Richard Dawkins says he is a Cultural Christian

[Rival]

I actually enjoyed listening to Charles Spungeon's semons, not that I necessarily agree with all his statements, but I remember his radio show broadcasts with pleasure.

Spurgeon died in 1892. How was he doing radio broadcasts?

 

[YoursTrue]

Billy Graham is the only televangelist that I think was authentic. He was the real deal.

He is the one I listened to a lot and he is part of my movement to pray at last. And God answered my prayers. But I do not believe as Billy Graham does. ok, did.

 

[YoursTrue]

Spurgeon died in 1892. How was he doing radio broadcasts?

I think the sermons were read, thanks for mentioning it. You're right. Jesus, The King of Truth | Spurgeon Sermons with C.H. Spurgeon The sermons were read by someone else.

 

[YoursTrue]

Billy Graham is the only televangelist that I think was authentic. He was the real deal.

oops, it's Billy Graham, not Billie. thanks.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

I actually enjoyed listening to Charles Spungeon's semons, not that I necessarily agree with all his statements, but I remember his radio show broadcasts with pleasure.
I also enjoyed listening to Billie Graham but that was before I believed in God. I needed help in my life and enjoyed the experiences he told. I was hoping God could help me, Billie Graham would often give examples of people that God helped and I appreciated that. Although I do not now have all the same beliefs Billie Graham did. However, his sermons helped me look for what I consider to be the "one true" actual God. And I believe I found Him. He heard me,

I had always enjoyed listening to Dr. Richard Dawkins, even when I was a devout Christian believer praying to God 10-15+ times per day. I took the Christian faith very, very seriously and it consumed most of my free time, but I couldn't help but find myself enthralled with Dr. Dawkins' lucidity and rationality. This video is one of my favorites:

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I had always enjoyed listening to Dr. Richard Dawkins, even when I was a devout Christian believer praying to God 10-15+ times per day. I took the Christian faith very, very seriously and it consumed most of my free time, but I couldn't help but find myself enthralled with Dr. Dawkins' lucidity and rationality.

Everyone is different.

For me, I cannot tolerate listening to people who are so busy preaching that they cannot hear the other side, much less understand it. It doesn't matter to me if the person is Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, or Atheist like Dawkins. I simply tune out the hostility.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

Everyone is different.

For me, I cannot tolerate listening to people who are so busy preaching that they cannot hear the other side, much less understand it. It doesn't matter to me if the person is Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, or Atheist like Dawkins. I simply tune out the hostility.

I don't see Dawkins as hostile--he doesn't mock or belittle people, he just speaks his mind and doesn't make any apologies about it, and so has offended many people because of it. For me, it's refreshing to see someone say what they think.

 

[metis]

Oh? Are you one of the atheists who fakes being a theist too? Lmao

Do you really need to use sarcasm?

 

[metis]

Billy Graham is the only televangelist that I think was authentic. He was the real deal.

My parents, who were Lutherans, watched Jesuit priest Bishop Sheen in the late 50's and early 60's, and I do believe he was quite authentic and very bright as I watched and now have a theology book of his sermons.

 

[pearl]

Billy Graham is the only televangelist that I think was authentic. He was the real deal.

My husband, who is not a church goer or even interested, use to watch Billy Graham. Too bad his son was nothing like him.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

My parents, who were Lutherans, watched Jesuit priest Bishop Sheen in the late 50's and early 60's, and I do believe he was quite authentic and very bright as I watched and now have a theology book of his sermons.

I've heard good things about him, although he was before my time.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I don't see Dawkins as hostile--he doesn't mock or belittle people,

Oh please. He calls religious faith a delusion. Last time I read the DSM-5, religious beliefs do not qualify as delusion. It's simply something he says to rile people up and get an emotional response.

 

[YoursTrue]

I don't see Dawkins as hostile--he doesn't mock or belittle people, he just speaks his mind and doesn't make any apologies about it, and so has offended many people because of it. For me, it's refreshing to see someone say what they think.

I can understand his idea. IF there was no Bible (although I know many object to it), and if I thought there were no people applying its principles in their lives, I'd have to agree with Dawkins. There are many religions on this earth. They can be confusing. And as bad as I am now, I'd be worse if I thought I had not found God and He found me. But that's me and just because I say it I realize not all will agree.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

Oh please. He calls religious faith a delusion. Last time I read the DSM-5, religious beliefs do not qualify as delusion. It's simply something he says to rile people up and get an emotional response.

From Wikipedia:

A delusion is a false fixed belief that is not amenable to change in light of conflicting evidence.

This sounds a lot like most religious beliefs to me...

 

[IndigoChild5559]

From Wikipedia:

A delusion is a false fixed belief that is not amenable to change in light of conflicting evidence.

This sounds a lot like most religious beliefs to me...

