Perhaps, Mark, you could just keep whatever concept of God you may hold, in your own heart, and not, as you have done time after time, demean the beliefs of others.

This 'Christian God' who talks directly to Pat Robertson, giving veiled predictions of future calamities, why, if He wants to have any credibility at all, would He not speak through someone with a higher calibre of sanity?

The notion that God, if he exists, would want His children to wage war on one another, in His name, is ludicrous. To justify their thirst for blood, religious extremists around the world keep up the mantra that 'God is on their side'. Geesh! God must get pretty dizzy running from one side to the other.

If the belief in a God makes you feel less alone in this universe, and it works for you, Mark, I say, wonderful.

Whatever gets you through the night.....

Ok, if you are willing to call someone a “fool” for believing in science when there is much in nature you say it cannot explain, are you willing to apply this to yourself in adhering to a system that too cannot explain everything?

See, you misconstrue the concepts of “knowledge” and “faith” in using the term “belief”.

To begin, science does not say that miracles cannot or do not happen. Scientific method (and thus what we deem “science”) is systematically designed to require rigorous proof of hypotheses. Ask any genuine scientist and they will tell you we are a long way from a unifying theory of everything and are, in fact, inclined to be skeptical about those truths we have so far discovered.

But what they will also tell you is that explaining the unexplainable requires belief without proof. Whether or not someone attributes a happening to scientific or supernatural origins without evidence doesn’t matter; they are both wrong.

And you falsely claim that to deny the miraculous is to deny the existence of God. It is entirely possible that there is a God who doesn’t perform miraculous events observable to humans. For more on this read David Hume.

(And on a side note, the personal beliefs of our Diestic founding fathers. Jefferson edited the New Testament to remove any sort of supernaturality to Jesus. See also "Clockmaker Theory")

You use the term “miracle” to denote the unexplainable. But what this does is bring in a whole host of associations with divinity. The unexplainable happens every day, but this in no way necessitates divine intervention. Causality is the main issue here, and our understanding of it. For a majority of man’s existence sickness came from demons, thunder from an angry God, and the Sun revolved around the Earth.

All these and other mysteries were filed under “miraculous” until humans engaged in scientific exploration showed the causality behind them all.

Your argument boils down to the idea of an uncaused-first cause. How did existence come into being if not for some entity which exists outside of existence and could therefore manipulate anything and everything at its will?

Religion attributes this to God. But there are competing theories which admittedly require adherence to some belief without proof. Most plausibly is the randomness inherent in an infinite realm. If there truly is such a thing as “eternity”, or an unbounded infinite span of “being” then all things happen, forever. That means that, even if it is a 1 in 1,000,000,000 x10 ^1,000,000,000,000,000,000th chance that our universe would just happen to come into existence, it will.

Some people find this disturbing. Few find comfort in thinking they and everything around them are an accident. But some of us are perfectly fine with it.

I have no problem with people having a personal spirituality. It is when they allow what should be a vertical relationship spread horizontally to their fellow man and start judging and condemning those who disagree with them. Every time you base your social evaluation on a text which differentiates mankind into “saved” and “damned” you make yourself out to be an agent of something which cannot be proved and therefore lose any semblance of reason and rationality.

Existence may be “miracle enough” for some, but don’t force others to make the same leap of faith.

Let me see if I can condense your argument here, Mark...

Miracles are an event unexplainable by science; Because of this, miracles require some force external to the universe to exist; Miracles exist, so some force external to the universe exists; the God of Abraham is the only possible force external to the universe; Therefore, the God of Abraham exists.

The argument itself is flawed, but I'm not going to attack it, yet.

There is a great two part South Park episode this past fall that spoke to this (Go God Go and Go God Go XII). It basically asserts that all of the problems that are supposedly caused by "religion" would exist without "religion" and that deifying science is just as illogical as believing in any other God.

Anyways, on to the point...

Lack of proof doesn't disprove something, just like the inability to disprove something doesn't prove it. To believe otherwise shows intellectual laziness...

The second definition of Faith on dictionary.reference.com is "belief that is not based on proof."

One of the problems with Science is that since it is a human enterprise, it is often flawed and incomplete... however, this doesn't invalidate any of its claims. To the contrary, since all scientific study is revised over time when new methods of measurement become available, science represents the height of human inquiry and thinking, and it should be treated as such. This isn't to say that it is invincible; it should just be given certain deference in argument.

Now, the truth of the Jewish and Christian religions depends on the infallable truth of one document: The Bible. The Bible was written by men, and it is subject to all of the biases and imperfections that plauge anything else that is created by men. This isn't to say that the Bible is inherently flawed, just that the chances of it being "perfect" and infallable are close to nothing.

The thing is, whenever you accept something without proof, you assume. Science assumes matter, religion assumes certain things about God... there is no way around assumptions when it comes to the unprovable (and "the beauty and complexity of the world around us" proves nothing but that the world is pretty).

I don't believe or deny the existence of any God, to do either would show the same level of close-mindedness.

CO,

I don't know if God speaks directly to Robertson about the things Robertson announces. I do know that if God isn't telling Robertson what is to come and Robertson is then calling God to witness for lies, then Robertson will have some explaining to do. That, of course, is between Robertson and God.

And as for your particular understanding of God - you really should get past elementary school misunderstandings of God (this means that, yes, a well-schooled 8th grader has a better understanding of God than you do).

Anillo and Georgia,

I'll answer your posts after I return from Church...

:o)

CO writes:
"This 'Christian God' who talks directly to Pat Robertson, giving veiled predictions of future calamities, why, if He wants to have any credibility at all, would He not speak through someone with a higher calibre of sanity?"

This is the troubling line of reasoning. If God made the world, why doesn't he make it readily apparent God made the world? If God wanted to be taken seriously, why wouldn't God speak through someone who by all appearances should without question be taken seriously? So, faith in God is not required because we can have faith in appearances. If God's part in creation was apparent there would be no journey to faith. But that journey is to my way of seeing exactly why we're here. If we had all the knowledge and all the power as we come into this world, life would be boring: no surprises, no challenges, just pure self gratification. It is coming to faith that gives life its richness and beauty, that makes the journey a worthy one. So, of course it will not be apparent to all that something more exists. But for those of us who have witnessed miracles, we know it is our gift from God.

If you look at the Philosopher's post, there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the mind. He believes that things exist as reason explains them, not that reason exists as a way to explain things. It's an easy mistake to make, one that I made for many years.

GF writes:
"But what they will also tell you is that explaining the unexplainable requires belief without proof. Whether or not someone attributes a happening to scientific or supernatural origins without evidence doesn’t matter; they are both wrong."

That doesn't make sense. Just because I can't explain the mechanism doesn't mean I can't see it as it's happening. I can't explain the science behind the sun lighting our world every morning, but I can see it with my eyes. Religion and spirituality acknowledge the light without requiring the mechanism to be fully understood, and they're not wrong about the sun coming up just because they can't explain how it happens.

