Atheist parent

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:See, atheists can judge with the best of them!

Oh we all judge. I just think we should judge each other from a rational basis, rather than "my God said what you are doing is immoral".

How is judging someone for their pseronal belief rational?

Of course it's rational. If a full grown adult came to you and told you that he believes the earth is flat, what are you going to think about him?

What you may be confused with, is belief vs preference. It's irrational to judge people for having preferences, like the color blue, or spicy food. But belief is different. You can absolutely judge someone for their belief. You are free to believe whatever you want, and people are free to judge you for what you believe.

I hope someday you know what it means to be truly alone. You are an evil person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If scientific knowledge and philosophical inquiry reveal to you that you don't believe in a diety, lovely.

But if I showed the same I information to a believer and they continued to have faith, we couldn't say they had made a mistake or failed to understand the arguments.

That's what I mean by "proof." Maybe we are in agreement if I restate it like this?

I'll admit that I'm a bit lost in this conversation. In hopes of not confusing things more, I'll say that "information" doesn't necessarily have the same impact on people of faith (believing in some religion) and people without faith (atheists). Faith, from what I've seen, can happily co-exist with reason as well as outside of reason. Faith supersedes reason. I've seen very intelligent, well-educated people take great pride in the fact that their understanding of science, etc, does not interfere a bit with their ability to have faith in their religion. I've seen it here on DCUM and IRL

The definition of faith is belief without proof. You seem to not be keeping that in mind

Besides, what science harms faith? Unless you literally believe that God created the earth in 7 human days, there's no conflict. The conflicts between science and faith only come in the details, which a believer is often free to reject, or in reading the bible or other text literally, which many many don't.
(Still an atheist here)

I think science is incredibly harmful to faith. I am not a scientist by any stretch, but I am generally fascinated by it. Science drives or inspires my choices around medical care, education, nutrition, fitness, hobbies, and interests. I care what the studies say, knowing full well they may be in conflict with each other or later disproven. But I appreciate the effort to study an issue and quantify and explain the results.

I absolutely believe the depth of my interest in science drives my atheism. How could I believe in a deity when it has no foundation in anything we have come to understand about the driving forces in the universe? That said, I know plenty of educated people who certainly accept scientific tenets (but don't have the underlying interest in them) who are also able to embrace faith.

Maybe science is harmful to faith for you. That's not a universal experience. I'm a cradle Catholic and a humanities person, but I am the sole non-scientist in a family of STEM folks who are also practicing Catholics. I was also married to a Jew from a family of Jewish scientists. My best friend is half-Jewish and and a scientist. Another close friend is a devout Muslim and a medical doctor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:See, atheists can judge with the best of them!

Oh we all judge. I just think we should judge each other from a rational basis, rather than "my God said what you are doing is immoral".

How is judging someone for their pseronal belief rational?

Of course it's rational. If a full grown adult came to you and told you that he believes the earth is flat, what are you going to think about him?

What you may be confused with, is belief vs preference. It's irrational to judge people for having preferences, like the color blue, or spicy food. But belief is different. You can absolutely judge someone for their belief. You are free to believe whatever you want, and people are free to judge you for what you believe.

I hope someday you know what it means to be truly alone. You are an evil person.

I doubt that Jesus would approve of this message!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If scientific knowledge and philosophical inquiry reveal to you that you don't believe in a diety, lovely.

But if I showed the same I information to a believer and they continued to have faith, we couldn't say they had made a mistake or failed to understand the arguments.

That's what I mean by "proof." Maybe we are in agreement if I restate it like this?

I'll admit that I'm a bit lost in this conversation. In hopes of not confusing things more, I'll say that "information" doesn't necessarily have the same impact on people of faith (believing in some religion) and people without faith (atheists). Faith, from what I've seen, can happily co-exist with reason as well as outside of reason. Faith supersedes reason. I've seen very intelligent, well-educated people take great pride in the fact that their understanding of science, etc, does not interfere a bit with their ability to have faith in their religion. I've seen it here on DCUM and IRL

The definition of faith is belief without proof. You seem to not be keeping that in mind

Besides, what science harms faith? Unless you literally believe that God created the earth in 7 human days, there's no conflict. The conflicts between science and faith only come in the details, which a believer is often free to reject, or in reading the bible or other text literally, which many many don't.
(Still an atheist here)

I think science is incredibly harmful to faith. I am not a scientist by any stretch, but I am generally fascinated by it. Science drives or inspires my choices around medical care, education, nutrition, fitness, hobbies, and interests. I care what the studies say, knowing full well they may be in conflict with each other or later disproven. But I appreciate the effort to study an issue and quantify and explain the results.

