Those who want to believe in god

by JimmyYoung 15 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • cofty
    cofty
    Absolutely. Especially if it’s harmful and an impediment to advancement. - DD

    If you look at my first post on this thread you will that I am making a distinction between fundamentalist christianity and mainstream christians who accept the facts of science and scholarly criticism of the bible. My criticism of Jimmyyoung is that he attacks an easy target and tars all believers with the same brush.

    In what ways do you think Anglican Christianity or Universalism is an impediment to advancement?

  • DATA-DOG
    DATA-DOG

    I don’t know exactly what those two denominations claim to believe, but how is believing in an invisible being, and having any kind of a hierarchy where a group of humans speak for that being to other “lesser” beings, making choices for them that limit their personal development based on the “word” of that being not an impediment to advancement on some level? How can any kind of group-think be good in the end?

    Due to my personal life, I find myself in the company of Pentecostals quite often. As a rule they are nice people, but their thought processes are short-circuited by their ideology. There are certain conversations that are simply impossible to have. Forget any philosophical discussion about life, or sitting down at the pub and debating the nature of existence. They already “know.”

    DD

  • DATA-DOG
    DATA-DOG

    Mainstream Christians who accept science confuse me more than Pentecostals. If you’re really a Christian and believe in the Bible as God’s word then you can’t reconcile those beliefs with science.

    Although I disagree with groups like the Pentecostals, at least they believe the Bible, or their interpretation of it. If the Bible says homosexuality is wrong, then it is, ect. They aren’t picking and choosing their core beliefs.

    Then we have the intellectual dishonesty of Mainstream Christians and the mental gymnastics necessary to reconcile scientific truth with Biblical “truth.”

    The only truth I see in the Bible is that of Archetypal examples and common sense, like, “you reap what you sow”, ect. Some lessons are just as true now as they were 2,000 years ago, but we don’t need organized religion to understand those truths.

    DD

  • cofty
    cofty

    DD - Pentecostals are fundamentalists. In every post I have made in this thread I have been careful to make a distinction. Fundies reject science and the results of the enlightenment. We need to oppose the dogma of fundamentalist christianity.

    Millions of mainstream christians, such as Anglicans, Episcopalians, Congregationalists and Universalists, do not claim the the bible is infallible. They accept evolution, in fact some leading scientists are christians of this sort. They don't need to do mental gymnastics to accommodate reality.

    I'm wondering if the problem in communication here is because fundamentalist christianity is almost universal in the USA and the opposite is the case in the UK and Europe.

    I think we need to make a distinction between a Salafist Jihadi and the elderly lady shuffling off to her parish church.

  • Iymus
    Iymus

    Father is an originator

    The concept of Believing in a source or originator seems practical. An example is Hippocrates the Father of Modern medicine.

    When it comes to existence or life itself it seems reasonable to believe in a Father of existence or Spiritual Father.

    John 5: 26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself

  • Rivergang
    Rivergang

    Those churches that tend to be classified as "mainstream" do share certain similarities with many of the JWs who remain long-term with their religion:

    i.e. While giving lip service to the whole thing, they quietly ignore its more extreme demands.

    I see this in operation amongst some of my own family. Also, I have seen notable examples of this amongst others whose time "in the truth" exceeds 70 years.The only issue with that is the certain "compromises" that have to be worked, and the double standards that have to be applied. For example (and speaking here from direct experience), parroting the WTS / FDS line about "Higher Education" whilst delivering an assembly talk, yet at the same time allowing ones son to attend university. (Then, just to advertise the matter further, the son went on to become a highly regarded electrical engineer in the whole state!).

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit