767
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 589:
Line 589: + + +
Debate:Is religion morally wrong? (view source)
Revision as of 15:42, April 26, 2007
, 15:42, April 26, 2007→A place for a few more answers
::Flippin this statement so far as I can tell doesn't seem to based upon reason but rather upon faith. As Thomas Jefferson (a deist) said, “Nature [has] implanted in our breasts a love of others, a sense of duty to them, a moral instinct, in short, which prompts us irresistibly to feel and to succor their distresses.” In your "Nature" means "good luck" or at the very difference "luck". I don't see any difference between "good luck" and God. You think these are unrelated concepts, but I'm not sure why. [[User:Everwill|Everwill]] 11:36, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
::Flippin this statement so far as I can tell doesn't seem to based upon reason but rather upon faith. As Thomas Jefferson (a deist) said, “Nature [has] implanted in our breasts a love of others, a sense of duty to them, a moral instinct, in short, which prompts us irresistibly to feel and to succor their distresses.” In your "Nature" means "good luck" or at the very difference "luck". I don't see any difference between "good luck" and God. You think these are unrelated concepts, but I'm not sure why. [[User:Everwill|Everwill]] 11:36, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
If I sound condescending it is because you are no different from a fundamentalist muslim. That is you refuse to critically examine your belief set objectively. To answer hypothetical questions will lead you in a direction you refuse to go. You demand that others prove the unprovable as evidence that there is a God. Understand this: we agree that God is neither a flying spaghetti monster, nor a bearded old man laying on a cloud. Relax, I understand your position completely, because I've been where you are. It's okay. Each finds his own path in due time.[[User:Everwill|Everwill]] 11:36, 26 April 2007 (EDT)