On news 24 this morning I'm sure I heard that the synod is the only place other than parliament where laws are made, this horrified me slightly before I though, well there must be limits or we'd all be going to church on Sundays by law. So exactly what laws can they enact?
I don't need a long philosophical or theological debate about whether there is or is not a god(s), I just rely on good old fashioned common sense that tells me it is utterly absurd to think there are greater omnipotent beings.
Believing in god ranks up there with believing in fairies at the bottom of the garden.
challenged? lol shouting folk down because you don't agree with them, asking for proof but unable/ unwilling to supply proof of your own, that is a very feeble challenge. pmsl
I haven't the foggiest idea what you're talking about steg - and following your post of 20.21 yesterday, I get the distinct impression that you don't either.
I think essentially what Naomi and everyone else is saying is ' you can't prove a negative'. I can't prove your god doesn't exist wheras IF he does you ought to be able to prove it to me...nothing feeble in that.
... and why is that exactly? Christianity especially is a religion that is evangelical so why wouldn't your god do everything within his power to create as many believers as possible? We frequently hear about ' miracles' etc but this tends to be an overused word about somthing which has happened which has a perfectly plausible explanation- so why doesn't your God ' show himself' and why can't you prove to me his existance?
depends on what you accept as proof, nox, how can some one prove some thing that is incomprehensible? As i have said in this thread already maybe the point isn't actual life its self, so why would "god" have to prove he is , Most people that seem to of walked this earth seem to of had enough proof
Naomi, I totally agree. By mentioning the Church of Scotland dignitaries, I was not suggesting that THEY should be given seats in the Lords, but rather that the Church of ENGLAND ones should be summarily removed.
I can't think of any reason why a bunch of blokes in colourful frocks should be acceptable as legislators, whilst another bunch in sombre black robes aren't, given that they are ALL supremely deluded about reality!