Christian Fundamentalism Defined (education, pagan, atheists, according)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I had never heard of meditation until I went off to college at a liberal Lutheran university.
That surprises me. But, OK. Good to know you weren't told that all the Buddhists and Hindus who meditate are exposing themselves to evil forces of darkness.
That surprises me. But, OK. At least you weren't told that all the Buddhists and Hindus who meditate are exposing themselves to evil forces of darkness.
I wouldn't be surprised if children are taught that kind of thing in some of the more extreme congregations of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. Thankfully I was not taught that.
I wouldn't be surprised if children are taught that kind of thing in some of the more extreme congregations of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. Thankfully I was not taught that.
I've heard it from a LOT of evangelicals. Which is why I, wrongly, made that assumption.
I believe him. I've yet to read anything Mystic has posted that has led me to think he's anything but honest and truthful.
I myself am not in the habit of believing anyone who fails to substantiate what they say in even the smallest way. It does not matter who the speaker is, a top scientist, or an old man selling pencils from a cup on a street corner.... I will only believe what they say if they can substantiate it.
The New Agers have diluted their definition of their god as time has gone on but the basics remains the same. There is a claim that human consciousness can operate independent of, or following the death of, the brain. There is nothing to support such a claim. No argument, evidence, data or reasoning has been presented of any kind to support this, least of all by anyone on THIS forum.
These New Ager people are not being honest and truthful therefore. They are making claims based on nothing at all. And that is not honest. Though, no doubt, some of them actually believe it themselves. And some do not. But either way it remains a dishonesty to espouse unsubstantiated nonsense as true.
Sure, our knowledge of the human brain and human consciousness is incomplete. So anything could turn out to be true in the future, and we remain open minded to that. But at THIS time 100% of the data set that we DO have points to a total dependency of consciousness on the brain. 0% of the data set at this time suggests the possibility of a disconnect between the two.
The data set might change in the future to suggest otherwise, who knows. But right now, thems the facts, and anyone who informs you otherwise is not being truthful with you and is not being honest with you.
I believe him. I've yet to read anything Mystic has posted that has led me to think he's anything but honest and truthful.
Thank you, Dew. Honesty is ALWAYS about what someone personally knows to be true or false. It has nothing to do with what is or is not verifiable by anyone else. Dishonesty is knowing something to be false and claiming it is true. The pretense that truth must be subject to empirical validation is pure human vanity, hubris and arrogance. Pretending that truth must be subject to our puny efforts to validate it is absurd because we have limited ability to do so for everything we experience or must deal with in life.. What is personally experienced by anyone is true for them, regardless what anyone else thinks about it. Expressing those personal truths is neither lying nor dishonest. Those poor souls dependent upon only empirical validation choose to live in a very tiny circumscribed world.
The New Agers have diluted their definition of their god as time has gone on but the basics remains the same. There is a claim that human consciousness can operate independent of, or following the death of, the brain. There is nothing to support such a claim. No argument, evidence, data or reasoning has been presented of any kind to support this, least of all by anyone on THIS forum.
These New Ager people are not being honest and truthful therefore. They are making claims based on nothing at all. And that is not honest. Though, no doubt, some of them actually believe it themselves. And some do not. But either way it remains a dishonesty to espouse unsubstantiated nonsense as true.
You do understand the difference between someone stating something as a factual claim, and someone simply saying "I believe...", don't you?
I myself am not in the habit of believing anyone who fails to substantiate what they say in even the smallest way. It does not matter who the speaker is, a top scientist, or an old man selling pencils from a cup on a street corner.... I will only believe what they say if they can substantiate it.
OK. That's your prerogative. Is everyone else supposed to to the same? If it is .... rotsa ruck trying to make that happen.
You do understand the difference between someone stating something as a factual claim, and someone simply saying "I believe...", don't you?
Or do you? I'm not always sure.
To be fair, it's not always easy to tell when a believer is making a statement of personal faith vs a factual claim. I see an awful lot of (what look like) factual claims from the fundamentalist Christians, liberal Christians, and New Agers. If they mean to be making statements of personal faith and not factual claims, they should explicitly say so (in my opinion).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.