Date:   12/28/2005 8:43:39 PM ( 19 y ago)
Hits:   6,731
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=641877

0 of 0 (0%) readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?

Hi and thanks for replying.

Hmmm. Ok. Well, I "think" you are saying that the question of "how can one argue by using the very thing that is in question" is unanswerable? Or, that it superseeds logic? Is that what you are saying? That may be a big point. Because if one is arguing on "faith", it would be impossible to connect on the same level with the person who is arguing with "logic". Apples and oranges. So, it just comes to trying to convince the other one that faith is the true litmus test, while the other one believes logic or Science is the true litmus test, and thus the 2 sides will never see eye to eye unless the "faith" folks can find a way to argue with "logic" or the logic folks can find a way to argue with "faith". Faith cannot be convinced, I do not think. It must be experienced first hand in order to be believed. I do understand the concept of having to put oneself in the path to receive the gift of faith unless one happens to be lucky enough to have it fall in your lap. And, while I am admittedly a skeptic of Chistianity because it is very important to me to believe that God accepts all, I also know that the idea "believe and then you will see" has a lot of truth in it.

I am not sure I see the distinction between God recognizing religion or his son, but is it not really the same thing? If he only recognizes his son, one must therefore, by default, be a member of the only religion that believes in Jesus as God's only begotten son? Or, am I missing a finer point here?

Thanks!


 

<< Return to the standard message view

fetched in 0.02 sec, referred by http://www.curezone.org/forums/fmp.asp?i=641877