Could understand something like this?\n\nIf a particular truth does not exist inside a person, such a person will not be able to write any sentence which reflects that truth. Therefore, in the final analysis truth exists in people in the first instance, and any truths in books are secondary and derivative to this living source. Applies to angels and other higher beings also.
133691
Less than 10%. I am a law student and find that a few of my peers STILL can not write a complete sentence.
474169
I believe in the existence of a life after death.But I don't believe that anyone can describe it accurately nor judge on who goes where and why.That is up to someone or something that is beyond our current level of understanding and our only guide is often mistranslated religious texts of various religions that may or may not hold guidance in a better way of life in order to gain a better life after death.but these texts and religious beliefs should never be used to try and judge others or behave with self righteous attitudes carried by self propaganda.
412674
I have been going through the same thing right now.  I have done a lot of research and it is something that is really hard to prove.  Also there are 5 or 6 books that aren't in there and it makes me wonder who decided which books belong in the Bible and which don't.  Also have you noticed that other religions are just a loyal and believe just as strongly in their religions or "bibles" laws.  It's a strange thing.  Sometimes it makes me wonder if I always believed just because I was born here and my parents do .... I'm interested to see the answers you get though.
604201
It is very sad. Anyone who does a good amount of reading on ethics will know better. Christians tend to not read good books. They just accept the beliefs they were raised with and stick to them out of loyalty, fear, and familiarity. A lot of people don't like to think that what their parents taught them was wrong. A lot of people also have a very hard time dealing with mortality without a belief in a Heaven and benevolent god waiting for them. The truth is, we really just do not know what happens. There could be a deeper purpose to our being here. There could of been an intelligence behind what is. I would never say there definitely is or is not. On the same token though I can see the works or man from a mile away. The Bible wreaks of man, and all his fears. It's far too obvious that a god had nothing to do with what's in that book. I can can spot it just like I can spot the hand writing of a three year old. It's a shame others have such a hard time seeing this. I think this goes beyond their intelligence or lack thereof. It comes from a much deeper emotional issue. To lose faith in God would be akin to losing meaning to everything and that would leave them horribly broken and lost. It's too bad they can't see the other alternatives. One can lead a very spiritual life without placing belief in ridiculous claims.
136450
You are interested in opinions, and you will get as many as there are people; all different, proving nothing, determining nothing, getting closer to nothing. \n\nYou answered one of my questions "Is there truth outside of God's truth?" Since you didn't leave your email open, I could not respond to you, except to answer you here. Why are you so concerned about the religion of others? I don't see the point of your question.\n\nI probably wouldn't have bothered hunting you down, until you left that last one-liner: "Search for your own truth, not one provided to you by others." Cheap shot, without reason or knowledge. You are very young and presumptuous and quick to apply labels from your limited learning and experience. You have no idea how many decades I have researched truth, have only started keeping a list of references in the last nine years, and already have over 700 books on that list, so unless you have read a thousand books, we may not even be able to have a decent discussion, especially when you think truth is something broad, general, changing, and temporal, like an opinion, or some rationalized belief, or based on perception. Base your premise on something solid before you pontificate.\n\nIf you are still interested in truth, read my Essay on my web site at :  www.members.cox.net/b2fnow\n\nthe Essay defines truth; you will find it in the Articles\nthen read the article "Finding Truth"\n\nthese will clear up a lot of your confusion\n\nOh yes, it doesn't matter which religion or no religion; ultimately it is about truth. Christianity is about a relationship with God, and is non-denominational.
414319
I like the spirit of your philosophy, but as to the exact wording, it seems backwards to me. Try this: We don't know how, but faith allows us to know that everything is going to work out, somehow. Faith is a way of knowing, we can not know everything, but we can understand almost everything if we know the subject matter. More and more facts are coming to light for us everyday that we live if we live in faith, with one small exception. Death always catches us flatfooted. Unless, we are very old and or very wise and courious, and ready to find out.