The DSM-5 defines delusion as follows:

"A false belief based on incorrect inference about external reality that is firmly sustained despite what almost everyone else believes and despite what constitutes incontrovertible and obvious proof or evidence to the contrary. The belief is not one ordinarily accepted by other members of the person's culture or subculture (e.g., it is not an article of religious faith)."

 

[Augustus]

A delusion is a false fixed belief that is not amenable to change in light of conflicting evidence.

That would cover pretty much any emotionally important belief that people hold (political, ideological, etc).

We are all affected by cognitive dissonance as it is a feature of our evolved cognition.

 

[wellwisher]

“It seems to me to be a fundamentally decent religion, in a way that I think Islam is not,” he commented.

When questioned about that statement, Dawkins said: “The way women are treated in Christianity is not great about that, it has had its problems with female vicars and female bishops, but there is an active hostility to women which is promoted I think by the holy books of Islam.”

Richard Dawkins says he is a Cultural Christian

I found this report on Dawkins, one of the world's most famous and antagonistic atheists, claiming to be a cultural Christian to be absolutely fascinating. I hope it will open up a discussion about what a cultural Christian is as opposed to a true believer, and why (perhaps) such a person would...

www.religiousforums.com

The brains of men and women are wired differently. My guess, is the common tradition of many religions, of men being Priests and top Leaders, reflects this difference in natural brain wiring of men versus women. If you understand how the brain works and differs, it is easier to understand the ancient set up, and why this set up has allowed the main religions to endure for millennia.

The female brain is more naturally wired, left to right or side to side; ear to ear or audio centers. Women are more verbal or language orientated. This wiring allows women more access to both sides of the brain, at the same time; thoughts and feelings. Some women can become scatter brained, when both sides of the brain are working, data processing together, but are drawing different conclusions. This is common with falling in love.

This natural wiring is connected to maternal instincts, such as the needs of child raising. Women can use subtle audio-emotional cues to create a sense of predictable logic, for each of children's behavior. For example, all babies have a range of cries, with each cry meaning something different; tired, hungry, frustrated, needs changing, wants attentions, needs pity or pampering care, back rub, etc. To the outsider, one may hear just a baby crying. But the mother can feel the different emotions, in each cry, in a crowd of babies, and learn to differentiate which cry is which; they need a bottle. The child also learns to communicate, even before formal language, since the mother is responding, with cause and effect, to their subtle variations of sound; natural baby words and mother planting the cause and effect seeds of language.

The problem is, although this maternal skill is very useful for babies and children; can satisfy their basic or short term needs ASAP, it may not be optimized for the long term needs of a Church, into the next century. It is one thing to hear the cry of your young teen child, wanting the new pants, that all the kids have, with one leg longer than the other. But satisfying this short term fad need, if applied to Priests, in Mass. doing 1000 year old rituals, may cause these rituals to morph and lose membership. Women; maternal instincts, are more like to try to help every new liberal fad, so the babies will stop crying. The Church did that in the 1970's, and since then there has been a decline in membership. Latin is too hard to understand; whaww, whawww!

The once solemn historical site, became a theme park with new rides; folk masses. There are no 1000 year old religions that have been run exclusively by women, at least in modern times. They morph too fast, usually by male con artists knowing how to coax material instincts; pity or coo. The Catholic Nuns or penguins are tough, to change, since they loyally report to a "Dad", who she will defend like a mother bear. They help raise the church children in the long term vision of Dad.

Men are wired more front to back; visual cortex-frontal lobe. Men are visual animals. This wiring is used to see the world, as is, and imagine possibilities. Like in science, which has been a male dominated area of knowledge, seeing is believing as we define nature in tiny details, while the imagination allows the engineer to extrapolate to the future. This wiring is why men still create the majority of inventions before they become derivatives.

The male wiring is less about short term needs. Rather, like science, the male is about looking for eternal trends; laws of physics. The Longevity of Religions is connected to the wiring of the male brain. The female brain would empathize with the temporal cries and hear the short term cries of say the transsexuals. She would try to accommodate, but without seeing the future implications. The mother may cater to her son's every need, like a Saint, but at times, this can make him too dependent; long term problems.

Christianity, did not want people to think that the male brain wring, meant women were subservient or less than men. This is implied by the male leadership tradition. They gave the female, a major role with the symbolism of Mother Mary, who was the mother of Jesus. Her short term love and care, helped to mold him for his destiny, which though his own long term vision; spirit, still has sticking power.

Behind every great man is a woman. Men and women are wired to be compliments. From above, the male and female brain wiring, If superimposed, makes the sign of the cross. In intimate relationships, that endure, the brains will cross program like two networked computers merging their operating systems; cross wiring.

The image of Jesus on the cross, and the tradition of Jesus being a virgin, is about his brain cross programed by MotherMary; pure maternal instinct, not short term contaminated by the ego centric complexities; games, that can arise from sexual love. This delays the clean cross to old age of the living couple; return to pure love. Jesus would die young, so he would still be an innocent cross; less you become as children (of a loving mother.) They are free to be since mother is watching out for them. Integrated brain wiring diagram.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The brains of men and women are wired differently.

