Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Humanist_Activist

(7,670 posts)
110. I grew up accepting both, and as such, never took the Bible literally...
Fri Jun 5, 2015, 02:26 AM
Jun 2015

I'll be honest and say this is an example of compartmentalization and cognitive dissonance, I couldn't reconcile a world where evolution happens, galaxies exists, quadrillions of suns and worlds exist, and there's a god guiding/created it all, and he also sent his ONLY begotten son to be crucified to save one species on one planet.

I was taught to use my reason to interpret the Bible, that's what the Church taught me, and, through the Holy Spirit, I would know what is true in the Bible and what isn't. It lead me to doubt the truthfulness of the whole text, so either the Church is wrong about the Holy Spirit guiding me, my reasoning is faulty, or Bible isn't really that good a book to find truth in.

The nuns in my Catholic school told us that back in the '50s. nichomachus Jan 2015 #1
even the US Catholics are still firmly evolutionist MisterP Jan 2015 #12
Well, as Ford points out, it's a preferable to New Earth creationism, but cbayer Jan 2015 #2
Problematic? Leontius Jan 2015 #5
You just made fun of Christians, Jews and Muslims JDDavis Jan 2015 #13
How do you think he made fun of anyone? Who are you going to report him to? cbayer Jan 2015 #17
I find it problematic because it continues to insert a guiding hand into a process cbayer Jan 2015 #16
Black or white, 1 or 0, guided or random, you limit your choice too much Leontius Jan 2015 #76
I don't limit my choices at all and it's certainly not black and white. cbayer Jan 2015 #78
Is consistent, is not consistent . Black or white, 1 or 0. Leontius Jan 2015 #79
No, it's nothing like my thinking at all. cbayer Jan 2015 #80
"Evolution depends on randomness." Jim__ Jun 2015 #95
Are you honestly questioning whether evolution depends on random mutations? cbayer Jun 2015 #99
I'm asking you to cite your evidence that the evolutionary process cannot be chaotic. Jim__ Jun 2015 #102
Cognitive dissonance and intellectual dishonesty... MellowDem Jan 2015 #3
The incredible God of the Gaps trots along to his new hiding place. AtheistCrusader Jan 2015 #4
Geez, AtheistCrusader, I so wish you would participate in the discourse here beyond simple dismissal pinto Jan 2015 #8
Evolution and religion are fundamentally incompatible. AtheistCrusader Jan 2015 #9
Why does this guy get to spout logic and history and science and facts in a JDDavis Jan 2015 #14
I agree, evolution and a "guiding hand" are incompatible. pinto Jan 2015 #38
I'm not sure that is true Major Nikon Jun 2015 #107
Touché and fair point. AtheistCrusader Jun 2015 #109
But evolution says edhopper Jan 2015 #6
Don't fall over, but I agree with you 100%. cbayer Jan 2015 #18
I remember edhopper Jan 2015 #20
Well, I knew we could only be on the same page for a minute or two, lol. cbayer Jan 2015 #22
I took him to mean edhopper Jan 2015 #23
And I disagree that they are receding. Quite the contrary. cbayer Jan 2015 #24
As I said edhopper Jan 2015 #25
I'm not sure there is a finite amount of what can be known, but that's a different subject. cbayer Jan 2015 #26
That quote edhopper Jan 2015 #28
I really don't see how you can reach that conclusion. cbayer Jan 2015 #30
Can you give me the source of that quote edhopper Jan 2015 #31
No, I can't, but I bet you can find it if you try. cbayer Jan 2015 #33
here edhopper Jan 2015 #35
Glad you found it but I can't stream. cbayer Jan 2015 #41
That he is saying edhopper Jan 2015 #43
See my other post about the Bill Moyers interview. cbayer Jan 2015 #46
I used the quote in the context of this thread edhopper Jan 2015 #49
I like it when we end up agreeing, edhopper. cbayer Jan 2015 #52
Yes edhopper Jan 2015 #54
NGT would also object to the way you're using the label "agnostic". eomer Jan 2015 #88
I can't listen to this, but I've heard him speak before. cbayer Jan 2015 #89
He clarifies that his real preference is to have no label at all applied to him. eomer Jan 2015 #90
I want to give a public shout out to you for transcribing this for me. cbayer Jan 2015 #91
Por nada - the discussion is one that I really enjoy listening to so it was no burden. eomer Jan 2015 #92
I will listen to it next time I have access to some real internet cbayer Jan 2015 #93
BTW, that's apparently not the interview where he said this. It was to Bill Moyers. cbayer Jan 2015 #45
I watched the interview and he said it. edhopper Jan 2015 #48