"In my view, is that you are either going to accept that God exists, and thus that science simply cannot explain the whole world, or you are going to say that God doesn't exist..."

Ummmm... God created everything, including "science." So Believeing in God DOES explain the whole world. I see no need to separate God from the world he created, of which "science" is a part!

GF writes:
"But there are competing theories which admittedly require adherence to some belief without proof. Most plausibly is the randomness inherent in an infinite realm. If there truly is such a thing as “eternity”, or an unbounded infinite span of “being” then all things happen, forever. That means that, even if it is a 1 in 1,000,000,000 x10 ^1,000,000,000,000,000,000th chance that our universe would just happen to come into existence, it will."

Note the "Most plausibly is the randomness inherent in an infinite realm." Why in the world would you assume that an infinite realm contains inherent randomness? That is, how do we know anything about the infinite, whether it would be a closed, static system or an open, flowing system as is assumed here? Are you infinite? Do you live in an infinite world? These are big, whopping assumptions yet you argue they require no proof. Why do you accept this assumption without proof? Is it just because they are arranged in the language of science and reason?

frawg- I have said it here previously but i think the ONUS lies on those that claim. I mean if it is something life defining i think that should be brought out in the open. But it can't be. This is rally my concern. ALL HUMANS ARE AGNOSTIC as none can verfy and thus KNOW a god(s) exist.

As a related issue (which also i have mentioned) science is a lot different and does investigate the world on KNOWABLE, VERIFIABLE facts, not based on "myths". my only gripe looking down on science from a notch or two up- is that science is liited by our knowlegde pool. We can only measure by the tools and data we have. But again that is part of the scientific method- to go now and add to that as we LEARN more.

Big difference in addig to the knowledge pool and growing with VERIFIABLE facts, rather than a legend or myth that is stagnant and born of sunny days, storms, volcanos and a good hunt. All which surely are incorporated into the design of "GOOD AND EVIL".

----

Mark: here is my concern- whena a prayer is answered everyone thanks god. When a person dies as last week or whatever, no one condones god.

Look i could easily recover from a bad accident without praywer just as if i had prayed. I could also die from an accident without prayer or with. i mean there is ZERO credibility in the framework. it is RANDOM. unless god myscheiviously picks and chooses. Which is a cruel game for her to play.

take 10 people and divide them up into two rooms of 5 people each. tell one room a god exist and don't mention it to the other room. Let them live in there for 10 years.

Add a catastophic event- say a tornado or something. The room of theists will pray while the room of atheists will not have any knowledge of praying. if all the theist live do you guys really think a god played a role in answering prayers for the theists? Because the the atheist lived as well...with no prayer.

on the other hand if everyone died- does this suggest that god chose not to answer the theists prayers?

the point is all lived or died. Do you really think god saved the half based on them praying while the other half lived any way? or do you think god really killed the half that died based on lack of faith? while the others that prayed still died? what does this suggest? That those who prayed didn't pray good enough or long enough or in the muslim fashion...instead they chose the jewish fashion rather than the christian or Buddhist fashion. did they choose the wrong religion?

or does it really boil down to it didn't matter in the 1st place since a god doesn't exist? demonstrated by indifference to the theists or the atheist?

i'd like to know.

My bad, that was Anillo and not GF. I do have trouble with this apparent world.

I dunno...I kinda like the "kill 'em all, and let God sort them out" ex-navy military man, instead of the pious patron of dogma kind of Mark.

Morris: "If you look at the Philosopher's post, there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the mind. He believes that things exist as reason explains them, not that reason exists as a way to explain things. It's an easy mistake to make, one that I made for many years."

you know that is an excellent point. One that i argue Socrates DID NOT get the credit due. I have never heard any one metnion that perhaps he refers to the archtypes as being parralel to what you say. MEaning perhaps Socrates views gods as Archtypes...a symbol or a path of endearment or strnghth or knowledge etc. They were perhpas symbolic to him and NOT a true god in the sky. Which to me makes more sense than anything. Not sure why no-one ever speculated on this before thogugh.

But witht eh plagerism by the Jewish faith and Christian faith and othesrs all that took from this Greek doctrine and narrowed it down to 1 god- kuudos to them. they simiplified the complexity. But i still think that the "GOD" is idealist- nothing more. And in that case i can say YES god exists as a figurative entity to believe in.

So folks- yes i have faith in that. Not, hoevver, in aliving breathing guy in the sky. But by the archtype of a GOD i could see many people believing that and liviggn a good life by it.

BTW this also could explain why prayers and death and living etc. is all random any way. Stil the thought of god or the belief feels fulfilling..and maybe is a good thing. ??

BS writes:
"Mark: here is my concern- whena a prayer is answered everyone thanks god. When a person dies as last week or whatever, no one condones god."

Actually, that's not entirely true. Research shows that about half of athiests lost a parent at a young age. That is, they stopped believing in God when God did not answer their prayers. But what else does this say? Maybe instead of the relationship between religion and happiness being that religion causes happiness, maybe happiness causes religion. That is, if the pain of losing a parent can cause a disbelief, maybe the joy of living can cause a belief. Of course, that would mean that reason would have less to do with whether or not people believed. And us happy believers would accept that. As I said above, things don't exist as reason explains them, reason exists as a way to explain things.

frawg: "basically asserts that all of the problems that are supposedly caused by "religion" would exist without "religion"" that was my point about the two rooms of people. i just caught that in your post. but the same idea i lay out.

BS,
Thanks for the compliments.
You write:
"BTW this also could explain why prayers and death and living etc. is all random any way. Stil the thought of god or the belief feels fulfilling..and maybe is a good thing. ??"

I'm impressed you figured this out even before getting my response.

Asife from the fact that the tale has been told and retold and plagerized many many times. I have 1 real problem with the bible, Koran, etc.

I look at the bible as a math text rather than acook book. If it is indeed the document that explains the story and teh path to live in that story- how can one deviate from it? if it is a cook book ,then sure- add a pinch of this and omitt that (as humans do).

but i find it impossible to deviate from a math text that says this is part 1 and to get to part 20 you must do this. or live this way. when someone deviates from that text i do not see how they can justify any of the beleifs in that text. it is either take that route or don't. Soemthing that many people argue is aproblem for theists- that they picck and choose which prars of the bible to live by. rather than all.
---

BTW i am still concerned that a god would knowingly create Lucifer. Why woudl a god creat us to love us and make us live, then die and THEN go to a happy place or a bad place based on how we live?

And fellas- no that is NOT an exampe of FREEWILL- far from it. This is truly god's way or the high way. If you you don't follow what god wants- then you are screwed. Thats not very nice.

Why insert that clause in the 1st place? rather than just let goodness only exist? A very sick joke by god if you ask me.

"...and I find absolutely nothing in the Bible which is indicated by science to be untrue."

Joshua - 10:13 “And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies.”

So the Lord stopped the movement of the entire universe to Joshua could carry out ethic cleansing against the Gibeon?

Yeah, that sounds scientifically plausible.

