Spiritual but not religious?

Mr ProgFreak wrote: The T wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: The T wrote: Mike, now you're also a master in children psychology?  I tend to fully agree with Robert on that one. Children are heavily selfish by nature. They have to be in order to get what they want from the first persons they come in contact with. I don't think toddlers are good or bad by nature. Depending innumerable factors, they can be either. Or become either. By nature the only thing they are is creatures striving to survive. How they will do it, they'll learn from the environment, their parents, and all the rest.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnXmDaI8IEo I know, it's a long video ... but it's quite interesting. Of course it is a complex subject, which is why I think that anecdotal evidence can only get you so far. That's why psychology relies on statistical evidence, not to prove things, but to support their likelihood. You're an statistics lover Mike, I guess you should also believe in its power in this case.  I'm not sure why you would mention statistical evidence here though, since the presentation is mostly about scientific studies and medical findings.

^ I didn't ask whether his message was good or bad - I merely mentioned that even the Pope has no way of knowing what the message was. So even those people who firmly believe in Jesus don't even really know what it is that they believe in. We don't know whether Jesus preached peace and love.

Mr ProgFreak wrote: ^ I didn't ask whether his message was good or bad - I merely mentioned that even the Pope has no way of knowing what the message was. So even those people who firmly believe in Jesus don't even really know what it is that they believe in. We don't know whether Jesus preached peace and love.

^^ Most Christians are never given all the information that scholars today for the most part agree on. Some even think that the Gospels (Mark, Luke, Matthew, John) were written by the actual disciples - and thus, eyewitnesses - of Jesus. I'm pretty sure that most of them think that all the Gospels agree that Jesus Christ actually was/is God (Catholics have to). Some even assume that the whole Bible is the inerrant word of God.

Showing that all of that is wrong is IMO no small thing for a believer. It's what most Atheists probably suspect, based on the simple observation that not all religions can be correct. Even if one of them was correct, why should it be Catholicism ... or any particular one of the others?

So: If you pick one of the aphorisms that are commonly attributed to Jesus and you like it - fine. But if you think that this brings you closer to Jesus ... think again, because Jesus probably did not say it.


Edited by Mr ProgFreak - June 10 2010 at 15:21

James wrote: Téo is an Atheist/Agnostic though, Mike.

That doesn't mean I'll automatically agree with him on everything. Neither would I disagree with Epignosis on everything.

Mr ProgFreak wrote: ^^ Most Christians are never given all the information that scholars today for the most part agree on. Some even think that the Gospels (Mark, Luke, Matthew, John) were written by the actual disciples - and thus, eyewitnesses - of Jesus. I'm pretty sure that most of them think that all the Gospels agree that Jesus Christ actually was/is God (Catholics have to). Some even assume that the whole Bible is the inerrant word of God.  If it was proven that Jesus was not God (I believe he wasn't, of course, but it will never be proven anyway), maybe some people who have that conviction will falter. But most will persevere in their beliefs. For science will never be able to prove anything that has to do with god, precisely because it can't be proven. Again, about the authenticity of the source of the message, I just say, what's the point? Even if it was proven that Luke wrote it (not skywalker of course), will it make it a lesser message? Yes, some people will stop believing in catholicism and atheists of the Dawkins-school will score a big point. So what? It is just a matter of trying to win the argument?  Showing that all of that is wrong is IMO no small thing for a believer. It's what most Atheists probably suspect, based on the simple observation that not all religions can be correct. Even if one of them was correct, why should it be Catholicism ... or any particular one of the others? I don't disagree.  So: If you pick one of the aphorisms that are commonly attributed to Jesus and you like it - fine. But if you think that this brings you closer to Jesus ... think again, because Jesus probably did not say it. I haven't tried to get closer to Jesus so I can't respond to this, but it's obvious that the message is one I like.

The T wrote: ^I might be checking that thread again Mike. I think it's time for me to stop with the carbs too!

Epignosis - 5 pounds = me

(Lost in ten days).

Epignosis wrote: The T wrote: ^I might be checking that thread again Mike. I think it's time for me to stop with the carbs too!  Epignosis - 5 pounds = me (Lost in ten days).

I'm now down to 101kg ... 15kg down, 16 more to go. The fasting days really helped me through a serious weight loss plateau!

Mr ProgFreak wrote: Epignosis wrote: The T wrote: ^I might be checking that thread again Mike. I think it's time for me to stop with the carbs too!  Epignosis - 5 pounds = me (Lost in ten days). I'm now down to 101kg ... 15kg down, 16 more to go. The fasting days really helped me through a serious weight loss plateau!

Seriously thats excellent.........what I found amazing with fasting sessions ( 3 days) was it actually gave me a huge surge in energy too.

How is that explained? Energy through fasting? Sounds impossible (and failed miserably with me ). I guess othe requirements have to be fulfilled.