Search results

lol no. The christian god is a part of a trinity including jesus. The islamic god denies the divinity of christ and asserts the teachings of muhammed about the ways of god to be correct. The jewish god denies the divinity of christ and the teaching of muhammed. They're conceptually very...

The answer imo is that they don't really 'believe it so easily', for the most part they don't think about it and when they do they find they can't really believe, but it is something that they really, really wish were true, so they pay hommage to the belief as something to be respected.

If you really are muslim you just brought more disrespect to your religion than this thread ever did. edit: If the OP is serious about his reasons for posting, he should search through the thread a bit more... in the past there were many, many muslims and we discussed the issue with them in...

I know what muslims believe, my point is to inasero that muslims don't believe jesus ever claimed to be god. For the point of discussion here, here is a basic internet post by a muslim defending why they don't believe jesus ever claimed to be god...

Meh muslim/jewish scholars would obviously disagree with them and offer up their own evidence... I also know there is secular evidence that 'jesus' may not have even existed (at the very least in the form christians imagine). I personally care little either way.

"holds valid in its self" i.e. is true just because it is? It is true that there are some things i.e. fundamental mathematics which we, in the end, have no way of validating. However, I feel the difference between accepting these and accepting a christian god is a) the simplicity of these...

No evidence against 'christianity' ? a) There is no more evidence for the christian god than there is magical pixies making people fall in love with one another, it is good enough for me to discount magical pixies on this basis (as i'm sure it is for you also) and thus is good enough for me to...

It does devalue the contributions of others but only by virtue of the fact that it recognises the great contribution of great britain. If we 'included' the others then it would devalue the contribution of great britain and their contribution to australia ('legal' formation, laws, governance...

You obviously don't get the point. The point is not that anyone here has claimed a conspiracy theory, but that an often-employed method by christians to reject the importance of any lack of evidence is similar to that used by conspiracy theorists.

If you (or anyone you know) can actually show evidence of any paranormal event then go collect your million: http://www.randi.org/joom/challenge-info.html

Perhaps a reason other than 'traditional flag design/to represent subordination', i.e. That there is a historical connection? The nation of australia, its laws etc as we know it today are derived from great britain, there is no greater influence. No it's just a symbol that we use to quickly...

I'm going to be quite blunt, they're faking it. Do you believe hypnotism is real? Maybe if you read up about exactly how stage hypnotism works you'd have a better understanding of what might be going on when 'regular people' become 'possessed'.

Your friend is either a) delusional b) lying c) mistaken. As for seeing people floating in general, do you know how many people believe they have seen cris angel levitate? Show me one documented, scientific case of a demonic possession... not just hearsay, if we went by that then surely UFO's...

just lean in and place your lips on hers... do what you enjoy... don't ram your tongue down her throat or go a little crazy or whatever, just be calm.

"Wanna do anything tonight?" "Not really." "Me either." "Guess that's it then."

It would be logically possible. Have you missed the past few pages of the thread? There are some pretty good naturalistic explanations as to how we came into the existence we now know. As for that being proof for your god, well it's no more proof for your god than the flying spaghetti...

What proof for zeus would you accept? To my mind at least asking 'what proof would you need to accept an illogical personal god' is basically the same as asking 'what proof would you need that a square can be a circle or that 1+1=6?'

Hard question to answer... I don't know what it would take as anything it would take appears to me to be logically impossible (if we're talking about a personal god). Obviously I could start believing just because idk... my parents get a terminal illness, but I'm assuming the question means...

Agree with everything in this post.

Yeah I probably should have talked a little longer, in the case of 'god' though I imagine my definition of what an agnostic is, is probably at least the most common (particularly w/in philosophical circles), as I doubt many would profess that one day we will know the answer. Agnosticism comes...