Re: NO EVIDENCE

In alt.religion.christian Adonis <zerocalories@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> "thomas p." <gudloos@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:4829cb72$0$56770$edfadb0f@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > "Adonis" <zerocalories@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> skrev i en meddelelse 
> > news:YeidnccTB6mKMLTVnZ2dnUVZ_jmdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >> <EskWIRED@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> >> news:g0c9t7$3d3$3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>> In alt.religion.christian Bill Bowden <wrongaddress@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Religion is a way of setting
> >>>> standards and morals to live by
> >>>
> >>> You are confusing religion with ethical systems.  No belief in the
> >>> supernatural, the sine qua non of religion, is neccessary to set
standards
> >>> to live by.
> >>>
> >>
> >> That is absurd. religion is not necessary for standards.
> >
> > Isn't that what was said in the post you responded to?




> sine qua non \sin-ih-kwah-NON; -NOHN; sy-nih-kway-\, noun:
> An essential condition or element; an indispensable thing.

> So when he says......" the sine qua non of religion, is necessary to set

> standards"; is a another way of saying that religion is an essential
condition 
> to set standards to live by.

Belief in the supernatural is the sine qua non of religion.  However, no 
such belief is necessary for one to set standards to live by.  





> >
> >>Religion is a way to force others wills and codes on others. Religion
is 
> >>nothing more than a dictator ship.
> >
> >
> > 


-- 
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so 
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
	-- Bertrand Russel