• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

First cause of the universe.

F1fan

Veteran Member
Yes


Evidence can be useful when trying to get facts straight while gaining knowledge about material things. Wisdom is not about evidence.
Then how do you know it's wisdom from foolishness?


Scripture is the source that can lead one towards Wisdom.
Then scripture offers evidence. Explain this evidence. Why don't we see more believers follow it? What's gone wrong with Christianity and the Bible?
 

stvdv

Veteran Member
Then how do you know it's wisdom from foolishness?
Purify your thoughts, words and deeds by proper food and intake of other senses is a good step leading to good health and sharp discrimination to make the right choices
 

stvdv

Veteran Member
Then scripture offers evidence. Explain this evidence.
I did not say nor imply that Scripture offers evidence

Why don't we see more believers follow it?
Bible does declare "the Path is narrow"

What's gone wrong with Christianity and the Bible?
Nothing has gone wrong with the Bible, or any book for that matter. It's about what people use it for. Some use it as guidance to Spiritual gain, Wisdom, while others use it for Worldly gain
 

gnostic

The Lost One
You're not using the correct definition of a god. The correct definition of god does not limit gods to being eternal. The question is a valid one: where do gods come from? If one says that they have always existed, he has an additional burden of proof. I don't believe that you've met that simply by declaring true "by definition."

Is that based on natural theology, or fiction?

“Natural Theology” is only a couple of steps better than “Revealed Theology”, but because of the deity or deities are still required, therefore both are rooted on superstitions.

It is “better” in the sense there are some logics in Natural Theology in it speculation...

...where as there are no logics to the dogma of the Revealed Theology, like in the creation myths of Genesis or the Quran.

The problems with Revealed Theology like Christian Bible and Islam Quran, are the needs to defy logic and nature with miracles of god to create, and the needs to tell stories.

The “story” parts with God, angel visitations, talking animals, and miracles involving Adam, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad, are what make Revealed Theology - “fiction”.

Nature don’t require a story to be told. Nature don’t need god, angel, fairy, etc involve in the natural processes.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
“Natural Theology” is only a couple of steps better than “Revealed Theology”, but because of the deity or deities are still required, therefore both are rooted on superstitions.

It is “better” in the sense there are some logics in Natural Theology in it speculation...

...where as there are no logics to the dogma of the Revealed Theology, like in the creation myths of Genesis or the Quran.

The problems with Revealed Theology like Christian Bible and Islam Quran, are the needs to defy logic and nature with miracles of god to create, and the needs to tell stories.

The “story” parts with God, angel visitations, talking animals, and miracles involving Adam, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad, are what make Revealed Theology - “fiction”.

Nature don’t require a story to be told. Nature don’t need god, angel, fairy, etc involve in the natural processes.

I didnt ask which one is better.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
That's not what I asked. You said I lacked understanding of the start of the Universe. (not a start of the Universe as we know it) Are you saying the Universe (all that exists) had a start?
You asked a poorly formed question. It cannot be answered as asked. What makes you think that the universe is all that exists?
 

Kfox

Well-Known Member
That there was never nothing? Yes. Absolutely. Think about what nothing means. It means that there is no that there literally is no thing that exists. No matter. No energy. No forces. No fields. It is the absence of being, for if anything existed, there would be something. It is the absence of being.

Can the absence of being be? No. That is a logical contradiction.
Sounds kinda like you're making the same point I made back on post #165
 

Kfox

Well-Known Member
How do words work? If I define Kfox to mean dead person, does it mean that you are dead? You are doing magical thinking. You apparently think that a word causes something to be as the word defines it. Good, we can test that. Kfox means dead, You are dead now! ;)
Poor analogy. If Kfox means dead, I would be dead if I were a Kfox. To suggest because my name is Kfox I must be dead is as ridicules as suggesting anybody with the last name of "Green" is actually the color green.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Poor analogy. If Kfox means dead, I would be dead if I were a Kfox. To suggest because my name is Kfox I must be dead is as ridicules as suggesting anybody with the last name of "Green" is actually the color green.

You have to learn that words in general don't cause anything. So if I say that the universe means everything that exists, those word here on the screen doesn't make it so that the universe is everything that exists.
 
Top