Who can prove their religion/denomination is the one?

I would suspect that there are a few who would say that "they're all right". I would also anticipate some saying, "they're all wrong". Can anyone really provide a "staff of moses moment" that can entice or at least challenge the thinking of the other. My opinion is, is that if nobody can provide substantiated proof, then we must all simply just respect one anothers beliefs without consequence.

 

Your question is a non-starter.

In a frame of reference based on faith*, "proof" is simply a matter of believing it to be so. ANY Half-Fast-Self-Proclaimed Preacher can prove primacy in a faith frame of reference...all ya' gotta' do is say it's so!!! Easy...and easy to peddle to the brain-dead masses.

Take ANY proposition, add faith...VOILA, proof!!

* - A reality-belief posited on matters outside observable perception.

 

There is an old saying. If half of a denomination believed that Jesus had an inny and the other half believed he had an outy, they would form two new denominations.

 

If you are looking for proof you are not ready for salvation.

 

I've been a Catholic my entire life yet I have a lot of respect for other denominations. Consider Baptists, for example. Their preacher's "tell it like it is". I have no doubt that Christ is in my church as well as theirs.

 

I suppose it was meant to be a rhetorical question. The bottom line IMO is that those that disparage the beliefs of another actually lack faith in their own. Religious experiences are subjective and undoubtedly real across all beliefs. Faith is faith, it is without physical evidence and only affirmed through spiritual experiences. Evidence cannot be provided when experiences are subjective.

 

The point is if you believe that that is important, than that is okay. It is when an innie challenges an outie over their belief is where it becomes a problem.

 

This seems to be a typical conservative Christian response. It wreaks of a superiority complex.

 

My point exactly. Why can't others have this same type of faith in their own beliefs. There is an old notion which suggest that those who speak poorly of others feel better based on their need to feel superior, but in fact demonstrate their weakness.

 

Whereas all other denominations except for the Theistic Evolutionists defy science in regard to their teachings about the Bible, this sole denominatiuon requires that the bible be confirmed by the facts we already believe in and can prove in science.

It may at first seem like blasphemy (now forgiven according to Jesus) to assert that one's faith in the bible is founded upon his faith that the science supporting it is correct.
But this does not actually contradict the Chrisrtian tenet that one accept and believe in Christ.

To believe in Christ because one has become convinced of the Bible's veracity by means of a conscious reflection upon what it says, and upon what we know from science is just tge two edge sword.
Science and the bible then cuts through doubt and surrealistic doctrines from ancient times as proposed by the churches teachings, evermore out of step with reality.

 

Not for us Theistic Evolutionists.

Faith is fact for us.
Take Gen 1:1. we KNOW that God was dead right:









Gen. 1:1 In the beginning, (the Formative/Cosmology Era), God, (the Uncaused First Cause, or the Dark Energy which pre-existed the material Universe, perhaps), created... (all that which has followed the Big Bang from the singularity of Planck Time which consisted of Seven Stages:
1) The Inflation Era
2) The Quark Era
3) Hadron Era
4) Lepton Era
5) Nucleosynthesis Era
6) Opaque Era
7) Matter Era,... in an enormous Einsteinian energy transformation, E = mC^2),...
... the (matter composing the) heaven (beyond the Solar System) and the (accretion disk which congealed into the planet) earth.

 

That was the case until the Age of Enlightenment when the Scientific Method produced the facility to actual prove fact about life to everyone willing to examine the results of laboratory controlled experiments.
Everyones peers were able to produce identical facts for themselves, so all could agree on that Fact.

Using these Facts about the Reality we all enjoy, mutually, we have been able to logically and mathematically develope an image of what is Real and what is not.
This boy of Truth has grown very large and now can be cpmpared to what the faithful have insisted was True throughout the centuries, that is the Bible commentary and claims.

 

That was the case until the Age of Enlightenment.

Since then, the Scientific Method has produced the facility to actual prove facts about life to everyone willing to examine the results of laboratory controlled experiments.
Everyones' peers were then able to produce identical facts for themselves, so all could agree on that Fact.

Using these Facts about the Reality we all enjoy, mutually, we have been able to logically and mathematically develope an image of what is Real and what is not.
This body of Truth has grown very large.
It now can be compared to what the faithful have insisted all along was True, that is that what the Bible says and claims is factual.

 

Heretic!! He had an inny.

 

Theistic evolution aint a denomination, screwball.

Many denominations, like Catholics and Methodists accept a theistic evolution position.


It don't require that the bible be confirmed by science, either.

It just means that they don't think that biological evolution is a contradiction to what the bible says.

 

Your caption is wrong.

 

It certainly isnt Catholicism as Catholics worship a false God ....Mary....
The Bible states "thou shall have no other Gods before me..."
They also worship the Pope as much as Mary......

Just an opinion.....

 

An an unsubstantiated one at that...

 

The denominations on the internet will accept some saying that they believe in Evokution and are a Christian, but they ban the person if he maintains his interpretations specifically, especially if he shows how strong his arguments can be.

The physical denominational churches which ever preach the Theistic Evolution arguments do not exist.
They are alone and separate de facto.


Try getting a preacher anywhere to even suggest in a sermon that this interpretation of TE is a possible correct understanding:





Book:



The Last Human: A Guide to Twenty-Two Species of Extinct Humans
by G.J.Sawyer, (Author)

 

I disagree. It is substantiated by the quote I gave from the Bible.
Are you telling me that Catholics do not worship Mary...??
They have statuettes and paintings of her all over the World.
If thats not worshipping her, then what is???
While we're on the subject, why do Catholic Priests, Cardinals, etc, have to wear
all those ridiculous caps, hats, robes, and so forth to distinguish their rank...
Is it just tradition, or is it to tell us peasants that they are better than us...
Gimme a break...

 

What did Paul say about men covering their heads in church?
http://www.thebricktestament.com/epistles/on_women/01_1c11_04.html

 

That's cause it aint correct, bub. Those hominids are cousins, not linear related. You turned a many branched tree into a (*)(*)(*)(*) 2x4.

And the bible couldn't be talking about them anyway, since they didn't dwell in tents or play the harp or forge metal


And again, I gotta call bull(*)(*)(*)(*) on you for saying those pictures are sourced in that book.

They aint.

And everytime you put that book in between those dumb(*)(*)(*)(*) pictures, you prove that you are a liar.

 

This is close to what we in the Orthodox believe on veneration vs worship:

http://orthodoxwiki.org/Veneration

Veneration (gr. doulia) is a way to show great respect and love for the holy. It is to treat something or someone with reverence, deep respect, and honor. Veneration is distinct from worship (gr. latreia), for worship is a total giving over of the self to be united with God, while veneration is showing delight for what God has done. There can be confusion because one may venerate what one worships as well as venerate others. Veneration is part of worship to the Orthodox faithful, but they show love and respect to more than the God they worship.

 

Theology is a subjective discipline based uponrationalism, or trying to make sense of the world by figuring it out oneself.
Until the Age of Enlightenment, when the Scientific Method gave us a way of setting up laboratory conditions, the whole world of men was subjective.
But now we can PROVE scientifically speaking, that the Big Bang beginning of the heaven and the earth did take place.

That also "proves' in the discipline of Theology that the Bible was correct.

It bring a second witness, science, tothe defense of the theologian.

 

Not really, bub.

Who says that the Big Bang is the beginning of existence? Until we can prove it is, we ought not to insist that it is.


Science don't back up what you say.