A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY (Religion)
> dhw: I have made it clear that I do not regard the fallible human authors, selectors, translators and interpreters of the Bible as authorities, and you have referred me to a text that says: "every man who wishes to be saved must become [...] a judge of the books written to try us" (try apparently means test) and "the spurious is mixed up with the genuine." So you are now telling me what I was telling you: the books are not to be trusted..... If this life is all there is, I shall die grateful for having had it. If there is more to come, I hope it'll be as enjoyable for everybody (every soul?) as this one has been for me. > > Let me reciprocate. Enjoy every moment of this life, while always doing as you would be done by. Is that not enough for you?-Let me add, I have enjoyed my life to the fullest. It has been a privilege to have lived over four score years. I have found God, not the God of religions, but the God revealed by my own reason. This is much more fulfilling, because I have my own personal relationship rather than being told how I should believe. No religion knows the truth. It is all taken on faith, built on writings by other humans who know no more than I do. Each religion's truth differs. Jewish, Christian, Muslim all have different versions of God. Buddhism and other Eastern religions have a different approach. We are all part of God. He must be amused at this flailing about in trying to relate to him. I feel all religions are correct for their believers. God doesn't care if they differ, for no religion is better than any other. You don't need to follow a crowd for belief. And finally, don't ever attempt to impose your belief on others. Limit your self to explaining your belief. Anything else is insulting to intelligent folks.
Complete thread:
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
dhw,
2012-05-30, 10:19
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
Thomas Kelly,
2012-05-31, 14:28
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
Thomas Kelly,
2012-05-31, 14:31
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
Thomas Kelly,
2012-05-31, 14:33
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
dhw,
2012-06-01, 14:38
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
Thomas Kelly,
2012-06-01, 19:03
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
dhw,
2012-06-02, 12:22
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
Thomas Kelly,
2012-06-02, 13:49
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
dhw,
2012-06-03, 14:21
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY - David Turell, 2012-06-03, 15:18
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
Thomas Kelly,
2012-06-03, 21:27
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
dhw,
2012-06-04, 13:47
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
Thomas Kelly,
2012-06-04, 16:56
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY - David Turell, 2012-06-04, 17:45
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY - dhw, 2012-06-04, 22:33
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
Thomas Kelly,
2012-06-04, 16:56
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
dhw,
2012-06-04, 13:47
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
romansh,
2012-06-03, 23:15
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY - dhw, 2012-06-04, 13:51
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY - Thomas Kelly, 2012-06-04, 12:56
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
dhw,
2012-06-03, 14:21
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
Thomas Kelly,
2012-06-02, 13:49
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
dhw,
2012-06-02, 12:22
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
Thomas Kelly,
2012-06-01, 19:03
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
dhw,
2012-06-01, 14:38
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
Thomas Kelly,
2012-05-31, 14:33
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
Thomas Kelly,
2012-05-31, 14:31
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
Thomas Kelly,
2012-05-31, 16:43
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY - Thomas Kelly, 2012-05-31, 16:45
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY - Thomas Kelly, 2012-05-31, 16:51
- A RESPONSE TO THOMAS KELLY -
Thomas Kelly,
2012-05-31, 14:28