Amie

Well we'll just have to agree to disagree then Helen. I do not think a believer in a relationship with a non believer is a complication.
I think ones attitude about believers or non believers regardless of any relationship they are in can carry over and affect other relations.
No one asked you to encourage anything. I think there is more continuity than not between people regardless of any God beliefs...

Radorth

Note how Dr Trick avoids the issues he himself raised.

How SHOULD a God with "unlimited" choices operate? How could he have "unlimited" choices, what are they, and how would he excercise them without contradicting himself?

Better luck next time.

Rad

HelenM

I have no problem with agreeing to disagree

I'm sure it can...but I think we're getting into different issues now. My original intent was simply to say I think it's wise of someone who knows they couldn't tolerate and/or respect the beliefs of a theist, to avoid dating a theist.

I know . I was just saying my opinion, that's all...

I respect that, really I do.

Thanks for your comments, Amie

take care
Helen

Radorth

Yes, some nits have labeled him the "anti-Christ" and picket his lectures. I also believe people of other faiths can find God, if they are sincere. Unfortunately "good works" religions, including polluted Christianity, attract the lower life forms IMO and those who don't like to think too hard. Hard-core atheists and religious legalists are not so much different in one respect anyway- they believe in salvation through their own works. They are loathe to call themselves sinners as well.

I digress. I do think Peck's extraordinary insight and open-mindedness led him to Christ, and he tells us why he resisted for the wrong reasons as well. One thing his books have shown: there are millions of wise and intelligent people around the world who can grasp paradoxes and make important distinctions.

He also often makes note of the power of grace, and he doubtless saw that Christianity is all about grace, really.

Rad

Sabine Grant

I definitly agree with Amie's last statement. But again I am not limited as a person to seek only my own kind whether in an intimate relationship or social circle. I think it has a lot to do with our experiences thru life. If you are used to naviguate thru diversity, you consider diversity enticing, exciting, a place to grow and learn more.
As far as children, my own are quite older than yours Helen.. they are at the age where mom's spiritual preference is not so relevant anylonger. My son is the only one who is looking forward to attend church. My middle (15) is exploring Wicca and agnosticism...my words to her... " chose what you feel is best fit to you for now". As a christian I trust that God is... so I am being simply still. My oldest (18) has a personal faith that does not require religious practices. She cultivates her relationship with Christ by her own means and she is doing quite fine. It is actualy quite stimulating how their step dad ( my hubby) manages religious talks with my middle one. He ends up giving her reasons to not detest christianity. Had we had our own children, I believe that we would have harmonized our beliefs so that the children end up forming their own choices.
It certainly takes two special people to undertake a "mixed" marriage. I think mostly non prejudiced individuals. Very secure in their beliefs or opinions. But people who appreciate and value other human beings. After all a sunset is a sunset to an atheist or a christian....as long as they can both enjoy it together, they will be fine.

Dr Rick

If that god is omniscient and omnibenevolent, he should and would act in a way that prevents harm and suffering. If he doesn't, then he is not omniscient and/or omnibenevolent, and if he can't, then he is not omnipotent.

Possibilities are infinite, and an omnipotent being would be able to choose from all of them. If some of the possibilities were not open to him, then he would not be omnipotent.



Everything that is possible; this server doesn't have enough bandwidth to list all possibilities. The list of impossibilities for an omnipotent is much, much shorter and does not include preventing suffering and allowing free-will. Insisting that it does contradicts omnipotence. The Christian god did not both prevent suffering and allow free-will even though it was logically possible for him to do so. That means that he didn't want to (he is not omnibenevolent), that he didn't know how to (he is not all-knowing), and/or that he couldn't (he is not all-powerful).

The description of the Christian god as all-loving, all-knowing, and all-powerful is a contradiction because he purportedly created a world that is inconsistent with his character.



If he can't do something that is logically possible without contradicting himself then he has limits.

