100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Recovery from religion... | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
See my thing about the Hyksos is that kids are being tought that the hebrews were slaves to the egyptians,which there is no evidence of this besides what the hebrews authors wrote in Exodus.The hebrews lay claim to alot of things that can't be proven,actually most of the things they claim can't be supported through actual evidence at all.Like King David,King Solomon,Moses etc etc. Right. All three of the Abrahamic religions depend on the fiction of King David, King Solomon, Moses, Joshua, etc. so that is why Christianity or Islam is not willing to question the validity of those stories. If they faced the truth their own religious roots would disintegrate. It's all a big fat fiction and can't be proven otherwise. It's all a big fat fiction and can't be proven otherwise. But it also can not be proven false. It is false until you can prove that it is true. Otherwise there is little reason to believe it, especially when it has a huge effect on people's lives, politics etc. You simply cannot go around calling something true, or the gospel if you cannot prove it and don't even have valid evidence to support the claims. So it is fiction. Fiction fiction fiction. This is where faith plays a huge part and why we will be judge on our faith and not just our actions. I have no faith in fiction or the authors of it. Why should I? Sure you do, you have faith they are fiction. There is absolutely no way for you to know that for a fact as in through physical evidence as I have no way to prove it to be true through physical evidence. It's only by faith you believe it to be false. That is not faith. I have faith in the law of cause and effect. As far as unproven stories, they are fiction by default until they are proven to be true. They have already pretty much investigated and no evidence has been found that supports them as being anything but fiction. Jewish historians KNOW THIS. There are many external sources of the same thing(s) that are in the bible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See my thing about the Hyksos is that kids are being tought that the hebrews were slaves to the egyptians,which there is no evidence of this besides what the hebrews authors wrote in Exodus.The hebrews lay claim to alot of things that can't be proven,actually most of the things they claim can't be supported through actual evidence at all.Like King David,King Solomon,Moses etc etc. Right. All three of the Abrahamic religions depend on the fiction of King David, King Solomon, Moses, Joshua, etc. so that is why Christianity or Islam is not willing to question the validity of those stories. If they faced the truth their own religious roots would disintegrate. It's all a big fat fiction and can't be proven otherwise. It's all a big fat fiction and can't be proven otherwise. But it also can not be proven false. It is false until you can prove that it is true. Otherwise there is little reason to believe it, especially when it has a huge effect on people's lives, politics etc. You simply cannot go around calling something true, or the gospel if you cannot prove it and don't even have valid evidence to support the claims. So it is fiction. Fiction fiction fiction. This is where faith plays a huge part and why we will be judge on our faith and not just our actions. I have no faith in fiction or the authors of it. Why should I? Sure you do, you have faith they are fiction. There is absolutely no way for you to know that for a fact as in through physical evidence as I have no way to prove it to be true through physical evidence. It's only by faith you believe it to be false. That is not faith. I have faith in the law of cause and effect. As far as unproven stories, they are fiction by default until they are proven to be true. They have already pretty much investigated and no evidence has been found that supports them as being anything but fiction. Jewish historians KNOW THIS. There are many external sources of the same thing(s) that are in the bible. As far as unproven stories, they are fiction by default until they are proven to be true. You can only have faith in something that is unproven. That is where the line is drawn. There is no need for faith, once something is proven without a doubt to be true or not. That is why I believe God has not made any other appearances then what is in the scriptures. For if it was an absolute proven fact God was real and no doubt about it, the need for "faith" would be mute. And that is what we are judged on more or less, our faith. Our actions are fueled by our faith. More faith you have in something, more you believe it to be true, more you believe it to be true, more you will obey. Again if something was physically shown to be absolutely true without a doubt, there would be no need for faith. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well cowboy, you can have faith in anything you want.
