The kind of smugness feel on much institutionalised religion can be seen in this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tl8acXl3qVs
Gabby's point on religion-politics crops up early in the discussion too. On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 3:01:13 AM UTC, archytas wrote: > > I obviously agree RP. They are evidence of something, but rarely stand up > to detailed analysis even in their own terms. The Christians may be > Flavians conned by a Roman plot, Christ may not be a historical person but > an invention, Islam may be from Berber Jews and so on. Make these texts in > some way 'holy' perhaps as the word of god or an angel and hence he did > come to speak to us. This is more evidence of human gullibility than > anything else to me. And this doesn't mean the texts have nothing to offer. > > Religion for me can't be a matter of smug satisfaction or rejection of > counter-evidence as economics does through 'externalities'. Seeking is a > presence I understand, not the sacred. > > On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 12:42:27 AM UTC, RP Singh wrote: > > Neil, I don't understand how scriptures can be termed evidence, I can > quote from various scriptures but what is the use, to term them as evidence > is not scientific. > > On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 6:07 AM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > A scientist in some senses is prostrated before the evidence Molly. > > > On Saturday, February 28, 2015 at 7:47:49 PM UTC, Molly wrote: > > The Logos is God,[Jn 1:1] > <http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jn+1%3A1&version=ESV> as > Thomas stated: "My Lord and my God."[20:28] > <http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jn+20%3A28&version=ESV> Yet > the Logos is in some sense distinguishable from God, for "the Logos was > with God."[1:1] > <http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jn+1%3A1&version=ESV> God > and the Logos are not two beings, and yet they are also not simply > identical. In contrast to the Logos, God can be conceived (in principle at > least) also apart from his revelatory action─although we must not forget > that the Bible speaks of God only in his revelatory action. The paradox > that the Logos is God and yet it is in some sense distinguishable from God > is maintained in the body of the Gospel. That God as he acts and as he is > revealed does not "exhaust" God as he is, is reflected in sayings > attributed to Jesus: I and the Father are one"[Jn 10:30] > <http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jn+10%3A30&version=ESV> and > also, "the Father is greater than I."[14:28] > <http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jn+14%3A28&version=ESV> The > Logos is God active in creation, revelation, and redemption. Jesus Christ > not only gives God's Word to us humans; he *is* the Word.[1:14] > <http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jn+1%3A14&version=ESV> [14:6] > <http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jn+14%3A6&version=ESV> He is > the true word─ultimate reality revealed in a Person. The Logos is God, > distinguishable in thought yet not separable in fact. > > No room for ego, arrogance or anything like it there. > > On Saturday, February 28, 2015 at 11:28:06 AM UTC-5, Allan Heretic wrote: > > Over the years the word of God in reality is the essence of God.. the > essence of what is said.. just what the essence of God is.. i have no clue > other than it does exist. > > What i feel is of great importance is to change the perspective of just > who or what God is.. one thing i am sure of is the common perspective is > not working.. > > تجنب. القتل والاغتصاب واستعباد الآخرين > Avoid; murder, rape and enslavement of others > > -----Original Message----- > From: Molly < > > ... -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