281742
definitely, anything is open to interpretation and since no two individual are alike everyone can have different perspectives on the same topic or subject. When we make interpretations of anything we usually relate it to what we've been through or with experiences that shapes our lives thus hell for a person could mean fire and brimstone while to another it might mean an eternity of loneliness. Nothing is wrong hence the beauty of interpretation.
334569
"Everything that has a beginning has to have a cause." \nWhy do you say this?  As you should know, absolute statements are frequently wrong.  Still, I can roll with this.  Okay, for the moment I'll play along and say that everything must have a beginning.\n\n"Only God is self-existing without beginning, without a cause outside Himself." \nWhat?!?!?!?  What about your statement above?  Can't you see that you totally contradict yourself?  You have just violated logic and trashed your own argument.  Sigh.  If everything needs a beginning, then so does a creator.  If you make an exception for a creator, then you could also make an exception for the universe.\n\nWhere is your evidence for either of these two statements?  Where is your evidence for a creator without beginning?  I think you are trying to avoid falling into the "Who created the creator" question, but skirting the question does not eliminate it.\n\nOccam's Razor:  which is the simpler theory?  A universe without beginning or a creator without beginning that created a universe?\n\nI hesitated answering this question because I felt that you merely asked it to find someone who agreed with you, and that you would choose that as the "best answer".  I didn't want to screw up my best answer ratio... but thought it more important to show you the flaws in your logic.\n\nGood luck in your Q&A's.
607344
it goes against those who say we don't exist, life is meaningless, or that we cannot know, the skeptic i believe. knowing something implies that we must have life. or is dependent on the fact that we must be alive to know. Similar to the cartesian (descartes) who said I think therefore i am. \n\nDescarte is absolutely certain that he exists because he thinks and experiences things. This absolute certainty is then used to prove we can know something. but this is descartes not nietzsche. I don't know who came first but they sound similar. He's not reacting against descarte he's just rephrasing what he said. I pretty sure he is reacting against the skeptic who's all spaced out hippie and is like maybe my blue is your purple and we're just beamed down manifestations of one being. \n\nI never read nietsche so don't know exactly what he was trying to say. have to read the whole section of the book to know exactly but that's what it sounds like. \n\nalso if we try to say that we know we can't know we destroy any value of knowing we can't know. obviously if we can't know anything then we can't know we don't know. You can just say maybe we don't know. which is kind of weak. \n\nsorry so confusing; hope that helped :^)
447220
There are things in this world which defy explanation. What is truly amazing is that you yourself have this same gift within yourself, even if you do not care about it nor use it. It is not your intuition, which will inform you of many things that are unusual and accurate. It is not coincidence, because it happens too often. It is what I would like to call a higher mind function. Anyone who truly has this gift does not feel defensive about it, nor does he or she feel the need to try to explain it all the time. What is impressive about it is how accurate it can be sometimes, as you yourself have experienced. I am fortunate to have this gift, but it is not always "on." I can be with some individuals and not know a thing about them but I can meet other individuals and look them in the eye and begin to speak to them and all kinds of true things will start coming out. I have learned to keep fairly low key about all of this, and I do not usually mention it, but your question seems very important, so I offer what I have written here for what it is worth to you. My own gift, what will happen is that I will "see" an entire picture in a very brief flash inside my mind. When I speak with someone, what I am doing is describing what I saw from that picture as accurately as I possibly can. If I alter it or interpret it, that is called "colouring," and cancels the vision or gift or picture or reading. If I am around someone who is either negative or unbelieving, everything becomes quiet within me. But if I am around someone who is okay with this sort of thing, all of a sudden I will be telling that person all kinds of things, like the importance of rearranging his bedroom, or of walking more to strengthen his legs for balance, or of letting go of an old friendship that is actually over with.
