chuck schmidt

Not likely its not. Its elliptical.

What a moronic thread. <roflmao>

You may. God won't prevent you.

When you say Christians' belief it is like you think there is only one and all C's share it? For instance when you say "far fetched" in what sense? If you are critiquing the Bible what scripture, what chapter and verse and from what version of the Bible? In this entire thread what I read is people discussing people, not God. If that what you wish please feel free, but its a totally different subject.

Interesting take. My take of your description is that you are not describing God, you are describing man's reactions to each other and people's differing view of gods. In neither case does that mean He is out to lunch. It suggests that you, like many of us, are still trying to figure out when you hear Him and what He means.

Depending on what toys you are willing to sacrifice there is nothing stopping you. There are many who do just what you say you want. Just don't expect to be issued a government permit. If government "permits" you then they are responsible to rescue you by some twist of bureaucratic logic, so they won't. However if you go far enough and just do it, the odds of government bothering you are slim. There are many remote areas where this is common.

It was not my intention to refer to aesthetics. I suppose it was more in the nature of musing. Whenever people live in the man-made environment of cities they seem to drop faith in a deity and develop philosophies that give all credit to man. When they live on farms or in the bush and see the miracles of natural birth and growth, there tends to be a greater acceptance of the miracles of God. Neither is a rule, just a general observation. My comment wasn't meant to be persuasive.

Sorry Toad, force doesn't work with me. I don't admit anything. Your arguments have to contain the force of logic. This isn't a bar where you can shout down your opponent with force of personality.

Haven't studied them, have you? rotflmao

Of course it is. What didn't I argue with? Nothing serious I hope. LOL

I wouldn't say, "Nope." I'd just say your view, parts of which I may and may not agree with.

Agreed. You can. Mine too. You just don't gettit. Does God recognize "ugly"?

I know what you are saying. You are insisting that my argument fit within your demands for a particular form of logic. An example is the definition of "belief" in Wicki. It says (in part, of course): Epistemology is the philosophical study of knowledge and belief. The primary problem in epistemology is to understand exactly what is needed in order for us to have knowledge. In a notion derived from Plato's dialogue Theaetetus, philosophy has traditionally defined knowledge as justified true belief. The relationship between belief and knowledge is that a belief is knowledge if the belief is true, and if the believer has a justification (reasonable and necessarily plausible assertions/evidence/guidance) for believing it is true. [emphasis added] In other words the subject of the assertion is empirically provable at some level. In the logic as described above you are correct. The logic of God is not intended to fall within these bounds. Faith in God requires you to take it or leave it on God's terms.

What word would you use when the "belief" is not in doubt and/or is supported by evidence? Wicki says, "Belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true." Under "belief" Wicki also links to a topic called "religious beliefs," but nothing there seems to support your definition? dictionary.com says be⋅lief    –noun 1. something believed; an opinion or conviction: a belief that the earth is flat. 2. confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof: a statement unworthy of belief. 3. confidence; faith; trust: a child's belief in his parents. 4. a religious tenet or tenets; religious creed or faith: the Christian belief. I can find no definitive authority for your proposition. When I read the definitions from dictionary.com they lean your way. They leave one thinking that a belief is less concrete than a conviction. Still, if I believe I have my hat, must I only do so in the absence of evidence? I do not accept that use of the word "believe" or its companions such as "belief" necessarily concludes an element of doubt. I do understand where you are coming from. I suspect that it depends on the context. Use of the word might often mean that the user acknowledges an element of doubt or that not everybody might agree. However it might also mean an assertion that something is not only true, but true in the experience of the speaker.

Gee, can't argue with that.