Eagle, I have tried really hard not to attack your religion. In spite of what you might believe about me, and in spite of some cheap shots I may have taken, usually just to poke fun, I really do try to respect other people's beliefs.
That is appreciated. Thanks.
There are in fact a few people on GRS who I have gone "head to head" with in the past when it came to religion yet I completely respect their opinions and I frequently agree with their finance advice. I (and I think those of who I speak) see no reason we can't peacefully coexist, work together to help others here, and even have intelligent conversations about political or intellectual topics.
I feel the same way about you...except...
Had me going there for a few seconds. That’s like saying we can talk about anything… But [or except]… Not everything. Lol. Or am I understanding this incorrectly?
I too want to peacefully coexist, help others, and have intelligent conversations. In fact I thought for a moment there you had added me to the “enemies” list on the forum and were no longer even seeing my posts.
I have come to realize, because of things you've said, that you belong to a church, or at least a denomination, that clings to a view of themselves and the bible that is not supported by anyone else or by the evidence of history. You think you are the "true church" and the only "true Christians."
My denomination and consequently I supports the Bible as the inspired, inherent, infallible Word of God. I'm sure someone will disagree. In fact not all supposed Christians can agree on that. However, I know I am part of the “true church” and am a follower of Christ – the only way to God. I believe there are followers of Christ in a majority of Christian denominations with a few exceptions of cults like “Jehovah’s Witness” and “Scientology.”
As an atheist, I have no skin in the game but I can also see things as an outsider and see that much of what you claim is not even what is accepted as the "scholarly" Christian theology.
Please specify what I have claimed is not “scholarly” Christian theology. If you mean by “scholarly” people associated with the Jesus Movement then I’ll take that as a compliment. I believe in the Bible as the Word of God, Jesus is who He said He was, and there is no other way to God except through Him. If this conflicts with what so-called “Christian scholars” say well everyone has a right to his or her own opinion.
No offense intended, but some of the things you've said sound more consistent with the Gnostic movement in the 2-4 century than modern Christianity. But who am I to tell you which group to identify with.
Gnostic movement? Wow. Please specify which ideas that I’ve presented that led to this conclusion? I must say I’m a bit flabbergasted by this comment. Are you sure you know what Gnostic means? Or perhaps we have different definitions...
I believe Jesus, the Holy Spirit and God the Father are all one - as evidence in the Bible. There are not mulitple dieties as Gnostic theology often teaches. I don’t believe salvation is by knowledge as gnostic theology often teaches – it is by faith in Christ Jesus alone as clearly called out in the Bible. I don’t believe that matter is evil and knowledge is more important than faith as Gnostic theology teaches. What evidence have I given of Gnostic thinking? I'm very curious.
Out of curiosity how can I be Gnostic ("learned" or "intellectual") and not scholarly in the same post? I find this amusing. Wouldn’t that be a contradiction?
It is understandable how the kind of closed-minded thinking you have (probably) been raised to use limits your ability to process challenging evidence. For that reason, I find it a bit hard to be too critical of you but I also find it hard to take you seriously in an intellectual debate, which is what I think most of us are trying to have here.
So because of my belief system you feel I cannot process challenging information and it almost sounds as if you pity me a bit… Maybe I read this wrong. I find that humorous.
Not once that I can find have you directly addressed a challenge to your scientific or historical beliefs with actual evidence.
Scientific: I proposed several arguments/questions regarding Evolution. But like I said it is best for us to agree to disagree.
Historical: I gave evidence that you were wrong claiming that Hinduism and Budhism were in fact peaceful religions – while pointing out the darker sides of Christian history with the Crusades and Inquisition. I also pointed out that the split between the East and West occurred well before the Reformation.
None of this is to say that I can't coexist with you here and agree with you when you give good financial advice or other good advice (which you often do). But I have come to think that your beliefs and unwillingness to think beyond them is severely limiting you. That may not be something you can help but I hope, because you are clearly an intelligent guy, that you will be able to get past it and think more broadly as you mature.
I’m glad to coexist with everyone. Everyone has a right to believe what they wish. So out of curiosity how would I reduce my limitations? Or get past my belief system? Are you suggesting I just reject everything I know to be true? Lol.
In any case, I doubt if you even care what I think. I just had to say it.
It is always interesting to have someone criticize one’s life/views from an outside perspective. Even if this post has been in my opinion an attempt to invalidate most of what I’ve discussed beyond finances. Not sure how constructive this was but I can tell you did try to put some thought into what you wrote. For that I am appreciative.