There is no evidence for GOD...but I believe anyway. (Christian, evolution)

[Hawkins]

The whole point of Christianity is "Save by Faith" in accordance to a covenant. So the question is rather;

If everything is evidenced, how can you be saved?

[TRANSPONDER]

Originally Posted by Hawkins

The whole point of Christianity is "Save by Faith" in accordance to a covenant. So the question is rather;

If everything is evidenced, how can you be saved?

Perhaps the question should be: if you believed on evidence, how could you not be saved?

[Freak80]

Originally Posted by Hawkins

The whole point of Christianity is "Save by Faith" in accordance to a covenant. So the question is rather;

If everything is evidenced, how can you be saved?

Well...how convenient.

"The reason we have no evidence for our religion is simple: our religion says that we must believe our religion without evidence."

Silly, but it works.

[Rafius]

Originally Posted by Freak80

"The reason we have no evidence for our religion is simple: our religion says that we must believe our religion without evidence."

Silly, but it works.

Which rather makes the Christians her look rather foolish when they keep insisting that there IS evidence.

[mordant]

Originally Posted by Hawkins

The whole point of Christianity is "Saved by Faith" in accordance to a covenant. So the question is rather;

If everything is evidenced, how can you be saved?

Without evidence there is no basis to even think you NEED saving or that there is a covenant. So the REAL question is, if faith evidences nothing, how can you talk about covenants and a need for salvation to begin with?

[Arach Angle]

yup

its not what we believe,
its how we believe.

Blind faith?
The first thing you learnis the way it has to be faith?

The cross was the "saving" us from "ingnorance" by being a "lesson".
silly fundies,
farer forgive them there funnie fundyies.

[TRANSPONDER]

I was going to say that was wrong, but maybe that's right - if you mean the methods of reasoning.

[Arach Angle]

Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER

I was going to say that was wrong, but maybe that's right - if you mean the methods of reasoning.

Like I tell my kids.

"Its ok to run when you are over matched and wait to the odds even up."

My post is correct when using reason, common sense, honesty. I don't fear religion because religion is not real. You are looking for a boogyman under the bed when the problem is the image in the mirror while we brush our teeth.

[wolf39us]

Why capitalize "god" every time? Just confused by this...

[Matadora]

Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER

The suggestions of Philosophy are at least based on logical reasoning, but even that requires validation by science, or they are simply interesting hypotheses.

Or they are simply metaphysical based pseudo-science thoughts. That's the difference between Philosophy and Science. Philosophy is metaphysically based and Science is empirically derived knowledge. This is why the two separated long ago. Philosophy remained Philosophy and Scince became Natural Science.