Many Christians Lack Responsibility

This is interesting. Why do you think he said that?If you are supposed to doubt everything he says, then why listen to him in the first place?I get the jist of what he is trying to say, "don't trust me and look it up for yourself," fair enough. But if your subjective interpretation of the bible is supposed to trump his, because you are supposed to question him, why do you need his opinion to begin with? This is also interesting. I'm not going to ask you to prove it, but will you admit that you were told that once by someone else before you believed that it was the "innerrant Word of God?"In other words... ...based on what? Someone else telling you it was and then confirming it? - If so, how? I believe that is how most of us arrive at "atheism." Because we have questioned everything.- Oni

---

Petition to Bailout Comedy The Laugh Factory is imploring Congress to immediately fund what owner Jamie Masada calls an "Economic Cheer-Up." If Congress fails to act quickly, the Laugh Factory comedians are planning to march to Washington and plea to President Obama.

But two subjective interpretations on equal levels can lead to confirmation bias, wouldn't you think?Not to place your faith at equals, but say we are both racist. How would both of our opinions be better? Wouldn't it be better to view all opinions in an open minded way, even those of conflicting ideologies? Ok. But even still, you should question even his knowledge, as he instructed, and his "broader picture" is still subjective. So according to him, your "broader picture" is of more value to you than his...right? And while I agree with you that that is how knowledge is obtained, we have to remember that when speaking of things like "evolution," we are talking about something that brings with it an extensive amount of objective evidence. The problem with religious studies is that we are usually either studying someone elses subjective interpretation of scriptures, or for those lone believers who don't follow any 1 particular religion, their own subjective interpretation.It's like studying Astrology from a "master Astrologist," where in that equation is someone actually studying something with confirmed objective evidence? I think you meant to say "they would rather become deist, not "theist." Since theist still requires a belief in some type of theology.But, I, like Stile, question materialism, but I don't feel any leaning toward a belief in god(s) because of it.I do question the way we experience reality, but again, I see no reason to lean toward any belief in god(s) because of it.Atheism is the default position I take because we are all born this way and get indoctrinated out of it and into some, unverified, belief system about god(s) having no idea if we were taught truth of any kind.We should question everything.- Oni

---

Petition to Bailout Comedy The Laugh Factory is imploring Congress to immediately fund what owner Jamie Masada calls an "Economic Cheer-Up." If Congress fails to act quickly, the Laugh Factory comedians are planning to march to Washington and plea to President Obama.

No, personally I don't put theology and science at equal playing fields.A scientists interpretation of data is similar to a doctors interpretation of medical data. Both sets of data have been ojectively verified and are known as fact. So your opinion of what you see is founded on scientific fact.A pastor's interpretation of data is equal to an astrologers interpretation of astrological signs. Both sets of data are founded in the supernatural, and as such does not have objective evidence to support the premise. Yes but it's not objective in the sense of having supporting evidence, evidence which you can comparitively make a better interpretation with. So it's a one person account that you are interpreting. Without supporting evidence, of say a world wide flood or a man born of a virgin, your interpretation is no better than an astrologist's interpretation of stars. This is not the same at all. If and when a scientific theory changes, it does so because enough objective evidence, reviewed by many third parties, has changed the original theory. Like Newton for Einstein. But one, the original theory still accounts for what it concluded, and seocond, the new theory must explain the objective phenomenon with objective evidence. No scientific theory changes due to a new subjective interpretation of evidence unless it has supporting objective evidence.When you interprete a verse in the bible, you have no objective evidence to support the verse in the first place. Thus you have sooo many different interpretations. However, how many theories for gravity exist? For electromagnitism? For nucleosynthesis? For diversity in species?There are just one for each of those. Now, how many interpretations of Genesis are there? Here's my problem(s):(1) What is a diety?
(2) If you mean God, which one?
(3) What made him?
(4) Why does everything look like it happened naturally?
(5) How did god do it?
(6) Why are the scripture in the different religious texts so inaccurate?
(7) Why is it just one diest?
(8) Why does your geographical location dictate the god you'll worship?etc....To me, a diest/god/ID, brings up more questions than accepting life emerged naturally, just as I accept planets did, stars did, galaxies did, etc... Well, humans aren't born into a "child" state. Babies or infants are born atheist. By the time you get to a child that can describe things, you've already had a period of influencing.When my daughter was 4 she believed in god. She just heard it from her mother and tv. Now shes 12 and questions all of it. Go figure. - Oni

---

Petition to Bailout Comedy The Laugh Factory is imploring Congress to immediately fund what owner Jamie Masada calls an "Economic Cheer-Up." If Congress fails to act quickly, the Laugh Factory comedians are planning to march to Washington and plea to President Obama.

Fair enough. Fair enough. 1 - The theory of evolution. 1 - Planet formation theory1 - The theory of evolution. Ok, but in the verses, how much outside objective evidence is there to lend to the interpretation?In science, objective evidence is used to support the theories. Peer-review subjects the theories to outside opinion evaluating the same objective evidence. It is not left to meer subjective interpretation. With bible verses there is no outside objective evidence; it's all subjective interpretations. A baby's brain functions are very well known. They are incapable of 'believing' anything. They are atheistic by default, because they have no means to make such a choice...until they begin to learn language and understand words. By this time they are capable of being influenced by their parents., thus indoctrinated into a belief system. Can you cite the paper?- Oni

---

Petition to Bailout Comedy The Laugh Factory is imploring Congress to immediately fund what owner Jamie Masada calls an "Economic Cheer-Up." If Congress fails to act quickly, the Laugh Factory comedians are planning to march to Washington and plea to President Obama.