Blasphemy a crime under UN resolution

[sushiguru]

Looks to me pretty much like nothing will come of it though - too many un-addresses quarters to possibly write it with any semblance of equality.

[Gregory]

elyettoner wrote,

If it's proof you're looking for, I'm sorry to disappoint. Non-empirical objects cannot be proven. Evidence is all I can give.

I know im not the first person to pick up on this, but this makes no sense. You are a believer and yet you think God's existence is not experienced? How do you justify a statement like "Non-empirical objects cannot be proven"?

On the point of creationism - you are changing the definition. Christians would say that all creation is dependent on God, He holds everything in existence. Quite a different characterisation.

Haunted, I would object to tarring Catholics and Anglicans with the same brush,

Catholics and Anglicans have no theological trouble with evolution by natural selection

Anglicans don't seem to have much theological trouble with anything now, do they? Take Polkinghorne for example, esteemed Anglican clergyman and philosopher, in St Andrews a few months ago as you may know. He believes that God created the first few souls, and after that we created ourselves - in that God was not necessary as He had already acted before. This is a heresy in any Christians mind surely.

[LonelyPilgrim]

Anglicans don't seem to have much theological trouble with anything now, do they? Take Polkinghorne for example, esteemed Anglican clergyman and philosopher, in St Andrews a few months ago as you may know. He believes that God created the first few souls, and after that we created ourselves - in that God was not necessary as He had already acted before. This is a heresy in any Christians mind surely.

Nope, not in mine. But then I don't have sufficient hubris to pretend to know the methods and workings of the Almighty. I'm lucky that I can just about figure out the engine in my car and I'm pretty sure God doesn't work at Ford.

[Haunted]

Haunted, I would object to tarring Catholics and Anglicans with the same brush

Acceptance of science is not tar. Think carefully about your expressions. Would I also be guilty of tarring people if I said Anglicans and Catholics are both human? Listing similar features =/= tarring.

Anglicans don't seem to have much theological trouble with anything now, do they? Take Polkinghorne for example, esteemed Anglican clergyman and philosopher, in St Andrews a few months ago as you may know. He believes that God created the first few souls, and after that we created ourselves - in that God was not necessary as He had already acted before. This is a heresy in any Christians mind surely.

That's the great thing about christianity, it's so vague it can mean anything (and usually does).

[Humphrey]

That's the great thing about christianity, it's so vague it can mean anything (and usually does).

That's what happens when you try and tie 66 books of differing intellectual merit written over 15 centuries into some kind of coherent narrative without bothering to employ a decent editor; and then make matters exponentially worse by allowing anyone to reach their own interpretation, regardless of how bat-shit crazy they are. Utter chaos, but then such is the human condition.

[macgamer]

I have just read this article http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/human_rights_doublespeak_at_the_un/ which adds some pertinent information to the original topic of this thread.

Although it does come from a source which Haunted has already identified as being a potential mouthpiece of subversive and countercultural Catholicism.

[orudge]

Due to lots of spam posts to this thread by Internet spambots, I'm locking this topic. If anybody particularly wants to continue discussion here, please PM me or another moderator/administrator, and we can unlock it again.

[Haunted]

http://www.independent.ie/national-news ... 24069.html