I did indeed read what youve said...
the part where you said you were open...turned out to be false
the part where you said that you dont think they didnt think critically b/c they came up with a different conclusion...also turned out to be false...
which part should i pay attention to the part where you make an ascertion or the part where you back off of that ascertion?
either way as long as you now can admit that youre being one sided and not open thats what i was getting at.
as far as religion i already agreed to disagree
i did not say i do not think they have not thought about it critically.
i said i was a bit onesided. As in tunnelvision , sure there will be a few that have thought about it critically.
i just have a big problem with believing that, the reasons i mentioned earlier.
not open?
lol! man i am talking to you aren't i?
i did not call you ignorant or closeminded. you did, and still i am talking to you in a civilized manner.
and i certainly do not have to admit anything, lol! man really sounds like very childish.
different minds, different ideas.
i do not speak my mind to offend anybody , so do not take it that way.
religion is based on beleiving in something, so thinking logically and critically about that is very hard.
and there are facts i have mentioned that you can check for yourself.
a lot of books of the new testament are false.
a lot of stories are clear fairytales, men do not walk on water, seas do not split on command, and goliath was just a big dude and not a giant, etc etc etc.
i mean how can you think critically about stuff like that and than still take religion serious?
i am talking about religion, and not faith..... not the same...
do you understand what my point is?
again this is not an attack, so please do not take it that way.
just healthy discussion....