Democrats still haven’t received the message…

[Ihaveswag29]

I am a mathematician. That is a science. Mathematics is a PURE science. The only other pure science is God.

I am saying one out of every 2,000 children had autism over thirty years ago. Today, the CDC estimates there is one in 150 kids. You are told there is no link to autism and kids are just better diagnosed today, and so you believe the science.

The mathematician analogy I tried to make is that there is a 16.67% chance of anyone rolling a seven with two die. If you get into a game where they are rolling sevens 80% of the time for thirty years, there is something wrong. There is another factor, and the casino is telling you there is no link. I am saying that follows that that casino is making money. You are saying you will stay in the game because it is science, and in another twenty years it will all straighten out and I will see the seven was rolled 16.7% of the time. I am saying the pharmaceutical companies have scientist who say there is no link with vaccines to autism, and PURE science disagrees.

Have you interacted with autistic kids. There is tremendous research today that is helping them cope but you can tell that they are on the spectrum. Did you ever interact with kids over thirty years ago. How many of kids did not speak and had limited verbal skills that went undiagnosed and you now believe were undiagnosed autistic kids? Maybe one?

Do you think there may be more diagnoses because the definition and ability to detect autism changed? Or would that not affect things?

As the mathematician that you are (and I know I won't change your mind, but I am interested in this thought process), how are you arguing stats that show there is not a difference in percentages of kids with autism between those that are vaccinated and those that aren't? If vaccines truly cause autism, as you allege, then wouldn't it be more likely that vaccinated people actually get autism? Here's a study about it: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1124634/.

Tbh, I was going to just let this conversation go. But a kid in Texas just died because he wasn't vaccinated. So it is obviously topical. Here's an article about it: https://www.foxnews.com/health/first-measles-death-reported-west-texas-growing-outbreak.

 

[mediaexpert]

Thirty years ago, I researched this subject and found many linking vaccines and autism. Over a three-year period, I spoke each year with approximately fifty parents who had a child with autism, and around 98% of them reported that their child began showing signs of autism within weeks of receiving vaccinations. A doctor at the time published a book highlighting the correlation between the rising autism rates and the increasing number of additives in childhood vaccines. The findings were compelling, yet immediately afterwards, these claims were widely dismissed, with studies—such as the Danish study—countering the association.

Over the years, I remained actively involved with non-profits, and I’ve noticed a shift in how leaders address the causes of autism. Many have become increasingly vague while acknowledging the possibility that vaccines or environmental factors, such as electromagnetic waves, could play a role. Nevertheless, the public consistently states there is no link between vaccines and autism.

Recently, I watched a discussion featuring Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and parents of autistic children, where approximately only 80% of them attributed their child’s condition to vaccines. This raises concerns about how narratives are shaped as authoritative studies gain traction. I still believe they cannot override firsthand experiences.

BTW, I think RFK Jr will change the narrative just like Dr. Barry Sears changed mine thirty years ago on the authoritative narratives on the food pyramid. And just like Trump is changing the public’s thinking of eight years ago that we have to be in constant conflicts and wars.

 

[Ihaveswag29]

Thirty years ago, I researched this subject and found many linking vaccines and autism. Over a three-year period, I spoke each year with approximately fifty parents who had a child with autism, and around 98% of them reported that their child began showing signs of autism within weeks of receiving vaccinations. A doctor at the time published a book highlighting the correlation between the rising autism rates and the increasing number of additives in childhood vaccines. The findings were compelling, yet immediately afterwards, these claims were widely dismissed, with studies—such as the Danish study—countering the association.

Over the years, I remained actively involved with non-profits, and I’ve noticed a shift in how leaders address the causes of autism. Many have become increasingly vague while acknowledging the possibility that vaccines or environmental factors, such as electromagnetic waves, could play a role. Nevertheless, the public consistently states there is no link between vaccines and autism.

Recently, I watched a discussion featuring Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and parents of autistic children, where approximately only 80% of them attributed their child’s condition to vaccines. This raises concerns about how narratives are shaped as authoritative studies gain traction. I still believe they cannot override firsthand experiences.

BTW, I think RFK Jr will change the narrative just like Dr. Barry Sears changed mine thirty years ago on the authoritative narratives on the food pyramid. And just like Trump is changing the public’s thinking of eight years ago that we have to be in constant conflicts and wars.

So why are you are dismissing the Danish study again?

And this does go back to my initial point. Talking to people that feel that “x” occurred because of “y” is not a real metric. As a mathematician, how many people would you have to talk to that felt 2+2=5 before you thought it did too?

And can you point to the many studies you found?

Yeah RFK going down this path is insane. Probably going to kill a lot of children and bring back diseases that we previously had under control.

 

[mediaexpert]

So why are you are dismissing the Danish study again?

And this does go back to my initial point. Talking to people that feel that “x” occurred because of “y” is not a real metric. As a mathematician, how many people would you have to talk to that felt 2+2=5 before you thought it did too?

And can you point to the many studies you found?

Yeah RFK going down this path is insane. Probably going to kill a lot of children and bring back diseases that we previously had under control.

Yes, I take firsthand experience over a study.

If A, then B; therefore, C. You and I are arguing over C, and I am saying A or B is wrong. If you, as an engineer, showed me proof that a 200-pound man cannot walk across Bridge C and therefore we need to replace it. And you are to be paid ten million to replace it. However, I walked across that bridge, and I weigh 230. You can convince the town with media editorials and many more studies, BUT I have first-hand experience. Nevertheless, I would still want a new bridge because families want to cross that bridge together.

JFK Jr and I are not anti-vaccine. Please rid yourself of that fallacy. I am saying the bridge is necessary, but please examine the elements being used to construct the bridge. The elements in the vaccines are having an adverse reaction on some children.

Trump's audience with Muslim countries and religious leaders in 2017 was insane, but then we negotiated the Abraham Accords. Trump calling Kim Jong-un Rocketman was insane, but we got back hostages and Korean War remains, and we calmed him down.

 

[Ihaveswag29]

Yes, I take firsthand experience over a study.

If A, then B; therefore, C. You and I are arguing over C, and I am saying A or B is wrong. If you, as an engineer, showed me proof that a 200-pound man cannot walk across Bridge C and therefore we need to replace it. And you are to be paid ten million to replace it. However, I walked across that bridge, and I weigh 230. You can convince the town with media editorials and many more studies, BUT I have first-hand experience. Nevertheless, I would still want a new bridge because families want to cross that bridge together.

JFK Jr and I are not anti-vaccine. Please rid yourself of that fallacy. I am saying the bridge is necessary, but please examine the elements being used to construct the bridge. The elements in the vaccines are having an adverse reaction on some children.

Trump's audience with Muslim countries and religious leaders in 2017 was insane, but then we negotiated the Abraham Accords. Trump calling Kim Jong-un Rocketman was insane, but we got back hostages and Korean War remains, and we calmed him down.

Got it.

So, yeah. To round out this conversation. This is a great example of why I switched from being a Republican. I just can’t relate to ignoring scientific data to reach a conclusion I want, and that seems to be a big part of what the republican base and platform is built upon.

 

[mediaexpert]

And that is why I went from being politically agnostic to endorsing Trump. I was told to go to war with Vietnam to stop communism, I had to accept Obamacare to pay for my employees' health insurance, politicians have to have much better health insurance for free, politicians naturally become multimillionaires, I am racist if I hire someone on merit, science proved there are more than two genders, and we need illegals because there are jobs that Americans won't do. I worked in the fields during the week as a busboy and dishwasher on weekends, studied hard on the side, graduated, worked hard, and kept my nose clean. I do not want to send my hard-earned money to promote transgender plays to a country where they kill homosexuals and to countries that support their wars and don't want peace.

 

[tjreese]

So why are you are dismissing the Danish study again?

And this does go back to my initial point. Talking to people that feel that “x” occurred because of “y” is not a real metric. As a mathematician, how many people would you have to talk to that felt 2+2=5 before you thought it did too?

And can you point to the many studies you found?

Yeah RFK going down this path is insane. Probably going to kill a lot of children and bring back diseases that we previously had under control.

I haven’t read the links and really don’t have the desire at this time. That said when testing for differences between two things of uncorrelated data and not getting into variations to possibly alter the
total degrees of freedom a confidence level is
chosen. It may be two tailed which is just looking for difference
Or single tailed which is looking either larger or smaller.

A standard or typical test is 95% confidence. So you would fail if you only showed 94% difference between means. I’m not saying this or that shows a difference or not, but rather trying to illustrate that the null starts out with a no difference approach. In Japan they might accept a lower confidence
Limit on some things

 

[Ihaveswag29]

I haven’t read the links and really don’t have the desire at this time. That said when testing for differences between two things of uncorrelated data and not getting into variations to possibly alter the
total degrees of freedom a confidence level is
chosen. It may be two tailed which is just looking for difference
Or single tailed which is looking either larger or smaller.

A standard or typical test is 95% confidence. So you would fail if you only showed 94% difference between means. I’m not saying this or that shows a difference or not, but rather trying to illustrate that the null starts out with a no difference approach. In Japan they might accept a lower confidence
Limit on some things

This is all well and good. But that’s not even what he is saying. He is not disputing the data or any aspect of it. Just saying he is ignoring it because it doesn’t align with how others feel or what he thinks.

If there were some issue with the data or some counter study to consider, that’s an entirely different conversation. The fact those aren’t even part of the conversation is my point.

 

[BB62]

Yes, I take firsthand experience over a study.

If A, then B; therefore, C. You and I are arguing over C, and I am saying A or B is wrong. If you, as an engineer, showed me proof that a 200-pound man cannot walk across Bridge C and therefore we need to replace it. And you are to be paid ten million to replace it. However, I walked across that bridge, and I weigh 230. You can convince the town with media editorials and many more studies, BUT I have first-hand experience. Nevertheless, I would still want a new bridge because families want to cross that bridge together.

JFK Jr and I are not anti-vaccine. Please rid yourself of that fallacy. I am saying the bridge is necessary, but please examine the elements being used to construct the bridge. The elements in the vaccines are having an adverse reaction on some children.

Trump's audience with Muslim countries and religious leaders in 2017 was insane, but then we negotiated the Abraham Accords. Trump calling Kim Jong-un Rocketman was insane, but we got back hostages and Korean War remains, and we calmed him down.

I don't take any advice, especially when it comes to science, from someone who makes this statement.

"The only other pure science is God."

I can't think of a more ridiculous thing to say.

 

[mediaexpert]

This is all well and good. But that’s not even what he is saying. He is not disputing the data or any aspect of it. Just saying he is ignoring it because it doesn’t align with how others feel or what he thinks.

If there were some issue with the data or some counter study to consider, that’s an entirely different conversation. The fact those aren’t even part of the conversation is my point.

I am not disputing the data because, for thirty years, I have read similar studies. It is what I was trying to say that if A, then B, and therefore C. I am saying that if studies are saying C, then A or B is wrong because I have witnessed it firsthand. It has nothing to do with what I feel because then you would be correct, and I have ignored the science. Science is what you observe at the time of a perfectly normal child morphing into autism within a month. This was substantiated when others say they observed this, too, with their perfectly normal child from immediately to a short time. This is science.

I have heard the media repeatedly say that being against vaccines is anti-science. That is what I tried to explain to you about RFK Jr earlier. Unfortunately, people do not question reports. We all know that if you ask a mathematician what time it is, he will tell you what time do you want it to be, Ask scientists what they will write in their study, and they will ask you how much? Having said that, I still believe most studies are accurate; therefore, I won't dispute the data. But like I said, I will change my mind if they had an alternative like electromagnetic waves with the vaccines.

On a separate topic, you need to study how much propaganda the media allows that influence people.s opinions.

 

[mediaexpert]

I don't take any advice, especially when it comes to science, from someone who makes this statement.

"The only other pure science is God."

I can't think of a more ridiculous thing to say.

What is your definition of God?

 

[BB62]

What is your definition of God?

You mean a god?

If you're referring to the god of Abraham, I don't have a definition because I don't believe in it. I can use your definition if you like.

 

[tjreese]

This is all well and good. But that’s not even what he is saying. He is not disputing the data or any aspect of it. Just saying he is ignoring it because it doesn’t align with how others feel or what he thinks.

If there were some issue with the data or some counter study to consider, that’s an entirely different conversation. The fact those aren’t even part of the conversation is my point.

Well as I said, I haven't read anything to see if there is any background in the data. I just wanted people aware of confidence intervals and how they play into whether a difference is significant or not. If something shows no difference it can be the confidence interval is not met, but very close. It could be that the data lacks precision, repeatability and reproducibility thereby have too large of measurement error to detect significant differences that could actually exist. This is just basic info and sheds no light on anything I haven't read.

 

[mediaexpert]

God is the supreme being. He is infinite Love, Power, and Mind. He is the reason for your being because He is your Life everlasting. If you only believe in your earthly life, love, and mind, then you only believe in your flesh. That is your god. You need to learn to worship the God in Spirit and Truth. God is Love, Christ is Truth, and the Holy Ghost is Spirit. Being in a material world is difficult, but we need to have higher standards and goals and try our best to live in His world, where we have the greatest FREE gift of all - everlasting Life. A God who is perfect means He is pure science. Does my definition make sense to you?

In the fifties, the communists decided to play the long game and divide Americans. They worked hard to create divisions among the races, colors, creeds, and sexual preferences. They have succeeded in making some people think the Bible is not true and that marriage is not important because it is Puritanical that we can't make love to whomever or whatever we want.

I am glad you brought this up because I feel the media is pushing these falsehoods, and we must get to the root causes. One of them is that there is a God or a more pure goal for all of us.

 

[tjreese]

God is the supreme being. He is infinite Love, Power, and Mind. He is the reason for your being because He is your Life everlasting. If you only believe in your earthly life, love, and mind, then you only believe in your flesh. That is your god. You need to learn to worship the God in Spirit and Truth. God is Love, Christ is Truth, and the Holy Ghost is Spirit. Being in a material world is difficult, but we need to have higher standards and goals and try our best to live in His world, where we have the greatest FREE gift of all - everlasting Life. A God who is perfect means He is pure science. Does my definition make sense to you?

In the fifties, the communists decided to play the long game and divide Americans. They worked hard to create divisions among the races, colors, creeds, and sexual preferences. They have succeeded in making some people think the Bible is not true and that marriage is not important because it is Puritanical that we can't make love to whomever or whatever we want.

I am glad you brought this up because I feel the media is pushing these falsehoods, and we must get to the root causes. One of them is that there is a God or a more pure goal for all of us.

I was never well versed in the Frankfurt School influence, but believe this is the influence you mention in the 50s. There are many places to read or watch on this. The dialectic was a certain method in small groups of influencing a new meaning as a result or synthesis...particularly with people easily to compromise with peer pressure. Here is a bit on Hegel and things can be found on Gramsci as well

Then it is not hard to understand that when the Frankfurt School moved into Columbia (Teacher's college) the influence in public education. I'm sure there are better videos, but the truth is most probably don't care to learn about this unless we have a soc or psych major in our midst?

 

[BB62]

God is the supreme being. He is infinite Love, Power, and Mind. He is the reason for your being because He is your Life everlasting. If you only believe in your earthly life, love, and mind, then you only believe in your flesh. That is your god. You need to learn to worship the God in Spirit and Truth. God is Love, Christ is Truth, and the Holy Ghost is Spirit. Being in a material world is difficult, but we need to have higher standards and goals and try our best to live in His world, where we have the greatest FREE gift of all - everlasting Life. A God who is perfect means He is pure science. Does my definition make sense to you?

In the fifties, the communists decided to play the long game and divide Americans. They worked hard to create divisions among the races, colors, creeds, and sexual preferences. They have succeeded in making some people think the Bible is not true and that marriage is not important because it is Puritanical that we can't make love to whomever or whatever we want.

I am glad you brought this up because I feel the media is pushing these falsehoods, and we must get to the root causes. One of them is that there is a God or a more pure goal for all of us.

Lol. I'm reading your arguments using terms like data, research, evidence and the like. Yet in this argument you simply say "A God who is perfect means He is pure science."

Your belief in god ultimately comes down to faith. You know it and I know it. That is not evidence, that is not proof. Faith in something being true has no place in science.

I'm not gonna chase you around to get an explanation. You said it. You want to defend it, fine. You wanna preach your delusions, find someone easily fooled by BS, like your MAGA buddies.

Everlasting life, 72 virgins, every religion makes promises for the afterlife. You want to live your life to get the hypothetical prize at the end, be my guest. Just don't expect, demand or legislate I do it or follow any of the other rules that go along with it. Your loving god who allows children to starve and be murdered thanks you for your tithing.

 

[Ihaveswag29]

Well as I said, I haven't read anything to see if there is any background in the data. I just wanted people aware of confidence intervals and how they play into whether a difference is significant or not. If something shows no difference it can be the confidence interval is not met, but very close. It could be that the data lacks precision, repeatability and reproducibility thereby have too large of measurement error to detect significant differences that could actually exist. This is just basic info and sheds no light on anything I haven't read.

Great. But you're also assuming this kind of information matters for a conversation with a typical Republican. That's a gigantic leap. As you have seen, all that is needed is talking to people on their thoughts and personal thoughts on the subject.

 

[tjreese]

Great. But you're also assuming this kind of information matters for a conversation with a typical Republican. That's a gigantic leap. As you have seen, all that is needed is talking to people on their thoughts and personal thoughts on the subject.

I've not read things to know or take sides on anything and I certainly don't think lack of understanding of data lies only in the republican fold. It is lacking in professionals as well from all stripes.

 

[Ihaveswag29]

I've not read things to know or take sides on anything and I certainly don't think lack of understanding of data lies only in the republican fold. It is lacking in professionals as well from all stripes.

Yeah, I probably went too far there.

 

[mediaexpert]

Lol. I'm reading your arguments using terms like data, research, evidence and the like. Yet in this argument you simply say "A God who is perfect means He is pure science."

Your belief in god ultimately comes down to faith. You know it and I know it. That is not evidence, that is not proof. Faith in something being true has no place in science.

I'm not gonna chase you around to get an explanation. You said it. You want to defend it, fine. You wanna preach your delusions, find someone easily fooled by BS, like your MAGA buddies.

Everlasting life, 72 virgins, every religion makes promises for the afterlife. You want to live your life to get the hypothetical prize at the end, be my guest. Just don't expect, demand or legislate I do it or follow any of the other rules that go along with it. Your loving god who allows children to starve and be murdered thanks you for your tithing.

Yes, we walk by faith. Can you prove Love? Love is a spirit; you cannot see or touch it, but it is like God a given. So how do you prove Love? You can't even prove love! What can you prove? You look at things in one, two, or three dimensions; how do you know there is no fourth dimension that makes your concept of reality false? Please name a fact that is not based on faith. Have you studied metaphysics? Just because you see, feel, or hear something, it does not mean it is true unless you have faith in your senses.

God is everlasting Life. We say Christ is Truth and proves that we have everlasting Life, and as the Son of God and the son of man, He rose from the dead. After three days, we have proof that He rose from the dead. Hundreds saw him after He died on the cross and rose from the dead. The Twelve Apostles died horrific and torturous deaths instead of saying it was a hoax. That is scientific proof!