Morris- yeah BUT- it doesn't do a thing for me. And yes folks- it makes me a little perturbed. but what can i do? i can'tjust going around living by fairy tales. since my brain won't do that, try as i have, i am stuck with knowable, verfiable positions. Even if gravity requires faith by me to beleive it wil exist tomorrow ;-)

Just because science can't explain everything in the universe now, that does not mean that it will not be able to in the future, and it certainly does not imply a god. The fallacy in your argument is called the "god of the gaps" theory

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps

Mark,

Some people may wonder what an apparently extremely intelligent wonderful woman would see in you? I don't, I think your swell.

Of the many blessings or miracles bestowed upon you is the wonderful dialog and debate you two share together.

Maybe some day Mrs. N. will post in your blog, I would love to see in writing, the incredible patience and tolerance she must display everyday.

Mark -

You may be surprised or not believe me, but if I were/had to be religious, I would be Catholic. Not being glib or making fun. The reasons why are too numerous and probably incoherent to explain, but mostly it’s a respect for certain aspects of the traditions and humanitarianism.

Morris –

I never said one could not witness an activity or phenomenon such as the sun rising without understanding the mechanisms behind it. Perhaps my language was not clear, for that I apologized.

What I mean is that to explain something, or to give adequate exposition of why something happens, requires knowledge, not simply belief.

In fact, one need not have knowledge to observe – as in your sunrise case – one need only have the necessary sensual faculties.

No one is “wrong” about being able to “see” the sun come up or to “acknowledge” the light, because these actions do not entail any explanatory language, they are merely empirical statements devoid of causal value.

Why in the world would you assume that an infinite realm contains inherent randomness?

This is why I used the term “plausible” and not “probable”. Plausibility rests on inductive reasoning and makes no claims to absolute proof. I am admitting to be assuming without full knowledge the nature of existence, that infinity is a big – really HUGE – concept our mere mortal minds would probably explode at were we to ever fully grasp its gargantuan characteristics.

However, as our consciousnesses tend to do, one cannot help but speculate or put “faith” in mental exercises on the unseen through such endeavors as string theory or spirituality. I’m not telling anyone to convert to agnosticism. I wish there was proof on the nature of the cosmos, but this is simply something beyond the human realm.

For me, infinity entails a breadth and scope of possibilities of not only spatial and temporal aspects, but of probability and randomness; the likes of which our current scientific understanding is only beginning to understand on theoretical levels. Is existence closed and bounded like the surface of a sphere or is it open and unbounded like the XYZ planes? Who knows? Not me.

But in the scope of this discussion, we are debating the points of design versus accident or random. The problem lies in that each approach meets Ockham’s requirements in parts; guided creation offering simplicity in explaining the complexity of things and chaos eliminating the question of where the designer came from.

I cast my lot with the latter, a personal choice I do not push on anyone because each mind finds comfort in different ways. And as long as these ways remain personal and do not interfere negatively with the well-being of society they have the right to them.

Raker,

She does put up with a lot - on the other hand, I'm a pretty good cook, so she'll well fed in recompense for the daily annoyance.

Anillo,

I'd love to answer now, but I'm off to see my Mrs who is still in the hospital - hopefully, God willing, to come home today or tomorrow. I'll be back later, as I'll be cooking a lamb shank for the old man in celebration of his 80th birthday, and I'll try to find some time then.

mmmmmmm lamb shank. Lucky dad. Happy 80th. to him.

It is all part of the sad sad story of how science has been continuously undermining faith. It is so easy to forget that the only true science is that which is based on faith in God. For if God created science, we can only learn science by knowing God.

Mr. Stensin,

You can choose to live your life the way you choose to live it, I can't do that for you, that's for sure, but one other thing is for sure, God cared enough to allow you the opportunity to live and be a witness to what He has done, All He asks is that you acknowledge Him as the reason for your existence, to turn toward Him, as that reason.

I'll try to explain in simple terms!

All things considered, God endowed each person with the ability to choose right from wrong, good from bad, at which time we call the age of accountability. Now, you know that through choosing the wrong way, there are indeliable consequences in choosing wrong i,e. when you touch a hot stove eye, you immediately recognize that it hurts and that you don't do it again, those are the consequences of choosing wrong. Now, on the flip side, let's look at the experience for choosing the good/right way, Let's say you've worked for however many months or years, and during that time you keep saving and saving the money you make, and one day you decide it's time to do something with that money, let's say you decide it's time to get that new car, and you go to a car dealership, you talk it over with the dealer, and you sign a simple contract, hand the dealer the money and your off, in a brand new car, WOW! after all that hard work, FINALLY!, your reward is driving around and is thus is now pleasant experience, by getting to go places.

You had faith in yourself, that you could accomplish what your goal was!!

At the same token, We Christians have Faith... that if we work hard for the cause of Christ, that we will one day be rewarded with far greater rewards, than this world could bring, this world is just a starting place, for us to be able to see what is necessary for us to do, in order to acheive the greater goal which God has already provided, If we just TRUST and OBEY!!

Which leads to this...

As you can see, God created man with a choice, which made him entirely fallible, and indeed in the beginning man took the wrong road(Sodom & Gomorrah), so something had to be done, to save the few people who chose to do right over wrong, at which point God decided to destroy all the people except Noah and his righteous family(at that point in time), God sent His promise to Noah and all His descendants that He would never destroy the earth with flood again, I'm sure you've seen a rainbow before! Now, keep this in mind, the rainbow is one [promise], Ok, After all these years and years, man once again was persuaded by Satan, into thinking that he would be conquerer of the earth, and not the One who made it, and thus, became involved in acts of self indulgence or self righteousness, thus leading to more sinful deeds, So God decided that to show man that He truly was the Creator and provider for man, He had to send someone, who was that someone? Jesus Christ, PRAISE THE LORD!! God sent Jesus Christ in His image, as the Savior of all mankind, to wash away all the sin of the world. Now, get this... God left His Promise to the world, and that being the Cross that Jesus hung and died on, for all the people in the world to see as witness to that promise, and that's why Jesus lives in the hearts of all who believe!! Even though Jesus is not there on the Cross any longer, this is why Apostle Paul wrote in the book of:

2 Corinthians 5:7

"We live by faith, not by sight!"

Another prime example of most sublime form of faith is accounted for in the book of...

Luke chapter 18:35-43

"As Jesus approached Jericho, a blind man was sitting by the roadside begging. When he heard the crowd going by, he asked what was happening. They told him, "Jesus of Nazareth is passing by."
He called ut, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!"
Those who led the way rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, "Son of David, have mercy on me!" Jesus stopped and ordered the man to be brought to him. When he came near, Jesus asked him, "What do you want me to do for you?" "Lord I want to see," he replied.
Jesus said to him, "Receive your sight; you faith has healed you." Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus, Praising God. When all the people saw it, they also praised God."