I absolutely believe the depth of my interest in science drives my atheism. How could I believe in a deity when it has no foundation in anything we have come to understand about the driving forces in the universe? That said, I know plenty of educated people who certainly accept scientific tenets (but don't have the underlying interest in them) who are also able to embrace faith.

The two previous entries confirm that there are at least 3 atheists posting here -- the two who are discussing science and me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If scientific knowledge and philosophical inquiry reveal to you that you don't believe in a diety, lovely.

But if I showed the same I information to a believer and they continued to have faith, we couldn't say they had made a mistake or failed to understand the arguments.

That's what I mean by "proof." Maybe we are in agreement if I restate it like this?

I'll admit that I'm a bit lost in this conversation. In hopes of not confusing things more, I'll say that "information" doesn't necessarily have the same impact on people of faith (believing in some religion) and people without faith (atheists). Faith, from what I've seen, can happily co-exist with reason as well as outside of reason. Faith supersedes reason. I've seen very intelligent, well-educated people take great pride in the fact that their understanding of science, etc, does not interfere a bit with their ability to have faith in their religion. I've seen it here on DCUM and IRL

The definition of faith is belief without proof. You seem to not be keeping that in mind

Besides, what science harms faith? Unless you literally believe that God created the earth in 7 human days, there's no conflict. The conflicts between science and faith only come in the details, which a believer is often free to reject, or in reading the bible or other text literally, which many many don't.
(Still an atheist here)

I think science is incredibly harmful to faith. I am not a scientist by any stretch, but I am generally fascinated by it. Science drives or inspires my choices around medical care, education, nutrition, fitness, hobbies, and interests. I care what the studies say, knowing full well they may be in conflict with each other or later disproven. But I appreciate the effort to study an issue and quantify and explain the results.

I absolutely believe the depth of my interest in science drives my atheism. How could I believe in a deity when it has no foundation in anything we have come to understand about the driving forces in the universe? That said, I know plenty of educated people who certainly accept scientific tenets (but don't have the underlying interest in them) who are also able to embrace faith.

Maybe science is harmful to faith for you. That's not a universal experience. I'm a cradle Catholic and a humanities person, but I am the sole non-scientist in a family of STEM folks who are also practicing Catholics. I was also married to a Jew from a family of Jewish scientists. My best friend is half-Jewish and and a scientist. Another close friend is a devout Muslim and a medical doctor.

Correct, but higher education does correlate with increased atheism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:See, atheists can judge with the best of them!

Oh we all judge. I just think we should judge each other from a rational basis, rather than "my God said what you are doing is immoral".

How is judging someone for their pseronal belief rational?

Of course it's rational. If a full grown adult came to you and told you that he believes the earth is flat, what are you going to think about him?

What you may be confused with, is belief vs preference. It's irrational to judge people for having preferences, like the color blue, or spicy food. But belief is different. You can absolutely judge someone for their belief. You are free to believe whatever you want, and people are free to judge you for what you believe.

I hope someday you know what it means to be truly alone. You are an evil person.

I doubt that Jesus would approve of this message!

Jesus wouldn't approve of you avoiding someone because they follow Him.

[Anonymous]

I think science is incredibly harmful to faith. I am not a scientist by any stretch, but I am generally fascinated by it. Science drives or inspires my choices around medical care, education, nutrition, fitness, hobbies, and interests. I care what the studies say, knowing full well they may be in conflict with each other or later disproven. But I appreciate the effort to study an issue and quantify and explain the results.

I absolutely believe the depth of my interest in science drives my atheism. How could I believe in a deity when it has no foundation in anything we have come to understand about the driving forces in the universe? That said, I know plenty of educated people who certainly accept scientific tenets (but don't have the underlying interest in them) who are also able to embrace faith.

