God's character

[Hulei boy]

As related to another thread, Why be against God?

I was thinking, why does God describe himself as being "jealous" and
"wrathful?" Why would God have such petty and childish emotions? I
have also asked why God would command his people to kill women and
babies as in the case of 1 Samuel 15:3

So I reckon for alot of people the ancient earth Goddess, Gaia, who
just follows natural law would be more ideal. Or maybe the
non-theistic beliefs of the Buddhists who just follow moral precepts
and pray for all living beings. Or maybe just a non-theistic common
fellow who happens to have good morals like the Samaritan of the bible.
All these options would seem to trump the Judeo-Christian God and his
violence and childish behavior.

Cheers,
Rob

[ChurchInThePub]

Rob, theres no simple answers to questions like that. God is not like
us - his thoughts and actions are above ours. For wisdom on questions
like this try reading and meditating on the book of Job.

Job 38
The LORD Speaks
1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the storm. He said:
2 "Who is this that darkens my counsel
with words without knowledge?

3 Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.

4 "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.

[a gnostic]

The story of Job is an interesting choice since in that story this
supposed God taunted the mythical Satan to give him his worst. What
the hell is up with that?

I do find it fascinating when Bible believing Christians acknowledge
some that God has committed some immoral act, and then in order to hold
onto their belief in the a perfect God they answer that we humans just
are not smart enough to undersand God. We don't understand his wrath
on innocent women and children, his killing people for trying to catch
the ark when the oxen slipped, or killing some guy because he didn't
like the idea of having sex with his dead brother's widow, or God's
jealousy. Instead of saying these things seem awfully wrong, they say
that we just don't understand God's infinite wisdom.

It's all so irrational it's difficult to understand this type of
thinking.

a gnostic

[lee95406@yahoo.com]

Hulei boy wrote:
> As related to another thread, Why be against God?
>
> I was thinking, why does God describe himself as being "jealous" and
> "wrathful?" Why would God have such petty and childish emotions? I
> have also asked why God would command his people to kill women and
> babies as in the case of 1 Samuel 15:3
> >

> Cheers,
> Rob

Because gods are created by people.

http://www.samharris.org/forum/

[e271828]

"God is not like us - his thoughts and actions are above ours."

This is not a sufficient argument for God-- can I say the Snowman's
thoughts and actions are above ours, and have this hypothetical Snowman
absolved from logical scrutiny? There are indeed simple answers to
questions like Hulei-boy's: ordering the death of innocent people,
etc., disqualifies him from being the all-loving God as proported by
many of the other scriptures. The Bible is fraught with
self-contradiction, and there is no reason this vestige of
civilization's evolution should be revered any more than the
subjugation of woman and draconian legal systems.

The excerpt from Job is an example of semi-good poetry being misused as
support for an argument-- those words which sound pretty or aesthetic
are rarely logical and reasonable. In the case of Job 38:4, our
protagonist could have responded: "You do not exist, and Earth
congealed from planetessimal discs approximately 4.5 billion years ago
without your intervention" and bitch slapped God. Unfortunately such
theatrics are absent from the good book.

[Constantine]

Rob said,

"I was thinking, why does God describe himself as being "jealous" and
"wrathful?" Why would God have such petty and childish emotions? I
have also asked why God would command his people to kill women and
babies as in the case of 1 Samuel 15:3"

Do you seriously believe jealousy and wrath are "petty and childish
emotions?" That is not reasonable.
Are you saying there is no reason an adult should be angry? You never
get angry over anything? If a child molester violated your young child
you would think it petty to be wrathful or jealous for your childs
virginity? Here I can not believe you are serious when you say you
consider jealousy and wrath petty and childish.

If you were to look at the biblical examples of God's jealousy and
wrath you would see that they often involve false worship. It is
reasonable that a creator has a right to require obedience from His
creation if He chooses. Your argument sounds artificially logical
because humans are on the same level of sovereignty with other humans.
We have no right of ownership over another. This would not be the case
with a Creator. A Creator would have every right to treat His Creation
any way he sees fit or to destroy it. Yet the Bible presents a Creator
who is not arbitrary. He has consistent standards and often yields on
the side of mercy. In the cases of 'devoting cities to destruction' the
Levitical laws stated the cities were to be given terms of peace first.
But again, how can you make a logical claim that a Creator should have
any limit on what He does with His Creation? The examples of killing
men, women, children show how serious the Biblical Creator considers
disregarding the Ultimate Reality. The Bible portrays the Creator also
as our "Heavenly Father." We are "His progeny." So the Bible sometimes
portrays those who try to corrupt spiritually his creation or his
"children" as "defiling" or "raping" them. We certainly recognize a
father's right to such emotions.

Your argument is known as a "straw man" argument. This kind of argument
takes a biblical description of God (such as "jealous" or "love") then
gives the term a meaning (such as "petty") so that the new definition
makes the argument appear ridiculously simple while all the time
avoiding more logically obvious matters (such as "Would a Creator have
unlimited right to treat His Creation anyway He wanted?"). A scarecrow
is easier to knock over than a real man.

[firba1]

I don't know if you have ever read Frankenstein, but I would like to
point out in that book, Frankenstein cannot do anything to his monster
and why should any creator be able to? Do our parents have the right to
kill us? According to many Christians, they do not. Is this any
different? Our parents may get mad at us as children or even as adults,
but they still cannot kill us as they please. And although many adults
may get mad at times, I would not feel comfortable with a sovereign
leader who decided that he should kill a multitude of people, just as
some contemporary dictators may have done.

[Hulei boy]

Kind of on point, friend, but not really

If God wants to destroy Sodom and Gommorah for instance he does (either
that or natural disaster, or both) but the instance of 1 Samuel 15:3
has God commanding his people to go out and kill women and babies for
him. A little different. And for you personally, would you go out and
kill someone's infant if God commanded you?

Because many Mideast religions, like Christianity and Islam, have alot
of holy wars and intolerance in their holy books does not make them any
more right. These are also the religions that have used governments to
conquer huge areas of the world and thus gain followers. Sad

[almsman]

I for one do not admit God commited an immoral act as you descibe it.
The problem is that you do not want to admit that someone greater set
the rules to live by. You cannot accept that God put restraints not
only on us but Himself .

This isn't about understanding God's wisdom as that would happen when
we understood how the universe actually started and not by some
expolsion of a couple of molecules that came from (nowhere) as scienece
would have us to believe.

[Constantine]

firba1 wrote:
>Do our parents have the right to
> kill us? According to many Christians, they do not. Is this any
> different? Our parents may get mad at us as children or even as adults,
> but they still cannot kill us as they please. And although many adults
> may get mad at times, I would not feel comfortable with a sovereign
> leader who decided that he should kill a multitude of people, just as
> some contemporary dictators may have done.

You disregard the point above that humans are not creators of one
another, we share the same nature, so the analogy is different from
whether or not a creator would have moral limits on how he uses his
creation. A creator would by definition be of a different nature than
his creation. A closer analogy, but still imperfect, would be a potter
and his pottery. Can a potter not use his products as he wishes?

