progressive christianity

[OMGitsaROSS]

I agree partly with those points but i'm agnostic//atheist.

[Virgin Mary]

How can this be? :'s If you have H2O molecules (water is arranged HOH) then you have H2O molecules not water. Water is a substance in which H2O is the primary molecule. Unless it's ice or steam then water begins ionising almost immediately. I don't know what I'm talking about, wait till I get a PhD then I can continue.

[Mentor]

no,

none of my family or friends belive (sp?) in god I havn't even read the bible but I do have faith in Gods existence.

You can have faith elvis is still alive if you like, in fact theres More evdence suggesting thats the case than there is for god "/

i dno, i used to feel the same but im completely changed now. its hard to explain but once you feel god in you you dont need there to be physical proof in his/her/whatevers existance you know that what you can feel inside you is strong enough to convince you at least. i know this post is gonna get me bare flamed, but anyone else with faith will back me up, im sure.

Unluckly a gut feeling, how ever strong, is not what i define reality by. God is a none issue, theres no evidence for or against, i have no reason not to belive in him as equaly i have no reason to belive in him. Since i lack a reason to belive in him, in the same way i lack a reason to belive in Tim the invisable dinosour. I simply dont concider it an issue, im an aithiest - without a belief in god. (not the same as beliveing god doesnt exist)

Until somthing suggest or at least points to the possiblty or likelyhood of such a thing, i see no reason inderving to establish more about the abstract concept that is god.

i was brought up a catholic but it annoys me how much organized religion adds extras onto the basic concept of god. noones asking you to believe in any other gods, all it says is that other religions can contain truth too, whether they be in its teachings, commandments or whatever. just because it isnt christianity you shouldnt shut yourself away from it and write it off =/

Christanty just offers one possible idea of what god could be. The one in christanty is jellous, wrathful and pretty stupid alot of the time. Far from perfect as most concepts claim. Hence why he gets so mad and comits mass genaside when people beliveing in a differnt god than him (which happens a number of times in the bible)

The christian conception of god is just one possible god concept. Many others exist, although i agree, its far better for people to establish there own idea of god that will benifit them and with luck make them better as a person, than to have a large organised religion which simply lends itself to a neverending stream of corruption.

Of course I believe in scientific laws, they can be considered proof of some kind of creator. Scientific theories are all about which label stick, not facts. When the big bang was first suggested it was rejected by scientists and the general public but accepted by the Pope and the Catholic community. And just for the record, water is a substance formed from H2O and many other elements, not H2O itself.

Water is H2O, its true pure water is very rair, but only the H2O is actualy water, the rest are just other minerals and chemicals mixed in with it. The water remains as just alot of H2O.

Plus all science is with facts, a scientific theory is a best explaintion at the time for the evdence avaible, when more evednece appears you can check the theorys predictions were correct, if they were, theory seems to be right, or at least close to it. If not, the theory needs refineing in order to get closer to the truth.
Gravity = fact. We know gravity exists and that things are attaracted to each other by a gravition pull
The theroy of gravity = a theory explaing how this actualy works, we have a good idea, but we dont know for sure exactly how gravity is working, so it remains a theory.

How can this be? :'s If you have H2O molecules (water is arranged HOH) then you have H2O molecules not water. Water is a substance in which H2O is the primary molecule. Unless it's ice or steam then water begins ionising almost immediately. I don't know what I'm talking about, wait till I get a PhD then I can continue.

H2O molecules = Water. There just to names for the same thing, the H2O is simply a statement of which elements combine in order to create each water molicule.
Water IS H2O. Often Water is mixed with other stuff, because its to expencive to filter completely, thus the water from a tap isnt just water, its water + clorine and any number of any other chemicals, salts and minerals.

[Jazza]

How can this be? :'s If you have H2O molecules (water is arranged HOH) then you have H2O molecules not water. Water is a substance in which H2O is the primary molecule. Unless it's ice or steam then water begins ionising almost immediately. I don't know what I'm talking about, wait till I get a PhD then I can continue.