OP and atheist who thinks science doesn't harm faith, here again.
No scientist would agree with you that we have come to understand the driving forces of the universe. The more we learn the more we appreciate the huge gaps in our understanding. It's also becoming clearer that there are ways/aspects of the universe that we probably can't fully comprehend, even if we end up being able to describe them.

But I'll just state again, that if you had faith, you might think these properties of the universe were the result of God's actions, or his creation. There are many people who believe both and it is possible to believe both while fully understanding the scientific universe. Given that fact, I don't think we can say that science necessarily requires one to lose faith. It sounds like you had little faith to begin with (nor did I) but you are overselling the role science had in your becoming a full atheist. I predict you would have become one either way, even without science.

As for the person who believes proof of God is all around us, we can't have a productive conversation, can we? I know people of great faith who see Gods' works in everything but they understand that I don't and why I don't. If you cannot understand that, we can't really talk about it usefully.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I think science is incredibly harmful to faith. I am not a scientist by any stretch, but I am generally fascinated by it. Science drives or inspires my choices around medical care, education, nutrition, fitness, hobbies, and interests. I care what the studies say, knowing full well they may be in conflict with each other or later disproven. But I appreciate the effort to study an issue and quantify and explain the results.

I absolutely believe the depth of my interest in science drives my atheism. How could I believe in a deity when it has no foundation in anything we have come to understand about the driving forces in the universe? That said, I know plenty of educated people who certainly accept scientific tenets (but don't have the underlying interest in them) who are also able to embrace faith.

OP and atheist who thinks science doesn't harm faith, here again.
No scientist would agree with you that we have come to understand the driving forces of the universe. The more we learn the more we appreciate the huge gaps in our understanding. It's also becoming clearer that there are ways/aspects of the universe that we probably can't fully comprehend, even if we end up being able to describe them.

But I'll just state again, that if you had faith, you might think these properties of the universe were the result of God's actions, or his creation. There are many people who believe both and it is possible to believe both while fully understanding the scientific universe. Given that fact, I don't think we can say that science necessarily requires one to lose faith. It sounds like you had little faith to begin with (nor did I) but you are overselling the role science had in your becoming a full atheist. I predict you would have become one either way, even without science.

As for the person who believes proof of God is all around us, we can't have a productive conversation, can we? I know people of great faith who see Gods' works in everything but they understand that I don't and why I don't. If you cannot understand that, we can't really talk about it usefully.

Not the atheist you are addressing, but it is possible for people to become atheists in different ways, based on different influences. Some really are sold on the scientific argument and others on biblical/historical/archeological issues. I personally know people who never believed because religion just sounded like another fairy tale to them - no study of any kind involved. Some dropped their beliefs when they studied greek mythology in grade school. Others left when they started studying science in high school and others didn't leave until they did their own study of the bible and religious history.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whenever somebody brings up Thor, Zeus, fairies, etc, I really can't decide if they are just extremely stupid or extremely rude. Do you really think modern religious belief is equivalent to believing in fairies? Do you really have such a very low opinion of us, and such a very high opinion of yourself? Do you just enjoy denigrating people? Or can you really not see there is a difference? When you typed those words, did you feel clever or cruel?

There is no difference between believing in Jesus and believing in Zeus. Absolutely none.

But you didn't answer my question. Could you answer my actual question? I'm guessing you are feeling very intelligent, from this answer. But I can not tell.

anyway, can you tell me: what are you feeling about me when you typed that? And what are you feeling about yourself?

There are at least two people responding to the "there is proof of God" point. I am the pp who responded with Thor and Zeus and then answered your question by saying that I felt curious.

I also feel that you're uninformed and seem defensive -- asking people who place your god and other gods and supernatural beings in the same category to explain their motives and feelings instead of directing your attention to the information they present.

As for Jesus being different because he existed -- while there some evidence that a first century Jewish teacher existed, there is no (and there can't be) any evidence that he is the son of god -- or that there is a god. There is also evidence that the supernatural aspects of the Jesus story (born of a virgin, resurrected, etc) are borrowed from earlier myths and that the wisdom of Jesus is similar to wisdom from more ancient teachers.

