|
Search Results
|
| Post |
Author |
Forum |
Replies |
Views |
Posted
[asc]
|
| |
|
Thread: Questions for theists.
Post: RE: Questions for theists.
| Some of you need to pop along to a Catholic Church to find out what Catholics REALLY believe, before stating it incorrectly with such certainty. Eternal torment in hell is much the preserve of the eva... |
|
chadster1976 |
Religion
|
222 |
79341 |
December 1, 2011 at 6:45 am |
| |
|
Thread: Questions for theists.
Post: RE: Questions for theists.
| Whatever happened to the populist front Reg?
He's over there...
SPLITTER! |
|
chadster1976 |
Religion
|
222 |
79341 |
November 30, 2011 at 9:46 am |
| |
|
Thread: Questions for theists.
Post: RE: Questions for theists.
| The "Protestant" Bible? Protestant must mean after Martin Luther which would make it very much a revisionist piece.... or the term could be worthless! Ask just about any Christian in Belfast what they... |
|
chadster1976 |
Religion
|
222 |
79341 |
November 30, 2011 at 9:17 am |
| |
|
Thread: Member Photos
Post: RE: Member Photos
| (November 27, 2011 at 2:14 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: (November 26, 2011 at 11:15 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: Snuggles after a long day
[Image: https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-fnikS...age251.jpg]
Th... |
|
chadster1976 |
Introductions
|
20280 |
4438665 |
November 28, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
| |
|
Thread: Subsequent truths
Post: RE: Subsequent truths
| Might not be entirely relevant but a lot of the bible was originally written in Greek and some in Aramaic. |
|
chadster1976 |
Christianity
|
156 |
29879 |
November 22, 2011 at 11:32 am |
| |
|
Thread: Subsequent truths
Post: RE: Subsequent truths
| I didn't think I'd have to explain everything in such detail but...
The point about not closing one's mind and having an imagination is that if we had sat around happy with fires in caves, rather tha... |
|
chadster1976 |
Christianity
|
156 |
29879 |
November 21, 2011 at 4:19 pm |
| |
|
Thread: Why I believe in God.
Post: RE: Why I believe in God.
| I apologize wholeheartedly for mistakenly accusing you of arse-face related comments.
Let's just clarify something though, my belief in there being a God does not rely on the Bible at all. Religions ... |
|
chadster1976 |
Atheism
|
72 |
18469 |
November 21, 2011 at 3:57 pm |
| |
|
Thread: Subsequent truths
Post: RE: Subsequent truths
| Norfolk: to state there is no reason for a creator is no more valid than saying that you believe there is one. Extrapolate logically...
Why do I believe in God? I just do.
If there is no Creator, whe... |
|
chadster1976 |
Christianity
|
156 |
29879 |
November 21, 2011 at 12:13 pm |
| |
|
Thread: Why I believe in God.
Post: RE: Why I believe in God.
| Norfolk: Insisting the Bible is liberal as a precondition for the existence of God is bonkers. That's like arguing a lemur can't exist because it isn't in my daughter's encyclopaedia or flying cars mu... |
|
chadster1976 |
Atheism
|
72 |
18469 |
November 21, 2011 at 7:02 am |
| |
|
Thread: Why I believe in God.
Post: RE: Why I believe in God.
| Frodo, look at where Islam comes from. It is the same God, redefined by the words of Mohammed. |
|
chadster1976 |
Atheism
|
72 |
18469 |
November 21, 2011 at 5:01 am |
| |
|
Thread: Why I believe in God.
Post: RE: Why I believe in God.
| Norfolk: Again you mis-state my position. If you have read any of my posts, you will know that I have consistently argued against interpreting the bible literally. I do not argue that the Bible is the... |
|
chadster1976 |
Atheism
|
72 |
18469 |
November 21, 2011 at 3:58 am |
| |
|
Thread: Why I believe in God.
Post: RE: Why I believe in God.
| It is really quite simple. As God isn't factored into any testable scientific theories, his existence or non existence would have no effect on the outcome of any test based on those theories. Therefor... |
|
chadster1976 |
Atheism
|
72 |
18469 |
November 20, 2011 at 1:45 pm |
| |
|
Thread: Subsequent truths
Post: RE: Subsequent truths
| With no evidence, surely it is more like Schrodinger's cat? He both exists and doesn't exist at the same time...
I respect your atheist opinion and if I ever feel I have evidence contrary to it, I w... |
|
chadster1976 |
Christianity
|
156 |
29879 |
November 20, 2011 at 1:36 pm |
| |
|
Thread: Why I believe in God.
Post: RE: Why I believe in God.
| Norfolk. Read the thread. Toro said they are incompatible with God and I want to know how. Don't just disagree for the sake of it. |
|
chadster1976 |
Atheism
|
72 |
18469 |
November 20, 2011 at 1:26 pm |
| |
|
Thread: Subsequent truths
Post: RE: Subsequent truths
| Occam's razor also is entirely irrelevant. When Father William of Okham first posited it, he was remarking on observations in the natural world. It didn't question his faith (nor that of Thomas Aquina... |
|
chadster1976 |
Christianity
|
156 |
29879 |
November 20, 2011 at 1:22 pm |
| |
|
Thread: Subsequent truths
Post: RE: Subsequent truths
| It does occur to me that we currently postulate and accept many things we cannot directly measure. Think of how we measure and observe things now that were considered impossible only 2 or 3 generation... |
|
chadster1976 |
Christianity
|
156 |
29879 |
November 20, 2011 at 1:09 pm |
| |
|
Thread: Why I believe in God.
Post: RE: Why I believe in God.
| Sorry. Explain why quantum mechanics and relativity (special or general?) are incompatible with the notion of a God? |
|
chadster1976 |
Atheism
|
72 |
18469 |
November 20, 2011 at 12:54 pm |
| |
|
Thread: Subsequent truths
Post: RE: Subsequent truths
| IATIA "accepted as fact". I am very deliberate with my words.
Rhythm. Everytime we look under this stone we do come out with the same thing, those who try and argue "you can't prove he does/doesn't e... |
|
chadster1976 |
Christianity
|
156 |
29879 |
November 20, 2011 at 12:48 pm |
| |
|
Thread: Subsequent truths
Post: RE: Subsequent truths
| That is exactly why assigning a purpose is a philosophical argument, not a scientific one. Life has gone on happily for eons without us knowing its purpose and continually trying to determine what it ... |
|
chadster1976 |
Christianity
|
156 |
29879 |
November 20, 2011 at 12:13 pm |
| |
|
Thread: Subsequent truths
Post: RE: Subsequent truths
| That isn't a reason for YOU to exist...
Reproduction is not a reason as such. If you want to take that philosophical step then an equally valid argument could be "God exists because he was necessary ... |
|
chadster1976 |
Christianity
|
156 |
29879 |
November 20, 2011 at 10:54 am |