[Constantine]

Hulei boy wrote:
> And for you personally, would you go out and
> kill someone's infant if God commanded you?

Why do you ask a question you believe can have no good answer? If you
believed in God the question could be serious. Since you do not, why
ask?

> Because many Mideast religions, like Christianity and Islam, have alot
> of holy wars and intolerance in their holy books does not make them any
> more right.

That is true. No one I have read here is making the claim that wars
make anyone right. So I am not sure where your line of reasoning comes
from. But "holy wars" do not prove the claims wrong either.

[Steve in Virginia]

Interesting...so then to elaborate on the potter analogy, God, as the
creator of all of use has the right to "use" us as he wishes. If it
serves some supernatural agenda of his to destroy millions of innocent
people then so be it. Should we then just lick our wounds and accept
the fact that it is God's will. Is it God's will that people die of
infectious disease? After all bacteria and viruses are God's creation,
and who are we to develop medicines to combat their impact? Same goes
for surgery - isn't it past of God's "unknowable" will that we should
dies from heart disease, tumors, birth defects, disabling injuries?
God feeds and clothes the birds of the air and the beast of the field -
so why build houses, develop sanitation, grow crops?

So in essence, there is, allegedly, this God who creates and destroys
at whim; who is angry and jealous; punishes for the slightest
infraction of his unrealistic rules; kills the innocent; demends blood
sacrifices; creates a near-omnipotent demonic entity - Satan - who he
is unable to control, much less destroy AND unleashes upon a mortal
race of beings. He gives us reason and expects us to believe without
proof;provides us with an inquisitive mind, then threatens us with
eternal damnation if we use it; Claims we have free will, but is
supposedly omniscient and knows the past present and future...
contradictory in the extreme. If he knows what we're going to do, then
we don't have free will - we just don't have all the data. And the
list goes on.

Cheers,
Steve

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
false, and by the rulers as useful."

Seneca the Younger

[Helios http://members.fortunecity.com/juillet]

I guess there is a point nobody sees here, and it is that God destroy
or "send to kill" people 's bodies when he finds it is needed. But we
must remember we are to live for ever as something like spirits or
small gods, so the dead of a body is not our death. As in the Gospel of
Judas, Jesus asking Judas to deliver him to the Romans, in order to get
out of the "man" (body) he was imprisoned, means not he was going to
die as a spirit (or God ). MEANS he opened the door for everyone After
him to follow.
God didn't kill people. Only release spirits ; perhaps those spirits
has more chance to save themselves without bodies than with them.
(Assuming the Christian faith goes OK).

[firba1]

Does pottery ever really interact with anything on its own accord? If
we were like pottery, we would not care if we died. Are we not
ingrained with a fear of death? Is there no reason for that?

And to almsman:
The Big Bang is not merely this theory that scientists pulled out of
nowhere. They weren't all sitting around and then one said, "Hey, how
about the 'Big Bang!' Has a nice ring to it." If you know something
about science, you probably would have heard of Stephen Hawking. He has
observed, by "looking back in time" that at one time all the light
bended from a great mass and eventually led back to a singular mass.
And also, a "theory" in science is not merely what we would call a
theory, but it is thoroughly tested before it becomes that status

And to Helios:
If people's spirits are released, then why are we afraid of death? If a
God were to do something that would not truly hurt us, then why would
he make us afraid of it?

About this entire topic:
God is impossible as he is described. Is God perfect and omniscient? If
this is true, then how can he express surprise and anger? He already
knew what he had "found out." And if we were created in his image, how
can we be so imperfect if he is perfect?

[almsman]

Looking back in time is not a subject I can comment on since I really
don't know and those who run experiments can only assume they are right
but they as well really don't know. As far as Hawking goes he disproved
some of his own expriments.

A theory is tested in science the only problem is there is no way to
create the universe using a science lab and also theories in science
are always subject to other tested theories. The inert problem with the
big bang theory is where did the energy or particles come from that
created the universe?

[firba1]

Where did god come from?

[geocorona]

ChurchInThePub wrote:
> Rob, theres no simple answers to questions like that. God is not like
> us - his thoughts and actions are above ours.

Perhaps, but the contrary is true regarding human portrayals of God.

In stories, God is never far above the moral limits of the author, and
never exceeds the ideals of the society in which the author lives.

[almsman]

firba1 wrote:
> Where did god come from?

I don't know but if I did I would be God

[firba1]

Man... THAT would suck

[almsman]

Only for you

[Imagine]

Or maybe an Atheist, who doesn't try to infiltrate the minds of
others with illusions. I'm glad you mentioned God's childish
irresponsible behavior. That was a pretty good insight ! I can't
wait to see how the Christian's respond, and of course deny, that one !

[Imagine]

Agnostic, you the man !!
I've already spoke my peace, so I only want to add that I think God's
character is the guy with the white face, the red lips, and the funny
hat that opposed Batman. Can't think of his name at the moment. Or
maybe Agnostics description is more acurate. HITLER !

[dfnj2006]

The original text was having sex with his dead brother. But they
changed the semantics to protect the Bible reading masses from the
indecency of the human condition. Where do you think the eating flesh
and drinking blood ritual came from?

[dfnj2006]

I think man created God in his image not the other way around. God and
Jesus are words that only exist in the Bible, the minds of men, and the
spiritual feelings they experience in a sacred space. God and Jesus do
not exist in the same way you and I experience an apple. I am pretty
confident every atheist in the World believes in the existence of
apples!

[firba1]

So... Jesus didn't exist like an apple... so everything in the Bible
must be false if Jesus never existed. Wow.

[almsman]

Oh I have a good illusion the big bang theory cool man
Don't know what childish behavior you are speaking of unless its your
inability to speak without trying to be despicable at the same time
...yes that's it ..has to be

How is that for a response did I pass did I did I ..
Thank you oh mighty one wise one

[almsman]

Yes I'm sure they do being as fruity as thay are :)

[almsman]

Not from your warped perception of what His blood and body meant .

[almsman]

You are just to funny but ... funny queer or funny ha ha or stupid
funny or maybe ?????????

Nothing like talking down about someone you don't know anything about
isn't it or not ?

[datta swami]

God is beyond logic. This means that the actions of God are beyond the
normal logical analysis of human beings. His actions appear to be
beyond the capacity of logic but it does not mean that they are
illogical and unjust. When scholars discuss deeply, the actions are
found to be really justified. For example Krishna danced with Gopikas.
This action appears to be illogical and unjust because our power of
vision is limited to this birth only.

These Gopikas were sages in previous birth and requested the Lord to
give salvation from all the bonds like bond between husband and wife,
bond between parents and children and bond with money. Krishna
attracted their children and stole butter, which was their hard earned
money.

Ordinary human beings who cannot see beyond this birth can never
understand these actions. Beyond logic means not illogical but
superlogical. Beyond justice does not mean unjust but superjustice.

At the lotus feet of Shri Datta Swami
surya
http://www.universal-spirituality.org

[firba1]

So your "illusion" is the Big Bang Theory? I doubt you actually know
anything about it. And how it has been supported. By looking "back in
time" we can see when there was a central point of light that can be
seen. Also, there is a cosmic "background radiation" that could only be
explained as the echo of the Big Bang. Also, the constant redshift of
other galaxies proves that the universe is expanding. What else could
have caused this?

[almsman]

The illusion is that people believe that it happened all by itself not
that it happened.
I believe that when God spoke there was a big bang and that it
continues to grow at the speed of light.

I do not believe it happened by the explosion of an atom without
someone to start it and create the right conditions for life as we
have it . In other words it wasn't an random act or accident.

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/1/2006 4:04:27 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, alms...@yahoo.com writes:

I do not believe it happened by the explosion of an atom without
someone to start it  and create the right conditions for life as we
have it . In other words it wasn't an random act or accident.

LL: Who was that someone? Who created that someone? How could that someone have come into  existence without another someone to create him, her or it? Are you suggesting it was an accident?

[antonio]

Both question are all rigt . Who turned on the light. Why the light
was there? Science can't explain why matter has come up from nothing.
It is possible to imagine "nothing" who was there to test it?

[scooter]

You may "believe" all you want. However, you have also confirmed
firba's assertion that you havn't the slightest clue about the big bang
theory. Your post clearly shows that.

You need serious help if you think some imaginary character in an
ancient book of superstition can speak, cause the creation of the
universe and subsequently all life on this desolate planet that is most
likely unknown to all other life forms in the entirety of the universe.
Get a freakin grip. Your arrogance of "knowledge" that exists from this
idiotic book that was wriiten by men on this speck of dust we call
earth is pathetically woeful and silly. Knowledge that is worth
anything has always been garnered through trial and error---not some
ancient book of superstition. You have got to stop kidding yourself and
passing on this ridiculous superstion to children. It cripples those
persons who are indoctrinated and their ability to deal with life as a
reality. Instead, your superstition relies on "faith" and "god's will"
as explanations for things you do not understand. This kind of mindset
translates into other aspects of life which become equally delusional
with respect to literally everything that people encounter. Stop the
madness. You think people are rich because "god" wanted that way? You
think people are "evil" because "satan" has taken over their souls?
Please, stop being an idiot.

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/1/2006 5:36:56 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, kwi...@mail.utexas.edu writes:

Please, stop being an idiot.

LL: It's not going to  happen, kwills. Their minds have been completely ruined by theistic claptrap.

[Simpleton]

Are you sure that he spoke, and not farted? Besides, who was he
speaking to?

[Simpleton]

datta swami wrote:
> God is beyond logic.

Finally, we agree on something!

[Simpleton]

[almsman]

> -------------------------------1151797009
> Content-Type: text/html
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> X-Google-AttachSize: 1258
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
> <BODY id=3Drole_body=20
> style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: #008040; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman Balti=
> c"=20
> bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7><FONT id=3Drol=
> e_document=20
> face=3D"Times New Roman Baltic" color=3D#008040 size=3D3>
> <DIV>
> <DIV>In a message dated 7/1/2006 4:04:27 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,=20
> alms...@yahoo.com writes:</DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 10px; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px"><FONT=20
> style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=
> =3D2>I do not=20
> believe it happened by the explosion of an atom without<BR>someone to star=
> t=20
> it&nbsp; and create the right conditions for life as we<BR>have it . In ot=
> her=20
> words it wasn't an random act or accident.</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
> <DIV></DIV>
> <DIV><STRONG>LL: Who was that someone? Who created that someone? How could t=
> hat=20
> someone have come into &nbsp;existence without another someone to create him=
> ,=20
> her or it? Are you suggesting it was an=20
> accident?</STRONG></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>
>
> -------------------------------1151797009--

I don't know how God came about but I certainly know that I will never
understand everything like you think we should .

I guess unless everything is explained in a way that is suitable to you
it must not be possible or true.
As much as I would like to know all the answers I never will and
neither will you.

Oh yes I know if I don't know the answer just say it's God, right.

[almsman]

I will stop being an idiot when you prove without a doubt that
everything was an accidental happening the way science teaches.

My children are fine as 1 is a sophmore on the Deans list thank you
sir.
Dealing with life is something I know a little about.

My arrogance about knowledge doesn't hold a candle to your's obviously
.

[almsman]

He only farted when you came out .

He wasn't speaking to anyone .

[almsman]

> -------------------------------1151801404
> Content-Type: text/html
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> X-Google-AttachSize: 986

>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
> <BODY id=3Drole_body=20
> style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: #008040; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman Balti=
> c"=20
> bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7><FONT id=3Drol=
> e_document=20
> face=3D"Times New Roman Baltic" color=3D#008040 size=3D3>
> <DIV>

> <DIV>In a message dated 7/1/2006 5:36:56 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,=20
> kwi...@mail.utexas.edu writes:</DIV>

> <BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 10px; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px"><FONT=20
> style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=

> =3D2>Please,=20
> stop being an idiot.<BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
> <DIV></DIV>
> <DIV><STRONG>LL: It's not going to&nbsp; happen, kwills. Their minds have be=
> en=20
> completely&nbsp;ruined by theistic claptrap.=20

> </STRONG></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>
>

> -------------------------------1151801404--

No more warped than your atheistic claptrap

[Simpleton]

How do you know that?

[almsman]

How do you not know it ?

[Simpleton]

Because I never made the claim.

Now, quit stalling and answer the question I asked you: How do you
know it?

[almsman]

You make the claim that science knows even though their theories are
constantly bebunched for another scientific theory that may stand or
may not.

So I will say to you how do you prove your belief without anyone to
dispute it?

But to answer your question I can't prove it to you and if I could you
wouldn't believe then either.

[Simpleton]

No ma'am, I did not make that claim. I could, but I did not.

> So I will say to you how do you prove your belief without anyone to
> dispute it?
>

You will say, or you will ask?

> But to answer your question I can't prove it to you and if I could you
> wouldn't believe then either.

I am not asking you to prove it (not yet). I am simply asking you: How
do you know? As in, the Bible says so, or the Church of Mathieu says
so, or Bush told you. Or, more likely God told you in a private one on
one session. I might dismiss all of that as hogwash, but you'd have
answered the question. I may ask another question after that.

For example, if you asked me how do I know that Brazil lost to France,
I'd say I saw it on TV. You may choose to believe it or not, and may
demand proof, but I'd have answered your question.

How do you know that God spoke (and not farted), and the big bang came
about?

Of course, you don't have to answer. Free will and all

[almsman]

The reason I believe the way I do is after reading a lot of diferent
books from the Bible to many different authors some of which are
sciencetist and some of which are people such as myself with just an
opinion and many hours of searching my mind and heart along opions of
many people .I do think my way through many religious and non-religious
opinions of life and I have come to the conclusion none know it all and
most know very little.

So that being said I am like you I only have what I sense in my heart
is right. Yes you will say it is in your mind but it really is what you
believe in your heart that will determine what you will live by.

