Key

Member
  • Content Count

    1,285
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Key

  • Rank
    Spiritual Pilgrim
  • Birthday 11/15/1964

Helpful Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Here, not There

Recent Profile Visitors

2,791 profile views
  1. In a roundabout way, she asks do scientist think God exists? Answers, they can neither say that a God exist, nor that one doesn't exist, as there are no observable consequence. (Short version.)
  2. Now you are overthinking. My point was a deity isn't always necessary for a belief system to be a religion, hence the reference of some people actually worshipping (for lack of a better term) nature. So, your issue is what is the non-belief. I made no intention on questioning what you personally believe, for I know enough by now not to have to.
  3. What you say may well be true, especially to you. Again, I simply made one example. I am well aware of many differing views, as well as beliefs, and stated so. The question was how it would be a belief if something didn't exist. In truth, even if you don't think so, it isn't always as less complicated as you present, either. So, in kind of like Schrodinger-esqe situation, we are both wrong and right. Even in that we have similarities as we do differences. There is no escaping differences, as that makes distinctions, whether we like them or not.
  4. I agree for the most part. I don't laugh, except where the humor is obvious. At the same time, I learn a little bit about differing views each time some members do clash, or argue, for lack of a better description. Everything contributes to the condition of the world, beit local or global. That should be the focus of man's survival. To tolerate and accept each other without destroying EVERYTHING during the process. Science proves we are suppose to be the stewards of our Earth, and largely fail because of differing beliefs and greed. Some religions also state the same. We cannot survive without each other's comfort and empathy. Which is why those like Mike are greatly needed and appreciated, at least by me. Welcome to the forum, btw.
  5. I wasn't trying to blanket all Atheist under my explanation, but merely suggested some. Also, to other people, like Dan, they are all lumped together simply because they don't believe in his God. I also offered an example. Don't assume it was meant to cover all, either. There are, to be sure, very many branches of atheism, with the trunk being no belief in "God" without evidence. Belief systems can very well be made intact as such, just as my example showed. There are many factions, or varying belief systems of other religions with little to connect them, too. So, perhaps your definition of a "shared" theory or belief should have to suffice?
  6. Atheism to some may be considered a "religion", as many define that word as a belief system. Therefore, Atheism is a belief that does not necessarily include a deity without proof of existence. There are many that find power exists in nature alone, without need in belief of any gods, for example.
  7. As much as I'd like to have our men and women out of harm's way in the Middle East, it is wrong to betray those who have aided us in our efforts to achieve our goals against our enemies. To withdraw would enact the same carnage upon the Kurds as was occurred upon the Iraqi's who opposed Hussein in the first Gulf War when Bush Sr. withdrew instead of finishing the mission, and failed in his promise of aid to them.
  8. That is one view. Another view that many factions hold, is that Christianity is about what we must do in this life to receive the spiritual afterlife we desire. Indeed, much like some Muslim factions, it can lead to efforts of cleansing society of sinners and non-believers. Example: Spanish Inquisition. Either view, in my mind, is a kind of distortion of what Christ was teaching. I also think that Satan, if he does exist, would use the truth if it accomplishes what he wants. This is where discernment is greatly tested, no? So many factions, so many truths, but so few are right in the way the truth is used.
  9. You do know they had little understanding of mental illness back then, right? And why the heck are you bringing in Dr. Spock? His thinking wasn't entirely original, either. Then, you go and make the broad assumption of "liberals" again. Why? How do you understand it's "most"? Show me the study that says it. This feels insulting to me. I'm fairly liberal minded, and my kids did get a proper spank when they needed it. Thankfully for me, it didn't happen often. Oh, and I wouldn't have a bear or a dog maul them, either, if they mocked me.
  10. Hmm...to my recollection He did say He wouldn't do it. But said nothing of either man, or nature doing so. So, it's true, He won't let it happen, but apparently "we", that is mankind, will, unless action is taken expediently.
  11. Your "pastor"? As RevBogovac asked, "why"? If you intend to share your degrees with a leader of another church, they are under no obligation to recognize them unless issued by that church. Practically the only degrees universally accepted by groups and individuals as having validity are those obtained by accredited traditional learning institutions, even though court challenges have deemed honorary degrees to be just as valid with the understanding they can not be used except as intended. Meaning a true medical degree can allow practice of medicine. You wouldn't want an honorary doctor performing surgery on you, would you? At the same token, churches often accept honorary degrees for duties within their ranks as they were bestowed per faith and/or accomplishments within the organization. Other churches may not know the reasons or how obtained, so question for themselves.
  12. Doesn't it, though? Kinda like tabloids. Can't believe half the stuff written in them, yet one just has to turn the page just one more time to see what else is in there. In my view, informative as entertaining much of the time. But, that's me.
  13. Debating morality, or ethical conduct towards humanity? Either way, if something irritates me, I need to scratch it for some relief. If it's something stuck in my craw, I need to spit it out, or suffer indigestion because of it. Makes sense? It is more for my purview, than for trying to flip another's viewpoint.
  14. Yes, they did. They also understood when to appease a mob to quell a potential riot without risking resources. Romans were shrewd as well as ruthless.