While the body, soul and spirit are inextricably linked, only the death of the body can separate the spirit and soul from the body, but an unregenerate spirit keeps one separated from God.
That's right.
Prove it. Without your usual twenty pages of scripture.
Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke Don't worry sir, I don't take your poor reasoning personally.
An atheist doesn't believe in God because they are unconvinced of His existence. An atheist doesn't became an atheist out of fear of something he doesn't believe in. That's just silly. - This of course has been explained to you numerous times and no doubt will require doing so again in ...[text shortened]... Please don't take the above personally. It has to be said. It's a matter of intellectual growth.
An atheist doesn't became an atheist out of fear... ... that he is aware of.
... that he is willing to admit.
Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke Don't worry sir, I don't take your poor reasoning personally.
An atheist doesn't believe in God because they are unconvinced of His existence. An atheist doesn't became an atheist out of fear of something he doesn't believe in. That's just silly. - This of course has been explained to you numerous times and no doubt will require doing so again in ...[text shortened]... Please don't take the above personally. It has to be said. It's a matter of intellectual growth.
"An atheist doesn't believe in God because they are unconvinced of His existence."
"It's a matter of intellectual growth."
Think so? Think thus; an atheist doesn't believe in God because he has convinced himself that God doesn't exist in defiance of reason.
Atheism is the deconstruction of reason. Life came from life. Creation is the only rational explanation for the existence of the universe. Life is the evidence for a life giver.
Evolution is the only other option, and there's no evidence for it, nor is there anything for reason to grasp onto in regards to it.
Originally posted by josephw Prove evolution without the twenty million pages of theory based on not a shred of evidence.
You actually and sincerely think there is "not a shred of evidence" supporting the theory of evolution or is this just more of your disposable hey-look-at-me Dasa-style bravado?
Originally posted by josephw Life came from life. Creation is the only rational explanation for the existence of the universe. Life is the evidence [b]for a life giver. [/b]
Maybe the universe and various forms of life in it have always existed. That's also an explanation. So your assertion that your preferred explanation is the only one isn't true.
Originally posted by josephw [b]"An atheist doesn't believe in God because they are unconvinced of His existence."
"It's a matter of intellectual growth."
Think so? Think thus; an atheist doesn't believe in God because he has convinced himself that God doesn't exist in defiance of reason.
Atheism is the deconstruction of reason. Life came from life. Creation is the only rat ...[text shortened]... and there's no evidence for it, nor is there anything for reason to grasp onto in regards to it.[/b]
To say there is no evidence of evolution is unadulterated head in the sand stuff.
Sounds like i am not alone in convincing myself of something that stands in defiance of reason. (And overwhelming evidence!!!)
Originally posted by KellyJay Not to a rose, rabbit, whale, jellyfish, crawfish, octopus, oak tree with evolutionary beliefs all are related at some point.
'All known forms of life are based on the same fundamental biochemical organisation: genetic information encoded in DNA, transcribed into RNA, through the effect of protein- and RNA-enzymes, then translated into proteins by (highly similar) ribosomes, with ATP, NADH and others as energy sources, etc. Furthermore, the genetic code (the "translation table" according to which DNA information is translated into proteins) is nearly identical for all known lifeforms, from bacteria to humans. The universality of this code is generally regarded by biologists as definitive evidence in favor of the theory of universal common descent. Analysis of the small differences in the genetic code has also provided support for universal common descent. A statistical comparison of various alternative hypotheses has shown that universal common ancestry is significantly more probable than models involving multiple origins.'
Originally posted by FMF But it doesn't mean religious fundamentalism occurs only because of damage to the brain. What other things can be the result of damage to the brain?
11 May '17 14:03
damage to a part of brain=fundamentalism
Back to Top