Aa
Intuition - learned or unexplained sixth sense phenomenon?
BB - Thanks for the book suggestion - I'll put it on my list! I love reading:) Well, if it's true that intuition is learned, how do you explain a child's intuition? They wouldn't have had the time and experience to build the knowledge base you are talking about. I believe that there are some things we cannot explain.
LOL Mayflowers! I was thinking the SAME thing, was about to post something similar in fact! HA HA! Been reading her rants for ages, and finally felt compelled to post for the first time.
Not much of a believer myself, and barn babe's position, in and of itself, is fine, but there's definitely some kind of mentally unbalanced quality to her obsessive need to slam down others in a personal, insulting way. She must be a joy to know in real life. Hardly a liberal. She's more ignorant, close-minded, prejudiced, arrogant and demeaning than any hard-core conservative I've ever known. I sent this link, in fact, to a few liberal friends, and the general consensus was, beliefs or not, that so-called babe is WHACKED!
barn babe, I recommend you talk to your shrink about upping the meds a bit, okay?
Not much of a believer myself, and barn babe's position, in and of itself, is fine, but there's definitely some kind of mentally unbalanced quality to her obsessive need to slam down others in a personal, insulting way. She must be a joy to know in real life. Hardly a liberal. She's more ignorant, close-minded, prejudiced, arrogant and demeaning than any hard-core conservative I've ever known. I sent this link, in fact, to a few liberal friends, and the general consensus was, beliefs or not, that so-called babe is WHACKED!
barn babe, I recommend you talk to your shrink about upping the meds a bit, okay?
I think somebody didn't get enough hugs when she was growing up.
"Or will you refuse because you're scared it might shed some light on an area you don't want exposed?"
"Scared" isn't the word here that I would use. What would scare me about anything you folks are saying you believe? What area would I not want "exposed?" The area of faith-based fantasy? Go ahead - expose away. The faith and belief systems you people ascribe to CAN'T BE PROVEN. But you continue to believe in them. That's the problem here. Science is science. Facts are facts. What you've got is zilch. Nada. Untestable fantasies.
" I would think if you're confident enough in your own beliefs that you wouldn't have a problem with it."
My own beliefs. Jeebus, listen to yourself. My own beliefs. It's so wonderful how you've managed to relativize things here. These are not "my beliefs." There is ONE TRUTH. Get it? The world does not work by reshaping itself to whatever way the speaker believes it should be. There. Is. One. Truth. One.
What makes up the truth? Axioms. Facts. It doesn't need to be believed to be true. Are you getting it yet? You don't have to believe it - it's still true.
I think it's absolutely bizarre how those who ascribe to faith have learned to severely blur the line between faith and fact so they can pretend both are equal ways of knowing something. It's all part of their belief that they "know" some "higher truth."
This meme is really common. And it's always associated with the same lame examples. Here's one: "You have faith that the sun will rise." The sun appears to come up whether I believe it will or not. Actually, the sun rising is an illusion because the earth actually rotates towards the sun. It doesn't even really "rise." It appears depending on where the earth is in its rotation. There's no faith involved here. Is there? Did you want to refute this for me with your "faith?"
My belief. Jeebus, that's really lame. Yeah, one of my "beliefs" is that 2+2=4. You want to argue with me about that? Because you'd be wrong. It's true ALL. THE. TIME. Always. How about if I said my belief is that 2+2=16? How would you respond? There isn't your "truth" and my "truth." There is only one truth. And that truth is FACTS.
" You see, even though I'm a Christian, I have no problem studing (sic) other religions and even enjoy doing so. I'm not so narrow minded that I refuse to research all beliefs. Are you open minded enough to admit that you may not know everything? That there is an even remote possibility in an outside force that we don't fully understand?"
Why don't you set up some experiments to prove the existence of "outside forces, "other beliefs," and "other religions." No problem. Test away. Until then, I'm not a believer in faith-based magic. What you refuse to acknowledge is the reasonableness of skepticism about your own belief system. I don't have a belief system. I rely on evidence-based facts in living my life.
If faith were really worthwhile, why do religionists need to manipulate people and preach and make promises and threats to inculcate people? No religionist ever answers this question. I mean, wouldn't we all want to get a piece of the action if it really offered what it claimed to offer? Morality, compassion - aren't these the cornerstones of your "faith?" If they are, why wouldn't we all want your faith, instead of fleeing from it? And why does something so "all-powerful" as your god need spokespeople? I mean, he's god, for gawdssakes, right?
