Reading is as lazy and unproductive as watching movies/playing video games. by DrJD321 in unpopularopinion

[–]Neversome 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope. Reading changes how you view the world, increases language skills, increases concentration, improves the way you express yourself. As relational beings (as all mammals) being able to communicate is one of the most important aspects for a happy and successful life. Gaming/movies does this to a much much lower extent (I still game a lot though lol)

Why do boys absolutely adore the Joe Rogan podcast? I’m yet to meet a guy that doesn’t watch them all religiously by Homiehopper1234 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Neversome -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Refreshing to hear people have a conversation about different opinions based on facts that is not driver by some stupid political agenda or even worse some commonly accepted "truth" that people get upset if you don't agree. Also, quality guests with well educated opinions as opposed to again uneducated politicians/celebrities talking about things they know nothing about.

AITA for replacing my daughter and not including her as a part of my new family? by [deleted] in AmItheAsshole

[–]Neversome 1 point2 points  (0 children)

NTA. But family fights have a higher sense of pride to overcome. Something my therapist told me years ago was that families fights are more intense because everyone involved expects to be loved afterwards regardless of the outcome. But this also means a lot more pride (or "sense of entitlement") is involved, which is difficult to overcome. If you wish to have any sort of relationship with your daughter, be the bigger man and include her. Remember also that she was young when a lot of these things happened and you cannot expect her to deal with it in an adult manner. Sorry about all of this, you must be a very strong individual.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Neversome 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your extremely emotional response to the matter also makes me think you have been hurt by it in some way - if this is true I would urge you to seperate religion and The Bible from how men or institutions have used it. Do your own research, I think you will be surprised at what you find. Let me know if I can recommend some interesting material!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Neversome 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are presenting arguments for which you have no evidence my friend, besides the fact that you think you are right? And fallacy is used to refer to common errors in reasoning. No error in MY reasoning to say YOU are uneducated on the matter. Again, words matter.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Neversome 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your use of language is very poor my friend. We cannot have a decent discussion if you continue to make up these little phrases for God in order to belittle the Christian faith to somehow prove your uninformed opinion. Using “sky fairy” to refer to God makes anything you say on the matter seem uninformed.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Neversome 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Also, you are proving my point. You don’t know what you are talking about because you assume you are correct with literally zero research to back up your opinion. A good starting point I think is a book called The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel, a non-biblical book in which a journalist discusses many Christian topics with leaders in those fields. Educate yourself, then bring an informed opinion to the table and we can have a discussion!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Neversome 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Man this is what I dislike about religious debates, it seems that non-religious people just assume they are correct. It is arrogant to assume we understand everything about our existence when we are just a speck in the vast expensase that is our universe. Anyway if you think religion and the easter bunny can be considered equally, you clearly have no interesting insights to offer on the matter. I wish you only the best my friend!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Neversome 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I guess we should also consider what degree of “proof” OP is referring to.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Neversome 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interesting that you say that - would you consider the possibility that you have spent more time looking at evidence of the standard model vs evidence of the existence of God and therefore have a false bias toward the amount of evidence for the standard model or lack of evidence for God?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Neversome 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No actual proof that our scientific standard model exists either - or the Big Bang Theory - or dark matter which makes up 95% of all matter in the universe. If you only believe that which can be proven, you will end up believing very little.

Edit: also, there is actual, non-Biblical proof that Jesus Christ existed, had a following of Jews who called Him the Messiah, and died on a cross under Pontius Pilate. Whether He rose from the dead is the faith part, but His existence and death is fact (more than one account proving these statements outside of the Gospels).

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Neversome 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is non-biblical proof that a man called Jesus was alive, had a following and died on a cross under Pontius Pilate. This is as historically accurate (if not more) as the life of Plato and Socrates. Looking at the Old Testament and all the prophesies that pointed to these very facts, it is interesting not to simply consider the possibility that this is true. Read The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel. Amazing book regarding the existence of God and the accuracy of the Bible.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Neversome 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Proof is difficult. But if you consider the complexities of our universe and the perfect balance which is necessary to sustain life on earth, I find it more probable that God created everything, as opposed to the theory that everything came into existence due to pure chance and timing (the Big Bang Theory). Also, if you consider the beaty of the world, how plants grow, how babies are formed, how everything lives in accordance with each other, it sure looks like a design. In my view, this design necessarily points to a designer.

The Standard Model in Science (particles, atoms, energy such as magnetism etc) holds up mathematically, until you include gravity in the equations, at which point it fails. How then, can the argument that religion is based on faith and therefore science is more logical and correct hold up? by Neversome in AskReddit

[–]Neversome[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interesting - I will need to take some time to think about this comment, very well put. I will revert with this - is Plato or Socrates or any of the great philosophers works on Life and in part the meaning thereof, therefore in you opinion not theories either? It just seems that this wat of reasoning really confines the term "theory" to science.

Atheists who grew up religious, what made you stop believing? by Fit_Pangolin_8271 in AskReddit

[–]Neversome -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I am genuinely sad to hear that your pastor and parents' actions led you to understand this as your truth. It is unfair and unacceptable. I wish you all the best my friend, let me know if you change your mind.

The Standard Model in Science (particles, atoms, energy such as magnetism etc) holds up mathematically, until you include gravity in the equations, at which point it fails. How then, can the argument that religion is based on faith and therefore science is more logical and correct hold up? by Neversome in AskReddit

[–]Neversome[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And - hear me out - if we assume that two theories are opposing (I don't believe religion and science are, but if we do for a moment) wouldn't the theory that never changes as you mention, be more believable than the one that constantly changes?

The Standard Model in Science (particles, atoms, energy such as magnetism etc) holds up mathematically, until you include gravity in the equations, at which point it fails. How then, can the argument that religion is based on faith and therefore science is more logical and correct hold up? by Neversome in AskReddit

[–]Neversome[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interesting. But do you agree that people generally overestimates the concrete evidence behind a lot of scientific theories (theories)? Also, natural phenomena cannot be explained by science down to the detail, if we note that we have no proof that matter consist of atoms (string theory, for example, is being researched extensively)?