Plus, culture and exposure to new ideas, people and ways of looking at things.
I think he meant that our advice would rely on how our society deals with relationships and how to handle our own limitations put on us. Having little to no experience in how your society works inside and out we could wind up giving you advice that would not work.
You're reaching. Jesus was telling His listeners that the owner of the vineyard (God) holds all wealth, and He is generous and gracious to all. Those called and chosen at the
Q1: We should never reject the unknown. We wouldn't be where we are today if science rejected the unknown.
I hope that's true.
What is faith?
"Faith" and "belief" are closely paired, so it's possible that there's conflation occuring in my usage. Then again, I am a skeptic at the most fundamental philosophical levels. So I suspect what you are calling "belief" is something I would still consider "faith-based."
I agree with GHF. "Morals" as given by god, are not morals at all. They are commands. Much like when we command our dog to get off the couch. He does. Not because it is the 'moral' thing to do but because of fear
At least one of them went there in that era.
Nope, just reading the chalk on the asphalt.
And why should I?
I don't have any problem with homosexuals in a personal manner. My friend recently decided to do it.
We are not here for any purpose, there is no purpose in the universe, it just is.
Yes. God has a problem with sex outside of a committed male/female marriage. Not a difficult concept.You've seen tons and tons of hypocritical Christians in your life.
Truth is Truth, and what I state is my truth, and what you say is your truth, neither one has been defined by the Ultimate Source as being, in any way, reliable. However, I've been researching 'God' for over 50 years, and I believe that what I say is, essentially, true, but, perhaps, not the Ultimate Truth.
My mistake. Looked like it was you
I wasn't referring to ignorance. Sense of wrong and right is a man made construct for survival.
What I linked was a website built by a person that did a lot of research into Warren's claim. But of course you can't dispute the points she makes on that website because that would require you to objectively consider the possibility Warren may not have Native American heritage.
And it's a terrific strawman! If for no other reason that shouldn't SOMEBODY be living it up like tomorrow doesn't matter?
I agree that the 7 questions are not particularly apt. But the OP is interesting. I particularly agree with Stephen Jay Gould and Denis Noble. Being biased against religion is an influence in evolutionary science, at least among some scientists. The question is whether a sort of paranoia about "letting God back in" is hemming in scientific inquiry to a strictly reductionist point of view.
This is horrible logic...you're essentially arguing that a deity must exist because wind exists although we can't see it?
I took a Sudafed once, and it made me think I was Marie Antoinette.
That sounds fun :)
That's like saying "Just three words - Floyd Lee Corkins".
Fair points mate as usual.
Yep, that one makes you look even more stupid than the last. Care to continue?
You pointed out that neuroscience says the person stops when the brain stops. My point being how can science know that if they can't even point out where the person resides within the Brain. Science at this time can not make a comparative measurement between live Fred Uttlescay and dead Fred Uttlescay, because they don't know where to look. Just because brain waves stop does not mean Fred Uttlescay stopped. Mabye Fred Uttlescay stopped working in our observable universe does not mean Fred Uttlescay stopped working in another universe. There was a study that came out recently that says the brain may operate on 11 dimensions. So think about that we can observe 4 that leaves another 7 dimension that the brain theoretically operates on. So maybe once Fred Uttlescay stops working on these 4 dimensions maybe he continues to work on the 7 we cannot observe.