I don't have faith in what I consider to be fiction. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See my thing about the Hyksos is that kids are being tought that the hebrews were slaves to the egyptians,which there is no evidence of this besides what the hebrews authors wrote in Exodus.The hebrews lay claim to alot of things that can't be proven,actually most of the things they claim can't be supported through actual evidence at all.Like King David,King Solomon,Moses etc etc. Right. All three of the Abrahamic religions depend on the fiction of King David, King Solomon, Moses, Joshua, etc. so that is why Christianity or Islam is not willing to question the validity of those stories. If they faced the truth their own religious roots would disintegrate. It's all a big fat fiction and can't be proven otherwise. It's all a big fat fiction and can't be proven otherwise. But it also can not be proven false. It is false until you can prove that it is true. Otherwise there is little reason to believe it, especially when it has a huge effect on people's lives, politics etc. You simply cannot go around calling something true, or the gospel if you cannot prove it and don't even have valid evidence to support the claims. So it is fiction. Fiction fiction fiction. This is where faith plays a huge part and why we will be judge on our faith and not just our actions. I have no faith in fiction or the authors of it. Why should I? Sure you do, you have faith they are fiction. There is absolutely no way for you to know that for a fact as in through physical evidence as I have no way to prove it to be true through physical evidence. It's only by faith you believe it to be false. That is not faith. I have faith in the law of cause and effect. As far as unproven stories, they are fiction by default until they are proven to be true. They have already pretty much investigated and no evidence has been found that supports them as being anything but fiction. Jewish historians KNOW THIS. There are many external sources of the same thing(s) that are in the bible. As far as unproven stories, they are fiction by default until they are proven to be true. You can only have faith in something that is unproven. That is where the line is drawn. There is no need for faith, once something is proven without a doubt to be true or not. That is why I believe God has not made any other appearances then what is in the scriptures. For if it was an absolute proven fact God was real and no doubt about it, the need for "faith" would be mute. And that is what we are judged on more or less, our faith. Our actions are fueled by our faith. More faith you have in something, more you believe it to be true, more you believe it to be true, more you will obey. Again if something was physically shown to be absolutely true without a doubt, there would be no need for faith. While the Bible does not intend to deliberately school its readers in scientific principles and data, any subject which it discusses about God's creation is accurate and true. As one case in point, we can turn to Job 26:7, where we read a modern description of the earth as it spins in empty space. Isaiah wrote during the reign of the Judaean king Hezekiah, who died in 687 B.C., but Cyrus did not begin to reign as king of the Persian empire until after 600 B.C., more than 80 years after Isaiah left the scene. Only God could know the name of the man who would be the Persian king before he sat on the throne. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well cowboy, you can have faith in anything you want. I don't have faith in what I consider to be fiction. .... you make these discussions a little to personal Jeanie. No one's here trying to convert anyone nor change anyone's mind. We're all just here for enlightenment, discussion, which leads to finding out more about one another on a more personal level. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Fri 03/30/12 12:51 PM
|
|
While the Bible does not intend to deliberately school its readers in scientific principles and data, any subject which it discusses about God's creation is accurate and true. As one case in point, we can turn to Job 26:7, where we read a modern description of the earth as it spins in empty space. Isaiah wrote during the reign of the Judaean king Hezekiah, who died in 687 B.C., but Cyrus did not begin to reign as king of the Persian empire until after 600 B.C., more than 80 years after Isaiah left the scene. Only God could know the name of the man who would be the Persian king before he sat on the throne. Cowboy you are rambling. I am only talking about the claim that King David was a real person. I don't care to discuss that other stuff which I know nothing about. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Fri 03/30/12 12:48 PM
|
|
Well cowboy, you can have faith in anything you want. I don't have faith in what I consider to be fiction. .... you make these discussions a little to personal Jeanie. No one's here trying to convert anyone nor change anyone's mind. We're all just here for enlightenment, discussion, which leads to finding out more about one another on a more personal level. I'm not making anything personal Cowboy. You are the person who joined in the discussion and started making claims that we are judged by our faith, when I was only stating my opinion that King David is fiction and that there is no evidence to suggest otherwise. You can have faith in that story if you want. I consider it to be fiction and I find no reason to have faith in it being true. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well cowboy, you can have faith in anything you want. I don't have faith in what I consider to be fiction. .... you make these discussions a little to personal Jeanie. No one's here trying to convert anyone nor change anyone's mind. We're all just here for enlightenment, discussion, which leads to finding out more about one another on a more personal level. I'm not making anything personal Cowboy. You are the person who joined in the discussion and started making claims that we are judged by our faith, when I was only stating my opinion that King David is fiction and that there is no evidence to suggest otherwise. You can have faith in that story if you want. I consider it to be fiction and I find no reason to have faith in it being true. I'm sorry, I missunderstood your original comment. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My original statement was clear. It is my opinion:
All three of the Abrahamic religions depend on the fiction of King David, King Solomon, Moses, Joshua, etc. so that is why Christianity or Islam is not willing to question the validity of those stories. If they faced the truth their own religious roots would disintegrate. It's all a big fat fiction and can't be proven otherwise. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can answer that. I am opposed to same sex marriage and I have said I dont feel same sex sex is healthy or natural. Never said I was 'scared' of anyone though,, not sure where the phobia part comes in,,,lol Regular sex is not healthy either. its healthy enough to create life,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can answer that. I am opposed to same sex marriage and I have said I dont feel same sex sex is healthy or natural. Never said I was 'scared' of anyone though,, not sure where the phobia part comes in,,,lol Regular sex is not healthy either. its healthy enough to create life,,, Actually sex is quite healthy for someone physically and mentally. To much sex is unhealthy, but sex in general is healthy. But sex with the same gender is not healthy. Yeah it may be physically and mentally healthy in general, but it unhealthy for it is unproductive. Sex is for reproduction, for populating the world. This can not be done by same sex intercourse. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can answer that. I am opposed to same sex marriage and I have said I dont feel same sex sex is healthy or natural. Never said I was 'scared' of anyone though,, not sure where the phobia part comes in,,,lol Regular sex is not healthy either. its healthy enough to create life,,, Actually sex is quite healthy for someone physically and mentally. To much sex is unhealthy, but sex in general is healthy. But sex with the same gender is not healthy. Yeah it may be physically and mentally healthy in general, but it unhealthy for it is unproductive. Sex is for reproduction, for populating the world. This can not be done by same sex intercourse. Not causing reproduction just makes it neutral health-wise... unhealthy would imply harm to health. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My original statement was clear. It is my opinion: All three of the Abrahamic religions depend on the fiction of King David, King Solomon, Moses, Joshua, etc. so that is why Christianity or Islam is not willing to question the validity of those stories. If they faced the truth their own religious roots would disintegrate. It's all a big fat fiction and can't be proven otherwise. That would be because the record of the exodus from Egypt was 'expunged' by defacing the walls of the Temple where it was written in stone. It would seem that the Pharoh at the time wanted no record of his terrible loss. Don't believe me... Look it up. There is indeed a temple where ALL of the writtings upon the pillars (how the Egyptians of the time recorded history) was removed by chisel and asp. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Speaking to the original topic:
I think the term “Recovering from Religion” when applied to individuals who are suffering from the effects of cognitive dissonance is a relevant one. Cognitive dissonance occurs when an individual experiences discomfort or anxiety as new information comes into conflict with current beliefs. An individual might resolve the discomfort in different ways: choosing one belief over another - by modifying the current beliefs – resisting any new information that causes dissonance, or by continuing to seek fuller knowledge and confirmation within a peer group. The latter solution (in bold) could be called the “Recovering from Religion” solution. Like any other group, including the group through which the religious beliefs where originally conferred, the new group becomes the group of peers that lend confirmation to new or developing beliefs. It’s a social psychological phenomena backed by a great deal of research and has led to the development of every kind of help group one can imagine. People get together, share their own experiences, exchange information, and support each other as individuals come to terms with reality or shape new or re-shape past values. There can be varying degrees of change and not everyone is going to walk away from the experience as an atheist, but those who have experienced a high level of cognitive dissonance between religious beliefs and other information, are more likely to, at least, become skeptical or may settle (be comfortable) with some form of agnosticism. In terms of religious ‘upbringing’, I think there is quite a difference between a ‘recovery’ group and the group in which a child develops the religious beliefs. The relationships between the individual and the two groups are completely different in emotional attachment, in authority, and in open mindedness. Furthermore, an adult has a greater capacity to understand their own abilities, cognitively and intellectually, and will assert their own authority in choosing new found information as a souse of knowledge, rather than having a total reliance on the authority figures of their childhood. What an individual is actually seeking through the group affiliation is confirmation of their dissonance, and support in accepting information which conflicts with their current belief system. The first beliefs are more a matter of indoctrination, while changes in beliefs are more a matter of facing new information with an open mind. To open the mind might simply require a supportive peer group. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Speaking to the original topic: I think the term “Recovering from Religion” when applied to individuals who are suffering from the effects of cognitive dissonance is a relevant one. Cognitive dissonance occurs when an individual experiences discomfort or anxiety as new information comes into conflict with current beliefs. An individual might resolve the discomfort in different ways: choosing one belief over another - by modifying the current beliefs – resisting any new information that causes dissonance, or by continuing to seek fuller knowledge and confirmation within a peer group. The latter solution (in bold) could be called the “Recovering from Religion” solution. Like any other group, including the group through which the religious beliefs where originally conferred, the new group becomes the group of peers that lend confirmation to new or developing beliefs. It’s a social psychological phenomena backed by a great deal of research and has led to the development of every kind of help group one can imagine. People get together, share their own experiences, exchange information, and support each other as individuals come to terms with reality or shape new or re-shape past values. There can be varying degrees of change and not everyone is going to walk away from the experience as an atheist, but those who have experienced a high level of cognitive dissonance between religious beliefs and other information, are more likely to, at