Interesting and Humour - page 4194
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
It seems to me that talking about religion should be banned just as much as talking about politics.
1. if you speak about the essence you should show some, at least formal, proofs of what you have written
2. and you didn't even have enough mind to see the contradiction in statement about "divine source" and, there and then, denying "blind religious beliefs" while the concept of god is a purely religious concept
Oh, getting to the point at last))
1. Formal proof of what exactly was I supposed to present? ))
2. don't get confused, god and the divine are different things... God was not mentioned in my post, so your subsequent conclusions are also irrelevant...
It seems to me that talking about religion should be banned just as much as talking about politics.
To deny that there is a higher mind that created the world is the height of inadequacy ))
God or a higher intelligence who created the world is nothing more than Russell's kettle,
but in this situation all humans are sitting in Plato's cave so it's even pointless to argue...
---
the most adequate (imho) of the concepts is when god = the world
or god = the driving principle of evolution
at least it's constructive.
Oh, getting to the point at last))
1. Formal proof of what exactly was I supposed to present? ))
2. don't get confused, god and divine are different things... god was not mentioned in my post, so your subsequent conclusions are irrelevant...
...of the validity of your assertions, if it's not banter...
If there is a god, then there is a god, and if there is a Caesar, then there is a Caesar.
the most adequate (imho) of the concepts is when god = the world
or god = the driving principle of evolution
at least that would be constructive
that's for pantheists :)
What is the definition of the religion you want to ban?)
"Hey, kid, what parish are you from?"
-- You got something to pray for?
1. the correctness of your statements, if this is not a stele.
2. it is you who will learn to think... if there is a divine then there is a god, if there is a Caesar then there is a Caesar
1. If you have doubts about correctness, then state at least one for starters... I do not want to engage in telepathy, what exactly is your problem with correctness...
2. divine does not mean =god at all, there is an object-god and there is a property-god. Obviously these are completely different...
It seems to me that talking about religion should be banned in the same way as talking about politics.
Then we will move on to history and cultural studies; if they are banned, we will move on to philosophy and epistemology; if they are banned we will write anecdotes in ancient Sumerian.