 

[tjreese]

Yes, we walk by faith. Can you prove Love? Love is a spirit; you cannot see or touch it, but it is like God a given. So how do you prove Love? You can't even prove love! What can you prove? You look at things in one, two, or three dimensions; how do you know there is no fourth dimension that makes your concept of reality false? Please name a fact that is not based on faith. Have you studied metaphysics? Just because you see, feel, or hear something, it does not mean it is true unless you have faith in your senses.

God is everlasting Life. We say Christ is Truth and proves that we have everlasting Life, and as the Son of God and the son of man, He rose from the dead. After three days, we have proof that He rose from the dead. Hundreds saw him after He died on the cross and rose from the dead. The Twelve Apostles died horrific and torturous deaths instead of saying it was a hoax. That is scientific proof!

All that said, I can understand why certain things are troubling...particularly for one absent more understanding on the Christian side as a counter balance to that which which seems at odds with the reality we know. There are things that some have to reconcile or as you say be led by faith. Opening your mind and trying to reconcile seems best for some. I'm not going to add much more, but when you reference people seeing Him after His death (many will not know this) I'll add to that by stating that the New Testament was written during the years that eyewitnesses were alive.

Different understandings also take place when certain scripture is taken literally or figuratively, but the bottom line like all things, is that if a discussion with someone on a subject has different understandings, it may very well be due to different starting places. Why would we expect others to have the same understandings on things if their backgrounds are different or the starting places are different?

 

[BB62]

All that said, I can understand why certain things are troubling...particularly for one absent more understanding on the Christian side as a counter balance to that which which seems at odds with the reality we know. There are things that some have to reconcile or as you say be led by faith. Opening your mind and trying to reconcile seems best for some. I'm not going to add much more, but when you reference people seeing Him after His death (many will not know this) I'll add to that by stating that the New Testament was written during the years that eyewitnesses were alive.

Different understandings also take place when certain scripture is taken literally or figuratively, but the bottom line like all things, is that if a discussion with someone on a subject has different understandings, it may very well be due to different starting places. Why would we expect others to have the same understandings on things if their backgrounds are different or the starting places are different?

You mean if one wasn't indoctrinated from birth that Christianity is the one true religion?

The starting places for someone born in Saudi Arabia are different. Same for India. They believe the true religion is Muslim or Hindu. How are they any different than you? Would you say that if you were born in one of those countries you'd still be Christian?

 

[tjreese]

You mean if one wasn't indoctrinated from birth that Christianity is the one true religion?

The starting places for someone born in Saudi Arabia are different. Same for India. They believe the true religion is Muslim or Hindu. How are they any different than you? Would you say that if you were born in one of those countries you'd still be Christian?

Well, I have in the past typed the differences in Christianity and other religions and what makes Christianity much different. Even the Muslims referenced Mary the most high and borrowed prayer beads as well. Mary was held in much higher esteem than Mohammed's own daughter, Fatima by the muslims

Your hypothetical question about if I were born in Saudi Arabia or India has no answer since you or I don't know the answer to that question. There are Christians in those countries although a very small amount. That said it is also reasonable to suggest that I would not have been exposed to Christianity and I get that. Ultimately, if Christianity is the superior religion how are those in countries as you suggest treated since many are not Christian. Many have proposed an understanding from their position. I'll also add that although denominations in Christianity disagree on some things, they agree on the main things even if some differences in understanding exist.

In the first couple of hundred years of Christianity there was differences in some things that were regarded as heresies, primarily due to no supporting evidence elsewhere than that location in question. Things put into the NT were common writings on papyrus found in different continents that were alike.

 

[TwinDegrees2]

You mean if one wasn't indoctrinated from birth that Christianity is the one true religion?

The starting places for someone born in Saudi Arabia are different. Same for India. They believe the true religion is Muslim or Hindu. How are they any different than you? Would you say that if you were born in one of those countries you'd still be Christian?

Bob, not being obstinate here, but by all means I'd encourage you to read the New Testament. Even if you come away still not believing, you'll at least have more compassion for those who do and will understand more of ancient history.

 

[BB62]

Yes, we walk by faith. Can you prove Love? Love is a spirit; you cannot see or touch it, but it is like God a given. So how do you prove Love? You can't even prove love! What can you prove? You look at things in one, two, or three dimensions; how do you know there is no fourth dimension that makes your concept of reality false? Please name a fact that is not based on faith. Have you studied metaphysics? Just because you see, feel, or hear something, it does not mean it is true unless you have faith in your senses.

God is everlasting Life. We say Christ is Truth and proves that we have everlasting Life, and as the Son of God and the son of man, He rose from the dead. After three days, we have proof that He rose from the dead. Hundreds saw him after He died on the cross and rose from the dead. The Twelve Apostles died horrific and torturous deaths instead of saying it was a hoax. That is scientific proof!