Your post is VERY long, so I'm only going to respond to a few choice spots. In general, I do agree that brains are sexually dimorphic, which is simply the scientific way to describe what you said above -- that we are "wired differently."

But I certainly do not agree with all the generalizations that you assume are due to that difference. Further, even when such generalizations are accurate, you are simply pointing to the top of the bell shaped curve; there are always exceptions to the rule. And finally, I disagree with your main point that these differences mean that men are more suited to lead.

My guess, is the common tradition of many religions, of men being Priests and top Leaders, reflects this difference in natural brain wiring of men versus women.

I don't think there is any reason for men to be leaders and not women. Each sex brings to leadership their respective gifts. In some cultures, the religious leaders are women. The fact that leaders tend to be men in the west and elsewhere is simply due to the ancient spread of patriarchal Indo-European culture over most of the world.

The female brain is more naturally wired, left to right or side to side; ear to ear or audio centers. Women are more verbal or language orientated.

I agree that women have a larger corpus callosum, facilitating their integration of hemispheres. And I agree that women in general are more gifted with verbal skills and communication. Why does that not strike you as being a talent that would provide good leadership?

This wiring allows women more access to both sides of the brain, at the same time; thoughts and feelings. Some women can become scatter brained, when both sides of the brain are working, data processing together, but are drawing different conclusions. This is common with falling in love.

Women are the only ones who can be scatter brained? Women are the only ones who fall in love? This is just bigotry on your part. And being "scatterbrained" has absolutely nothing to do with integrated hemispheres.

This natural wiring is connected to maternal instincts, such as the needs of child raising. Women can use subtle audio-emotional cues to create a sense of predictable logic, for each of children's behavior. For example, all babies have a range of cries, with each cry meaning something different; tired, hungry, frustrated, needs changing, wants attentions, needs pity or pampering care, back rub, etc.

While this may be statistically true, as I said, there are always plenty of exceptions. There are women who are absolutely terrible mothers, and fathers who are extremely nurturing and responsive.

To the outsider, one may hear just a baby crying.

An OUTSIDER? Since when is the father an outsider? You have just atrociously insulted fathers.

But the mother can feel the different emotions, in each cry, in a crowd of babies, and learn to differentiate which cry is which; they need a bottle.

It is true that women tend to respond to an infants cries with sympathy. I'm not sure what that has to do with who is a better leader.

The child also learns to communicate, even before formal language, since the mother is responding, with cause and effect, to their subtle variations of sound; natural baby words and mother planting the cause and effect seeds of language.

If you think that fathers don't participate in the learning of language of their children, you are mistaken.

The problem is, although this maternal skill is very useful for babies and children; can satisfy their basic or short term needs ASAP, it may not be optimized for the long term needs of a Church, into the next century.

I don't see why you think this. A clergy who has a more nurturing approach to leading is just as good as a clergy who has a truth based approach.

It is one thing to hear the cry of your young teen child, wanting the new pants, that all the kids have, with one leg longer than the other. But satisfying this short term fad need, if applied to Priests, in Mass. doing 1000 year old rituals, may cause these rituals to morph and lose membership. Women; maternal instincts, are more like to try to help every new liberal fad, so the babies will stop crying. The Church did that in the 1970's, and since then there has been a decline in membership. Latin is too hard to understand; whaww, whawww!

You keep going on about women being maternal as if this is a bad trait for clergy to have. It's not.

Christianity, did not want people to think that the male brain wring, meant women were subservient or less than men.

Oh yes it did. And this is the case in other religions sometimes as well.

I'll stop here. I think I've made my point that while, yes, men and women are wired differently, it simply means that they bring different talents to leadership, not that one is better suited to lead.

 

[metis]

I've heard good things about him, although he was before my time.

Oh, you are so immature!

BTW, within Catholicism, many conservative Catholics have problems with the Jesuits because of the strong emphasis on education they have. I know two of them personally for just one example, and they each have two ph.d.'s. Another I took two Catholic theology classes from when doing my undergrad work, and I wasn't even Catholic, and he was one of the brightest professors I had.

Obviously, Judaism has long put heavy emphasis on education, and I always appreciated the give & take in Torah study. And you're not too shabby yourself, btw.

 

[YoursTrue]

Oh, you are so immature!

BTW, within Catholicism, many conservative Catholics have problems with the Jesuits because of the strong emphasis on education they have. I know two of them personally for just one example, and they each have two ph.d.'s. Another I took two Catholic theology classes from when doing my undergrad work, and I wasn't even Catholic, and he was one of the brightest professors I had.

Obviously, Judaism has long put heavy emphasis on education, and I always appreciated the give & take in Torah study. And you're not too shabby yourself, btw.

Well, not to make a joke, but going back to Moses' time, I guess there were no courses offered in microbiology. Well, then there wasn't even the Catholic religion either.