Theres no appropriate title

There is more proof of God than there are atoms in the entire universe.
If you would like for me to get into mathematical computations I will be happy to show you. If I did proove that God does exist and that Christ is His Son, and that Christ is the only way to Heaven,

WOULD YOU ACCEPT CHRIST AS YOUR SAVIOR?????

 

You just summed up your point of view.
You are totally closed minded to anything other than your point of view,
regardless if it is correct.
I told you that I can prove it! & You still refuse to believe.
WoW-that's sad

 

I will continue to pray for God to open your eyes.
Wouldn't that be to cool-if you became a believer.
Then you would understand where I am coming from.

=)

 

=)
You'll give in =)
You have to when you weigh out the consequences =)

God always wins the argument

 

How the hell did this intellectual discussion on Abortion turn into the Preaching hour?


FACT: You do NOT need to have religion, to have Faith.

FACT: Your interpretation of God, is not necessarily the same interpretation that someone else has.

Hypothesis: All versions of God are the same God, under different interpretation.

Personal Belief: I do not believe the same thing you do. I'm not sure many people do. I will, however, listen to your beliefs and have calm, intellectual discussions about them. IF, however, you decide to start Preaching, and trying to force me into your belief system, you're an asshat and I shut you out. You can believe what you want to believe, I can believe what I want to believe. I'm not forcing you. Don't force me.

Funny Definition: Militant Agnostic - "I don't know, and you don't either."

Now.
Back on Topic.
(I have nothing to add to the topic that hasn't already been said)

 

Mani stated ->
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sterling, you said -
The truths held by one person may not be identical to the truths of another, this is a Fact.
We all have truths, and strange as it may seem – I have read on many posts people typing out The Same Message to each other. Regardless of the topic they are simply phrasing their case differently.
If we all have truths, what happens when they contradict each other? Who's truth is then right and who decides that? The stronger of the two? The smarter? Or is there something that will be judge over the two "truths" to establish which one is right, if either.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes, I did. However I'm sorry if my post not concise enough. Yes, we have truths that contradict each other. I would suggest that the first step is to ‘agree to disagree’. I would think this is something we can do. Don’t you?
Also, since I do not believe you or anyone else here is qualified to claim that what truth is “right” or “stronger”, nor do they have the right to force/impose a belief upon another person. You pushed forth an interesting angle of this debate, but one I am not going to be suckered into just now.

Also you stated –
…then that would imply that we are now accountable to that higher authority. This is offensive to most human beings - we would rather not be held accountable for our actions and for what we do or do not do with our lives…
Yes and no. A agree that there should be more accountability, as I posted earlier. However, I know of many people that follow the routine of going to church, accepting accountability then turn around to do it again. “Asking for forgiveness” is a powerful tool that frees guilt, and pressure, allowing you to go on. If that works for you – I salute you~!

Yes, I atone for my errs, accept responsibility and accountability for what I have done and what I am. I just don’t need a church to do it.

~PM~

 

Okay....
Please back off on the bible-thumping. This is a debate. Not a seminar to convert people into monotheisam.

~PM~

 

Mr. Arglaar,

I wasn't speaking to you in the beginning of this conversation. Now, since you have pulled yourself into it, You can rest assured I can bring your un-knowledge- ( I would think you are agnostic from your above statement )-into full knowledge (epignosis).

There is Good News for you. I can show you the way to disprove you disbelief- That way you could come to the full understanding of knowledge.
As an agnostic- if you understand what the meaning of the word is -
(I am not trying to put you down here) Agnostic just means you haven't done enough research to come to your own conclusion. As I stated above to Hamma-If I could prove to you beyond a doubt that there only one God and His Son's name is Jesus Christ, and that He (meaning Christ) is the only way to heaven and to escape eternal hell,......

WOULD YOU ACCEPT CHRIST AS YOUR LORD AND SAVIOR????
(If I proved to you that He is who He says He is) ?????

You have just been entered into a question that you can not deny or refuse to answer-you must figure it out for yourself. Simply not answering the question does not release you from the consequences.

Not answering the question-is in fact answering the question....

"Truely I say to you, if you are not with me, then you are against me"
Would you believe Christ said that????

 

Yes, actually, I think I would.

 

Zabdiel. Did you read at all what I said?

Welcome to asshattery, and /ignore.

 

God, Abortion, right , wrong. ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................

I have many beliefs on each.

My Beliefs are not yours but make mine no more right than yours nor any more wrong.

Keep in mind that though we might not agree with each others view, we don value each other as friends. Hopefully the arguments like this one do't drive wedges in those bonds .

This was a very very long forum to read sigh....

Know that the underlying statement in all sides was a person must do what they believe is right, be it they believe morally that thier religion should diactate, or they just believe that it should be there right and no one elses.

Again be glad that you live in a society or a world that lets you have theese rights, and though you might not agree with everyones(which is also your right) you atleast dont need to let it offend or upset you and possibly look at them as not the same people you love to game with.

Damn you guys know i like to be the fun easy go easy guy quit makeing me think so deep it hurts =P

 

Shads, you said -
"Know that the underlying statement in all sides was a person must do what they believe is right, be it they believe morally that thier religion should diactate, or they just believe that it should be there right and no one elses."
This is in essence what I was trying to point out. Each individual has a view on what they feel is right or wrong. The problem is when someone's "right" is in contradiction with someone else's "right". How do we solve this? How do we figure out who is really right, because there can only by one right about a given subject.

This is the quandary - what is the truth about right and wrong. Who is right and who is wrong about, for example, abortion? You can't say both are right because you don't want to offend anyone. There has to be one overarching objective truth about this subject, and we have to use an objective truth to decide that - otherwise we are stuck with a relative truth based on subjective ideas and it is anything goes. If there is no objective truth, how can we know anything for certain?



Arglaar, you said -
"FACT: You do NOT need to have religion, to have Faith.
I agree with this statement, but what makes this statement true? How do you back this up and what authority do you use here? Is this your truth or someone that you have read, or is this your opinion? Because I agree with you, does that make it true? What happens when more people disagree with me and you? Are they now right and we are wrong? How do we decide?

FACT: Your interpretation of God, is not necessarily the same interpretation that someone else has.
Again, I agree with you here. But then, what definition do we use to interpret God with and where did we get our definition? In other words, who's truth are we referencing here when we begin to interpret? Also, what happens when say the God we try to interpret has made claims that He is the only God? What do we do then?

Hypothesis: All versions of God are the same God, under different interpretation.
Again, how do we back up what we are saying here? Under what definition are we placing God? Our own or someone else's? Or are we allowing God to define Himself? If we are, where are we finding His definitions?

Personal Belief: I do not believe the same thing you do. I'm not sure many people do. I will, however, listen to your beliefs and have calm, intellectual discussions about them. IF, however, you decide to start Preaching, and trying to force me into your belief system, you're an asshat and I shut you out. You can believe what you want to believe, I can believe what I want to believe. I'm not forcing you. Don't force me."
Herein lies the crux of the problem. You have a truth you believe and this other person has a truth they believe. Which is right? Who has the right truth? Why do you believe what you believe Argy? Is it personal experience that guides your belief or a reasoned study that has brought you to this truth? This again calls into the debate Pascal's Wager. I won't debate the existence of God here, as we do not have the room.

But there is one objective truth that will answer this. There has to be or nothing makes any sense. If all truths are right, then none are really right and any statements to that affect nullify themselves. Also, to say nothing is certain is a self-cancelling statement as well. Something MUST be certain or nothing is and this is all chaos.

 

why did you post this? !!!