Heh, that's a neat way to put it.

approach better, but it is often not understood well. It appears that almost nobody ever read more than the Lilliput chapter in "Gulliver's Travels."

I've read Gulliver's Travels. My favorite part is when two factions are created by separating them into who cracks open a soft boiled egg by the small end or the big end. On such differences are denominations born.

The better to gobble them.

I also prefer "The Miller's Tale" to "The Nun's Priest's Tale" in the Canterbury Tales.

Then you just crack them on the side and avoid the end controversy entirely.

and Christians will continue to believe in what they believe in.

"Two ships passing in the night."

Evidence shows that they willingly make statements of faith and belief in those creeds, confessions and other liturgical and doctrinal ways. I assume that they mean what they say when they make such declarations. Am I incorrect to do so? Are people just mouthing the words of such creeds?

I define nothing for anyone but myself. You appear not to understand the meaning of some words. I am merely reporting what people actively do in this particular regard. A creed is a pledge, akin to an oath. Most begin with the words, "I believe..." Do people say that without understanding what they are saying? If so, I will have to rethink, I suppose.

Have you ever recited such a creed? Did you mean it?

The Scout Oath? Oath of Enlistment? We - also known as "sinners" - do many things by rote that don't require an analysis of every word.

You keep defining what a Christian is required to believe after your personal in-depth studies of the Bible you have made to discredit the validity of Christianity and your desire for "explanations" for "this and that" that have nothing to with any individual's personal faith.

The Bible - from Genesis to Revelation - is the story of man's evolution in his relationship with God - and his evolving understanding of God.

The "Old Testament" transition to the "New Covenant" as promised from the beginning!

Your desire to poke holes in faith is more a justification for your personal choice rather than an effective attack on someone else's personal faith.

Logic and reason remain the antithesis of faith.

Last edited Tue Jan 2, 2018, 01:12 PM - Edit history (1)

And, please note, I have never said the Pledge with the words, "under God." I say it as I learned it in grammar school before that was added to it.

I was not a Boy Scout. I was an enlistee in the USAF, so yes, I have taken the oath of enlistment, by affirmation. I know and agree with what is in both the Pledge of Allegiance and the Oath of Enlistment, and say both in earnest. I understand them and agree with them, or I would not have said them.

Now, again, have you recited a Creed of Christianity? I asked you that question, but you did not answer. I have answered your questions, despite your neglect in answering mine.

I know the Bible. I've read the entire thing half a dozen times, cover to cover. I know what it is. I know what it contains.

All the same, I must say that I agree with your final sentence: "Logic and reason remain the antithesis of faith." Indeed they do.

Good day.

This basically is one non-theist attempting to define terms for all theists. A one sided debate, but the advantage is that the debater will always prevail.

Seriously? Of course they are. Probably >50% I would guess, more so if being dragged to church by their parents.
Most people "born into" *any* religion don't really question or think anything about it.

The ones that do - become atheists.

make statements like that if I didn't accept them as accurate.

Belief systems are not necessarily logical - they function on the lower levels of the brain.
That system is faster and actually "in charge" - it's the elephant.

The more recent "logical" brain (driver) needs time and effort to analyze things and get the lower level to respond.

So the kicker is the DRIVER is not usually leading the way. The ELEPHANT is.

and to alert me when danger is near. However, I rarely allow it to make any other decisions. It is, after all, a lizard brain, so what can it possibly know? I don't eat flies.

despite my protestations.

Lizard brain don't care. It does its job as best it can. Lizard brain is there for you, but it is not smart. It has its job. It does that.

>>I rarely allow it to make any other decisions.

It's actually processing more than you think and making decisions faster than your logical brain.
Your logical brain it simply making excuses for things that have already been decided.

People with parts of the "reptile" brain damaged are overwhelmed with the simplest of tasks. Instead of the being a "spock" like being, we're a mess. Next time you go to a supermarket think how much brainpower would be required to make all the "logical" choices. It's that lizard brain making them "on the fly" before your logical brain can even get off the ground.

in advance. I use the same supermarket always, because I know where the things I buy are located. I get a cart and follow the simplest path through the store that takes me to where the items I plan to buy are located. I take them from the shelf, put them in the cart and move on to the next location.

I don't make impulse purchases. When I have all the items I need in my cart, I choose a register lane based on how efficient the person in that lane is. In some cases, when I do not find an efficient person working, I use the self-check lane. I know all of the members of that store's staff on sight, and have experienced their abilities.

I don't shop in supermarkets in a random way, nor do I allow my lizard brain to choose what I purchase. Ever. I plan ahead for such shopping trips, because I want to spend as little time as possible in that activity. I don't really like grocery shopping.

I let the lizard brain keep track of my surroundings and warn me of dangers. I let it help me avoid collisions with my car, as well. I do not allow it to choose food for me, though.

I STILL remember the thought process in Kindergarten that led me to be silent during the two-beat 'under god' bit of the Pledge.

What kind of person just does things by rote because they were told to?

my elementary school teacher explained the change to us, but said, "Nobody is required to say those words. You can say them if you wish, or simply leave them out." I thought that was quite advanced thinking for the mid-1950s. I left them out then, and have done so ever since.

I don't take oaths, make pledges, or declare by beliefs by rote. Ever. Not even once. I think about what I'm saying. Always.

I do not understand people who do not do that.

That's it. Though that has caused some on this board to argue that Mormons aren't Christian even though they meet my standard.

Additionally, if someone says they are Christian, I believe them. I don't try to define it for them.

How about if you also point your indignation at those that refuse to define atheism as atheists define it on this board. Because that happens. And only the atheists seem to care.

You began:

Reading is FUNdamental.

Quite nice.

"Conflict" means uncertainty or dispute. "Veracity" means truth. I hope that helps you understand my sentence. I do try to be clear in my writing, but I never mind explaining my words to those who don't understand them. I'm always happy to supply explanations of my vocabulary.

My conclusions about Christians being literalists to some degree is based on my logical arguments regarding creeds. Please see those arguments above in my original post.

Now, have you recited a religious creed? Did you believe what you recited? I've asked another person that, but that preson responded with question about what I had recited, and did not answer my question. Perhaps you'll be more forthcoming. Do you adhere to a creed that is associated with your denomination of Christianity? Do you stand by that creed?

Did you mean conflicting statements of what is considered truth?

And while you frame this as a logical argument, the logic depends on accepting your personal conclusion as the only logical one.

It was a simple sentence. So, yes, I did answer your question, specifically and at some length.

So, now, please do me the courtesy of answering my simple question of you.

When you do explain which meaning you personally assigned to your statement, ask me your question again.

You made a vague statement carrying multiple meanings.

Words do have meaning.