-->
@SkepticalOne
I observe topics of religion needn't be from a perspective of belief.
That's something I wasn't implying if that's what you are trying to get at. I guess I'm off on a tangent from the forum topic.
I observe topics of religion needn't be from a perspective of belief.
Please give me an example of anything else where in order for me to understand it, I have to understand it already. Where it is impossible for me to figure out the answer for myself without accepting someone else's answer (that cannot be demonstrated in any way) as correct already. These are answers you can't question.
That's something I wasn't implying if that's what you are trying to get at. I guess I'm off on a tangent from the forum topic.
its not always appropriate for you to take everyone off on some empirical tangent. Imagine you're the one kid with ten thousand questions whose holding up the class from getting through the lesson.I think this is a false equivalence: we are under no time pressure as in a classroom. And a student's questions are only annoying if you can't answer them, I think. "Why does gravity work" has a defined (if complicated) answer. This is exactly where we SHOULD be going off on tangents.
That isn't what I'm asking. If there's a god that's timeless, it should not require time travel to demonstrate it. It's either there or it isn't. Can you offer any demonstration at all?
If I told you I owned a rhinoceros, and I rode it to work today, would you believe me?
So, then short answer is "no"?That isn't what I'm asking. If there's a god that's timeless, it should not require time travel to demonstrate it. It's either there or it isn't. Can you offer any demonstration at all?Everything is expected to be the way it is. We can't go back to the times of Moses and talk to a bush. We can't see Jesus go to his crucifixion.
Totally random but, hat would be awesome. I love it when people ride ridiculous things to work.
It WAS awesome. Do you believe me?
I don't really believe that.changing the world takes action.
Thanks for proving my point: you would accept literally no proposition that's far, far, far less outlandish than "magic being spoke universe into existence", without evidence and reason to do so. And you're also not being very sporting about the idea of debate with someone who disagrees with you, at all. I almost feel like I've bullied you, I'm sorry.
Becoming vocal, even political. Look at Richard Dawkins. He writes books, has debates and discussions publically.
Look at Richard Dawkins... He is a household name.
It has changed me and the way that I deal with other people. If that's not 'changing the world' nothing is.It appears to be ineffective for changing the world.