You've got it wrong, H2O is 2 H (Hydrogen) molecules and 1 O (Oxygen molecule) which is exactly what HOH is. Water which is found naturally is less commonly H2O because it will have trace amounts of whatever it has been in contact in with it but H2O is just the water part when pure.

[Concentric2]

Unluckly a gut feeling, how ever strong, is not what i define reality by. God is a none issue, theres no evidence for or against, i have no reason not to belive in him as equaly i have no reason to belive in him. Since i lack a reason to belive in him, in the same way i lack a reason to belive in Tim the invisable dinosour. I simply dont concider it an issue, im an aithiest - without a belief in god. (not the same as beliveing god doesnt exist)

Until somthing suggest or at least points to the possiblty or likelyhood of such a thing, i see no reason inderving to establish more about the abstract concept that is god.

Then you are more agnostic than atheist; atheism is actively disbelieving the existence of a greater power.

[Mentor]

Then you are more agnostic than atheist; atheism is actively disbelieving the existence of a greater power.

Not really, athism correctly means "without belife in god" just look at the word.
a = without (think of asyimetrical or amoral etc)
theism = belief in god

Although if you want to get in to the more technical side, i would classify myself as a weak athiest, which is admittedly quite close to an agnostic option, since i dont claim to know ether way. I hold the stance because from a purely logical point of view, beliveing there definitely isnt a god is just as stupid believing there is one, in that no evidence exists to suggest ether way. (the position a strong aithiest would have is an active belife that god doesnt exist)

The difference between my position though and an agnostic is an agnostic belives there may or may not be a god, and hasent decided which one is true, setting for an undecided opinion. My own as a weak aithiest is that no decison exists since it makes no sence to deny or accept a proposition that hasnt been made. By made i mean in terms of being indicated by any form of evedence.

You dont belive in magical super goats. You dont have any reason not to belive in them, theres no evedence that proves they dont exist. The reason is theres no reasonable evedence that actualy suggests or implys there existence. The same is true from my prospective of god.

[FlyingJesus]

Getting away from the pointless discussion of water and back to the original topic; I think this is the worst form of Christianity available. It's basically a way of being able to tell everyone you're a Christian without actually following any Christian laws. It's the "pick and choose" sector of Christianity, where if you don't want to live by a Bible law you can just say "nah I interpret it differently so it doesn't apply to me in that way".

In my opinion, if you're going to be a Christian you should actually read the Bible and live by its teachings rather than just saying you believe in God. Fair enough, you could have a belief in any god without following any rules, but to truly believe in the Judeo-Christian God should mean that you respect (and hell, if the Bible's any example, fear) Him enough to do as He says, to the letter. You can go on about certain laws being outdated, but social codes shouldn't affect how you follow your religion. Do it properly, because you're only kidding yourself otherwise.

[lAdmire]

is progressive christianity different than christianity?
cause i'm christian & like.. yeah.
umm... i unno.

[Concentric2]

The difference between my position though and an agnostic is an agnostic belives there may or may not be a god, and hasent decided which one is true, setting for an undecided opinion. My own as a weak aithiest is that no decison exists since it makes no sence to deny or accept a proposition that hasnt been made. By made i mean in terms of being indicated by any form of evedence.

You dont belive in magical super goats. You dont have any reason not to belive in them, theres no evedence that proves they dont exist. The reason is theres no reasonable evedence that actualy suggests or implys there existence. The same is true from my prospective of god.

I know what you mean but i still think what you're saying is the same as being agnostic. If you're agreeing that there is no evidence either way then how can you argue that you're being scientific about it and yet leaning towards one side.

[hobo]

imo, religion = bull. none of them appeal to me in the slightest.

& i don't agree with progressive christianity.
if you're going to be a Christian, you should follow the proper christian religion and it's rules, instead of following some adapted rules to make it easier.
it's kind of an easy option.