Well, as you can see, the faithless crowd tried to persuade the man into not believing, which is a prime example of atheists in the world today, they don't want to see anyone believe because their hearts are filled with envy and despise for the one and only one who can save us from our demise, And as for he blind man... Well, You can see where his faith led him, NOW HE CAN SEE!! THANK ALMIGHTY GOD!!! AND PRAISE THE LORD!! And in the same sense, athesists such as yourself, Bill, need evidence, well, the evidence is already there, see how the crowd went away rejoicing with the blind man after he received his sight? They also went praising God.

Make no mistake friend, God is the same yesterday, today, and Forevermore!

SO, After we have acheived this much knowledge of right and wrong, then it is time to share our knowledge of God's great plan of Salvation with others. God commands that we should.

I think that is a good starting point for you!!
I hope you will open your eyes to the Truth!!

Jeremiah

Shoel- i just have to ask why would you follow somegod that KNOWINGLY created Lucifer? that alone is among the cruelest intentions ever. I would never creat a lucifer and call it on my children. How sick!

On the subject of children- how many of you are willing to stone your children to death if tey cuss at you? the bible says to do it. How could you NOT kill your children in the name of god?

i would imagine if you did so- the law would accept it as christian adherence- no questions, no problems. right?

r-i-g-h-t

---

then again that chich that drowned her children in TX was gfound insane because she said GOD told her. While the woman that stoned her kids to death was found criminal as she said the DEVIL told her to do it.

I guess all in all the legal system was fair and balanced?

Point of clarification...

I wrote
"God created man with a choice, which made him entirely fallible"

The choice factor is what makes [man] fallible, NOT God himself, Everything God makes is perfect in design.

Just wanted to point that out there!!

Jeremiah

Jeremiah- "At the same token, We Christians have Faith... that if we work hard for the cause of Christ, that we will one day be rewarded with far greater rewards, than this world could bring, this world is just a starting place, for us to be able to see what is necessary for us to do, in order to acheive the greater goal which God has already provided, If we just TRUST and OBEY!!"

this is intrinsic to my argument. You have to go through life to be rewarded. why not just skip this chapter and be there?

the other thing about "OBEY". something about being subservient to a god that urks me. sounds like a slave master and again- NOT freewill- rather God's way or the highway. Sounds like an Angry Jealous god to me- and if you don't play byher rules she is sicking lucifer on you. That's just too cruel for me to share that message with my children. What an evil story of god to have children ponder.

Jeremiah, was Lucifer perfect?

did God KNOW lucifer would turn to the dark side? if so then God was a sick SOB to make Lucifer.

If god did NOT know Lucifer would turn, then god didn't keep her paperwork in check.

Christian,

Prove it didn't happen. Of course, you are missing entirely my point in this post.

Bill,

Sophomoric - if we can't choose to do good or evil, then we have no choice at all: God didn't want robots.

Georgia,

No, what is inexplicable is inexplicable: some things which we can't explain today will be explained tomorrow...some things, on the other hand, are permanently inexplicable, and are thus miracles.

The modern day neo-Darwinists goes thusly:

"We live in the modern, scientific world where we've set aside all those silly superstitions. We know how things work, and one of the things we're sure of is that there is no God out there intefering with the physical reality we live in. Now, assume matter."

There is no way that we'll ever be able to explain the existence of matter without reference to a Creator. It is a massive and inescable miracle that matter exists. No two ways about it - something other than matter created matter, and that Creator must be above and beyond the material universe we live in. Scientifically (and here's the hard part for some people), there's no other explanation for matter being here.

Now, the other for-certain miracle is DNA. In all of our experience, materials organized for the transmission of information is evidence of intelligence. We might not understand what information is being transmitted in cave paintings, but we know for certain that information is being transmitted because every time we want to transmit information, we organise materials in a way which transmits it - for instance, the oddly shaped symbols which, when organized in a certain way, transmit to you the concept of "Intelligent Design".

It is only our relentlessly secularist-minded people who look at DNA and say, "well, here's some materials organized in a manner to transmit information - by gum, must be entirely by random that they came together...I'll organize millions of pieces of material in order to transmit the information that DNA is an accident." Bold assertion that something is true doesn't make it so - and ever since DNA was discovered, secularists have come up blank when trying to explain how the enormously comlex DNA necessary for even a very primitive single-celled organism could come together by random action.

So, two bang-up miracles - two bits of information which can only be explained by a Creator outside of the physical universe we inhabit interfering with events. After understanding this, figuring on the sun standing still for a bit or a virgin giving birth is no great leap.

What BS...I mean Bill Stensin, should do is tell his kids a more heartwarming story than the one about the 'evil' God.

Sit the tykes down with their teddybears and explain that when they die, there will be nothing awaiting them except an utter blackness of which they will be totally unaware. That way, even if God turns out NOT to exist, when his kids are about to pass on, they can enjoy the terrifying angst and bitterness of knowing they will soon utterly cease to exist in any way. Yes little ones, there is no hope of anything beyond this life.

Sweet dreams kiddies. "Thanks Dad!"

Anillo,

Most of what I wrote to Georgia will cover your arguments as well - and I've heard of the theory you've brought up - and its just a laughable attempt by secularists to get around the miracle of existence without having to ascribe it to God...it merely pushes God back a step in the process. Make yourself a glass sphere and take everything out of it - and I mean everything, including light - and then get something to be there without inserting something into the sphere and you will have disproved the existence of God. You know you can't do it - and you also know full well that no matter how long humans ponder the matter, we're never going to come up wtih an explanation for existence absent God.

Often believers are accused of needing God in order to be ok with the world - I think the acuality is that some people very much need - or think they need - to not believe in God because a universe without a God (or with a nebulous, non-interfering God) is much easier for the typically self-centered human being to live in.

We are, after all, amazingly egotistical - getting us to stop thinking of ourselves for even a moment is something close to miraculous. Like today: I have been wanting my wife to come home...fretting over her condition, visiting her every day, spending hours at the hospital trying to comfort her as much as I can...just occured to me that my prime motivation for all this is because I want my wife home FOR ME, not for her. I've apologise to God for that, and I hope I'll be both forgiven and guided into a path which will make be concerned for my wife entirely for her sake.

For a lot of people, it is frightening to think that they might not be free agents - that there may be a God who takes an interest, and from whom everything the individual has comes from, including basic existence. For such frightened rabbits - and I was one of them - it is much more comforting to hold to an entirely materialist view of the world.

LtB,

But that does explain why there are so many people desperately looking after their health...if you really think this all there is, then you're going to greedily hold on to it for all your worth...

Sees,

That is a bunch of nonsense...you see the suicide rate in relentlessly secular Sweden?

Mark,

You see the suicide rate in the Middle East (and Iran)?

Well in all fairness I plan on desperately looking after my health too, though I will also take comfort that my faith will eventually carry me through to a better place. If Im wrong, I wont know anyway, if the non-believers are wrong they WILL know...if you get my drift.