[firba1]

to almsman:
1) Matter cannot travel at the speed of light.
2) How is it that the theistic theories of the beginning of the
universe are on a separate plane from the scientific theories of the
universe? If one scientific theory can displace another one, why can't
a scientific theory displace theistic one? Example 1: The Earth is flat
and the center of the Universe.

[firba1]

almsman wrote:
>So that being said I am like you I only have what I sense in my heart
>is right. Yes you will say it is in your mind but it really is what you
>believe in your heart that will determine what you will live by.

I don't know how your "heart" determines your morals and rules. Maybe
you have this abstract idea of your "heart" but i do not see how your
mind and heart are different.

[almsman]

It can displace a theistic view if that view is wrong .

I didn't mean matter moved that fast just that the universe is
expanding at a rapid rate . Excuse my misquote please.

[firba1]

So why can't science replace religion altogether? Traditionally, it
seems the view held by most of the population is wrong. What is tying
us so close to this "God?" Has God really given us anything directly?
Science has directly contributed to the medium we are using right now.
I think my question really is, what makes theists so steadfastly
religious?

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/1/2006 7:32:45 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, alms...@yahoo.com writes:

I don't know how God came about  but I certainly know that I will never
understand everything like you think we should  .

LL: Atheists don't say we should understand everything. They say that there are things we don't understand, but we shouldn't make the mistake of filling in the gaps with god. Atheists find they don't need the answers to everything. If you ever have the courage to  accept that, you will find yourself free of superstition, myths, demons and  theistic rationalizations.

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/1/2006 7:46:13 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, alms...@yahoo.com writes:

My children are fine as 1 is a sophmore on the Deans list thank you
sir.

LL: At a bible college? Studying theology?  I'll bet your child is not studying any kind of physical science.

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/1/2006 7:50:29 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, alms...@yahoo.com writes:

No more warped than your atheistic claptrap

LL: Prove atheism is wrong. And, please, don't try to do it using the bible. Think on  your own, if you can.

[Simpleton]

almsman wrote:
> Simpleton wrote:

> > > But to answer your question I can't prove it to you and if I could you
> > > wouldn't believe then either.
> >
> > I am not asking you to prove it (not yet). I am simply asking you: How
> > do you know? As in, the Bible says so, or the Church of Mathieu says
> > so, or Bush told you. Or, more likely God told you in a private one on
> > one session. I might dismiss all of that as hogwash, but you'd have
> > answered the question. I may ask another question after that.
> >
> > For example, if you asked me how do I know that Brazil lost to France,
> > I'd say I saw it on TV. You may choose to believe it or not, and may
> > demand proof, but I'd have answered your question.
> >
> > How do you know that God spoke (and not farted), and the big bang came
> > about?
> >
> > Of course, you don't have to answer. Free will and all
>
> The reason I believe the way I do is after reading a lot of diferent
> books from the Bible to many different authors some of which are
> sciencetist and some of which are people such as myself with just an
> opinion and many hours of searching my mind and heart along opions of
> many people .

Ah, so you are postulating an entirely new hypothesis. See, that's all
you had to say. I almost believed that God told you himself.

> I do think my way through many religious and non-religious
> opinions of life and I have come to the conclusion none know it all and
> most know very little.
>

So do you consider yourself an exception in that you knew that God
spoke out the big bang. After all, I'd imagine that very few people
know that.

> So that being said I am like you I only have what I sense in my heart
> is right. Yes you will say it is in your mind but it really is what you
> believe in your heart that will determine what you will live by.

No, that was not what I would have said.

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/1/2006 9:13:54 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, fir...@gmail.com writes:

I think my question really is, what makes theists so steadfastly
religious?

LL: Fear, wishful thinking, brainwashing. All are very strong concepts, hard to shake without a lot of courage and use of one's intelligence.

[almsman]

> -------------------------------1151819778
> Content-Type: text/html
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> X-Google-AttachSize: 1036

>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
> <BODY id=3Drole_body=20
> style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: #008040; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman Balti=
> c"=20
> bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7><FONT id=3Drol=
> e_document=20
> face=3D"Times New Roman Baltic" color=3D#008040 size=3D3>
> <DIV>

> <DIV>In a message dated 7/1/2006 7:46:13 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,=20
> alms...@yahoo.com writes:</DIV>

> <BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 10px; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px"><FONT=20
> style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=

> =3D2>My=20
> children are fine as 1 is a sophmore on the Deans list thank=20
> you<BR>sir.<BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
> <DIV></DIV>
> <DIV><STRONG>LL: At a bible college? Studying theology? &nbsp;I'll bet your=20
> child is not studying any kind of physical=20
> science.</STRONG></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>
>
> -------------------------------1151819778-

Actually you are wrong on all counts. She attends Kennesaw State where
she majors in mathmatics

[almsman]

The simpliest answer is that evolutionist or atheist think that order
comes from disorder or that something comes from nothing.

You really have to have a lot of faith to believe that we came from
some soup from a billion year old pond that a sciencetific made
experiment in a lab could not replicate using external energy to make
with special traps to catch or else they would have been lost. Which in
truth makes creation even more believeable in that it takes a outside
force to create even the most simple amino acid .

[Simpleton]

almsman wrote:
> firba1 wrote:
> > So why can't science replace religion altogether? Traditionally, it
> > seems the view held by most of the population is wrong. What is tying
> > us so close to this "God?" Has God really given us anything directly?
> > Science has directly contributed to the medium we are using right now.
> > I think my question really is, what makes theists so steadfastly
> > religious?
>
> The simpliest answer is that evolutionist or atheist think that order
> comes from disorder or that something comes from nothing.
>

You are confused about what an evolutionist does or says. You are
better off sticking with what *you* think and asking when it comes what
an evolutionist of atheist thinks. Just raise your hand. And here's a
hint: An evolutionist is concerned with the origin of species not
entropy or cosmology. Unless he also happens to be a
physicist/cosmologist.

> You really have to have a lot of faith to believe that we came from
> some soup from a billion year old pond that a sciencetific made
> experiment in a lab could not replicate using external energy to make
> with special traps to catch or else they would have been lost.

Why? If a theory consistently stands up to experimental and
theoretical challenge, all you need is your rationality.

What you need a lot of faith for is to believe in human authored books
written about 2000 years ago when it consistently runs into more
potholes than a street in Manhattan.

> Which in
> truth makes creation even more believeable in that it takes a outside
> force to create even the most simple amino acid .

No it doesn't. Because it exposes the hole: If you claim that it takes
an outside force to create a simple amino acid, you have no choice but
to stick to that assertion and also conclude that it takes another
outside force to create that force in the first place.

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/2/2006 8:44:57 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, alms...@yahoo.com writes:

Actually you are wrong on all counts. She attends Kennesaw State where
she majors in mathmatics

LL: Mathematics is not a physical science. In any case, how does she reconcile her understanding of mathematics with a belief that a god can interfere in it enough to erode its meaning or upend it all in one fell swoop? What's the use of studying something as precise as mathematics with  a belief such as that?

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/2/2006 9:17:56 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, alms...@yahoo.com writes:

You really have to have a lot of faith to believe that we came from
some soup from a billion year old pond that a sciencetific made
experiment in a lab could not replicate  using external energy to make
with special traps to catch or else they would have been lost.

LL: And you don't need a lot of faith to believe that we all descended from Adam, created from dust by the sky daddy,  and Eve, fashioned by Adam's rib by the same sky daddy?

 

Can you replicate that scenario in a lab?

 

almsmith: Which in

truth makes creation even more believeable in that it takes a outside
force to create even the most simple amino acid .

LL: But you purport to know what that outside force is: an invisible, unknowable being? Good thinking!

[almsman]

> -------------------------------1151819870
> Content-Type: text/html
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> X-Google-AttachSize: 1000

>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
> <BODY id=3Drole_body=20
> style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: #008040; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman Balti=
> c"=20
> bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7><FONT id=3Drol=
> e_document=20
> face=3D"Times New Roman Baltic" color=3D#008040 size=3D3>
> <DIV>

> <DIV>In a message dated 7/1/2006 7:50:29 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,=20

> alms...@yahoo.com writes:</DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 10px; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px"><FONT=20
> style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=

> =3D2>No more=20
> warped than your atheistic claptrap<BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
> <DIV></DIV>
> <DIV><STRONG>LL: Prove atheism is wrong. And, please, don't try to do it usi=
> ng=20
> the bible. Think on&nbsp; your own, if you=20
> can.</STRONG></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>
>
> -------------------------------1151819870--

Thats funny you don't want me to use something because you don't
approve . Talk about being closed minded.

Prove there is no God and you will prove yourself right.

I could prove God's existence if you would simply look around yourself
and see that there is no way for all the various species to all have
evolved from one cell. By the way where did the one cell come from?

Well I have began again reading about science and the beginnings of the
universe and the more I read the more I beliveve I am right.

I am not against learning as you may think or using my God given
ability to discern correct scientific solutions to questions that arise
about life and how we came to be and discern bad science just because
someone created an experiment that may prove them right or maybe not.

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/2/2006 9:45:31 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, alms...@yahoo.com writes:

I could prove God's existence if you would simply look around yourself
and see that there is no way for all the various species to all have
evolved from one cell. By the way where did the one cell come from?

LL: If you can't imagine where the one cell comes from without a creator, how can you not ask where the creator came from? No theist will answer this question.

 

almsmith: I am not against learning as you may think or using my God given

ability to discern correct scientific solutions to questions that arise
about life and how we came to be and discern bad science just because
someone created an experiment that may prove them right or maybe not.

LL: I'm sorry to have to tell you, but you have no ability--god give or otherwise-- to discern correct scientific solutions. You have shown over and over again that you don't know the difference between science and fantasy. As soon as science disproves or even questions your fantasy, you reject the science. You don't understand science and you never will with that attitude.

[almsman]

> -------------------------------1151819674
> Content-Type: text/html
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> X-Google-AttachSize: 1383
>

.

> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
> <BODY id=3Drole_body=20
> style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: #008040; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman Balti=
> c"=20
> bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7><FONT id=3Drol=
> e_document=20
> face=3D"Times New Roman Baltic" color=3D#008040 size=3D3>
> <DIV>

> <DIV>In a message dated 7/1/2006 7:32:45 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,=20

> alms...@yahoo.com writes:</DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 10px; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px"><FONT=20
> style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=

> =3D2>I don't=20
> know how God came about&nbsp; but I certainly know that I will=20
> never<BR>understand everything like you think we should&nbsp;=20
> .</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
> <DIV></DIV>
> <DIV><STRONG>LL: Atheists don't say we should understand everything. They sa=
> y=20
> that there are things we don't understand, but we shouldn't make the mistake=
> of=20
> filling in the gaps with god. Atheists find they don't need the answers to=20
> everything.&nbsp;If you ever have the courage to&nbsp; accept that, you will=
> =20
> find yourself free of superstition, myths,&nbsp;demons and&nbsp; theistic=20
> rationalizations.</STRONG></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>
>
> -------------------------------1151819674--

Thats odd you don't have to know all the answers? Then it should be
easy to have faith in science even when theories are constantly changed
because they were proven wrong.
Or just as easy to believe in God since we connot know all about Him.

You are full of rationalizations accepting theories that can never be
proven so you make the mistake of filling gaps with the things you
don't know with unproven theories.

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/2/2006 9:59:50 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, alms...@yahoo.com writes:

Thats odd you don't have to know all the answers?  Then it should be
easy to have faith in science even when theories are constantly changed
because they were proven wrong.
Or just as easy to believe in God since we connot know all about Him.

You are full of rationalizations accepting theories that can never be
proven so you make the mistake of filling gaps with the things you
don't know with unproven theories.

LL: Name one thing about your belief in god has been proven scientifically.

[almsman]

While you are very good at saying you don't have all the answers you
certainly expect anyone who speaks about God to know everything, kind
of a double standard which comes as no surprise from someone who calls
me an idiot and knows nothing about me but their own contrived veiw.

I won't argue about my ability to think but just to say that for all
your superiior insights you have not given any reason except theories
that are just that for the way you believe. WOW the way you believe
that must make you religious.

[almsman]

That may be the easiest thing yet.

Nothing can be made without an external force or interaction

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/2/2006 10:09:42 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, alms...@yahoo.com writes:

While you are very good at saying you don't have all the answers you
certainly expect anyone who speaks about God to know everything, kind
of a double standard which comes as no surprise from someone who calls
me an idiot and knows nothing about me but their own contrived veiw.

I won't argue about my ability to think but just to say that for all
your superiior insights you have not given any reason except theories
that are just that for the way you believe. WOW the way you believe
that must make you religious.

LL: And just as I predicted, you have no answer to my question:

 

If you can't imagine where the one cell comes from without a  creator,
how can you not ask where the creator came from?

 

Until you can answer that rationally, we cannot have a rational discussion about the beginning of the universe.

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/2/2006 10:13:29 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, alms...@yahoo.com writes:

Nothing can be made without an external force or interaction

LL: You STILL haven't answered the question: If you can't imagine where the one cell comes from without a  creator, how can you not ask where the creator came from?

[almsman]

Would it matter if I asked and got an answer ,no.You wouldn't believe
it.
I have never asked God where the one cell comes from because I don't
believe that is where we came from. As far as where we came from we are
created beings not an accident from nothing .

I have stated many times I don't know all the answers but if I had the
answer it would require you to believe it or it would mean nothing to
you.

You speak of being rational as if your way of thinking is the only way
to think . Quite frankly it isn't.

[almsman]

No I'm not confused about evolution or entropy seeing as one disproves
the other.

Evolotion means going in ever increasing spiral whereas entropy means
an ever decreasing spiral.

Trust me on this I will never raise my hand to ask your consent on what
to believe.

You want me to say where God comes from I couldn't say ,but I do know
where we came from.

