right?
2006-12-12 08:13:13 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
absolutely not
2006-12-12 08:17:08 · answer #1 · answered by Nemesis 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not sure if it's not ethical. Makes them lose a lot of credibility with me. Especially when they say it's ALL 100% Absolute. All one has to do is read the first 2 chapters of Genesis, the very beginning of the Bible, to know it can't all be 100%. There's 2 different beginnings.
To me, it makes them appear desparate. Trying so hard to make something Perfect when the rest of us know it isn't.
2006-12-12 16:34:28 · answer #2 · answered by Kithy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If faith is a good method to know the existence of God, why is the same method not used in a court of law to determine who murdered someone? Before you send someone to die, isn’t it a good idea to make sure it’s the right person? Should you pick anybody off the street and ask them to prove they did not commit the murder, and if they don’t know what you are talking about, they are obviously guilty? Should the burden of proving you did not do the murder rest on you or on he who claims it was you and accuses you? If I start claiming that I feel God within myself, shouldn’t I show you some evidence? Or since you don’t know what I am talking about, you are obviously deaf, and have no eyes to see, no introspective ability, so you must be obviously illogical, and all I have to tell you is “Pray and have faith!.”
In the Middle Ages someone who couldn’t prove that the Devil DID NOT talk to him, was guilty anyway and had to be tortured and killed. We could still do that experiment and just pick anyone off the street and tell him or her that WE KNOW that Satan has possessed him/her. We KNOW, not by proof of evidence, but because the Blue Angel spoke to us. How about that method in a court of law? It would cost expensive lawyers, and it would save the taxpayers money.
Since when it comes to practical application faith is the same in every religion, why don’t all faithful join together in Iran and form the new country of the AlmightyAllahJehovaShivaVishnu Incorporated?
2006-12-12 16:18:58 · answer #3 · answered by DrEvol 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No that would not be ethical. Also, It would be an even greater crime to conceal that which you know to be true from those who lack such knowladge. The problem is distinguishing between the two. In the mean-time, i'll keep preaching the Gospel truth and you keep asking pointless questions...
2006-12-12 16:19:07 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
But if you know for a fact, that it is truth then you must reply if you are asked! That is what this forum is about.
2006-12-12 16:20:01 · answer #5 · answered by martha d 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do not calim to "know it all"... but I do know The Truth of God and of The Salvation Message... The Good News.... I know these to be Truth.... these I will state Absolutly.... for sure....
2006-12-12 16:18:37 · answer #6 · answered by idahomike2 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There are no absolute truths. I assume therefore I am.
2006-12-12 16:23:38 · answer #7 · answered by POV 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you admitting to us that you are habitually wrong, don't know right from wrong, truth from lie.
2006-12-12 16:45:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Knowledge and faith are two different things. You are asking is it ethical to pass our faith on to our children.
YES
2006-12-12 16:16:58 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Our finite minds appeal to imperical evidence(possible argument)
Our spirits appeal to faith.(no argument)
2006-12-12 16:20:17 · answer #10 · answered by bonsai bobby 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