Lol. We have faith in our senses because science has proven how they work. Experience.........EVERY DAY FOR EVERY HUMAN BEING it's being proven over and over that our senses work.

Even if Jesus rose from the dead, how does that prove he's the son of god, there is a god, god is in control, there's a heaven and hell........and all the other fantasies you believe?

 

[BB62]

Bob, not being obstinate here, but by all means I'd encourage you to read the New Testament. Even if you come away still not believing, you'll at least have more compassion for those who do and will understand more of ancient history.

Don't talk to me about compassion when you Christians ignore the teachings of Jesus everyday with your hatred of those less fortunate. Compassion for those who believe? Are you kidding me?Complete hypocrisy.

FYI I was raised in the Church of the Brethren in the cornfields of Indiana. Sunday school and the sermon every Sunday for 14 years. Vacation Bible school every spring. Church camp every summer. Sang all the songs and performed in plays every Christmas. Sunrise service every Easter. Been there done that. You're not talking to a novice here.

I believed what I was told to believe. Then I started thinking for myself.

 

[BB62]

Well, I have in the past typed the differences in Christianity and other religions and what makes Christianity much different. Even the Muslims referenced Mary the most high and borrowed prayer beads as well. Mary was held in much higher esteem than Mohammed's own daughter, Fatima by the muslims

Your hypothetical question about if I were born in Saudi Arabia or India has no answer since you or I don't know the answer to that question. There are Christians in those countries although a very small amount. That said it is also reasonable to suggest that I would not have been exposed to Christianity and I get that. Ultimately, if Christianity is the superior religion how are those in countries as you suggest treated since many are not Christian. Many have proposed an understanding from their position. I'll also add that although denominations in Christianity disagree on some things, they agree on the main things even if some differences in understanding exist.

In the first couple of hundred years of Christianity there was differences in some things that were regarded as heresies, primarily due to no supporting evidence elsewhere than that location in question. Things put into the NT were common writings on papyrus found in different continents that were alike.

Of course you know the answer. If you were born and raised in Saudi Arabia to Saudi parents who were Muslim you would be Muslim.

Your deflections to Mary or denominations or heresies mean nothing and are not on point or relevant.

The numbers vary....... but humans have worshipped as many as 18,000 gods during their time on earth. Both of us deny the existence of 17,999 of them. The only difference is I don't believe in one more.

 

[mediaexpert]

Okay, let's go back to basics: God is Love, and Love is God. Please notice the capital letter L, meaning Divine or infinite love. This is a FREE gift to everyone to accept through the Truth. We are all in the world but not of the world. What does that mean? I accept that in this world, we have to be practical and accept that we have a finite life with finite senses, and for the most part, my god is me. However, as a believer in God, I accept that my reality is God alone, where I have infinite Love and an infinite Mind. In the world, my life or time is finite. If I live to age 120 or if I believe the world is 7,000 years old or 300,000,000 years old, as a mathematician, divide any of these numbers by infinity and you get zero or, as scripture says, a twinkling of the eye. If you do not accept God and will only accept god (self), your reality is that you only have life. Is that what you want? You may think you lived Life and had accomplishments, but the most you have done adds up to less than dirty rags.

BTW, even though I believe. I am in the world, and I mess up all the time, and I am the world's biggest hypocrite, so yes, if you want to judge me, you are correct. I need to practice what I preach.

 

[tjreese]

Of course you know the answer. If you were born and raised in Saudi Arabia to Saudi parents who were Muslim you would be Muslim.

Your deflections to Mary or denominations or heresies mean nothing and are not on point or relevant.

The numbers vary....... but humans have worshipped as many as 18,000 gods during their time on earth. Both of us deny the existence of 17,999 of them. The only difference is I don't believe in one more.

Actually there are more differences than one and Mary shows an understanding and belief in Christianity to a degree by Muslims. You find no such thing the other direction. I understand what you understand, but you don’t understand what I understand. This is an example of not ending at the same understanding due to different starting places…which is fine. I don’t need to attempt to change your view

 

[BB62]

Actually there are more differences than one and Mary shows an understanding and belief in Christianity to a degree by Muslims. You find no such thing the other direction. I understand what you understand, but you don’t understand what I understand. This is an example of not ending at the same understanding due to different starting places…which is fine. I don’t need to attempt to change your view

It's like you're talking to yourself lol. You don't read the post. Just stream of consciousness.

I didn't say anything about differences or Mary or Muslims believing in Christianity.

You understand me but I don't understand you? Lol. This post is representative of what you do when you don't have an answer.

 

[TwinDegrees2]

Don't talk to me about compassion when you Christians ignore the teachings of Jesus everyday with your hatred of those less fortunate. Compassion for those who believe? Are you kidding me?Complete hypocrisy.

FYI I was raised in the Church of the Brethren in the cornfields of Indiana. Sunday school and the sermon every Sunday for 14 years. Vacation Bible school every spring. Church camp every summer. Sang all the songs and performed in plays every Christmas. Sunrise service every Easter. Been there done that. You're not talking to a novice here.

I believed what I was told to believe. Then I started thinking for myself.

I hate no one Bob. I don't like yappy little dogs though.

 

[BB62]

Okay, let's go back to basics: God is Love, and Love is God. Please notice the capital letter L, meaning Divine or infinite love. This is a FREE gift to everyone to accept through the Truth. We are all in the world but not of the world. What does that mean? I accept that in this world, we have to be practical and accept that we have a finite life with finite senses, and for the most part, my god is me. However, as a believer in God, I accept that my reality is God alone, where I have infinite Love and an infinite Mind. In the world, my life or time is finite. If I live to age 120 or if I believe the world is 7,000 years old or 300,000,000 years old, as a mathematician, divide any of these numbers by infinity and you get zero or, as scripture says, a twinkling of the eye. If you do not accept God and will only accept god (self), your reality is that you only have life. Is that what you want? You may think you lived Life and had accomplishments, but the most you have done adds up to less than dirty rags.

BTW, even though I believe. I am in the world, and I mess up all the time, and I am the world's biggest hypocrite, so yes, if you want to judge me, you are correct. I need to practice what I preach.

Back to basics? If you're not gonna interact and engage with the questions I ask, all you're doing is preaching at me and I have better things to do.

Faith in our senses is a ridiculous take.

Are you resetting because you don't want to or can't answer the questions?

"Even if Jesus rose from the dead, how does that prove he's the son of god, there is a god, god is in control, there's a heaven and hell........and all the other fantasies you believe?"

It's like you don't have a clue as to how someone would not believe in your god. "God is love and love is god"? Are you serious? You can stop right there. You immediately presume god to be real. I DON'T. Do you understand?

The only cognitive part of your post was when you said the only reality I have is life. YES! Exactly. That's what I want. I don't live my life in preparation for some afterlife that I have no idea even exists.

The one common thread among almost all religions is the promise of a better, wonderful, stupendous afterlife as long as you follow the rules during your real life. Why is that? Have you EVER ONCE thought about that? You tell your child if they clean their room you'll take them out for ice cream. If they don't, no TV for a week. Do what I want you to do and you'll get a reward. What do you think the child is going to do? All religions use this basic reward/punishment trick because IT WORKS.

The only difference between you and your afterlife and the child's reward/punishment is the child KNOWS FOR A FACT one of those two outcomes is very likely to happen assuming the parent keeps his word. You don't know for a fact there is a heaven or hell but you are willing to live your entire life in a way that gets you to heaven and not to hell. The only thing that you have is your FAITH that there is a heaven. It is not a fact.

I don't care if you choose to spend your life in pursuit of something you don't know to be true. But to act like such a ridiculous exercise is normal and makes sense is insane or is the result of a lifetime of brainwashing.

 

[tjreese]

It's like you're talking to yourself lol. You don't read the post. Just stream of consciousness.

I didn't say anything about differences or Mary or Muslims believing in Christianity.

You understand me but I don't understand you? Lol. This post is representative of what you do when you don't have an answer.

I'll remind you that you mentioned Mary and the beads borrowed 600-800 years later by the Muslims does have something to do with the differences in the religions as your "implication" there was no difference only in where you were born...of which I also said there were Christians not yet killed in the countries you mention... which should have registered that your implication may not be accurate. Your inability to understand connections is not my issue, but clearly validates that people starting from different backgrounds many times have different endings.

 

[BB62]

I'll remind you that you mentioned Mary and the beads borrowed 600-800 years later by the Muslims does have something to do with the differences in the religions as your "implication" there was no difference only in where you were born...of which I also said there were Christians not yet killed in the countries you mention... which should have registered that your implication may not be accurate. Your inability to understand connections is not my issue, but clearly validates that people starting from different backgrounds many times have different endings.

You're losing it. It's like you think you're still young enough that your thoughts make sense.

I said nothing about Mary with borrowed beads 600 years ago. I made no implication that the only difference only in where you were born. Christians not killed in the countries I mentioned? Wtf does that have to with anything?

I don't understand your connections because they make no sense except to you. You end up jumping steps to get to your point and then blame others that can't follow you.

My point was simple. Your religion is much more than likely based on what your parents believed and therefore what you were brought up to believe. Children are easily impressionable, especially by their folks.

As usual, your wandering rants have left me unwilling to continue.

 

[mediaexpert]

Back to basics? If you're not gonna interact and engage with the questions I ask, all you're doing is preaching at me and I have better things to do.

Faith in our senses is a ridiculous take. WHEN DOING A PROOF, A THEN B, THEREFORE C. A and B are conditional statements almost always based on faith. I take God as real just like you take your senses as real, but think about it, you can actually be in an awaking dream.

