Character is not related to truth. Character doesn't say anything at all about reality and the existence of anything.
Apart of that the character of a person often depends simply on the viewpoints of those that judge him.
So the reason why he doesn't actually tell us anything and gives us good reason to believe in him is that then we wouldn't have any "faith" anymore?
Do you really believe this?
You believe in a God who created paradise and hell and tortures those that do not have faith in something for which...
No it doesn proove any point. Actually all you say (or even admitted) is that people "created" religions.
Now i could have told you that already before.
That however doesn't mean that they are true.
By the way ... why are you so "insistent" on "aliens" ?
-Science doesn't see God.
-The burdon of...
why do we have to repeat this stuff time and time again in all kinds of threads?
Creationism = False
Evolution = True
Discussion in some related thread please.
The topic here is a different one.
Neither.
Science states that it doesn't know. THATS the difference.
All science says is that if we followed the natural laws back in time and if they had been valid till the absolute start then THIS universe would have started from a singularity. We do not know where this came from nor do we...
I tend to agree.
But i wouldnt be so bold in generalising it especially when you make an exception in the opposite case for yourself. like..
Why should i not think that people (including you) are of yourse also likely to be offended by the TONE of a persons argument if they dont agree?
See ...
You are a bit to relativistic for me.
Sure NOTHING is absolutely stable.
Yet still i see a difference between telling mankind something today in a generally understandable language (like if you want maths or logical constructs) and telling a tribe within a prehistoric area of ancient times...
Sure but if God waited some 200000 years after humans appearance before sending a message he could have waited some 5000 more and we had everything recorded on tape and used a rather stable language (like modern english) that is not changing as fast as old tribe or clan dialects.
Get my point...
I think you don't do yourself a favour with this claim.
According to your "elementary logic" i would have to be offended by anything i dont agree with and not offended by anything that i agree with.
And according to your logic the reason why you find Dawkins statement to be bad is your...
Just three remarks:
1) I would not consider language a problem for a God who knows when and how to reveal himself
2) Have you ever read the scriptures? For it is quite some huuuuuuge gap between extra terrestrials and angels for example.
3) How (using your opinion above) would you differ between...
Judging from the attention that homosexuality gets by christians compared to all the other evils in this world i would think there appears to be a disbalancing.
To be honest, i have come to the idea that the mere notion of claiming (lonely) prophethood is already a string indication that one is not in contact with any god.
First course: good (add at least 1 or 2 years formal logic)
Second course: i am not sure what exactly that course should include. You mean some kind of historic overview and comparisson of religions?
Generally i do not think that religious studies are required to educate people.
As for effects...
Actually thats not really comparable, nor are the views the same.
Which already is a problem for an intelligent mind because "action" requires time already by mere definition.
You might only say that the time continuum we live in was created;)