85884
:}  No one can know anything for a fact beyond any doubt..\n\nEven our very senses fool us. There are dreams and mirages. We’ve all thought we heard saw or smelled something that was inaccurate.\n\nThoreau in Walden Pond, Presented the idea that we could know that we exist because if we did not we could not question whether we did or not.\n\nHaving established that nothing, beyond perhaps our own existence, can be established with absolute certainty, we must proceed to behave as if those things for which there is significant evidence, in fact exist and work as the evidence would suggest they do.\n\nWhile this procedure at times will lead to error, for the most part it is necessary to pursue this line of reasoning, called inductive logic, if we are to conduct normal life functions.\n\nIs there a god?  I use the same process. So for my purposes Yes, as far as my data goes in allowing  me to analyze the information, the preponderance of evidence suggest that God is a certain fact.  \n\nThen using the scientific method it simply remains to see if the predictions I make based on this hypothesis come to be\n\nAnd they have.\n\nI'm 100% sure \n\n\n\nOne additional fact \nMy salvation depends less on my faith than on his faithfulness!
666634
Hi,\n\nThis sentence - which, despite some answerer's comments, is very often said - is a very valuable sentence because it gives us a lot of insight into the believer's mind. It's my belief that somebody who grows up in a very insular 'fundamentalist' house often tends not to develop an independent sense of right-and-wrong. There must be exceptions, of course, but a lot of people refrain from killing, stealing, coveting and wearing mixed fabrics not because they've ever objectively considered the right-and-wrong of these actions but merely because 'God told them not to'. 'Hell' is the equivalent of 'wait till your father gets home' - but the difference is that the latter is only applicable for children who don't have a fully-formed concept of actions and repercussions.\n\nFor somebody whose definition of 'good behaviour' is based solely on what they read in a book, it's quite logical for them to presume that an atheist would not engage in good behaviour. The unfortunate implication is that, for these people, they would freely murder, rape, steal, pillage and wear mixed fabrics if it weren't for God's decree against those actions. Furthermore, they see murder as bad not because a person's life has been lost and his/her family torn asunder but merely because the perpetrator 'sinned' against God. Would you trust such a person with your child?\n\nLastly, what objective conclusion can you draw about the morality of a person who says 'A sin is a sin - lying and killing are equal in the eyes of God'? What conclusion can you draw about the morality of a deity who would believe that?
561443
I understand that the thing that people have called "God" doesn't exist and it is really a small portion of something so great that it is all encompassing. Knowing that it is all encompassing I know that I cannot comprehend it and no word can describe it.  Therefore, any text about it is incorrect and makes it less than what it actually is.  What it is is just meant to be observed and appreciated but never spoken about.
219218
If the person making such a generalization was a serious scientist, researcher, philosopher, etc. -- that is, someone whose JOB is to discover universal truths or principles about nature, mankind, society, etc. then the generalization could have merit.\n\nIf an ordinary person makes that kind of sweeping statement, then there probably is no merit or validity to it.\n\nTo answer your question: Yes, a statement about a universal principle CAN be made. But it should be made by someone trained in discovering and verifying such principles.\n\nOrdinary people should perhaps restrict their statements to particular situations or individuals, because then, they would be more believable. There is no point in saying something that nobody believes.
231646
Why would someone concern themselves with theories when we have the Truth available to us. \n\n\nhttp://www.chick.com/information/general/salvation.asp
58629
depends on what you mean by truth. I believe that the truth is actually a relative concept. if i believe soemthing to be true, then that is my truth. It's no better or worse than anybody else's. Some truths are so prevalent that trhey are almost a Truth (absolute). but all we experience is necessarily filtered by our own choices and beliefs and that goes for everyone alive. so even these almost absolute thruths can be as misguided as my own private truths.\nmy truth and yours are definitely out there, if you care to look for it. the Truth, however, is not.
492228
Yes, I read it and found it very interesting.  The reader should keep in mind, though, that the author does not claim to be anything but human, that is, he does not claim to be God made manifest in a human form like Moses, Jesus Christ, Mohammed, The Bab, and Baha'u'llah.  Therefore, his interpretation of what God is revealing to him is subject to error.  Only the Manifestations of God are perfect and flawless.  Even the highest saint is still human and subject to error.\n\nwww.bahai.org