Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?

[The Grand Nudger]

I don't think that they actually have a different experience or appraisal of this stuff...most of it is pious theater.  Doubt abounds, in the hearts of atheists, in the hearts of believers, in the biblical narrative. There's no dissonance, simply a disparity between what they advertise and what they feel. Neo came to us as some sort of flaky swedenborgian and has somehow transformed into a putatively fundamental catholic....or maybe not, maybe he's shopping now for a new faith.

None of these "god spoke to me" types w get on the boards..when pressed, maintain that god actually spoke to them. None of the "I have a personal relationship with christ" types we get on the boards maintain that they actually have a personal relationship with christ. It's just a script. Similarly, the most ardent literalist throws the story right under the bus when it rubs against whatever they believe, or say they believe. Monkey men and snake people......

There's no dissonance there, no discomfort...theyre all very comfortable in doing all of this.

Just dishonesty.

[Whateverist]

I suspect that is true. That's why every now and then one will upbraid another for not acting Christian correctly .. at least when outsiders are present.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Neo came to us as some sort of flaky swedenborgian and has somehow transformed into a putatively fundamental catholic....

Are you saying that it is acceptable to gradually (or suddenly) loose one's faith but unacceptable to grow in it?

(I haven't gone full RCIA yet, but I do have a very healthy respect for the Church Fathers, largely because of my Swedenborg studies. Something about Catholic culture rubs me the wrong way; although they do have the best visual art. Methodists have the best hymns, thank you very much John Wesley. My lack of commitment is a personal problem of mine and not a doctrinal one. Always been a bit of a square peg.)

[Amarok]

My general principle is that things are as they appear to be until shown otherwise

lol well that explains a lot

[The Grand Nudger]

Neo came to us as some sort of flaky swedenborgian and has somehow transformed into a putatively fundamental catholic....

Are you saying that it is acceptable to gradually (or suddenly) loose one's faith but unacceptable to grow in it?

(I haven't gone full RCIA yet, but I do have a very healthy respect for the Church Fathers, largely because of my Swedenborg studies. Something about Catholic culture rubs me the wrong way; although they do have the best visual art. Methodists have the best hymns, thank you very much John Wesley. My lack of commitment is a personal problem of mine and not a doctrinal one. Always been a bit of a square peg.)

Are you saying that there are no black swans!?!?!

Yup.  See what I mean?  (I know you don't, lol...  )

Methodists, the best hymns? Dude......you need to go to a Black Southern Baptist service (it;s where lapsed catholics go when they don;t want to feel guilty but can;t sit through the boringness). Tell me who's that writin!

[Neo-Scholastic]

Are you saying that it is acceptable to gradually (or suddenly) loose one's faith but unacceptable to grow in it?

(I haven't gone full RCIA yet, but I do have a very healthy respect for the Church Fathers, largely because of my Swedenborg studies. Something about Catholic culture rubs me the wrong way; although they do have the best visual art. Methodists have the best hymns, thank you very much John Wesley. My lack of commitment is a personal problem of mine and not a doctrinal one. Always been a bit of a square peg.)

Are you saying that there are no black swans!?!?!

Yup.  See what I mean?  (I know you don't, lol...  )

Methodists, the best hymns?  Dude......you need to go to a Black Southern Baptist service (it;s where lapsed catholics go when they don;t want to feel guilty but can;t sit through the boringness).  Tell me who's that writin!

Yeaaaah...can't do the gospel thing...must be some lingering Presbyterian stodginess. I mean they're DANCING! in church. How can that be!?!

[Amarok]

Are you saying that it is acceptable to gradually (or suddenly) loose one's faith but unacceptable to grow in it?

Ones waking up and smelling the coffee the other is going back to sleep

[Thumpalumpacus]

Music is a powerful tool for spirituality.

[The Grand Nudger]

Are you saying that there are no black swans!?!?!

Yup.  See what I mean?  (I know you don't, lol...  )

Methodists, the best hymns?  Dude......you need to go to a Black Southern Baptist service (it;s where lapsed catholics go when they don;t want to feel guilty but can;t sit through the boringness).  Tell me who's that writin!

Yeaaaah...can't do the gospel thing...must be some lingering Presbyterian stodginess. I mean they're DANCING! in church. How can that be!?!

-and because of that awesomeness..I'll give you the elaboration that a human being deserves - rather than what a christer automaton can expect from me.

I;m not telling you what is or isn;t okay with your personal faith..but I would point out, that even framing a question as-such implicitly claims that one version of faith is lesser than another......  

Are you "growing" into catholicism, or degenerating into it?  

I'd say neither, in a vacuum (though in your case it does seem like a degenerate change) but even expressing it as such exposes the fluidity of doctrine and authority that you accept, internally.  One faith tradition tells us that much of what the other maintains to be infallibly true is childishly silly - OFC there was no talking snake.  Some here think that you must feel dissonance, but I don't think so, given how tenuous any authoritative voice on the god subject obviously is, for you.  Today, the "early church fathers" get your respect, but not so long ago they were base simpletons. I'm still at that point, where I recognize that they were base simpletons. Even your hero aquinas was bound, however smart he might have been, to being able to conclude only certain things, to share a specific view -of- those conclusions...and while you come away thinking that he proved god, in some sense, in a way that hasn't been refuted...I see him as having realized that he -couldn't- prove god...and perhaps not even having believed in the way that he is now mythologized to have believed...but, he lived at a certain time, and had to hold his tongue. His comments to the effect that christer god simply could not be arrived at purely by reason are as close to an affirmation of atheism as would have been less-than-lethal in his own time.

[Ravenshire]

Okay...fine. I'll grant that there are maybe 3 or 4 AF members that can still give enough of a shit to  raise a serious objection.

Fixed that for you.

Chad, what you (and most of the other faithers who come here) just don't get is that we don't give a shit about your religious arguments. If we're arguing them at all, for the most part it's out of boredom, wanting to play whack-a-mole, whatever... Most of of come from religious households, grew up in religious communities and quite likely still live in religious communities. The arguments and evidence were unconvincing then and remain unconvincing now, especially considering they haven't changed.