Searching the past to understand the future.
3 and a lesser extent 1.I like Ken's blog.
6 led to 3, which in turn led to 1. It's amazing how quickly it all crumbles.
It's almost all number one for me. I just couldn't see a need for any sort of deity when science explains everything pretty well.
So you're saying that science lead you to a sort of inconvenient truth?Thank you, thank you. I'll be here all week. I'm also available for weddings and bar mitzvahs...
Mine was closest to number three; basically, there are fundamental elements of Christianity that simply don't make sense to me (the idea that Christ's sacrifice can somehow atone for *my* sins, the entire concept of the trinity). Add to that the way the character of G-d appears to develop and grow as the narrative progresses, and the absence of supporting historical evidence, and a very strong impression that the universe acts according to its nature rather than any outside guidance, and...On the other hand, I wouldn't consider myself a pure rationalist, either; there are several things I believe in (or half believe in) that I'm pretty sure are unprovable, untestable, or just untrue.
Post a Comment