There are plenty of educated people who are aware of all of this and remain Christian, choosing a metaphorical interpretation of Jesus and God that they are comfortable with.

Then they aren't true Christians. We don't get to construct the Gospel into a form that we are "comfortable" with. The very essence of being a Christian is following Jesus into places in which we are very uncomfortable.

Never heard that -- as a long term Christian, I learned that being a Christian meant believing that Jesus Christ was the son of god and our savior who died for our sins so those who believed in him could have eternal life.

Well, I suppose you can parse words over that. Jesus did say that all that is required to be saved is to believe in Him. However, most Christians, especially long-term Christians, do want to grow in their faith and thus develop a relationship with Him. That requires "picking up your cross and following Me," as his disciples did. And yes, He very well may lead you where you'd rather not go -- especially when it comes to challenging our human instincts that we are our own gods and can manipulate Christianity to be anything we want, as long as we are "comfortable."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whenever somebody brings up Thor, Zeus, fairies, etc, I really can't decide if they are just extremely stupid or extremely rude. Do you really think modern religious belief is equivalent to believing in fairies? Do you really have such a very low opinion of us, and such a very high opinion of yourself? Do you just enjoy denigrating people? Or can you really not see there is a difference? When you typed those words, did you feel clever or cruel?

There is no difference between believing in Jesus and believing in Zeus. Absolutely none.

But you didn't answer my question. Could you answer my actual question? I'm guessing you are feeling very intelligent, from this answer. But I can not tell.

anyway, can you tell me: what are you feeling about me when you typed that? And what are you feeling about yourself?

There are at least two people responding to the "there is proof of God" point. I am the pp who responded with Thor and Zeus and then answered your question by saying that I felt curious.

I also feel that you're uninformed and seem defensive -- asking people who place your god and other gods and supernatural beings in the same category to explain their motives and feelings instead of directing your attention to the information they present.

As for Jesus being different because he existed -- while there some evidence that a first century Jewish teacher existed, there is no (and there can't be) any evidence that he is the son of god -- or that there is a god. There is also evidence that the supernatural aspects of the Jesus story (born of a virgin, resurrected, etc) are borrowed from earlier myths and that the wisdom of Jesus is similar to wisdom from more ancient teachers.

There are plenty of educated people who are aware of all of this and remain Christian, choosing a metaphorical interpretation of Jesus and God that they are comfortable with.

Then they aren't true Christians. We don't get to construct the Gospel into a form that we are "comfortable" with. The very essence of being a Christian is following Jesus into places in which we are very uncomfortable.

Never heard that -- as a long term Christian, I learned that being a Christian meant believing that Jesus Christ was the son of god and our savior who died for our sins so those who believed in him could have eternal life.

Well, I suppose you can parse words over that. Jesus did say that all that is required to be saved is to believe in Him. However, most Christians, especially long-term Christians, do want to grow in their faith and thus develop a relationship with Him. That requires "picking up your cross and following Me," as his disciples did. And yes, He very well may lead you where you'd rather not go -- especially when it comes to challenging our human instincts that we are our own gods and can manipulate Christianity to be anything we want, as long as we are "comfortable."

Now you're predicting Jesus' intentions and speaking for most Christians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whenever somebody brings up Thor, Zeus, fairies, etc, I really can't decide if they are just extremely stupid or extremely rude. Do you really think modern religious belief is equivalent to believing in fairies? Do you really have such a very low opinion of us, and such a very high opinion of yourself? Do you just enjoy denigrating people? Or can you really not see there is a difference? When you typed those words, did you feel clever or cruel?

There is no difference between believing in Jesus and believing in Zeus. Absolutely none.

But you didn't answer my question. Could you answer my actual question? I'm guessing you are feeling very intelligent, from this answer. But I can not tell.

How were you denigrated? To me, that is a factually neutral statement that is not especially clever or cruel. I think the problem is that you feel very superior for having "the right answer" compared to other religious beliefs and can't handle when someone points out the obvious fact that there is no reason to believe in Jesus instead of Thor or Thor instead of Buddha.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whenever somebody brings up Thor, Zeus, fairies, etc, I really can't decide if they are just extremely stupid or extremely rude. Do you really think modern religious belief is equivalent to believing in fairies? Do you really have such a very low opinion of us, and such a very high opinion of yourself? Do you just enjoy denigrating people? Or can you really not see there is a difference? When you typed those words, did you feel clever or cruel?