The theories that you say are confirmed over and over have continually
been discounted over time as we will see.

[almsman]

> -------------------------------1151858278
> Content-Type: text/html
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> X-Google-AttachSize: 1279

>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
> <BODY id=3Drole_body=20
> style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: #008040; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman Balti=
> c"=20
> bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7><FONT id=3Drol=
> e_document=20
> face=3D"Times New Roman Baltic" color=3D#008040 size=3D3>
> <DIV>

> <DIV>In a message dated 7/2/2006 8:44:57 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,=20

> alms...@yahoo.com writes:</DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 10px; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px"><FONT=20
> style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=

> =3D2>Actually=20
> you are wrong on all counts. She attends Kennesaw State where<BR>she major=
> s in=20
> mathmatics</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
> <DIV></DIV>
> <DIV><STRONG>LL: Mathematics is not a physical science. In any case, how doe=
> s=20
> she reconcile her understanding of mathematics with a belief that a god can=20
> interfere in it enough to erode its meaning or upend it all in one fell swoo=
> p?=20
> What's the use of studying something&nbsp;as precise as&nbsp;mathematics=20
> with&nbsp; a belief such as that?</STRONG></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>
>
> -------------------------------1151858278--

I'm glad you set me straight on that of course it isn't phsyical
science.

I wasn't aware that God interfers with math??? or would since He
created it.

[almsman]

> -------------------------------1151858687
> Content-Type: text/html
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> X-Google-AttachSize: 1827

>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
> <BODY id=3Drole_body=20
> style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: #008040; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman Balti=
> c"=20
> bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7><FONT id=3Drol=
> e_document=20
> face=3D"Times New Roman Baltic" color=3D#008040 size=3D3>
> <DIV>

> <DIV>In a message dated 7/2/2006 9:17:56 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,=20

> alms...@yahoo.com writes:</DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 10px; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px"><FONT=20
> style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=

> =3D2>You=20
> really have to have a lot of faith to believe that we came from<BR>some so=
> up=20
> from a billion year old pond that a sciencetific made<BR>experiment in a l=
> ab=20
> could not replicate&nbsp; using external energy to make<BR>with special tr=
> aps=20
> to catch or else they would have been lost. </FONT>
> <DIV></DIV><STRONG>LL: And you don't need a lot of faith to believe that w=
> e=20
> all descended from Adam, created&nbsp;from dust by&nbsp;the sky daddy,=20
> &nbsp;and Eve, fashioned by Adam's rib by the same sky daddy?=20
> </STRONG></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
> <DIV><STRONG></STRONG>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV><STRONG>Can you replicate that scenario in a lab? </STRONG></DIV>
> <DIV><STRONG></STRONG>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV><STRONG>almsmith: </STRONG><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Which in<BR>trut=
> h makes=20
> creation even more believeable in that it takes a outside<BR>force to create=
> =20
> even the most simple amino acid .</FONT><BR></DIV>
> <DIV><STRONG>LL: But you purport to know what that outside force is: an=20
> invisible, unknowable being? Good thinking!</STRONG></DIV></FONT></BODY></HT=
> ML>
>
> -------------------------------1151858687--

Much better thinking than believeing we came from some kind of soup!

[Simpleton]

You are.

> Evolotion means going in ever increasing spiral whereas entropy means
> an ever decreasing spiral.
>

No, that is just another one of your hypotheses.

> Trust me on this I will never raise my hand to ask your consent on what
> to believe.
>

Nah, I can't do that. But you do not have to ask for my consent on
what to do you with your life, either.

> You want me to say where God comes from I couldn't say

Of course you couldn't, which shows that you can be honest if you try.

,but I do know
> where we came from.
>

But everyone who is not in denial knows that. From your mom and dad.

> The theories that you say are confirmed over and over have continually
> been discounted over time as we will see

And if you actually recognized the wisdom of that, you'd be wiser.

[almsman]

> -------------------------------1151860054
> Content-Type: text/html
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> X-Google-AttachSize: 1407

>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
> <BODY id=3Drole_body=20
> style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: #008040; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman Balti=
> c"=20
> bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7><FONT id=3Drol=
> e_document=20
> face=3D"Times New Roman Baltic" color=3D#008040 size=3D3>
> <DIV>

> <DIV>In a message dated 7/2/2006 9:59:50 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,=20

> alms...@yahoo.com writes:</DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 10px; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px"><FONT=20
> style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=

> =3D2>Thats=20
> odd you don't have to know all the answers?&nbsp; Then it should be<BR>eas=
> y to=20
> have faith in science even when theories are constantly changed<BR>because=
> =20
> they were proven wrong.<BR>Or just as easy to believe in God since we conn=
> ot=20
> know all about Him.<BR><BR>You are full of rationalizations accepting theo=
> ries=20
> that can never be<BR>proven so you make the mistake of filling gaps with t=
> he=20
> things you<BR>don't know with unproven=20
> theories.<BR><BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
> <DIV></DIV>
> <DIV><STRONG>LL:&nbsp;Name one thing&nbsp;about your belief in god has been=20
> proven scientifically.</STRONG></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>
>
> -------------------------------1151860054--

You see even when I answered this in another post you totally ignored
it just as I thought.
You won't except because it would mean you would have to change and you
are to bigoted in your opinions to do that.

[almsman]

> ,but I do know
> > where we came from.
> >
>
> But everyone who is not in denial knows that. From your mom and dad.
>
>
>
> > The theories that you say are confirmed over and over have continually
> > been discounted over time as we will see
>
>
> And if you actually recognized the wisdom of that, you'd be wiser.

cute response but means ?????????

[scooter]

almsman wrote:

> scooter wrote:
> > almsman wrote:
> > > firba1 wrote:

> > > > almsman wrote:
> > > > > Imagine wrote:
> > > > > > Or maybe an Atheist, who doesn't try to infiltrate the minds of
> > > > > > others with illusions. I'm glad you mentioned God's childish
> > > > > > irresponsible behavior. That was a pretty good insight ! I can't
> > > > > > wait to see how the Christian's respond, and of course deny, that one !
> > > > >
> > > > > Oh I have a good illusion the big bang theory cool man
> > > > > Don't know what childish behavior you are speaking of unless its your
> > > > > inability to speak without trying to be despicable at the same time
> > > > > ...yes that's it ..has to be
> > > > >
> > > > > How is that for a response did I pass did I did I ..
> > > > > Thank you oh mighty one wise one
> > > >
> > > > So your "illusion" is the Big Bang Theory? I doubt you actually know
> > > > anything about it. And how it has been supported. By looking "back in
> > > > time" we can see when there was a central point of light that can be
> > > > seen. Also, there is a cosmic "background radiation" that could only be
> > > > explained as the echo of the Big Bang. Also, the constant redshift of
> > > > other galaxies proves that the universe is expanding. What else could
> > > > have caused this?
> > >
> > >
> > > The illusion is that people believe that it happened all by itself not
> > > that it happened.
> > > I believe that when God spoke there was a big bang and that it
> > > continues to grow at the speed of light.
> > >
> > > I do not believe it happened by the explosion of an atom without
> > > someone to start it and create the right conditions for life as we
> > > have it . In other words it wasn't an random act or accident.
> >
> > You may "believe" all you want. However, you have also confirmed
> > firba's assertion that you havn't the slightest clue about the big bang
> > theory. Your post clearly shows that.
> >
> > You need serious help if you think some imaginary character in an
> > ancient book of superstition can speak, cause the creation of the
> > universe and subsequently all life on this desolate planet that is most
> > likely unknown to all other life forms in the entirety of the universe.
> > Get a freakin grip. Your arrogance of "knowledge" that exists from this
> > idiotic book that was wriiten by men on this speck of dust we call
> > earth is pathetically woeful and silly. Knowledge that is worth
> > anything has always been garnered through trial and error---not some
> > ancient book of superstition. You have got to stop kidding yourself and
> > passing on this ridiculous superstion to children. It cripples those
> > persons who are indoctrinated and their ability to deal with life as a
> > reality. Instead, your superstition relies on "faith" and "god's will"
> > as explanations for things you do not understand. This kind of mindset
> > translates into other aspects of life which become equally delusional
> > with respect to literally everything that people encounter. Stop the
> > madness. You think people are rich because "god" wanted that way? You
> > think people are "evil" because "satan" has taken over their souls?
> > Please, stop being an idiot.
>
>
> I will stop being an idiot when you prove without a doubt that
> everything was an accidental happening the way science teaches.

Science doesn't teach anything of the sort. However, much of science is
based on probability--something you clearly know nothing about. The
equations already exist for the probabilities you like to call
"accidental" save for the big bang itself. However, given your utter
lack of scientific backround, perhaps you should ask your pastor. I'm
quite sure he is well versed in science...hahahaha. Since there are
already probability equations for such things perhaps you can show us
some tangable evidence for your "god" as well. You have already
demonstrated your penchant for "making things up" of which you know
nothing about. I.E. you know nothing about blackholes yet you post as
if you had some knowledge of the theory and/or their existance. Why
would someone want to post information that is clearly pulled right out
of your ass in an attempt to discredit something you know nothing
about? Let me answer that for you: You're a closed minded arrogant kook
who thinks that some ancient book that you and your friends read is
somehow truth. You base this assertion on...let's see: NOTHING!!

>
> My children are fine as 1 is a sophmore on the Deans list thank you
> sir.

You miss the point entirely. Perhaps you should have your child post
here as s/he may be able to produce a coherent argument. The point is
that people are conditioned or wired to react and think in a certain
manner. If people are pre-disposed to explanations that include so
called "supernatural" phenomenae, then they are not progressing as a
species. Instead, they are resigning to a statement of "I don't know
therefore god did it". That is assinine and counterproductive.

> Dealing with life is something I know a little about.

Yes, very little as you aptly demonstrate.

>
> My arrogance about knowledge doesn't hold a candle to your's obviously

You don't freakin get it. The difference between you and me is that I'm
not stupid or arrogant enough to think that some ancient superstitious
book has all the answers I'll ever need to know. Moreover,, I do not
automatically accept any scientific premise that hobbles out of the
mathematics or the lab, nor does any scientist. Wanna know why? Cause
they aren't freakin stupid. The idea of blackholes has been in the
works since Einstien first proposed his re-worked theory of gravity. I
say re-worked because he came after Newton and much of Newton's math is
inside Einstien's equations. Having said that, blackholes are just now
being indirectly observed. We can see the gamma rays which are emmited
from blackholes and also the effects of their gravity on surrounding
stars. Meanwhile, you're too busy sucking up to your pastor because if
you don't you won't have any friends when they kick you out of the
church.

[Simpleton]

almsman wrote:

> cute response but means ?????????

How do you know it was cute, if you did not understand it?

[almsman]

Didn't say I didn't understand just makes no sense

[Simpleton]

Then why did you call it a cute response?

[almsman]

You were trying to being cute about the mom and dad quote so I just
wondered why you talk of billions of years ago then jump to your
parents as to where we come from - cute huh

[Simpleton]

Er, you started the "God yodeled the big bang" discourse, and asked
where did we come from.

I answered your question. There was no jumping on my part, ma'am.

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/2/2006 10:49:29 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, alms...@yahoo.com writes:

I wasn't aware that God interfers with math???  or would since He
created it.

LL: Why wouldn't he? According to your beliefs he has that power. He has the power to perform miracles and bring people back from the dead and, of course, to create the universe and man in an instant from nothing and destroy the earth with a flood. Why shouldn't he be able to  interfere with our understanding of  even the mathematics of it if he so desires? 

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/2/2006 10:51:30 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, alms...@yahoo.com writes:

Much better thinking than believeing we came from some kind of soup!

LL: Yes, dust is much better than soup any day.

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/2/2006 11:01:23 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, alms...@yahoo.com writes:

You see even when I answered this in another post you totally ignored
it just as I thought.
You won't except because it would mean you would have to change and you
are to bigoted in your opinions to do that.

I don't always have time to read every post. Evidently you do.

 

LL

[Prophet Izaach]

A narcissistic misantrophist perhaps?
...
...

[antonio]

LLP wrote

L: Why wouldn't he? According to your beliefs he has that power. He
has the
power to perform miracles and bring people back from the dead and, of

course, to create the universe and man in an instant from nothing and
destroy the
earth with a flood. Why shouldn't he be able to interfere with our
understanding of even the mathematics of it if he so desires?

IMO
I find a bit difficult to understand the logic of this discussion. Do
you believe in a "rational" God that uses human beings to play a
funny game when he feels boring? I feel completely skeptic about the
possibility of explaining the God idea by means of human logic. The
problem is that we have the capacity to reason and become self aware.
But this capacity is connected with NS process it is completely
utilitarian.. Do you imagine a utilitarian rational and shrewd God. ?
Is there any way of imagine God without attributing him the human
qualities and flaws?

[scooter]

No there isn't. But, you touch on a point which most of the theists
seem to miss over and over. You IMAGINE a god. And why do you imagine
there being a god? Because it is not real. Just because you choose to
call an imaginary character "god" does not make it any less fictional.
If you were to call it Zeus would you then say "I know no one has ever
seen him but I know he is real because I have a personal relationship
with him?" Do you not see the obviousness of the truth? God exists only
in the imagination and the imagination is fantasy.

[Prophet Izaach]

I've managed to read all the posts. [ Yeah, I don't have a life. T_T ]
It seems that people have gone around different routes and some ended
up in discussions not pertaining, or somehow pertaining to the main
topic. Here's mine by the way:

God, in His purest form, is the most perfect entity concieved, or
almost concieved, by man. He is perfect. He does not need. He does not
want. He has. The absolute perfection spirals down to inexistence.

