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.
Have you seen someone who can only recite some verses when challenged? Totally lost the ability to use his own brain.
Have you seen someone who can only cite past research and past knowledge that he was taught when challenged?
How much of ANYTHING we know comes from information we gained of our own research and effort?
You just wrote your post with letters and words from a language you had nothing to do with creating or discovering. You were just taught by others, what they had been taught by others, what they had been taught by others, etc. That doesn't equate to your knowledge and command of the language not being genuine...or you not being able to use your brain.
But, I am talking about "raised and taught" in a religious sense -- not your normal "raised" and "taught" -- the question is: can it be normal?
You were talking about "taught" in a school science class (not faith-based"). I think that is a normal "teaching" versus religious "teaching". I think there are differences. Religious people can not tell the difference.
Have you seen someone who can only recite some verses when challenged? Totally lost the ability to use his own brain.
gee, there are people who devote their lives and careers to reciting lines and verses and earn a mint of money doing so, they are celebrated actors and actresses, and stars of the stage and screen, and bask in fame and success that is well-earned. It takes an incredible amount of talent, dedication and commitment, and a lot of brain power to memorize, access, and master a large body of technical material.
So what exactly is your point? Perhaps if you had a more clear command of the language yourself, you would be able to communicate with us in a more articulate manner?
But, I am talking about "raised and taught" in a religious sense -- not your normal "raised" and "taught" -- the question is: can it be normal?
You were talking about "taught" in a school science class (not faith-based"). I think that is a normal "teaching" versus religious "teaching". I think there are differences. Religious people can not tell the difference.
there is no difference whatsoever in simply parroting back what either a "science teacher" says or a "religion teacher" says. Either way you are a parrot.
It sounds like what you are saying is it is not normal to have either faith or religion. Again....what is the point you are trying to make in this thread?
gee, there are people who devote their lives and careers to reciting lines and verses and earn a mint of money doing so, they are celebrated actors and actresses, and stars of the stage and screen, and bask in fame and success that is well-earned. It takes an incredible amount of talent, dedication and commitment, and a lot of brain power to memorize, access, and master a large body of technical material.
So what exactly is your point? Perhaps if you had a more clear command of the language yourself, you would be able to communicate with us in a more articulate manner?
Actors and actresses are known for acting -- they are not God's representatives.
But, I am talking about "raised and taught" in a religious sense -- not your normal "raised" and "taught" -- the question is: can it be normal?
You were talking about "taught" in a school science class (not faith-based"). I think that is a normal "teaching" versus religious "teaching". I think there are differences. Religious people can not tell the difference.
Oh com'on...you are raised and taught whatever you are taught. That would include information about WHATEVER. Why should being taught religious doctrine be any different than being taught anything else?
A kid is taught "ABCs", reading, writing, arithmetic, history, science, geography, moral doctrines, etc. He didn't research any of it...if you ask him what he knows about it...he will tell you what he knows, based on nothing else other than what he was taught. And from your perspective that wouldn't demonstrate lack of brain power. BUT, if he was taught a religious doctrine...and you asked him what he knew about it...and he told you what he knew, based on nothing else other than what he was taught...you think that WOULD demonstrate lack of brain power?
You can call the information of the religious doctrine "wrong"...but you can't say learning, and then recalling THAT information, demonstrative of the person lacking cognitive ability. That's ridiculous...and frankly, the proposition lowers the Atheist stock, in that it appears you are "grabbing at straws" to try to say ANYTHING to discredit someone being taught religious doctrine.
Have you seen someone who can only cite past research and past knowledge that he was taught when challenged?
How much of ANYTHING we know comes from information we gained of our own research and effort?
You just wrote your post with letters and words from a language you had nothing to do with creating or discovering. You were just taught by others, what they had been taught by others, what they had been taught by others, etc. That doesn't equate to your knowledge and command of the language not being genuine...or you not being able to use your brain.
You beat me to it...
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.
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.