There is no difference between believing in Jesus and believing in Zeus. Absolutely none.

But you didn't answer my question. Could you answer my actual question? I'm guessing you are feeling very intelligent, from this answer. But I can not tell.

anyway, can you tell me: what are you feeling about me when you typed that? And what are you feeling about yourself?

There are at least two people responding to the "there is proof of God" point. I am the pp who responded with Thor and Zeus and then answered your question by saying that I felt curious.

I also feel that you're uninformed and seem defensive -- asking people who place your god and other gods and supernatural beings in the same category to explain their motives and feelings instead of directing your attention to the information they present.

As for Jesus being different because he existed -- while there some evidence that a first century Jewish teacher existed, there is no (and there can't be) any evidence that he is the son of god -- or that there is a god. There is also evidence that the supernatural aspects of the Jesus story (born of a virgin, resurrected, etc) are borrowed from earlier myths and that the wisdom of Jesus is similar to wisdom from more ancient teachers.

There are plenty of educated people who are aware of all of this and remain Christian, choosing a metaphorical interpretation of Jesus and God that they are comfortable with.

Then they aren't true Christians. We don't get to construct the Gospel into a form that we are "comfortable" with. The very essence of being a Christian is following Jesus into places in which we are very uncomfortable.

Never heard that -- as a long term Christian, I learned that being a Christian meant believing that Jesus Christ was the son of god and our savior who died for our sins so those who believed in him could have eternal life.

Well, I suppose you can parse words over that. Jesus did say that all that is required to be saved is to believe in Him. However, most Christians, especially long-term Christians, do want to grow in their faith and thus develop a relationship with Him. That requires "picking up your cross and following Me," as his disciples did. And yes, He very well may lead you where you'd rather not go -- especially when it comes to challenging our human instincts that we are our own gods and can manipulate Christianity to be anything we want, as long as we are "comfortable."

Now you're predicting Jesus' intentions and speaking for most Christians.

No, I'm reading the Bible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whenever somebody brings up Thor, Zeus, fairies, etc, I really can't decide if they are just extremely stupid or extremely rude. Do you really think modern religious belief is equivalent to believing in fairies? Do you really have such a very low opinion of us, and such a very high opinion of yourself? Do you just enjoy denigrating people? Or can you really not see there is a difference? When you typed those words, did you feel clever or cruel?

There is no difference between believing in Jesus and believing in Zeus. Absolutely none.

But you didn't answer my question. Could you answer my actual question? I'm guessing you are feeling very intelligent, from this answer. But I can not tell.

anyway, can you tell me: what are you feeling about me when you typed that? And what are you feeling about yourself?

There are at least two people responding to the "there is proof of God" point. I am the pp who responded with Thor and Zeus and then answered your question by saying that I felt curious.

I also feel that you're uninformed and seem defensive -- asking people who place your god and other gods and supernatural beings in the same category to explain their motives and feelings instead of directing your attention to the information they present.

As for Jesus being different because he existed -- while there some evidence that a first century Jewish teacher existed, there is no (and there can't be) any evidence that he is the son of god -- or that there is a god. There is also evidence that the supernatural aspects of the Jesus story (born of a virgin, resurrected, etc) are borrowed from earlier myths and that the wisdom of Jesus is similar to wisdom from more ancient teachers.

There are plenty of educated people who are aware of all of this and remain Christian, choosing a metaphorical interpretation of Jesus and God that they are comfortable with.

Then they aren't true Christians. We don't get to construct the Gospel into a form that we are "comfortable" with. The very essence of being a Christian is following Jesus into places in which we are very uncomfortable.

Never heard that -- as a long term Christian, I learned that being a Christian meant believing that Jesus Christ was the son of god and our savior who died for our sins so those who believed in him could have eternal life.

