about how those in some ways important to my life feel about me, and that calls for an individual evaluation, not based on a general label.

Me too. I really couldn't care less if I'm hated by certain groups and people...in the end it gains me nothing, and I loose nothing too. Neutral ground

[DeterminedJuliet]

As some other people pointed out, I think it would help if you told us something about yourself that didn't revolve around your beliefs/hatred of other (lack of ) beliefs.

What's your favourite food? What's your favourite travel destination? Do you have any pets? Do you like sports? etc, etc.

We're all people at the end of the day 

[Ecurb Noselrub]

I don't believe the entire Bible is the inerrant Word of God. I believe the New Testament Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, are the only works that are the inerrant Word of God. I consider the other books of the King James Bible to be commentary on the Gospels or in the case of the Old Testament, a historical reference for the Gospels.

As a Christian, this part interests me.  I no longer consider any of the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God. Instead, I try to look at the various books as simply historical documents that need to be analyzed.  I put more stock in the authentic writings of Paul than any of the other books. I put more stock in Mark than Matthew, etc.  The King James Bible is just a translation.  If I have questions about the meaning of a passage, I usually consult the Greek manuscripts.  Welcome to the forum.  

Regarding atheism, I'm not an atheist, but I see no reason to hate a particular state of mind.  I'm less and less inclined as I grow older to hate anything - takes up too much energy. If you want people to believe, then give them a reason why they should believe.   That would solve the problem better than hating the state of mind.  By analogy, if a doctor wants to address a particular state of health, he will prescribe some treatment.  He won't just write about how much he hates that particular ailment.

Atheists generally don't believe because they see no reason to believe.  If you want them to believe, show them something that will cause them to believe.  I have no idea what that could be, as my basis for faith is personal subjective experience, which I can't prescribe for anyone else, since it relates only to things that have happened to me. But maybe you can do better than that.

[The Magic Pudding]

I watched the movie "The Rite"
Atheists are the fools who don't recognise the threat.

I am guilty of yelling wake up Skully, what's with this sceptical shit, didn't you see a vampire jump over the moon last week?
I do have a line drawn here somewhere though, reality is on one side I'm sure, sureish.

[Whitney]

And I would like to make something clear to all--I don't hate atheists as people.

I'm not looking for peace, and when it comes to atheism the ideas of tolerance and indulgence as love don't work. In fact they are a form of hate in that they allow a person to stay in a state that separates them from God and ensures for them hell as an afterlife.

These seem awfully contradictory to me.

Ya...you are probably right that you won't last long, but not because you won't back down in debate.  I don't think you'll be able to debate while minding the civility rule with an attitude like the above....it's borderline as it is; if you had spoken the same way of black people you'd already have been banned...we just give a lot more slack for bigotry against atheist since it is still culturally acceptable to hate us.

[Asmodean]

we just give a lot more slack for bigotry against atheist since it is still culturally acceptable to hate us.

...Not everywhere though.

[Too Few Lions]

I'm not looking for peace, and when it comes to atheism the ideas of tolerance and indulgence as love don't work. In fact they are a form of hate in that they allow a person to stay in a state that separates them from God and ensures for them hell as an afterlife.

this kind of talk always worries me when it comes from a Christian. It reminds me a lot of the intolerance that has blighted pretty much the whole of the history of Christianity, and led to the persecution of millions of non-believers and other Christians deemed 'heretics'.

We're not going away, so you ought to learn to tolerate atheism rather than hating it.

[xSilverPhinx]

We're not going away, so you ought to learn to tolerate atheism rather than hating it.

In fact, the number of non believers grows, which is probably what the world could use right now

[Asmodean]

I'm not looking for peace, and when it comes to atheism the ideas of tolerance and indulgence as love don't work. In fact they are a form of hate in that they allow a person to stay in a state that separates them from God and ensures for them hell as an afterlife.

this kind of talk always worries me when it comes from a Christian. It reminds me a lot of the intolerance that has blighted pretty much the whole of the history of Christianity, and led to the persecution of millions of non-believers and other Christians deemed 'heretics'.

We're not going away, so you ought to learn to tolerate atheism rather than hating it.

That, and then there is the fact that my separation from god is no business of any one but me.

[Too Few Lions]

In fact, the number of non believers grows, which is probably what the world could use right now

Amen to that!

[Sandra Craft]

In fact, the number of non believers grows, which is probably what the world could use right now

Amen to that!

One could consider us breathing room between various religious zealotries.