What's wrong with people wanting proof before believing things willy nilly? Skepticism is more of an asset than faith, IMO. The great thing about facts is that they are going to be true even if you refuse to accept them. There is absolutely NO evidence for the magical invisible and immeasurable entities you claim are responsible for what we observe. None. And science is the same for everybody. It doesn't matter what you "believe." It doesn't matter if you believe it or not. Facts are facts. I hate to pound away at the same kindergarten-level point, but it gets back to 2+2=4. That's not a belief. It's a fact.
If I learned about a new religion in which snakes talked, wouldn't you say that was laughable? A religion that was based on flying monkeys carrying rose petals? Wouldn't you just laugh if somebody told you that's what their "religion" was all about? So why is your faith the one "true" faith? The problem is you people want to keep moving the goal posts. And when that doesn't work for you (because it simply can't and it doesn't, over and over again), you want to pretend that facts are "faith." Facts are "my beliefs." Wrong. Facts are facts. 2+2=4. Period. Even with all of the semantics and the game playing and the ridiculous promises of eternal glory if you refuse to believe it.
"If not, then you disappoint me. I hope you are up to the challenge. I look forward to hearing back from you."
I don't need to be patronized, but thanks anyway. I have no plans to read about Christian apologists like Strobel. Unless he is discussing experiments that he's set up or knows about that will help him prove the existence of his faith. But he didn't do that, did he? No. He just "decided" to start believing one day. For whatever reason. Why would I care who Strobel got on board to agree to his wacky religious ideas? I wouldn't care if it's the president of Harvard or the head of the Quantum Physics Department at Berkeley. If they believe in "higher powers" and divine knowledge, they've got a screw loose.
You've made it clear from your remarks that you base your beliefs on authority coming from others, through your religionist fantasies. No self-respecting individual does that. Truth comes from the authority of evidence. Try using your head next time instead of somebody else's.
I was having an interesting conversation with my partner a few days ago. We were talking about the b.s. of creationism and all that ID garbage. The "debate" about creationism and evolution. There is only one way it can go, because only one theory can survive. So creationism and evolution will be fought in the arena of ideas, and only one will survive.
Creationism will lose. It is losing, as a matter of fact. The harder that the creationists and religionists and wackos push for creationism, the more they challenge, the faster evolution will wind up being accepted. That's how it works. Because evolution can be proven. Has been proven. 150 years of fact-finding. It's a done deal. And creationists can't use logic and reason and testable experiments to prove their arguments.
Religionists are like people who believe in the earth being flat. Same thing. It's like you guys stay stuck in your outdated fantasies and magical belief systems, while the grownups move on down the road and discuss amazing and interesting stuff like how scientists now believe hippos are more related to whales than land mammals; or how the physicists have finally pinpointed the age of the universe, at 13.6 billion years, and every physicist, scientist, astronomer, and researcher is on board with this figure; or that there are areas of the brain that can be damaged and affect a person's morality.
The truth is simple when you don't believe in magic. The truth will remain even when there's nobody around to believe it.
"Scared" isn't the word here that I would use. What would scare me about anything you folks are saying you believe? What area would I not want "exposed?" The area of faith-based fantasy? Go ahead - expose away. The faith and belief systems you people ascribe to CAN'T BE PROVEN. But you continue to believe in them. That's the problem here. Science is science. Facts are facts. What you've got is zilch. Nada. Untestable fantasies.
" I would think if you're confident enough in your own beliefs that you wouldn't have a problem with it."
My own beliefs. Jeebus, listen to yourself. My own beliefs. It's so wonderful how you've managed to relativize things here. These are not "my beliefs." There is ONE TRUTH. Get it? The world does not work by reshaping itself to whatever way the speaker believes it should be. There. Is. One. Truth. One.
What makes up the truth? Axioms. Facts. It doesn't need to be believed to be true. Are you getting it yet? You don't have to believe it - it's still true.
I think it's absolutely bizarre how those who ascribe to faith have learned to severely blur the line between faith and fact so they can pretend both are equal ways of knowing something. It's all part of their belief that they "know" some "higher truth."
