Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 7,627
- Location
- Ireland/Northern Ireland Border
So in other words you are agreeing with deuse?
No, deuse things they should be a separate option.
Poll: What is your position on religion/god?
- Thread starter Naffa
- Start date
No, deuse things they should be a separate option.
I thought it was 11 dimensional space only? 26 dimensions was suggested some previous iterations of string theory, and then reduced to 11 by Edward Witten?
Although I haven't looked at the stuff for many years, and didn't understand the maths back then anyway.
It was widly known that the world was round prior to Columbus, I think the ancient Greeks worked it out.
Why would they when sound recording was possible before he was born?
Other than all of the ballonists obviously?
But it seems to me that your are strengthening his argument.
You are a Catholic and therefore see no need for two seperate denominations.
A Christian - say a protestant - would not in fact not classify themselves as a Catholic.
Either way, the OP did say he's not going to list all sorts of different donominations and so forth (for this very reason).
No they would classify themselfs as a Christian...I fail to see your logic here!
Deuse's point was:
"All Catholics are Christians, but all Christians are not Catholics
There should be a Catholic option... "
Spudbynight (a catholic) then said that he doesn't feel like there should be a distinction between the two.
My point is: Isn't that just proving deuse's point?^^
It was just an observation, not particularly somehting I'd go into a long discussion over.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 14,315
- Location
- Peoples Republic of Histonia, Cambridge
If you're trying to liken Jesus to an 11/26 dimentiinal loaf of bread I couldn't possibly comment.
Very few would put any meaningful degree of faith in string theory. It's as equally questionable as the proposal of a god. Science doesn't claim it to be true, only eludes that it's a theory worthy of further investigation.
Last edited:
There's no option that fits me in the poll, as deist implies belief in a deity with no recognition of any capacity of divine revelation. Pantheist would come closest, but denies any semblance of personality to the godhead which doesn't completely fit either. I do believe that 'all that is' is a manifestation of the godhead, and in fact 'is' God. But I also believe it's self-aware so pantheism doesn't strictly fit.
I'm a Spiritualist if it needs labelling, but I take experience and personal exploration over dogma. I've regretfully not got time to read the entire thread or join in properly, but if it's the usual mix of science v religion then I don't see an issue. If your experience even becomes science v religion then you're doing something wrong. One should easily complement the other, and experience to the contrary indicates you're clutching onto dogma instead of truth. JMHO.
I'm a Spiritualist if it needs labelling, but I take experience and personal exploration over dogma. I've regretfully not got time to read the entire thread or join in properly, but if it's the usual mix of science v religion then I don't see an issue. If your experience even becomes science v religion then you're doing something wrong. One should easily complement the other, and experience to the contrary indicates you're clutching onto dogma instead of truth. JMHO.
Atheist & a feeling of utter bewilderment at some of the stuff from the dark ages that some people still believe in. Regardless of how their holy books are discredited in one way or another by modern science or indeed simply common sense they still cling to their bizarre beliefs simply because 'it is written proof' & therefore it is fact.
In reality there is not even the slightest,faintest hint of proof that any god exists, Even the Church itself knowingly tries to deceive it's followers,why are their numerous relics of saint Peters bones scattered around different churches all over the Europe? bones that had been tested in the past & found to be mostly animal & even more comical enough bones to presume he had 14 arms & eleven legs ?
I wonder why the Catholic church will not permit any more carbon dating of it's relics ?? enough supposed bit's of wood from the crucifix cross that if added together would build a two story barn.
It's known church deception, any relics that comes to light that could cast doubt never see the light of day & are hidden in the Vatican archives with forbidden access. Why?? what could they possibly be afraid of I wonder??
In reality there is not even the slightest,faintest hint of proof that any god exists, Even the Church itself knowingly tries to deceive it's followers,why are their numerous relics of saint Peters bones scattered around different churches all over the Europe? bones that had been tested in the past & found to be mostly animal & even more comical enough bones to presume he had 14 arms & eleven legs ?
I wonder why the Catholic church will not permit any more carbon dating of it's relics ?? enough supposed bit's of wood from the crucifix cross that if added together would build a two story barn.
It's known church deception, any relics that comes to light that could cast doubt never see the light of day & are hidden in the Vatican archives with forbidden access. Why?? what could they possibly be afraid of I wonder??
Quite, the problem is as soon as you start using science in this sort of philosophical/theological debate as a counter, you have to start invoking that faith as you're moving beyond the predictive.
Too many people confuse science within the scientific context with science in the philosophical context, and forget that while science is incredibly powerful in a predictive context, in a philosophical one, it is just another philosophy.
Agnostic, I don't know one way or the other, and it's unlikely mankind will know any time soon.
I'm quite surprised so many people are atheists, for me believing there definitely isn't a god is as mad as believing there definitely is one.
I'm quite surprised so many people are atheists, for me believing there definitely isn't a god is as mad as believing there definitely is one.
Given the lack of proof of anything supernatural ever occurring either 2 thousand years ago or even last week & you wonder why so many are atheists?
But given the number of unexplained phenomena that have been explained over time, and the number of things that are still yet to be explained, it seems a little narrow minded to completely rule out one possibility, just because groups of people (religions) are very vocal about that possibility.
Really?
Supernatural or miracles are not tied to believing in GOD..In fact Deism rejects such happenings.
Deism in religious philosophy is the belief that reason and observation of the natural world, without the need for organized religion, can determine that the universe is the product of an all-powerful creator. According to deists, the creator does not intervene in human affairs. Deists typically reject supernatural events such as prophecy and miracles, tending instead to assert that a god (or "the Supreme Architect") does not alter the universe by intervening in it.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 7,627
- Location
- Ireland/Northern Ireland Border
I am sorry but I seem to be stating the opposite to deuse.
Deuse says they need to be seperate I don't think they do. Am I missing something?