Are you resetting because you don't want to or can't answer the questions? I WILL TRY.

"Even if Jesus rose from the dead, how does that prove he's the son of god, there is a god, god is in control, there's a heaven and hell........and all the other fantasies you believe?" IF ANYONE CLAIMS TO BE THE SON OF GOD AND IF KILLED WILL RISE AGAIN IN THREE DAYS, and then does it that is proof to me that He is the Son of God.

It's like you don't have a clue as to how someone would not believe in your god. "God is love and love is god"? Are you serious? You can stop right there. You immediately presume god to be real. I DON'T. Do you understand? MY DEFINITION OF GOD WAS IN PART THAT GOD EQUALS LOVE. If you presume that Love is real, then you have to presume God is real. I do not see Love with my senses, but I take that as a given, and since you can't prove Love, if you believe in Love, then you fit my definition of someone who believes in God, no matter how stubborn you want to be.

The only cognitive part of your post was when you said the only reality I have is life. YES! Exactly. That's what I want. I don't live my life in preparation for some afterlife that I have no idea even exists. I understand your position completely. I used to be a bodyguard for celebrities and had a wonderful life partying, doing drugs, and drinking like a fish on the Upper East side of NYC. I moved to the Village in Dallas where I played baseball, volleyball, football, and basketball year round and had sex with gorgeous women six days a week like clockwork. My life was incredible and everything I always wanted. I then had children and realized this is not the example I want for them. I slowly changed, and started to enjoy talking theology at church, and coming to my gnostic cpnclusions that made sense to me. I enjoy my role as trying to be a light to others.

The one common thread among almost all religions is the promise of a better, wonderful, stupendous afterlife as long as you follow the rules during your real life. Why is that? Have you EVER ONCE thought about that? You tell your child if they clean their room you'll take them out for ice cream. If they don't, no TV for a week. Do what I want you to do and you'll get a reward. What do you think the child is going to do? All religions use this basic reward/punishment trick because IT WORKS. Not all Christian denomination preach this, and I don't. I do my best to live a life of integrity. I try not to judge others, but I consistently judge myself, and I use the Bible as sufficient guide as life's manual. Then again, I realize God is my highest idea and I cannot do it on my own, so I constantly pray. When myself was my god, I had a fascinating life, but I pray and am thankful I have a content Life. I am happy. and the biggest achievement is I have two kids with amazing integrity, both have integrity more than I, If I die, and my A and B were wrong and my life was finite, I still won.

The only difference between you and your afterlife and the child's reward/punishment is the child KNOWS FOR A FACT one of those two outcomes is very likely to happen assuming the parent keeps his word. You don't know for a fact there is a heaven or hell but you are willing to live your entire life in a way that gets you to heaven and not to hell. The only thing that you have is your FAITH that there is a heaven. It is not a fact. ALL I KNOW IS THAT WALKING WITH GOD IS MY REALITY! Being in the world is my practicality, but in the twinkling of the eye this world will turn to dust. I have physical problems after losing twelve extremely close people to me, and then going through a nasty divorce that left me in over $300.000 in debt. but I look back and consider it all joy, as I remained as faithful as I could. My regret is that I did not handle it better, but I realize I am in the world.

I don't care if you choose to spend your life in pursuit of something you don't know to be true. But to act like such a ridiculous exercise is normal and makes sense is insane or is the result of a lifetime of brainwashing. MY POINT IS THAT TRYING TO LIVE WITHOUT GOD IS THE BRAINWASHING THAT WE ARE EXPERIMENTING, AS THE RESULT OF OUR ENEMIES AND WITH THE HELP OF THE MEDIA.

 

[BB62]

Yeah, the same book that says Jesus rose from the dead says the earth was created in 6 days, two of every animal in the world lived together on a boat for a year, and your god made a woman from the rib of a man. I've got more if you like.


God equals love.
Love is real.
Therefore, god is real.

The logic and scientific evidence just oozes out, doesn't it?

 

[BB62]

I hate no one Bob. I don't like yappy little dogs though.

Wow what a thorough and enlightening post.

I'm glad to hear you don't hate progressives and illegal immigrants and the LGBTQ community, among others. Your posts reflect a different attitude but I'm sure you're just misunderstood.

It is not arguable that you have no compassion for many groups of people. But since that's not hate I guess your god won't hold it against you. Just ask for forgiveness and you can start not loving your neighbor again tomorrow.

 

[tjreese]

Hate hearing about your previou strife, but happy you are where you are. You lost me in your gnostic conclusions, but that is fine. Bob lacks the requisite knowledge in theology to dig deep enough to be able to reconcile things and to attempt to understand a literal and figurative understanding and if there is a way that his concerns can be handled without disagreement in the Bible. Go as far as you want. but I thought the dots were close enough before without providing all the info to follow and it didn't work...so good luck to you as I have no desire to explain things. BTW, you are doing better than most in that he hasn't labeled you as far as I know...