![]() |
Re: Would you believe in God if??
If it could be 100% proven to me then I would believe. I wish that I did believe :(
|
Re: churchys strike again
Why should he get a ticking off?
I agree with him in fact.. although his claims about percentages are subjective which I can't really comment on. Where did anyone mention blind faith?... I've stated that I think similarly to this guy.. are you saying that I'm in that category? |
Re: churchys strike again
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: churchys strike again
Quote:
OK, lets cut all the confusion and hopefully get back on topic too.. Do you agree or disagree with the statements made by the belgian cardinal? Give your reasons.. simple |
Re: Would you believe in God if??
Looking at the state of the world and all its problems I have to say that even if there were 100% proof of gods existance I don't think I would wish to subscribe to revering him.
If the state of the world is part of his 'master plan' then I don't reckon he is a very nice 'entity' anyway !! :( |
Re: Would you believe in God if??
Even if it was as simple as that basa, would you mind if someone judged you on something you'd made? .. ( eg: urgh, look at that hideous thing little Billy has made for his mum in pottery class.. isn't Billy a horrible little boy... see the logic there? )
As I said it isn't that simple, the bad things in our world are the result of sin, God made our world good and it's sin that tainted the creation... so even the flawed logic in my example is unjustified IMHO |
Re: churchys strike again
[QUOTE=s1lv3r]So when I interpret your comments, I'm now responding to "facts"?? :eek:
It is a fact that a lot of the leaders in the Church are stuck in the past and shoudn`t be allowed to talk. It is a fact that there are a lot of people who blindly believe the ill-informed rhetoric these idiots spout. I`m not damning the rational people, but sadly they seem to be in the minority. OK, lets cut all the confusion and hopefully get back on topic too.. Quote:
|
Re: churchys strike again
Quote:
Quote:
Things do not become fact purely because a lot of others believe the same thing.. which is also the reason why I would not push my own beliefs as fact but rather try to present persuasive evidence if I wanted to maintain any credibility. |
Re: churchys strike again
Quote:
Quote:
*Edit* Strictly speaking nothing can be objectively proved, we have models that explain the behaviour of the universe and rules that have been derived from repeated observation, but none of these represent objective, absolute truth. So yes, something can become "fact" just because enough people believe in it. |
Re: moses 'parting of the waves' a myth
So there's someone playing the guitar underwater? Oh, sorry, did they mean "Reef"?!
Of course it may well not have *been* the "Red" Sea... http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/progra...e/redsea.shtml |
Re: churchys strike again
Quote:
bigoted? Up for debate I suppose but as someone who would support the view that homosexual acts and lusts are sinful I don't think of myself as intolerant.. just different in belief systems. Biblical understanding or interpretation is no tool of bigotry, I believe the Bible is the word of God, and as such anything that is literal in context should be taken as such, nothing wrong with that. In fact, if you apply cultural or personal interpretation as primary in understanding the bible you will be on thin ice.. because there is nothing then to stop you applying the same process to the whole of it. Who am I to tell God what he is saying to me. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: moses 'parting of the waves' a myth
Moses not only parted the sea on demand but got it to close again at the exact time the egyptians were crossing.
Two coincidences at precisely the right time? I don't think so? Quote:
|
Re: churchys strike again
Quote:
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: |
Re: moses 'parting of the waves' a myth
I mentioned this to a vicar this morning and she said that current thinking is that it's not the Red Sea but the Reed Sea...which would refer to the reed marshes around the Nile at that time.
Apparently Herew dosn't have vowels so they missed out an 'e' in the origional translation. *edit* Then I read grahams post :D |
Re: moses 'parting of the waves' a myth
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 22:50. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum