"Christ" and "Christians"

No, I don't believe in any.

 

It may not be able to be *proved* today, just as your world-view can't be, but that doesn't mean it can't be truly objectively true.

 

Of course it does! Let's see you prove it is "truly objectively true" that God exists, and then on that basis prove Jesus turned water into wine, or that the devil is an entity/being, or that God hates anything or wants all to be saved.

 

Like you, I can't prove my position, but think it more likely true than not.

 

Then it is not "truly objectively true".

 

Objectively True, would mean that it is true, whether it is known, believed, or is provable by empirical methods. Now, PROVING something that happens to be, 'objectively true', is not always possible.

If a tree falls in the forest, and nobody sees it, it still was an objective event. Even if i cannot prove that a tree fell on its own, the truth is that it did.

With our current data set, we cannot prove, or disprove the origins of the universe. Maybe aliens did it. Maybe God did it. Maybe nobody did it. We don't know, empirically. But our ignorance does not affect the OBJECTIVE REALITY that something happened, since we are here.

 

https://mavenroundtable.io/theintel...i4sGH42HnAke_B6V6cv9Os214gKV6zZUpbc8g7a2UH4jc

 

I think that will one day be revealed to all, without doubt.

 

If you can't prove something is true, you don't know that it is true.

And provable by going into the woods and seeing it.

-because it is observable as a fallen tree with there being no known case of that tree growing on the ground and unrooted.

So why assign its existence to a god when that is the MOST unprovable explanation with no evidence? But cosmologists HAVE shown that all things of the universe originated from a single point, and they have found cases of huge and unfathomable mass being reduced to such a single point. And together, all the evidence leads to a highly likely and practical explanation, ––unlike the explanation of "magic" given by religion which originated from a time when so much of human thought was comprised of superstition and magic.

 

So what? Such speculation and imagination is irrelevant and personal.

 

IMO the Koran is garbage but it is better than the Book of Mormon. The Bible is a much better written fairy tale that flows seamless from start to finish. A lot of the stories are nonsense but they all are consistent on the message of complete obedience and total loyalty to the Boss.

 

As a work of literature, the Qur'an puts the Bible to shame.

It's written as poetry. And, its consistency was easier to accomplish due to not having so many authors and not having to explain what amounts to two different religions.

 

That is not true in this case because the character said in John 14:14 (KJV) = *If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.*

So it should be obvious that you have to use the correct name and not one pulled from a hat.

 

It may be poetry in Arabic but in English it is garbage.

 

LOL.

Judging poetry on the basis of a translation is pretty clearly riddiculous, isn't it?

 

There are a lot of translations and it still sucks in all of them.

 

I think that comes from it never trying to be literature, from having multiple authors (some of whose work has beeen crammed together), and to there beeing significant differences of purposee (creationism, general history, genealogy, Mosaic law, the will of the OT God, the very different message of the NT God, projections about "end times", etc.).

Today, it's too confused to even agree on what is allegory.

 

Speaking a name isn't the answer. That is not "asking in my name". To ask "in his name" you have to actually be "in his name". But this is a mystery to Christians today.

 

I was writing about the Koran, not the Bible. The biblical fairy tale is much better written than the Koran.

 

So what is the character*s name?

 

Thank "god" we have enlightened liberals to lead the way by mocking Christianity and ridiculing it's imperfect and human followers!

The Pharisees live on!

 

I've never heard of anyone who knows anything about literature make that claim. I just don't believe there is a real argument for that.

I'm not suggesting either is true or false just that the Qur'an is an incredible piece of poetry.

 

I don't understand what you're asking.

 

What liberals are you referring to? And why does what they do bother you?

 

yep, some of the religious right is pretty nutty for sure