Mark- then why did you ask for prayers for your wife?

wouldn't want her to die and have go to the magic mushroom land up in the sky now would you? Also why did got not want robots? you mean he wanted us? why did she/he want us? was he she lonely? oh- certainly god wasn't lonely- not an inperfection? seems to me god could have simply imageined anything she wanted and so be it. Why go throught the bother to even have hamsters? seems that necessity is a flaw if you ask me.

--

bongo- just because you so much want some magic carpet to come ans take you up high into the sky doesn't make it so. who told you of Valhalla? ust because you want your blue shirt to be red does not make it red.

Your desire for some fairy tale to be true does not make it true. Just makes it...well a fairy tale.

Why aren't all you Christians muslims? Why not jesish?

Let's just say you were born a Muslim. how correct would your Christian view be? Or let us say you were born 3000 years ago living in South America wwith some polytheistic belief. Wouldn;t that have as much validty as the religio ypu rworship at this moment? you bet it would. And you would discard Christian ideals as not only voo-doo or evil or whatever, but you would live and die for your polytheism because it made you feel good about the world around. AND it asnered al that mysterious stuff that was not explainable until 3000 years later by....science.

So i am not sure how your christian mythos can differ from any other mythos. Other than you might claim it is different. Well gues what gang- IT ISN'T! Different fairy tale same results. just a fairy tale.

Here is a quote from Thomas Jefferson
why would the one and true God revealed himself to a small insignificant country on the Mediterranean and leave the rest of the world in a spiritial void.

Bill

Maybe Mark isn't asking for prayers from you non-believers...thought of that. I wouldn't.

Also, The very first post by CO is one of the most assinine posts I've seen yet!!

"The notion that God, if he exists, would want His children to wage war on one another, in His name, is ludicrous. To justify their thirst for blood, religious extremists around the world keep up the mantra that 'God is on their side'. Geesh! God must get pretty dizzy running from one side to the other."

If he exists!! You're kidding right??

Genesis 1
The Beginning
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2 Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

Genesis was written by Moses (a man remember)and at this point, the onos is on you nay-sayers to prove it otherwise.

I just had this argument regarding conjecture and theorem earlier with Garwood in another post and the bible and all that is around us is theorem, not conjecture. It cannot be proven that God didn't create the heavens and earth, but the bible, which is the oldest form of evidence, clearly indicates that God did create the heavens and earth, therefore, your statement stands as one of the stupidest yet CO, in short..BS.

Now, here's why I can say this. Because there is NO scientific evidence of how this world was created, but there is eye witness evidence that it was created by God which is indisputable and I doubt seriously that you'll be able to resurrect Moses and put him through the same crap that your wonderful party is putting Scooter Libby through...morons. So it looks like anything you say at this point is purely conjecture..now isn't it?

It's so funny how the libs can say there were no WMD's in Iraq and that there is no God, but they're the first to pray to God when a significant event happens in their life that threatens their mortality.

Talk about whacked out!!!

navydad

From what I can fathom from your post, you are suggesting that Moses was eyewitness to the creation.

Please, please tell me that I am wrong and that is not what you meant at all.

Since the scriptures were written by flawed human beings, as each and everyone of us are, I think I will take what they claim to be the 'word of God' with more than a grain of salt.

It cannot be proven that God didn't create the heavens and earth, but the bible, which is the oldest form of evidence, clearly indicates that God did create the heavens and earth, therefore, your statement stands as one of the stupidest yet CO, in short..BS.

Yowza. Even if we accept your deeply flawed logic here--a mighty big "if"--the bible is hardly "the oldest form of evidence." Sumerian mythology (from which the Bible cribs quite heavily--check the original story of Noah under his original name, Utnapishtim, for example) predates the Bible by centuries and offers a much different account of creation. Hindu creationism--which posits that the earth and the heavens were created by an egg laid by Brahma--also predates Christianity's creationism. So if you throw your creation ideals behind the "oldest evidence," then you should reject Christian creationism.

Also interesting how many arguments here rest on the fallacy of demanding people prove a negative: "Prove theat god DIDN'T do it!"

Noonan: According to the WHO, the suicide rate for Sweden is 13.4 per 100,000 people per year. The rate for the U.S. is 10.7. The rate for the U.K., which you consistently state rejects god more and more each day, is 6.9. Your point?

Canadian Observer,
It doesn't matter what we think or what the opinion we have concerning the creation of God Almighty.
All the men of scripture wrote ONLY under the inspiration of a divine guidance and not of their own opinion.
If it had been of their own opinion, then the world would have long been destroyed.
Not by Flood, but by the G-d of Moses.
Because Gods word is eternal. The scripture of the Psalms says, "Forever Oh Lord, thy word is settled in heaven." This was spoken & written & scribed by a man of great nobility and also a man that was next to Gods own heart, the King of Israel David."

True, we are all flawed, we all have the Adamic nature passed upon us because of the sin of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden.
But when Jesus Christ was born into the world he lived and died and ROSE AGAIN and gave his life that we might have once again fellowship with G-d the Father as Adam had.
He did this because of LOVE.
"For God so loved Canadian, that he gave his life
that if Canadian would believe, he might have eternal life." (Paraphrased for understanding)
In the Old Testament when G-d resided with the children of Israel under the leadership of Moses
the temple had two parts, the Holy and Most Holy.
The Holy is where the Priest came, but he entered the "Most Holy" (Where G-d dwelt)once a year to offer sacrifice for the atonement of the Israelites sin.
Because of mans sin and decadence, there was a rope tied around the priests ankle, and if when he entered the most holy place there was sin in his life, he had to be drug out of the place by the other priests.
Sin cannot enter there (the Most Holy Place) as sin cannot enter heaven.
The curtain that separated the Most Holy was torn asunder at calvary and we can once again have fellowship with G-d.
We no longer need a Priest, (As Catholicism teaches)but we can go directly to G-d. But remember this: "ONLY THROUGH HIS SON JESUS CHRIST"
As I have quoted, Moses and EVERY writing of scripture did not and DARED not give of their own opinions because they reverently respected their most high G-d that gave them the authority and mind to wit.
Therefore we have an infallible book from Genesis to Revelation that gives the will of G-d through His Son Jesus Chr-st.
And apart from the Spirit of the Most High G-d giving us WISDOM and UNDERSTANDING of His Holy Word, we shall never understand or gain the meaning of what His word says.
But be assured of this my friend, if we live true to Jesus Christ G-ds son, we too can have eternal life, for in Him ALL things consist, all things will be according to His will. "Praise the G-d of Moses, Noah, Isaiah and on into the new Testament which is the Revelation (Revealed Testimony) of Jesus Chr-st G-ds Son.

Jeremiah the Elder.

Anillo,
Thinking more about your original point, if any idea which can be conceived even at an infintesimal probability would become apparent over a long enough (infinite) timeline, then of course the idea of God would also have to be true at certain points during existence because they too can be conceived an thus have a more than zero probability.