This meme is really common. And it's always associated with the same lame examples. Here's one: "You have faith that the sun will rise." The sun appears to come up whether I believe it will or not. Actually, the sun rising is an illusion because the earth actually rotates towards the sun. It doesn't even really "rise." It appears depending on where the earth is in its rotation. There's no faith involved here. Is there? Did you want to refute this for me with your "faith?"
My belief. Jeebus, that's really lame. Yeah, one of my "beliefs" is that 2+2=4. You want to argue with me about that? Because you'd be wrong. It's true ALL. THE. TIME. Always. How about if I said my belief is that 2+2=16? How would you respond? There isn't your "truth" and my "truth." There is only one truth. And that truth is FACTS.
" You see, even though I'm a Christian, I have no problem studing (sic) other religions and even enjoy doing so. I'm not so narrow minded that I refuse to research all beliefs. Are you open minded enough to admit that you may not know everything? That there is an even remote possibility in an outside force that we don't fully understand?"
Why don't you set up some experiments to prove the existence of "outside forces, "other beliefs," and "other religions." No problem. Test away. Until then, I'm not a believer in faith-based magic. What you refuse to acknowledge is the reasonableness of skepticism about your own belief system. I don't have a belief system. I rely on evidence-based facts in living my life.
If faith were really worthwhile, why do religionists need to manipulate people and preach and make promises and threats to inculcate people? No religionist ever answers this question. I mean, wouldn't we all want to get a piece of the action if it really offered what it claimed to offer? Morality, compassion - aren't these the cornerstones of your "faith?" If they are, why wouldn't we all want your faith, instead of fleeing from it? And why does something so "all-powerful" as your god need spokespeople? I mean, he's god, for gawdssakes, right?
What's wrong with people wanting proof before believing things willy nilly? Skepticism is more of an asset than faith, IMO. The great thing about facts is that they are going to be true even if you refuse to accept them. There is absolutely NO evidence for the magical invisible and immeasurable entities you claim are responsible for what we observe. None. And science is the same for everybody. It doesn't matter what you "believe." It doesn't matter if you believe it or not. Facts are facts. I hate to pound away at the same kindergarten-level point, but it gets back to 2+2=4. That's not a belief. It's a fact.
If I learned about a new religion in which snakes talked, wouldn't you say that was laughable? A religion that was based on flying monkeys carrying rose petals? Wouldn't you just laugh if somebody told you that's what their "religion" was all about? So why is your faith the one "true" faith? The problem is you people want to keep moving the goal posts. And when that doesn't work for you (because it simply can't and it doesn't, over and over again), you want to pretend that facts are "faith." Facts are "my beliefs." Wrong. Facts are facts. 2+2=4. Period. Even with all of the semantics and the game playing and the ridiculous promises of eternal glory if you refuse to believe it.
"If not, then you disappoint me. I hope you are up to the challenge. I look forward to hearing back from you."
I don't need to be patronized, but thanks anyway. I have no plans to read about Christian apologists like Strobel. Unless he is discussing experiments that he's set up or knows about that will help him prove the existence of his faith. But he didn't do that, did he? No. He just "decided" to start believing one day. For whatever reason. Why would I care who Strobel got on board to agree to his wacky religious ideas? I wouldn't care if it's the president of Harvard or the head of the Quantum Physics Department at Berkeley. If they believe in "higher powers" and divine knowledge, they've got a screw loose.
You've made it clear from your remarks that you base your beliefs on authority coming from others, through your religionist fantasies. No self-respecting individual does that. Truth comes from the authority of evidence. Try using your head next time instead of somebody else's.
I was having an interesting conversation with my partner a few days ago. We were talking about the b.s. of creationism and all that ID garbage. The "debate" about creationism and evolution. There is only one way it can go, because only one theory can survive. So creationism and evolution will be fought in the arena of ideas, and only one will survive.
Creationism will lose. It is losing, as a matter of fact. The harder that the creationists and religionists and wackos push for creationism, the more they challenge, the faster evolution will wind up being accepted. That's how it works. Because evolution can be proven. Has been proven. 150 years of fact-finding. It's a done deal. And creationists can't use logic and reason and testable experiments to prove their arguments.
Religionists are like people who believe in the earth being flat. Same thing. It's like you guys stay stuck in your outdated fantasies and magical belief systems, while the grownups move on down the road and discuss amazing and interesting stuff like how scientists now believe hippos are more related to whales than land mammals; or how the physicists have finally pinpointed the age of the universe, at 13.6 billion years, and every physicist, scientist, astronomer, and researcher is on board with this figure; or that there are areas of the brain that can be damaged and affect a person's morality.