Well, I suppose you can parse words over that. Jesus did say that all that is required to be saved is to believe in Him. However, most Christians, especially long-term Christians, do want to grow in their faith and thus develop a relationship with Him. That requires "picking up your cross and following Me," as his disciples did. And yes, He very well may lead you where you'd rather not go -- especially when it comes to challenging our human instincts that we are our own gods and can manipulate Christianity to be anything we want, as long as we are "comfortable."

Now you're predicting Jesus' intentions and speaking for most Christians.

No, I'm reading the Bible.

I'd ask for chapter and verse, but know the meaning is all in the individual interpretation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whenever somebody brings up Thor, Zeus, fairies, etc, I really can't decide if they are just extremely stupid or extremely rude. Do you really think modern religious belief is equivalent to believing in fairies? Do you really have such a very low opinion of us, and such a very high opinion of yourself? Do you just enjoy denigrating people? Or can you really not see there is a difference? When you typed those words, did you feel clever or cruel?

There is no difference between believing in Jesus and believing in Zeus. Absolutely none.

But you didn't answer my question. Could you answer my actual question? I'm guessing you are feeling very intelligent, from this answer. But I can not tell.

How were you denigrated? To me, that is a factually neutral statement that is not especially clever or cruel. I think the problem is that you feel very superior for having "the right answer" compared to other religious beliefs and can't handle when someone points out the obvious fact that there is no reason to believe in Jesus instead of Thor or Thor instead of Buddha.

Or pp's feeling of superiority is wilting and the response is name-calling and accusations. Many Christians are not like this. Instead, their understanding of Jesus' message is one of love and compassion and turning the other cheek.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whenever somebody brings up Thor, Zeus, fairies, etc, I really can't decide if they are just extremely stupid or extremely rude. Do you really think modern religious belief is equivalent to believing in fairies? Do you really have such a very low opinion of us, and such a very high opinion of yourself? Do you just enjoy denigrating people? Or can you really not see there is a difference? When you typed those words, did you feel clever or cruel?

There is no difference between believing in Jesus and believing in Zeus. Absolutely none.

But you didn't answer my question. Could you answer my actual question? I'm guessing you are feeling very intelligent, from this answer. But I can not tell.

anyway, can you tell me: what are you feeling about me when you typed that? And what are you feeling about yourself?

There are at least two people responding to the "there is proof of God" point. I am the pp who responded with Thor and Zeus and then answered your question by saying that I felt curious.

I also feel that you're uninformed and seem defensive -- asking people who place your god and other gods and supernatural beings in the same category to explain their motives and feelings instead of directing your attention to the information they present.

As for Jesus being different because he existed -- while there some evidence that a first century Jewish teacher existed, there is no (and there can't be) any evidence that he is the son of god -- or that there is a god. There is also evidence that the supernatural aspects of the Jesus story (born of a virgin, resurrected, etc) are borrowed from earlier myths and that the wisdom of Jesus is similar to wisdom from more ancient teachers.

There are plenty of educated people who are aware of all of this and remain Christian, choosing a metaphorical interpretation of Jesus and God that they are comfortable with.

Then they aren't true Christians. We don't get to construct the Gospel into a form that we are "comfortable" with. The very essence of being a Christian is following Jesus into places in which we are very uncomfortable.

Never heard that -- as a long term Christian, I learned that being a Christian meant believing that Jesus Christ was the son of god and our savior who died for our sins so those who believed in him could have eternal life.

Well, I suppose you can parse words over that. Jesus did say that all that is required to be saved is to believe in Him. However, most Christians, especially long-term Christians, do want to grow in their faith and thus develop a relationship with Him. That requires "picking up your cross and following Me," as his disciples did. And yes, He very well may lead you where you'd rather not go -- especially when it comes to challenging our human instincts that we are our own gods and can manipulate Christianity to be anything we want, as long as we are "comfortable."

Now you're predicting Jesus' intentions and speaking for most Christians.

No, I'm reading the Bible.

I'd ask for chapter and verse, but know the meaning is all in the individual interpretation.

There's not a lot of room for misinterpretation, PP. Here is an example of a Jesus quote on this topic that is so important it is noted in multiple Gospels:


Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.
Matthew 7:21-23


And calling the crowd to him with his disciples, he said to them, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.
John 8:12


And he said to all, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. Luke 9:23