You write:
"But in the scope of this discussion, we are debating the points of design versus accident or random. The problem lies in that each approach meets Ockham’s requirements in parts; guided creation offering simplicity in explaining the complexity of things and chaos eliminating the question of where the designer came from."

And I think this is what we see, that at certain points life appears to be ordered and purposeful and at more painful points in life that order is not so apparent, just as the sun is less apparent when obscured by clouds or by the dark of night by the other side of the Earth. There surely are nights that appear longer that others, that appear to never end, and dawn appears to be an illusion when it first surfaces after such dark times. But it is only our mind's seeking of simplicity that creates the illusion that it is one way or the other.

That is, God's loving presence is experienced by some people some of the time. At other times by other people, that presence is not experienced. When people are hurting, they turn away from God or turn their God into one of sadness or anger as a way of simplifying their world, that is making the outer appearance fit their inward experience. Others turn toward God, but as Martin Buber said that comes by grace.

BS,
You talk about the experience of pain and loss as God's sick joke, but consider this perspective. What is depression but a seeking by the mind of sadness? What is an anxiety disorder but a seeking by the mind of stress? That is, some people seek out sadness and stress some of the time. That's why people join the special forces, they want a challenging and purposeful life. If the experience of pain is anethema to existence, why do people seek it? It's true that this is often troubling to the explaining function of the mind, that people have trouble making sense of why they would seek sadness or stress, just as others have trouble explaining why they seek out gambling or drugs when confronted with terrible consequences. But at the sensing level, some people seek out these things anyway. Now, psychiatry would have you believe that these things are "disorders" because they don't fit into simplified explanations of the way humans should act. But there are times I want to listen to sad music, angry music, tragic music, just as at other times I want to listen to something mythic like Lorena McKennitt.

I recognize that sometimes I want to be surrounded by sad things because sometimes I want to be sad, I can want to experience the loss of someone dear rather than rushing on to the next thing. The sick joke I see is how people treat those who have lost someone as victims. That is, when I've lost someone dear to me, I still have in me their spirit they shared, the love they poured into me the best way they knew how. And their "loss" allows me in time to share my life with others. Their "loss" allows me to realize that the true nature of this world is one of appearance, that things will not exist forever as they do in this moment.

And when I experience their presence watching over me after they're "gone" I know this world is more than just how it appears. The way they lit up my soul with a smile is something I carry with me. I am not a victim because their love abides in me. The sick joke is to me telling people that just because someone's body can no longer hold their spirit, they will never again experience that kind of love.

I will stay out of this debate, but as a believer, I am appalled at the lack of tolerance displayed by the left on this issue.

We must all understand that the libs are intolerant with any view that deviates from their own. Let us pray for the "great unwashed," pray that they all move to Canada...

No CO I am not. However, what I am saying is that we in the civilized world recognize some history, not all, as theorem when substantiated by documentation and credible witnesses and since Moses is recognized throughout history as credible, then his writings are considered theorem by oh...let's say a billion Christians or so...at least!

"flawed human beings" and Darwin isn't?

You're losing every once of credibility you NEVER had CO.

Jeremiah, I love your heart and your eagerness to learn and to help others, but we need to follow Keefer's lead sometimes and tell these loons where to go. They really don't care one way or another about our God or you or I, and they all have the opera syndrome (me..me..me.meee) and they simply want to find a way to humiliate people that don't agree with their anti-religion point of view.

What it boils down to is they won't believe because they can't touch or feel God, but you an I know that it's only when God touches us that it matters.

You know kinda like the WMD's in Iraq. Because they weren't there...they must not have been there...morons.

Sorry Mark, this CO guy is a kook.

Mark if you want, you can put kook, loon and moron in your "kill file".

It won't bother me.

Morris- yeah some of that is pretty good. I agree- when a close one dies, absolutely their affect on you goes on with you. in some cases that is like the words- "mumno konuckle orange vipers" even though it doesn't exist the conept TRULY does exist now. Just as even if a god doesn't exist- the concept of a god exists. Meanin i understand how that myth can drive peoples lives. the notion or the tale or legend of a god or hereo etc. all do tanscend into a reality. Even if theye were not.

OOOOH- i heard Sylvester Stalone on MNF a few weeks ago. He said the character ROCKY exist in philladelphia- even though it is alegend, fiction, character, etc. there apparently is a rocky statue in Philly, and a living, breathing aura of ROCK's spirit. hence my point exzclty.

Even if god does not exist- the notion carrys influence. which i make the point again about Socrates- i think he viewd the archtypes as just- symbols or figures for us to live by- or strive for. Nothing in stone, just figurative beings that stand for this and that.

Just what i think he meant with Archetypes. And Rocky is some what of that- a symbol of courage, strength, America, etc. God appears to be this same "archetype" conept. I believe any way. I have no other verification of a god, but CAN agree with others when they refer to God's influence and affect. Still nothing concrete, but it may not matter. The legend of God apparently has life...if not litteral life.

i thought we were over 4th grade name calling?

anyone???

navydad, don't get yourself banned over CO--that idiot has been singing the same tune for two years now. He does it for one purpose--to piss you off. Do as I do, and ignore him. Pray for his Godless soul...

BS

As long as you kooks continue to make insensitive remarks about our God and our religion, we'll call you anything we like...at least I will.

If you can't handle moron, kook or loon, then go back to the Daily Hogs for your daily dose of anti-Christian rhetoric.

Navy- i bet in another life you were born in 1670 and a muslim. I am pretty sure of it.

i bet you just were lucky that time. this time? man you got the bad roll of the religious dice huh?

sorry man- you'll get over it....next life. Probably be a Taoist or someting good for you. rather stuck in this dogmatic funk of yours.

good luck to ya ....next go around.

Navydad,

I agree, most liberals who come here, they are like trying to lead stubborn mules in the desert to water! Are entirely rude, and irrelevant!

especially this atheist person Bill Stensin, who has some very real problems and bizarre views of the world!!

At any rate, as you say, I do like to learn, in order to have an awareness of what is happening in our world, and I would much rather learn from GOP friends like you, AAR, Almiranta, Bigfoot, Kahn, Keefer, Matt, Mark, Morris, Spook, and many others who slip my mind!

Which is why I comment back and forth with you guys, to get my learning correct! If and when it is convenient for you to verify that it is correct or incorrect!

Mark,

I apologize for this off-topic comment in response to navydad!

Jeremiah

Amused,

Touche'.

I apologize too Mark.

But BS is still what he is.

Jeremiah- my views are bizzare? heloo- i am not living by a fairy tale.

Not sure why i am attacked on this area. I don't recall anything but making some comments about why i beleive, or lack there of , regarding religions.

is that so threatening to your fundamental beleif that some of you get so scared and attack as a response?

man no wonder you guys support attacking Iraq.

rusty,

He didn't do it quite like that - its more a matter of God revealed himself in the general sense to all mankind but only started to fully reveal himself to one people - the Jews...and he hammered and sifted this down until he came to one very young woman, whom the fullness of God's revelation to mankind was going to be delivered to the world. Everyone to one, and then one to everyone.

navydad,

I can see your point, but in the interests of fairness, Bill S's posts shall not be refered to directly as BS...allusions are still ok, though.

haha

like i never hear that one before

;-)

Bill S,

If you take a look at my prayer request, you'll see that it all wrapped up in a prayer that my wife and I have the courage to accept God's will - sometimes, it is a bit frightening, but God knows what is best for all of us, and even if we can't quite see why it should be a particular way, we must trust that God knows what He is doing, and that in the by and by, all will be made clear to us.

