Re: 信仰的堅持？
| |||||
何况这精妙的 天体运转 动物 植物 精妙的设计 科学的根基 是建立在本来存在的规律上人类只是发现 运用`体的结构和运行，牛顿严正表示：“从诸天文系的奇妙的安排，我们不能不承认这必是一位全知全能神的作为。宇宙间一切有机无机万象万物，都是从永生真神的智慧大能而来；他是无所不在，无所不能的；他在这无量无边，井然有序的大千世界中，凭其旨意，创造万物，运行万物，并将生命、气息、万物赐给人类；我们的生活、动作、存留，都在乎他，宇宙万物必有一位全能的神在掌管统治。”“在望远镜的末端，我看到了神的踪迹。” | |||||
| |||||
爱是,恒久忍耐，又有恩慈。 爱是不嫉妒，爱是不自夸，不张狂，不做害羞的事； 爱是不求自己的益处，不轻易发怒，不计算人的恶； 爱是不喜欢不义，只喜欢真理。 凡事包容，凡事相信，凡事盼望，凡事忍耐。 爱是永不止息。 | |||||
耶酥爱你 | |||||
愛，不是從上帝而來的；上帝的愛是有條件的，不是真愛。 另：酥字應為穌。 | |||||
How to be a better Creationist | |||||
一面人說世上就老耶一個神,一面又無恥地容許自己教內有各種各派不同的闡述.若然真理只有一個老耶,那麼多宗派,熟是熟非?還是貴教的老耶都不過是個一廂情願的幻想?神棍編造出來的混飯榥子? 修身齊家治國平天下,自身未修家門未齊就說這說那的什麼勞什子耶穌愛你.到底耶穌是神的獨生子,還是猶太反動份子的私生子,在有實質而無可質疑的證據前,請收起這論調吧. | |||||
A previous post about the design argument... Question: is that: 牛顿严正表示：“从诸天文系的奇妙的安排，我们不能不承认这必是一位全知全能神的作为。宇宙间一切有机无机万象万物，都是从永生真神的智慧大能而来；他是无所不在，无所不能的；他在这无量无边，井然有序的大千世界中，凭其旨意，创造万物，运行万物，并将生命、气息、万物赐给人类；我们的生活、动作、存留，都在乎他，宇宙万物必有一位全能的神在掌管统治。”“在望远镜的末端，我看到了神的踪迹。” True? 回復 1# 的帖子 1. Well, even if there is no God, you still can't do whatever you want to do. Also, by some other moral principles, people can still be good, even without God. Basically, you can rely on your 良心 to behave well... "何必自觉向善呢" 2. It seems that "自觉向善" is simply a mean for you to get some future benefit, but not because you want to be good...No wonder you say "要多坏就多坏", if there is no benefit for you to be good... "别忘了现在活着 就该感恩" I always 感恩 for my living. it is just the case that I won't 感恩 to the Christian God that doesn't exist. I thank my parents for their love, thank my friends for their care..., but I can't find a reason to thank this nasty, non-existent Christian God. 回復 5# 的帖子 Do you have lunch in McDonxxx's everyday? Think of a statement: "I have lunch in McDonxxx's today" Would this statement's truth value be always the same? Some sort of interesting philosophy of language question... | |||||
原帖由 weakest 於 2008-2-8 17:07 發表 >>>> 回復 5# 的帖子 >>>> Do you have lunch in McDonxxx's everyday? >>>> Think of a statement: "I have lunch in McDonxxx's today" >>>> Would this statement's truth value be always the same? >>>> Some sort of interesting philosophy of language question... that may b a little bit complicated for those simple-minds 耶酥爱你 just an other naive sheep-in-the-mainland-of-china intoxicated by that religion which has been very out of fashion in western world | |||||
想當年, 在聖經考試中, 小弟硬係諗唔起"耶穌"點寫. 結果只好求其寫D字去撞o下. 點知寫咗"耶鮮", 甚至"耶魚", 就係寫唔到"耶穌"呢兩個字.... | |||||
原帖由 weakest 於 2008-2-9 03:21 發表 2 the contrary , i dont think any "瘀 thing , i do think its 3岁定80 , if ..... at that time u not have that kind o' `````求其寫D字去撞o下'''' 的 胆量 , then .... how could ye 2days////todays 逃脱魔掌 ?? [ 本帖最後由 prussianz 於 2008-2-10 01:06 編輯 ] | |||||
原帖由 weakest 於 2008-2-9 03:21 發表 if ..... me were ye , then .... i'd rather write Jesus as `````耶骚'''' or `````牢耶骚'''' , when .... i was@church , i did often hear them ..... critickising////criticcising buddhism or taoism e.t.c. + calling guan-yin's names as 魔鬼 .... n must shatter her in2 pieces where-ever there be opportunity [ 本帖最後由 prussianz 於 2008-2-10 07:08 編輯 ] | |||||
原帖由 weakest 於 2008-2-9 03:21 發表 if ..... ye'd insist on seeking out 'the `````truth'''' @ that time , then .... ye would not have a open mind or let us c////see u here , | |||||
| |||||
原帖由 weakest 於 2008-2-9 03:21 發表 when ..... i was @church , i was ,,,,,suggested'''' 2 write something or feeling about that religion , @thattime , i did have some strong impulse to write down `````耶骚'''' even though i did know "耶穌" 點寫 , but ......... , i did -n-o-t- dare to be 'the dare-devil , o k , i must admit that i'm probably weaker than ye , if ..... me were ye , [ 本帖最後由 prussianz 於 2008-2-11 03:08 編輯 ] | |||||
(1) A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. (2) If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed. The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge. (3) During the youthful period of mankind's spiritual evolution, human fantasy created gods in man's own image who, by the operations of their will were supposed to determine, or at any rate influence, the phenomenal world. (4) The desire for guidance, love, and support prompts men to form the social or moral conception of God. This is the God of Providence, who protects, disposes, rewards, and punishes; the God who, according to the limits of the believer's outlook, loves and cherishes the life of the tribe or of the human race, or even or life itself; the comforter in sorrow and unsatisfied longing; he who preserves the souls of the dead. This is the social or moral conception of God. (5) I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science. My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance -- but for us, not for God. (6) Nobody, certainly, will deny that the idea of the existence of an omnipotent, just, and omnibeneficent personal God is able to accord man solace, help, and guidance; also, by virtue of its simplicity it is accessible to the most undeveloped mind. But, on the other hand, there are decisive weaknesses attached to this idea in itself, which have been painfully felt since the beginning of history. (7) A human being is part of the whole, called by us 'Universe'; a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest--a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and affection for a few persons nearest us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole nature in its beauty. Nobody is able to achieve this completely but striving for such achievement is, in itself, a part of the liberation and a foundation for inner security. 羅素說得更妙。 We are told that sin consists in acting contrary to God's commands, but we are also told that God is omnipotent. If He is, nothing contrary to His will can occur; therefore when the sinner disobeys His commands, He must have intended this to happen. 違反上帝的也是衪的志願，那麽違反者是該受罰還是受賞呢？要是受罰，是否公平？不受罰，對信衆又是否公平？兩難也。自己搞出來的，也要自己搞掂。要接受榮耀，也就要接受譴責。針無兩頭利。 | |||||
|