Rick

Sabine Grant

Beyelzu... still there ? I agree with Amie that as nice as a guy you seem to be, it will not be fair on christian women! Anyways... it is so alien to me that you could make the choice to not pursue a relationship with a woman because she is a christian. I can think of other reasons why we are going to set our limits in terms of intimacy with someone else.. for me for example, I had to set my limits to never again be involved with an alcoholic or a man caught in an addictive personality pattern which alterates his potential. But that is for self preservation. Because it can be very destructive for me as I know I tend to be a "rescuer" and I would become co dependent rapidly. I can think of setting limits to avoid relationships with abusive people whether it is physical or emotional no matter how attractive or intelligent they may be.
Beyelzu... what if you are treated decently, valued and appreciated ( and mostly needed) by a woman who happens to be a christian? should not the way the person will relate to you and treat you and value you be more important than their belief?
Is that to say that an atheist woman or agnostic will automaticaly treat you and value you better than a christian woman?
My hubby not only never considered marriage as an option for his wellbeing ( he was 51 when he married me) ( and it is certainly not the lack of great opportunities from his past relationships with women who kept him from ever marrying), but he insured he would never be a father and on the top of it all never considered having an involved relationship with a christian woman... and even more... a Frenchy!
There he is at the "golden" age, swept off from his feet by a christian woman, and step dad of three kids! so to say " fountain I shall never drink of your water" can easily be overturned by the reality of meeting the unexpected mate who completes you and makes you whole.
On my side, I already knew what kind of man would be that special mate....he had to be able to connect emotionaly and intellectually with me and vice versa. He had to display goodness to others and have empathy for all. He had to be bold in his opinions and fight for great causes. He had to be a writer and musician is a plus. At no time would his spiritual walk be an obstacle to me. All the other stuff is so much more important.
My first hubby was a christian. If we connnected spiritualy, we were never compatible in all the other areas. And 19 years of trying so hard to be compatible makes your life miserable. At some point of time you set yourself free and the other person free and you move on....
So please keep your mind open to the possibility that a God believing woman may be the special mate to you.
I gather also you are in your mid twenties or so( please correct me if I am wrong). You will gain a different perspective on other people as you continue to mature. In any case, your needs will change with time. In any case, pick the woman who will make you want to be a better man....( borrowed from the character of Jack Nicholson in "As good as it gets").

RufusAtticus

Then it should be stated as such. Otherwise, quit bitching about people addressing situations other than the one in Genesis. You complain about christians refering to the bible all the time, but then when they refer to something else you complain about them not looking to it. At least be consistant.

Really now, can you show me where Wildy used scripture to support her opinion on this?

[quopte]I am also left to point out that you too, deferred to the bible, which is why you too had a difficult time giving the obvious answer to the generic, bibleless question.[/quote]

WTF are you smoking? Where did I defer to scripture in forming my opinion? In fact I have mad it clear that I defer to a historical event from the 1950s to determine my opinion. Unless you can come up with a Bible that includes the American civil rights movement, you need to stop making things up.

And yet Wildy, a christian, never managed to use the bible to justify her response. It's amazing how willing you are to sterotype people, even when the counterevidence is in plain sight.

I challenge you to defend that answer. You have asserted as much but I haven't seen you defend it except by saying that it is the nonxian way to answer. Why is "no" the obvious answer in every instance of this question? What reasoning leads you to that conclusion?

RufusAtticus

#1 rule of test taking: You cannot apporpriately and logically answer an question by adding things to it that aren't there.

Yes it is obvious that the impetus behind the op was Genesis 3. However, it is also obvious that the question as written down did not refer to Genesis 3. Thus after the fact you cannot do a bait and switch and say that it does refer to Genesis 3.

RufusAtticus

Nothing wrong, if you realize that there is no such thing as "Christian" morals, just like there is no such thing as "Atheist" morals, or "Muslim" morals. Morals are a product of culture and they can only be justified by axioms. Atheism, christianity, and islam are each too diverse to have one common set of axioms and implementation of the axioms that would apply to every one in them.

Whether these axioms emerged from scripture or the enlightment, they are still axioms. Asking a Christian to defend their morality without using scripture is like asking an Atheist to defend their morality by using scripture. Sometimes it will be possible; sometimes it won't. It is nothing to gloat over.