If my wife were to pass away, I would be greatly saddened - because I'll miss her terribly, but I also understand what while she is my wife, she is not mine - she is God's, and if God calls her home, I must humbly accept this as being best for her, for me and for all concerned.

Mark

"I find absolutely nothing in the Bible which is indicated by science to be untrue"

If Adam and Eve were the only people on Earth, and if Adam and Eve begat Cain, Abel, etc., with whom did Cain begat?

I can't imagine the Bible condoning that all humans are the product of incest.

Incest is in fact the only universal taboo, the only rule found in every culture ever found on Earth. Some cultures allow murder, bigamy and every other sin. But none has been found that allow incest.

Look, there is plenty of greatness to be found in the Bible, truths to be learned and shared. I am a very devout man, myself.

But I find the stance that the Bible is infallible, like the stance the Pope is infallible, to be an unsupportable position.

Sees,

Thing about Judeo-Christian creation - its very different:

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters.

And God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. Genesis, 1:1-3, Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition

You don't really find that in any other creation story - there was nothing, and God by word created something. Most creation stories have it that this or that god or gods created the world, but there are other gods who didn't, and sometimes other gods are more powerful, etc, etc, etc...Judeo-Christian creation is unique.

Major,

If you find the Pope isn't infallible then you are in agreement with 1 billion Catholics - including the Pope. It is the teaching authority of the Church, as promulgated by the Pope, which is infallible...the Pope can make mistakes, the Church can't - not in matters of faith and morals. God assured us of that - "gates of hell" not prevailing, etc.

But as for Adam and Eve and who their children married, the official position is thusly:

It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2–3) as a fiction. A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism).

In this regard, Pope Pius XII stated: "When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own" (Humani Generis 37).

The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The Catechism states, "The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents" (CCC 390).

There was an Adam, and an Eve, and by the fall of Adam, sin entered the world and all human beings alive today are the descedents of Adam. Outside of that, let your own conjectures run wild...

bongo- just because you so much want some magic carpet to come ans take you up high into the sky doesn't make it so. who told you of Valhalla? ust because you want your blue shirt to be red does not make it red.

Fortunately I was able to get my Klingon Translator working, the only device by which I was able to begin to understand this rant.

BS, why cant you accept that my faith is my own, one I dont expect nor even desire that you share? I wont force it on you, why cant I believe the way I want? What exactly compels you to be so strident in your ridicule?

Your desire for some fairy tale to be true does not make it true. Just makes it...well a fairy tale.

You seem to be quite negative in your attacks and betraying a certain sense of hysterical angst, as if you are having an internal struggle with your own beliefs. Perhaps a sabbatical would help ease your mind?

I am always somewhat amused that as soon as the topic of Christianity comes up a number of liberal atheist pop out of the woodwork with the predictable accusations that the bible is just fairytales, etc, etc.

It always makes me wonder why they are so adamant and persistant about something that they don't believe in. What difference does it make if someone choses to believe it? Why should they care if someone believes in Jesus Christ?

They are certainly not going to change a believers mind by denigrating Christianity.

The only thing that I can come up with is that they feel the constant need to push back against God and deny His existance because they are either so afraid to admit His existance or are so self centered that they refuse to admit someone (God) holds authority over them. That they are not as independent,nor important as they want to believe they are.

What non Christians do not understand is that we have a relationship with God. When we take the first steps and accept Him as our Savior, we are filled with the Holy Spirit. And we begin our personal relationship with Him. This isn't an imaginary relationship; it is very real. It is this relationship that affirms that the bible is real, true and accurate. It's a supernatural experience, and as such unbelievers cannot understand it

Instead of being tolerant and accepting some atheists are intolerant. Understand this though. Just because you cannot understand it, does not mean that God does not exist. Nor does it meant the bible is not truth and inerrant.

I pray that some day those of you on this thread who are unbelievers will come to believe. God changes lives. My life is a testament to this. My life has never been richer and fuller. No it wasn't bad before-but it's better now. I would not have believed it before either. But it is. And it can be for you too.

Linn,

Ditto.

Most creation stories have it that this or that god or gods created the world, but there are other gods who didn't, and sometimes other gods are more powerful, etc, etc, etc...Judeo-Christian creation is unique.

Yes, it is different in that regard. But how does that make it more correct? Navydad's appeal was to antiquity--he tried to claim that the Bible is the oldest source, and therefore the correct one. It isn't the oldest source (and even if it were, that still wouldn't make it correct, but even if we go by navydad's logic, he's still wrong).

There is, however, one very important way that Judeo-Christian creation is the exact same as every other religious creation story: It has the same amount of scientific evidence to support it. Which is none. You say a single god blinked everything into existence; Sumerians said there were three main gods who, among them, created everything. But here's the thing: You can't prove your creationism case any more than the Sumerians could prove theirs (or the Hindus can prove theirs, or the Buddhists theirs, or Native American religions theirs, etc.).

As I noted above, creationists are very keen on forcing people to prove a negative: "Prove the Christian creation story isn't true!" That's a very basic fallacy, but even if we put that aside...if you want to argue that point, then you should prove why the Hindu creation story isn't true. Prove why the Sumerian creation story isn't true. Prove why every single other religious creation story that has ever existed isn't true.

Ya see Linn, if people believe in God then they might not turn to the democrats for assistance and a potential voter is lost.

When a troubled man prays for guidance and finds an answer, he is not beholden to the left for helping him assuage his problems; the libs arent happy with that idea, its just too independant. What do you need God for when the democrat party can provide for all your needs?

Now shuffle off to the broom factory like a good little socialist drone and let the Party worry about the big things.

Linn that's total crap. The fact is i actually was supporting why I had a problem with a belief system. I expounded on why it just doesn't work for me. And yes it is no differnt than Alice in Wonderland or Snow White etc.

The reality of things is not my (or other's I assume) feelings of anything other than overwhelmed by the overt Christian slam in the face. So quite the contrary to what you mentioned about me, us, we, i trying to devalue and denigrate your belief.

the fact is i am not a smoker- so don't blow your smoke in my brain. That is the point. You see the chrisitians are so afraid of losing the religious CONTROL they feel helps them keep the masses in check (nothing new). We have money, our calendar, our pledge of alegiance to this great nation, all tainted by someone's smoke.

We are not tring to persuade anyone to do anything regarding their own bleief. The fact is the Chrisitans are trying to cram it down every American's throat.

