[djm2]

I missed a train wreck. EZ and Tbolt must be playing in their switching stations!

@jsconyers: All I will say is that every relationship will require some give and take for it to be healthy and sustaining. Regardless of what you ultimately come to believe regarding the value of organized religion or belief for you -- and note that I differentiate these into separate issues -- that give and take is a necessary but not sufficient part of making a successful long-term relationship.

@the-economist: When all is said and done, you and I are probably pretty close in terms of beliefs about world view and the like. There is, however, one fundamental area where we differ.

Long ago I had the great pleasure of being allowed to teach Philosophy of Science courses to our graduate students who were gearing up to begin their dissertations. It was probably my favorite course; I got to teach it every two years for a stretch of time. One of the fundamental issues that comes into play in this context is the role of the different levels of knowledge and certainty that exist within theories. And fundamentally, when you decompose and analyze any theory, you ultimately get to two (among others) different levels of knowledge: (a) axiomatic principles which are comprehensive laws supported by a broad selection of data, and (b) assumptions, which are considered to be basic truths that are used to derive other more specific hypotheses but which are usually not directly testable.

Consider, for example, the origins of the universe. Most contemporary science would focus on the Big-Bang Theory -- and the derivations from the assumption of the Big Bang are largely consistent with the physical evidence that we see. But ask the question: What caused the big bang? The answers that you will get will largely consist of circular reasoning designed to befuddle the questioner and duck the issue. Typically, what this reflects is a matter of faith. The answerer "believes" that his/her assumption(s) is/are valid and is not prepared to take the argument any further. And how different is that from believing that "time traveling bunnies" or a god is ultimately the driving source of causality in the model.

For someone who is presumably a proponent of the science of economics, I am compelled to point out to you that economics is more replete with assumptions than most of the hard sciences (physics, chemistry) and only slightly better than psychology and sociology -- usually derided as "soft" sciences. And failing to address those assumptions has in large part contributed to the meltdown of the financial markets that we saw in the past couple of years.

I suspect that you are a first year graduate student in economics who has not yet come to grips with the breadth of ignorance that confronts any true scientist, and thus is suffering from a massive case of over-blown ego and excessive hubris. Get a bit of humility, dude. It will help you understand the world.

[kathrynhr]

I missed this thread also.

JS, I think you're on the right track with your decisions and remarks so far. People in churches are there because they're looking for something. Some are looking for God, some for companionship, some for a sense of meaning about something that has happened to them in the past, some because they were dragged or guilted there by someone else... the list goes on and on. Very few people attend church for reasons that are strictly pious.

If you're attending to grow a relationship with someone you care about, so be it. You have good intentions, and that's a good thing in and of itself. I don't think it's necessary to believe in order to attend church; Christ would not turn someone away because they had doubts - he would sit down and speak with them. I also don't think you need feel like a pretender if you attend church services and events without faith. Someone once told me that attending church is admitting that you don't have all the answers. I'd definitely say that applies here.

[JSanders]

Kathryn, perfect point.

Churches should be specifically for non-believers. The one I attend is. Ours is a large congregation and any one service might have 2,000-2,400 in attendance. Our pastor has specifically said to us regular attenders, "Hey, this service really isn't meant for you, but instead for the people who aren't here."

It's congregations that don't make visitors and seekers feel comfortable which are dying in the US. Questions like jsconyers' make it easy to understand why.

[the-economist]

Originally Posted by djm2

@the-economist: When all is said and done, you and I are probably pretty close in terms of beliefs about world view and the like.

Happy to hear that

For someone who is presumably a proponent of the science of economics, I am compelled to point out to you that economics is more replete with assumptions than most of the hard sciences (physics, chemistry)

The methodologies and models used by social sciences are extremely different to physics or chem or any of the natural sciences. We don't call economics the dismal science for nothing.

I suspect that you are a first year graduate student in economics who has not yet come to grips with the breadth of ignorance that confronts any true scientist, and thus is suffering from a massive case of over-blown ego and excessive hubris. Get a bit of humility, dude. It will help you understand the world.

Close enough. I was a phd student. Almost 20 years ago. I appreciate the advice though.

I'd rather not comment further on the main issue of the thread or your post. Some moderator got offended and booted me out once already. And to tell you the truth i believe they were right. The argument was getting heated for no good reason. Religion should really be a personal thing. No need for grand parades, either for it, or against it.