It must be an example that he has used more than once, then. cbayer Jan 2015 #51
I am not sure at this point if we understand what each other is saying edhopper Jan 2015 #34
I think when you took his quote out of context, you presented it as his thoughts. cbayer Jan 2015 #37
Watch the video edhopper Jan 2015 #39
You think he's an atheist? Even though he clearly says that he is not? cbayer Jan 2015 #42
I just looked it up edhopper Jan 2015 #47
Lol, it's just like some people assume I am a believer. cbayer Jan 2015 #50
He makes it clear edhopper Jan 2015 #53
I disagree. He makes it clear that god is not part of his scientific thinking. cbayer Jan 2015 #55
just to jump in-- digonswine Jan 2015 #65
You make some really good points. cbayer Jan 2015 #67
I do absolutely care- digonswine Jan 2015 #71
Ah, get some wonderful and refreshing sleep. cbayer Jan 2015 #72
Ahhh-that's better--as I was saying. . . digonswine Jan 2015 #82
That's a really interesting perspective you have. cbayer Jan 2015 #83
I suppose- digonswine Jan 2015 #85
If creation can be handled as allegory and not as literal, what is wrong cbayer Jan 2015 #86
I'm a thinking person and I don't care. cbayer Jun 2015 #98
I think I get that- digonswine Jun 2015 #106
One does not have to be an atheist or a theist? Well, logic says one does. Yorktown Jun 2015 #94
If he doesn't believe in God/s phil89 Jun 2015 #103
"scientific ignorance grows exponentially" is obviously a wrong statement. Yorktown Jun 2015 #111
St. Augustine: The Literal Meaning of Genesis, Book I struggle4progress Jan 2015 #7
That fits quite tidily okasha Jan 2015 #10
I think that needs to be repeated. There are no gaps. Leontius Jan 2015 #15
How convenient. AtheistCrusader Jan 2015 #19
Then why do we need science? phil89 Jun 2015 #104
Only fundies try and make us choose Prophet 451 Jan 2015 #11
I'm curious. AtheistCrusader Jan 2015 #21
I don't know the proper name Prophet 451 Jan 2015 #74
Your presumption is opposed to the scientific method... MellowDem Jan 2015 #68
Not really true Prophet 451 Jan 2015 #75
There's no need for a "stand-in".... MellowDem Jan 2015 #87
Why is 14 billion years nothing to a supreme being. edhopper Jan 2015 #70
To take those in order Prophet 451 Jan 2015 #77
Forgot who I was talking to edhopper Jan 2015 #81
When did God decide to create us? edhopper Jan 2015 #27
There isn't any reason why the two can not continue to exists, if you don't believe then it is your Thinkingabout Jan 2015 #29
I grew up accepting both. louis-t Jan 2015 #32
Can you answer any of my questions from post #27? edhopper Jan 2015 #36
No, because I'm not God. louis-t Jan 2015 #40
So we should just not seek answers edhopper Jan 2015 #44
It's never been a burning obsession of mine. louis-t Jan 2015 #56
I guess that is why edhopper Jan 2015 #57
compartmentalization... MellowDem Jan 2015 #69
Ok folks, now for something completely different - Randomness and Mathematical Proof (Sci Amer) pinto Jan 2015 #58
Intellectual dishonesty. The Bible DOES contradict scientific realities. Joe Magarac Jan 2015 #59
Did you read any of the discussions in this thread? Or just choose a drive by post? pinto Jan 2015 #60
Lol, Joe Magarac. Don't hold back. cbayer Jan 2015 #61
Hi Joe, don't worry about the people attacking you personally below. Warren Stupidity Jun 2015 #97
By his own admission: The belief in question is whatever the believer wants it to be. DetlefK Jan 2015 #62
I was taught that in a Lutheran college years ago. jwirr Jan 2015 #63
I was taught that in a Catholic high school okasha Jan 2015 #64
I think that science teachers in these schools were liberal thinkers who realized that it did not jwirr Jan 2015 #66
That'exactly right. okasha Jan 2015 #73
If God was in some way behind the creation of life... goldent Jan 2015 #84
Layer of ridiculous voodoo horseshit along with a dose of science-acceptance. Warren Stupidity Jun 2015 #96
The God of the gaps. It slices, it dices, it postpones the age of reason yet again! AtheistCrusader Jun 2015 #100
Perhaps one really can have their cake and eat it too Major Nikon Jun 2015 #108
How did he as a scientist come to the conclusion that God belongs into this theory? DetlefK Jun 2015 #101
the mainstream's always accepted the evidence as it came in MisterP Jun 2015 #105
I grew up accepting both, and as such, never took the Bible literally... Humanist_Activist Jun 2015 #110
Wish I'd seen this earlier. Been saying this for years. (nt) UrbScotty Aug 2015 #112
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Evolution-Accepting Chris...»Reply #110