As I said what I really meant and should have said was potential property. In your example one could say that you had the potential to become wet, you couldn't have gotten wet if you didn't have that potential.
Is it not fair to say that life is a latent property of matter that emerges under the correct conditions? If so then can't life be said to be a latent property of the universe? It doesn't have to mean that the universe itself is literally alive for it to have life as one of it's latent...
Do you think that intelligence arose in the universe purely by chance out of a universe which itself arose by chance? Or do you think there might some deeper significance there which we don't yet know about?
I'm aware of that being more of a panentheist or panendeist myself. What are the characteristics of your god then? Is it a person or sentient? If the universe is no more than a mindless physical system then why call it theism? What I want to know is, how does your belief differ in any meaningful...
I don't see the point in calling it pantheism if you don't believe the universe has a transcendent, more than physical aspect to its nature. There's no theism involved in the boring watered down incarnation of it, so it hardly deserves the name of pantheism at all.
Wow great argument! Maybe you should give this a read. No Escape: Male Rape in U.S. Prisons
Gang members in prison are the main perpetrators of prison rape. I wanted to ask him if he'd ever taken part himself, but of course he'd never reveal it. It wouldn't surprise me given that he's already...
Well your question assumes the Quran needed to be proof read, Muhammad had the entire Quran committed to memory, according to Islamic tradition. Oh I see Cordoba already said that anyway, nevermind!
You understand your question is unanswerable right? It would require someone to know why Allah did what he did, such knowledge is not possibly available so the question is pointless.
To criticise a barbaric practice like murder by way of stoning requires no propaganda. The punishment of stoning is there in the authentic books of Hadith for all to see. As long as Muslims accept the Hadith, stoning will always be seen as an act of divinely mandated justice in obedience to Allah.
So to you, rather than the actual stoning itself the barbarism is in posting pictures demonstrating women being stoned rather than men. You're doing a great of job of showing us Islam's moral compass.
Not strange at all actually, they're the ones (not all Christians of course) who believe that disbelievers deserve to be tortured forever for a mere theological difference.
I've considered this myself and I can think of at least two naturalistic reasons why fornication became considered wrong. One reason may have been to prevent the births of unwanted children that could not be looked after, another may have been to prevent the spread of diseases. So rather like...
Based on this he sounds more like a theist but sensibly admitted to having no idea regarding the nature of God, so maybe we could call him an agnostic theist.