The truth is simple when you don't believe in magic. The truth will remain even when there's nobody around to believe it.
Also by Lee Strobel:
"The Case for Faith" and "The Case for Christ."
As April2 pointed out, Strobel's intent as a once adamant atheist was to set out to disprove God by writing these books. He's interviewed some of the world's most well-known intellectuals, from scientists to historians and archaeologists, psychologists, lawyers, theologians, and many more. And most of the people he interviewed were not Christians nor did they claim to be. Strobel avoided interviewing too many Christians because he knew the answers they'd give and what they'd say.
I'd also be curious to know what you think about these books--all three of them or even just one. That is, if you've got the guts to pick up one of the books and actually read it.
Give yourself some *real* debating power against us Christians by educating yourself a little more about the beliefs, and maybe you'll gain a little more respect, seeing as we won't be hearing the same old rants about "mythological creatures," "magical thinking," and "Xtianism."
Seriously, I think we'd all appreciate hearing something new from you in a debate. Something that's actually *worth* reading and not just skimming over.
"The Case for Faith" and "The Case for Christ."
As April2 pointed out, Strobel's intent as a once adamant atheist was to set out to disprove God by writing these books. He's interviewed some of the world's most well-known intellectuals, from scientists to historians and archaeologists, psychologists, lawyers, theologians, and many more. And most of the people he interviewed were not Christians nor did they claim to be. Strobel avoided interviewing too many Christians because he knew the answers they'd give and what they'd say.
I'd also be curious to know what you think about these books--all three of them or even just one. That is, if you've got the guts to pick up one of the books and actually read it.
Give yourself some *real* debating power against us Christians by educating yourself a little more about the beliefs, and maybe you'll gain a little more respect, seeing as we won't be hearing the same old rants about "mythological creatures," "magical thinking," and "Xtianism."
Seriously, I think we'd all appreciate hearing something new from you in a debate. Something that's actually *worth* reading and not just skimming over.
Just curious here, but what are your views on how the universe came about?????
Do I believe in the tooth fairy or unicorns? Now that's just plain silliness. I can't believe you said that. The Bible is an accurate historical book. They do have proof of the accounts in the Bible really happening. They do have proof of the kings and even Jesus having lived during that time and that he even was crucified on a cross. They have proof of the cities, etc. mentioned in the Bible. Do I believe God is a "white dude with flowing robes"? No, He is a spirit. He has no form.
As for making fun of my mom for the dreams she's had, I bet you wouldn't like it or believe it if I told you she had a miracle happen that defies medical reasoning. They cannot understand it. I won't go into detail about it because it would just give you another opportunity to scorn and laugh at something that you just don't understand. God has used her to touch many, many people.
I don't know where you get your facts, either. You said most people are now turning away from religion. I actually believe you can believe in science and religion. I believe like many Christian scientists that they can go hand in hand.
I have a challenge for you. You seem like a very inteligent lady. Inteligent people are not closed minded. They are always willing to learn new things. They are curious. You obviously have a real hatred towards those who believe in God, but you don't seem to know much about Christianity or any religion for that matter. I would think you would want to know your enemy better so you can be better armed to back up your arguments. You've only chosen a handful of Christian people to lump all Christians together. That doesn't seem very smart to me. No one ever said just because we believe in God that we are therefore perfect, nor are we babbling idiots as you seem to think. My challenge to you is to do a study of Christianity and Judiasm and the roots of their beliefs. And read "The Case For A Creator" by Lee Strobel. Lee Strobel has a journalism degree and a Master of Studies in Law degree from Yale Law School. He was an award winning legal editor of the Chicago Tribune and an atheist until 1981. He set out to disprove God and who Jesus said he was. He interviewed some very highly respectable scientists and others, Christians and non-Christians, he didn't care. He interviewed them for their scientific knowledge. These weren't narrow minded fundamentalists, backwoods hicks either. These were respected world class scientists like Nobel nominee Henry F. Shaefer, the third most cited chemist in the world; James Tour of Rice University's Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology; and Fred Figworth, professor of cellular and molecular physiology at Yale Graduate School. They are just a handful who are highly sceptical of Darwinisms evolution theories. He interviewed Jonathan Wells who serves as a senior fellow with the Institutes Center for Science and Culture. His undergraduate degree from the University of California at Berkeley was in geology and physics, with a minor in biology. He receieved a doctorate in molecular and cell biology from Berkeley, where he focused primarily on vertebrate embryology and evolution and he also used to be an atheist until he started finding holes in Darwinism's evolution theories. I'm telling you all this so that you can see that it's not just dumb hicks that believe in a God or creator. This book is very well written without giving a one sided view. Lee Strobel is careful to give write down the others view points without interjecting his, as any good journalist would do. My challenge to you is to read this book (unless you're scared that it might put doubt in your mind about your own beliefs?) and let me know what you think. Are you really open minded enough to do it? Or will you refuse because you're scared it might shed some light on an area you don't want exposed? I would think if you're cofident enough in your own beliefs that you wouldn't have a problem with it. You see, even though I'm a Christian, I have no problem studing other religions and even enjoy doing so. I'm not so narrow minded that I refuse to research all beliefs. Are you open minded enough to admit that you may not know everything? That there is an even remote possibility in an outside force that we don't fully understand? If not, then you disappoint me. I hope you are up to the challenge. I look forward to hearing back from you.
