11–20 of 136 posts
Well, of course we focus on natural theologians' arguments for the existence of God, because God's existence is logically prior to any other arguments you could have about Him. It doesn't matter what God as revealed in nature can teach us about predestination if God doesn't exist to predestine anyone.
> exist He may existed, or will appear under certain circumstances. Or he may have quantum nature: doesn't exist, but manifests himself.
Two things to ask anybody who claims to have some information, or even just some personal beliefs, about something they call "God" : 1. What are the statements about what you call "God" that you believe in? 2. Why do you believe just that set of statements and not some other set of statements? I believe that the answer to 2., if they are honest, would most often be: They believe the set of statements they believe bec…
I'm not sure about all religions, but a Christian's belief that nature proves God's existence is taught in the bible: "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse" - Romans 1:…
Kind of off-topic but, why does the angloworld keep using a translation of the bible that's written in an almost "archaic" English (yes I know, I'm exaggerating, but I can't think of a better description from the top of my head). Coming from someone that was born and raised in a Portuguese speaking country, their version of the bible seems much more "accessible", But I acknowledge the fact that it might come at the c…
I'm not sure about all religions, but a Christian's belief that nature proves God's existence is taught in the bible: "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse" - Romans 1:…
Kind of off-topic but, why does the angloworld keep using a translation of the bible that's written in an almost "archaic" English (yes I know, I'm exaggerating, but I can't think of a better description from the top of my head). Coming from someone that was born and raised in a Portuguese speaking country, their version of the bible seems much more "accessible", But I acknowledge the fact that it might come at the c…
Native english speakers often agree the KJV is beautiful in writing and speech.
I'm not sure about all religions, but a Christian's belief that nature proves God's existence is taught in the bible: "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse" - Romans 1:…
Kind of off-topic but, why does the angloworld keep using a translation of the bible that's written in an almost "archaic" English (yes I know, I'm exaggerating, but I can't think of a better description from the top of my head). Coming from someone that was born and raised in a Portuguese speaking country, their version of the bible seems much more "accessible", But I acknowledge the fact that it might come at the c…
I'm not sure about all religions, but a Christian's belief that nature proves God's existence is taught in the bible: "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse" - Romans 1:…
Kind of off-topic but, why does the angloworld keep using a translation of the bible that's written in an almost "archaic" English (yes I know, I'm exaggerating, but I can't think of a better description from the top of my head). Coming from someone that was born and raised in a Portuguese speaking country, their version of the bible seems much more "accessible", But I acknowledge the fact that it might come at the c…
I'm not sure about all religions, but a Christian's belief that nature proves God's existence is taught in the bible: "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse" - Romans 1:…
Kind of off-topic but, why does the angloworld keep using a translation of the bible that's written in an almost "archaic" English (yes I know, I'm exaggerating, but I can't think of a better description from the top of my head). Coming from someone that was born and raised in a Portuguese speaking country, their version of the bible seems much more "accessible", But I acknowledge the fact that it might come at the c…
Not almost, it was deliberately archaic when written.
But also...the “angloworld” as a whole doesn't.
I'm not sure about all religions, but a Christian's belief that nature proves God's existence is taught in the bible: "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse" - Romans 1:…
Kind of off-topic but, why does the angloworld keep using a translation of the bible that's written in an almost "archaic" English (yes I know, I'm exaggerating, but I can't think of a better description from the top of my head). Coming from someone that was born and raised in a Portuguese speaking country, their version of the bible seems much more "accessible", But I acknowledge the fact that it might come at the c…
Now, lots of Christian denominations do favor more modern translations, but the KJV refuses to go away.
Fun fact from the church I grew up in (Mormonism): aside from the Bible and the Book of Mormon, Mormons have a book of scripture called Doctrine and Covenants, which contains revelations from God directly to Joseph Smith. But what's funny is that this book is also written in faux-Jacobean English. Smith didn't think it through!
The KJV was so dominant in 19th Century America that Smith (like most people probably) just assumed that if God spoke directly to us, he would use language that sounded like the Bible. So when he purported to write down the words of God, that's exactly what he made them sound like. He didn't think about the fact that the the KJV is written in Jacobean English because it was written in the Jacobean era, and that scripture only sounds old to our ears now because that translation has persisted for so long.
So today, lots of Christian churches are adopting newer translations of the Bible. But the Mormon church is stuck with the KJV forever because Joseph Smith established the tradition that that's how God sounds when he talks to us. We can't just produce a modern translation of the D&C because it's supposedly the primary source!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Kind of off-topic but, why does the angloworld keep using a translation of the bible that's written in an almost "archaic" English (yes I know, I'm exaggerating, but I can't think of a better description from the top of my head). Coming from someone that was born and raised in a Portuguese speaking country, their version of the bible seems much more "accessible", But I acknowledge the fact that it might come at the c…
that archaic language is what people have agreed upon; getting that agreement is not trivial. From an arts point of view, I would say that poetic words with multiple meanings, start a sort of mental process that includes questions and "reaching inward to find meaning"