Why would He need to create a universe? Why would He need to create
Man? On top of that, why would He need his love? Why would He be
jealous? Jealousy is driven by the feeling lackness. Lackness has no
room with perfection. And besides, envy is one of the
"Seven Deadly Sins". Why would He be wrathful? Is He insulted?
Offended? Again, wrath is supposedly one of the "Seven Deadly Sins".

Why would God need Man's praisings? How pathetic can He get?

[Prophet Izaach]

almsman wrote:
> No I'm not confused about evolution or entropy seeing as one disproves
> the other.

A very ubiquitous misconception by theists and creationsits alike. It
is a misunderstanding of both the Second Law of Thermodynamics and
Evolution.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics states: "No process is possible in
which the sole result is the transfer of energy from a cooler to a
hotter body." Entropy indicates unusable energy, and sometimes conforms
with order to disorder, and only applies to closed systems. Life is not
a closed system. If a parent plant has more usable energy than its
offsprings, how would the whole species, or the population thrive?

Entropy, or what theists and creationists call as "disorder" is not
just irrelevant on life. Order from disorder also occurs on nonliving
systems - without the need of an "Intelligent Creator". We have
snowflakes, sand dunes, and lightnings.

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/3/2006 7:48:13 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, antonio....@gmail.com writes:

I find a bit difficult to understand the logic of this discussion. Do
you believe in a "rational" God that uses human beings to play a
funny game when he feels boring?

LL: Then you haven't been reading your bible! It's full of stories of god interfering with the universe. Whether he is supposed to do it from boredom or something else I can't say. What do you call it when god made the sun stand still? If you believe he can do that you should also believe that he can interfere with mathematics and anything else he wants to interfere with for any reason or no reason. How are we mere mortals supposed to know when or whether he is interfering? When you believe in god, anything and everything is possible and you can't depend on anything because he could step in and change it at any moment.

[antonio]

scooter
wrote

Do you not see the obviousness of the truth? God exists only
in the imagination and the imagination is fantasy.

IMO
May be we are also an illusion produced by our neuronal -chemical brain
network. As a matter of fact many atheists think that way because they
don't believe in free will and think that we are determined by
chemical processes, that our sense of identity and self awareness is
only an illusion as well as the rest of human fantasies. In this case
as you can see there are just a few differences between the smart
atheists and the naïve theist.

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/3/2006 2:22:35 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, antonio....@gmail.com writes:

May be we are also an illusion produced by our neuronal -chemical brain
network. As a matter of fact many atheists think that way because they
don't believe in free will and think that we are determined by
chemical processes, that our sense of identity and self awareness is
only an illusion as well as the rest of human fantasies. In this case
as you can see there are just a few differences between the smart
atheists and the naïve theist.

LL: Antonio, you have no idea what atheists think. Why don't you stop trying to guess? You are always wrong.

[almsman]

> -------------------------------1151892120
> Content-Type: text/html
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> X-Google-AttachSize: 1342

>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
> <BODY id=3Drole_body=20
> style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: #008040; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman Balti=
> c"=20
> bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7><FONT id=3Drol=
> e_document=20
> face=3D"Times New Roman Baltic" color=3D#008040 size=3D3>
> <DIV>

> <DIV>In a message dated 7/2/2006 10:49:29 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,=20

> alms...@yahoo.com writes:</DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 10px; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px"><FONT=20
> style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=

> =3D2>I wasn't=20
> aware that God interfers with math???&nbsp; or would since He<BR>created=20
> it.<BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
> <DIV></DIV>
> <DIV><STRONG>LL: Why wouldn't he? According to your beliefs he has that powe=
> r.=20
> He has the power to perform miracles and bring people back from the dead and=
> , of=20
> course, to create the universe and man&nbsp;in&nbsp;an instant from nothing=20=
> and=20
> destroy the earth with a flood. Why&nbsp;shouldn't he be able to &nbsp;inter=
> fere=20
> with our understanding of&nbsp; even the mathematics of it if he so=20
> desires?&nbsp;</STRONG></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>
>
> -------------------------------1151892120--

You can kill someone does that mean you will?

As I said before sometimes I think your head hurts really bad.

And yes God can do all the things you said but I can't snap a finger
and make Him.

[almsman]

> -------------------------------1151892237
> Content-Type: text/html
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> X-Google-AttachSize: 954

>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
> <BODY id=3Drole_body=20
> style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: #008040; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman Balti=
> c"=20
> bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7><FONT id=3Drol=
> e_document=20
> face=3D"Times New Roman Baltic" color=3D#008040 size=3D3>
> <DIV>

> <DIV>In a message dated 7/2/2006 10:51:30 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,=20

> alms...@yahoo.com writes:</DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 10px; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px"><FONT=20
> style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=

> =3D2>Much=20
> better thinking than believeing we came from some kind of=20
> soup!</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
> <DIV></DIV>
> <DIV><STRONG>LL: Yes, dust is much better than soup any=20
> day.</STRONG></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>
>
> -------------------------------1151892237--

I agree!

[almsman]

> -------------------------------1151892559
> Content-Type: text/html
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> X-Google-AttachSize: 1197

>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
> <BODY id=3Drole_body=20
> style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: #008040; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman Balti=
> c"=20
> bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7><FONT id=3Drol=
> e_document=20
> face=3D"Times New Roman Baltic" color=3D#008040 size=3D3>
> <DIV>

> <DIV>In a message dated 7/2/2006 11:01:23 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,=20

> alms...@yahoo.com writes:</DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 10px; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px"><FONT=20
> style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=

> =3D2>You see=20
> even when I answered this in another post you totally ignored<BR>it just a=
> s I=20
> thought.<BR>You won't except because it would mean you would have to chang=
> e=20
> and you<BR>are to bigoted in your opinions to do that.</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>=
> </DIV>
> <DIV></DIV>
> <DIV><STRONG>I don't always have time to read every post. Evidently you do.=20

> </STRONG></DIV>
> <DIV><STRONG></STRONG>&nbsp;</DIV>

> <DIV><STRONG>LL</STRONG></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>
>
> -------------------------------1151892559--

That odd you replied to all but the one

[LLPENS@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/4/2006 7:12:56 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, alms...@yahoo.com writes:

And yes God can do all the things you said but I can't snap a finger
and make Him.

LL: Can you snap a finger and stop him? If so, please do. There are many things to stop that believers think he is doing.

[antonio]

LLP
You are wrong .I spent many years of my life being an agnostic. I have
been studying the epistemological consequences of a universe without
any God or any order for many years. At that time I had found extreme
existentialism as a good answer to my doubts .I respect people that by
rejecting God idea becomes pessimistic about human nature and human
destiny. J F Celine is a good example of that as well as many others
good and honest thinkers. I found reasonable the irrationalism as a
human sincere response to the lack of Faith in any God. However I
couldn't find any reason to be optimistic from the perspective of
pure rationalism .I think it is an empty optimism. It seems to be
something similar of the feeling of animals enjoying a good piece of
meat (of course the corpse of other animals). Well, the only over
optimistic secular scatology was the communist or Marxist social
ideology. Instead of God they believe in the capacity of mankind to
create a new man.