Enjoy your weekend

[mriff]

Originally Posted by the-economist

I'd rather not comment further on the main issue of the thread or your post. Some moderator got offended and booted me out once already.

I didn't know one could be banned by what they post in the Sensitive Discussions forum. I thought that was the point of establishing this forum area. Compare this to the evolution thread. Seems pretty tame.

[angelbear1973]

Originally Posted by mriff

I didn't know one could be banned by what they post in the Sensitive Discussions forum. I thought that was the point of establishing this forum area. Compare this to the evolution thread. Seems pretty tame.

Actually your wrong Dawg was banned for comments made in this section of the forum. So nthe ban stick can come from anywhere

[Noodle22]

One of the rules here is no personal attacks, so there are ways you can get banned.

[angelbear1973]

Originally Posted by Noodle22

One of the rules here is no personal attacks, so there are ways you can get banned.

or a mod just doesnt like whats said you can always get banned. They have a lot of freedoms

[Noodle22]

I wasn't there, so I can't say. I don't have a personal opinion on this, just pointing out this forum does have rules.

[mriff]

Ok. Well as I said, one could peruse the evolution thread. There are probably some 'banable' offenses in that thread and no one got kicked out after some rather heated rhetoric. Including me. I think the sensitive area should have some much broader latitude as far as getting kicked off BBF.

[TBOLTRAM]

Maybe the secret is not to take things too seriously. Having said that I remember what I was told one time when I was in high school.

"Everything in moderation, anything in excess is a sin including religion."

[Noodle22]

Now, how do you define moderation?

[TBOLTRAM]

Originally Posted by Noodle22

Now, how do you define moderation?

That is the question that seperates the men from the boys or the women from the girls.

[angelbear1973]

It really doesnt matter noodle, Dawg wont ever be allowed back. So he will just always be a great character from the past

[mriff]

Originally Posted by angelbear1973

It really doesnt matter noodle, Dawg wont ever be allowed back. So he will just always be a great character from the past

Well that's just too bad. He added a certain flair to the boards. A character as you say. He was maddening at times and funny at times. I think he should be allowed to rejoin.

[test54]

Originally Posted by mriff

Well that's just too bad. He added a certain flair to the boards. A character as you say. He was maddening at times and funny at times. I think he should be allowed to rejoin.

I agree.

[TBOLTRAM]

Maybe dawg could be put on special secret probation or something.

[angelbear1973]

I talked to him this morning and he still isnt getting any response from the mods Or Tom

[jsconyers]

I agree with all of the comments on Dawg. I am blind to the situation, but I would like to see him around. He did add some flare to the forums, especially this one!

Back to my original post; I ended up going to Easter Vigil this past Saturday with her and that was quite the experience. It was a 2 hour service. It was at the same church we went to before, however, this time there was a different priest and I actually didn't mind it, even being at the big church.

Even though it was a 2 hour session, it seemed to go by pretty quickly. Still, I have a lot of questions, some things just don't add up for me (yet). I believe that's because I don't know enough of the beliefs. She hasn't been Catholic very long, just over a year, and she has a lot of questions herself. I think that makes it a little easier on me as well. We've began looking at different churches in the surrounding areas as we both think a smaller church would be better.

I will keep you all updated on the progress (if any), for those that are interested.

[mriff]

Originally Posted by jsconyers

I agree with all of the comments on Dawg. I am blind to the situation, but I would like to see him around. He did add some flare to the forums, especially this one!

Back to my original post; I ended up going to Easter Vigil this past Saturday with her and that was quite the experience. It was a 2 hour service. It was at the same church we went to before, however, this time there was a different priest and I actually didn't mind it, even being at the big church.

Even though it was a 2 hour session, it seemed to go by pretty quickly. Still, I have a lot of questions, some things just don't add up for me (yet). I believe that's because I don't know enough of the beliefs. She hasn't been Catholic very long, just over a year, and she has a lot of questions herself. I think that makes it a little easier on me as well. We've began looking at different churches in the surrounding areas as we both think a smaller church would be better.

I will keep you all updated on the progress (if any), for those that are interested.

One comment js, a small one. You might want to make an appointment with the Priest and go sit down with him for a chat. You will be very surprised how that might turn out. You will find out that he will be extremely easy to talk to and has heard what you want to discuss thousands of times. He will not be at all offended with any question you may ask. And I guarantee you that he will not make you feel obligated to choose his church in any way. You may walk away with some counseling that will be very helpful.