You have it so backwards. Forcing your religion on someone is truly un-American and akin to a smoker violating my free air.

give me a break. I don't force you to listen to my music why would you force other's of other religions or none to beleive your ways?

if you want to smoke- go ahead, but don't force your smoke in my clean air.

and you have to gall to say i am forcing non-smoking on you?

duhhhhh

Sees,

Reason, though, supports the faith in a single Creator - various pagan stories of creation fail on the fact that there is no ultimate creator of matter...no surprise, as all creation stories were first written down long before the Greeks starting talking about irreducible matter.

We now the universe exists because we're in it - with our science we have got down to looking at the sub-atomic level and have been astounded by it - we've found that most of what exists is made up mostly of nothing, but we've also found that there is no agency in the physical universe which can create matter out of nothing. What the Jews wrote down all those thousands of years ago with no benefit of scientific method turns out to be a story of creation which tracks very well with what our reason has discovered via science.

As for the antiquity of the Bible - well, the first five books of the Bible were, as far as we can determine, written down about 3,500 years ago. The creation stories they contain were apparantly quite old by the time Moses wrote them down - perhaps even a thousand years older. This puts them back into the time when other creation stories also first arose (once again, as best we can determine), and as to which came first, the Jew or the Sumerian, there is really no way to determine. It is just as likely that the Sumerian borrowed from the Jew (or pre-Jew, if you like) as vice versa. What we know of history prior to the Greeks is mostly conjecture bridged with very few rock-solid facts - the only document we have pre-Greek which has come down to us with any real chance of completeness is the first five books of the Bible.

As an aside, there is also the oddity of the Semitic people...supposedly they came out of the Arabian penninsula. Why? Because no one can figure out where they came from, and there seems to be a lot of Semitic people there...just as likely, though, that they came out of Abraham - the birth of who's son was a miracle, and perhaps some genetic modification by the Author to create the Semites?

BS, you must be feeing very tainted. What I suggest you do is divest yourself of all the tainted money you have and work on the barter system for your needs. Id be happy to take the cash off your hands.

Then, next year at Christmas, inform your boss that you will NOT be taking a paid Christmas break but will instead volunteer to work, seeing as how you are feeling tainted by the Christian holiday being shoved down your throat.

As for the pledge, our nation was founded and created by men who were mostly Christian, if it werent for them you might be feeling quite a bit more tainted than you feel now. Or you might not be here at all. Perhaps suicide is an option you should explore, it must be very difficult to live under a flag which represents such abhorrent religious persecution.

Lose- Happy Holidays.

just has a nice ring to it. I prefer inclusiveness as opposed to 1 flavor. you know at dinner- a liberal meal sure beats a peice of burnt toast- any day of the week.

god bless you...or at least in pretend.

And on the other side we have science, which of course has given us the 'Big Bang' theory; there was nothing then suddenly there was the universe. Well, Im convinced.

The anti-religious have told us that one day science will explain everything, we just havent figured how to do it yet. So why is it that a God cant exist, and we just cant prove it yet because we havent figured out how to do it?

Its not the faithful youre afraid of, its those who want to force you to accept their beliefs, and there is the huge difference.

i should add- myself being so fat- i could use to back off at the dinner table a little...and the lunch table and the breakfast table.

Still- isn't America about diversity- not 1 relegion? not 1 faith, color or sex.

i mean come on- if all the conservatives got their way they'd be a contradiction. Seriously- all the white males keeping down the brother, the gals, the everyone else. You know no equal rights or any other liberal ideal. Suely don't want any liberals giving rights to blacks, and women, and jews, and irish, and homos, and dog's for pete sake!

Just a bunch of white guys sitting all together- no diverstiy. sounds like a gay convention to me.

And that is a contradticitiion to the GOP.

Happy Holidays to you too, since I dont have any idea what your core beliefs are, also Merry Christmas....see, you didnt get dragged to an inquistion! And if a Jew were to wish me Happy Hannukha, I wouldnt feel compelled to berate him for daring to be polite to me.

Do you plan on reimbursing your employer for the paid Christmas break you were given?

If you don't believe there is a God, you had better PRAY you are right. 'nuff said!

Ah yes, the value of the overriding 'inclusiveness; no winners, no losers, no unhappiness, no competition, no life.

Dont even bother competing since you will get a first-place trophy anyway. Dont bother studying to be a surgeon, the gas pumpers will make as much as you do. Dont bother worrying about your homework, the school system lets YOU decide what your grade will be. Like your neighbors nice car, dont worry, we will provide one for you too and make him pay for it.

We all get to wear identical clothing, work at identical jobs making identical money and living in the same pre-fab identical housing units. Greed and envy will be abolished and INCLUSIVENESS will be the new byword.

Now all we have to do is figure out how to keep one guy from being envious of his neighbors hot wife...WAIT!...we have the miracle of abortion and selective breeding and now everyone get to have a hot, future bride too.

This must all come to pass, we wouldnt want anyone to feel excluded, now would we?

I prefer inclusiveness as opposed to 1 flavor.

Yeah, sure ya do, its why you have an immigrant family of twelve living in your basement; you want everyone to feel inclusive in the great American society. They were homeless so you let them in.

Right? A somali family of twelve living downstairs at your place? You lent them a butcher knife so the father could perform a clitorectomy on his five year old daughter, since you didnt want to come off as not being multicultural and all.

All in all, I have to say I think we've done a pretty good job of having an actual debate here without too much rancor...

Lose: "We all get to wear identical clothing, work at identical jobs making identical money and living in the same pre-fab identical housing units."

that's the conservitive agenda isn't it? limit freedoms, make all one beleief, one color, one sex, etc.?

how you find this a liberal concept is beyond me.

see conservative see liberal. You know i tend to think variation is not marketed by the right.

gee ya think?

Bill S,

Whatever liberalism started out as, it has become the ideology of conformity and totalitarianism...conservatives are a variety pack...for instance, a complete Christian is neither individualist nor totalitarian...to be either is to sin.

I'd like to make another point of clarification here, in what Dad wrote...

All the men of scripture wrote ONLY under the inspiration of a divine guidance and not of their own opinion.

Meaning all wrote the scripture under the guidance of the one and only God, the Father of Jesus Christ.

I think someone made a comment about that earlier, not sure who?

Jeremiah

Reason, though, supports the faith in a single Creator - various pagan stories of creation fail on the fact that there is no ultimate creator of matter...

That doesn't satisfy the question, though; it barely even makes sense. Your contention is that polytheistic creation--several gods creating everything--"fails," whereas monotheistic creation somehow passes (and is even supported by "reason.") That's it? Everything being zapped into existence by several gods (one making the earth, one making humans, etc.) doesn't work, but if you combine them all into one god--that works? There's no difference there. You're still talking about creationism; whether it's done by one deity or by several is immaterial.

As an aside, there is also the oddity of the Semitic people...supposedly they came out of the Arabian penninsula. Why? Because no one can figure out where they came from, and there seems to be a lot of Semitic people there...just as likely, thoug