As for making fun of my mom for the dreams she's had, I bet you wouldn't like it or believe it if I told you she had a miracle happen that defies medical reasoning. They cannot understand it. I won't go into detail about it because it would just give you another opportunity to scorn and laugh at something that you just don't understand. God has used her to touch many, many people.
I don't know where you get your facts, either. You said most people are now turning away from religion. I actually believe you can believe in science and religion. I believe like many Christian scientists that they can go hand in hand.
I have a challenge for you. You seem like a very inteligent lady. Inteligent people are not closed minded. They are always willing to learn new things. They are curious. You obviously have a real hatred towards those who believe in God, but you don't seem to know much about Christianity or any religion for that matter. I would think you would want to know your enemy better so you can be better armed to back up your arguments. You've only chosen a handful of Christian people to lump all Christians together. That doesn't seem very smart to me. No one ever said just because we believe in God that we are therefore perfect, nor are we babbling idiots as you seem to think. My challenge to you is to do a study of Christianity and Judiasm and the roots of their beliefs. And read "The Case For A Creator" by Lee Strobel. Lee Strobel has a journalism degree and a Master of Studies in Law degree from Yale Law School. He was an award winning legal editor of the Chicago Tribune and an atheist until 1981. He set out to disprove God and who Jesus said he was. He interviewed some very highly respectable scientists and others, Christians and non-Christians, he didn't care. He interviewed them for their scientific knowledge. These weren't narrow minded fundamentalists, backwoods hicks either. These were respected world class scientists like Nobel nominee Henry F. Shaefer, the third most cited chemist in the world; James Tour of Rice University's Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology; and Fred Figworth, professor of cellular and molecular physiology at Yale Graduate School. They are just a handful who are highly sceptical of Darwinisms evolution theories. He interviewed Jonathan Wells who serves as a senior fellow with the Institutes Center for Science and Culture. His undergraduate degree from the University of California at Berkeley was in geology and physics, with a minor in biology. He receieved a doctorate in molecular and cell biology from Berkeley, where he focused primarily on vertebrate embryology and evolution and he also used to be an atheist until he started finding holes in Darwinism's evolution theories. I'm telling you all this so that you can see that it's not just dumb hicks that believe in a God or creator. This book is very well written without giving a one sided view. Lee Strobel is careful to give write down the others view points without interjecting his, as any good journalist would do. My challenge to you is to read this book (unless you're scared that it might put doubt in your mind about your own beliefs?) and let me know what you think. Are you really open minded enough to do it? Or will you refuse because you're scared it might shed some light on an area you don't want exposed? I would think if you're cofident enough in your own beliefs that you wouldn't have a problem with it. You see, even though I'm a Christian, I have no problem studing other religions and even enjoy doing so. I'm not so narrow minded that I refuse to research all beliefs. Are you open minded enough to admit that you may not know everything? That there is an even remote possibility in an outside force that we don't fully understand? If not, then you disappoint me. I hope you are up to the challenge. I look forward to hearing back from you.
You are reading content posted in the Relationships Community
How do you keep things safer between the sheets? We explore your options.
Can HIV be transmitted through this sexual activity? Dr. Jose Gonzalez-Garcia answers this commonly-asked question.
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