least, become skeptical or may settle (be comfortable) with some form of agnosticism. In terms of religious ‘upbringing’, I think there is quite a difference between a ‘recovery’ group and the group in which a child develops the religious beliefs. The relationships between the individual and the two groups are completely different in emotional attachment, in authority, and in open mindedness. Furthermore, an adult has a greater capacity to understand their own abilities, cognitively and intellectually, and will assert their own authority in choosing new found information as a souse of knowledge, rather than having a total reliance on the authority figures of their childhood. What an individual is actually seeking through the group affiliation is confirmation of their dissonance, and support in accepting information which conflicts with their current belief system. The first beliefs are more a matter of indoctrination, while changes in beliefs are more a matter of facing new information with an open mind. To open the mind might simply require a supportive peer group. TY Red for the interesting input. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can answer that. I am opposed to same sex marriage and I have said I dont feel same sex sex is healthy or natural. Never said I was 'scared' of anyone though,, not sure where the phobia part comes in,,,lol Regular sex is not healthy either. its healthy enough to create life,,, Actually sex is quite healthy for someone physically and mentally. To much sex is unhealthy, but sex in general is healthy. But sex with the same gender is not healthy. Yeah it may be physically and mentally healthy in general, but it unhealthy for it is unproductive. Sex is for reproduction, for populating the world. This can not be done by same sex intercourse. Not causing reproduction just makes it neutral health-wise... unhealthy would imply harm to health. It is unhealthy to the sociaty in general. And on a personal level to a degree. Personal - Causing many diseases and unwanted pregnancies. Sociaty - Again diseases and adotption and or abandoned children, or more common families with a step dad or possibly step mom. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can answer that. I am opposed to same sex marriage and I have said I dont feel same sex sex is healthy or natural. Never said I was 'scared' of anyone though,, not sure where the phobia part comes in,,,lol Regular sex is not healthy either. its healthy enough to create life,,, Actually sex is quite healthy for someone physically and mentally. To much sex is unhealthy, but sex in general is healthy. But sex with the same gender is not healthy. Yeah it may be physically and mentally healthy in general, but it unhealthy for it is unproductive. Sex is for reproduction, for populating the world. This can not be done by same sex intercourse. Not causing reproduction just makes it neutral health-wise... unhealthy would imply harm to health. It is unhealthy to the sociaty in general. And on a personal level to a degree. Personal - Causing many diseases and unwanted pregnancies. Sociaty - Again diseases and adotption and or abandoned children, or more common families with a step dad or possibly step mom. Wait, is this in reference to too much sex or to same-sex/sex that doesn't result in reproduction? I realize I didn't properly specify, but all I was referring to before was for the latter mention. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can answer that. I am opposed to same sex marriage and I have said I dont feel same sex sex is healthy or natural. Never said I was 'scared' of anyone though,, not sure where the phobia part comes in,,,lol Regular sex is not healthy either. its healthy enough to create life,,, Actually sex is quite healthy for someone physically and mentally. To much sex is unhealthy, but sex in general is healthy. But sex with the same gender is not healthy. Yeah it may be physically and mentally healthy in general, but it unhealthy for it is unproductive. Sex is for reproduction, for populating the world. This can not be done by same sex intercourse. Not causing reproduction just makes it neutral health-wise... unhealthy would imply harm to health. It is unhealthy to the sociaty in general. And on a personal level to a degree. Personal - Causing many diseases and unwanted pregnancies. Sociaty - Again diseases and adotption and or abandoned children, or more common families with a step dad or possibly step mom. Wait, is this in reference to too much sex or to same-sex/sex that doesn't result in reproduction? I realize I didn't properly specify, but all I was referring to before was for the latter mention. Both on the disease part.... would be kind of hard for unexpected children with same sex incidents lol. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recovering from Religion”
Religion is personal and so is Recovery. Recovery from anything will be Blessed and spring forth good cheer u might say from these few words which is Recovery constant. James 1:27 7 Pure and undefiled religion before Yahshua and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world. NKJV Its been proven over and over again that nations fail when they do not look after the poor and afflicted amoung them. Recovery is never ending. It's part of every life that has compassion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can answer that. I am opposed to same sex marriage and I have said I dont feel same sex sex is healthy or natural. Never said I was 'scared' of anyone though,, not sure where the phobia part comes in,,,lol Regular sex is not healthy either. its healthy enough to create life,,, Actually sex is quite healthy for someone physically and mentally. To much sex is unhealthy, but sex in general is healthy. But sex with the same gender is not healthy. Yeah it may be physically and mentally healthy in general, but it unhealthy for it is unproductive. Sex is for reproduction, for populating the world. This can not be done by same sex intercourse. Not causing reproduction just makes it neutral health-wise... unhealthy would imply harm to health. It is unhealthy to the sociaty in general. And on a personal level to a degree. Personal - Causing many diseases and unwanted pregnancies. Sociaty - Again diseases and adotption and or abandoned children, or more common families with a step dad or possibly step mom. Wait, is this in reference to too much sex or to same-sex/sex that doesn't result in reproduction? I realize I didn't properly specify, but all I was referring to before was for the latter mention. Both on the disease part.... would be kind of hard for unexpected children with same sex incidents lol. Disease can happen regardless of if it's opposite or same-sex though. |
|
|
|
|
