poker and god?!

[Mattnxtc 0]

wasnt saying you did believe that a 3 headed horse existed...but i was just showing how logically it can be proven it doesnt exist thats all...

No. You havent.You've lonly proven that i have no evidence to believe that there exists a three headed horse.And there's that same inability to disprove the existence of a god for the same reasons.It's unfalsifiable.

no u are wrong...lets look at it from the correct way. Lets say you actually believe this...well then u do have a belief in it...but where it falls apart is do you have justification for it? No u dont have any justification for it therefore your knowledge is wrong. do you see? Back to the other argument...What u miss is the very tool you try to use against christians. My burden of proof is low. Show me how it is logically possible that our universe is created by a 3 headed horse. You cant even fulfill the low amount of proof necessary so your assertion is still not logical.

[clowneyas 0]

UPDATE: "God" vs. "Atheists" - The Death BattleHas been changed. On FCP, the tournament is listed as 10 PM starting time, since they're on Eastern time. West Coast people, 7 PM start, but the tourney says it starts at 10!Hope to see ya there.Tourney Name: Gods Balls(0) $10 NL, normal blind structure!Password for tourney is: niaboccIf you believe in "God", and you win, then "God" exists. However, WHEN I win, this will prove that "He" doesn't!This will solve this argument once and for all time!

[Steppin Razor 0]

First, to those arguing about proof : Faith = belief in the absence of proof. If god can be proven, then you cannot have faith in him.

1. It is a common theme of the Hebrew writing to start with the end and work back...ie talk about the house first and then discuss how it was built. so that coudl be a possibility.

But genesis 1 is about how the heavens and earth were built.

2. the second is that while God put the plants trees shrubs etc..there, he had not given them the ability to multiply yet. this would seem logical as there was nobody to cultivate the land yet as man didnt exist.

1:22, 29 & 30

There are a few other possible solutions but those are 2 good ones to consider.

The whole point is that there does not need to be a 'solution'. As for the purpose of these 'nuances' let's call them, you'd get a better answer from a priest/pastor, etc.. Perhaps it's to redefine man's role as the most important of god's creation, I don't know.Take all the family trees that take up so much of Genesis. The purpose is to show genealogy back to Adam and Eve. That's why the bible has Adam having 'other sons and daughters' instead of naming every single one. The important thing is not who begat whom, it that people were begat.

[davezz5 0]

Just because linguistically speaking words seem random, does not mean their meaning is random. If there were some intelligent species on the other end of the universe(not that I believe that), I am pretty sure they would believe that 2 + 2 = 4, not in those exact words, but they would have a proof similar to ours. I do not think they would also have a book that was similar to the bible, and claimed a man died for the sins of all.I just happen to think that math can be described as universal. The Christian bible, I am not so sure. :roll:

This is an old philsophical axiom..Leibniz gives an example of the sum of angles in a triangle being 180 deg's.this is obviously not depended on any labelling that we as humans give to the propotion of distance between said angles, but is a logical truth that must exist in abstract form, human intepretation not withstanding.Therefore, regardless of definitions that we as finite beings place upon objects, or any other labelling process; even infinite beings have to observe the logical structure of the universe.The example of the triangle would clearly hold true in any universe.Thus laws of logic are universal

[Tritz 0]

I never want to play poker against God because I feel like he'd know my hole cards.

Tritz apparently knows your hole cards too. Don't ask me how.

TRITZ!Long time no see. How goes the airplane business?

Doing well, thanks for asking. Should be online soon.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

Leibniz gives an example of the sum of angles in a triangle being 180 deg's.this is obviously not depended on any labelling that we as humans give to the propotion of distance between said angles, but is a logical truth that must exist in abstract form, human intepretation not withstanding.Therefore, regardless of definitions that we as finite beings place upon objects, or any other labelling process; even infinite beings have to observe the logical structure of the universe.The example of the triangle would clearly hold true in any universe.Thus laws of logic are universal

Not in a universe of space described by non Euclidian geometry... but I guess that's not really the point.

[Mattnxtc 0]

The whole point is that there does not need to be a 'solution'. As for the purpose of these 'nuances' let's call them, you'd get a better answer from a priest/pastor, etc.. Perhaps it's to redefine man's role as the most important of god's creation, I don't know.Take all the family trees that take up so much of Genesis. The purpose is to show genealogy back to Adam and Eve. That's why the bible has Adam having 'other sons and daughters' instead of naming every single one. The important thing is not who begat whom, it that people were begat.

So im not sure if we are disagreeing or agreeing or whats going on haha...I completely understand ur argument and maybe i shouldnt have used "solutions" in that sentence. I wasnt in anyway tryin to prove anything to you but was merely clearin up the contradiction for others that might read this thread.

[Steppin Razor 0]

So im not sure if we are disagreeing or agreeing or whats going on haha...I completely understand ur argument

I hope so, because my point is that the word of god is not the literal words on the page in that particular order. The word of god is the meaning the words represent. The people who believe that other religions are wrong are missing the point of their own religion.

[clowneyas 0]

If i was to die tomorrow and be faced with my creator, it seems more plausible that we'd be having a good laugh at people insane enough to be certain of his or her existence than it is that i'd be condemned to hell.

Excellent view!IT'S FINALLY HERE, THE TOURNAMENT PITTING "GOOD" vs. "EVIL""GOD" vs. "SATAN" (or "atheists")GO TO FCP, AND UNDER "PRIVATE" TOURNAMENTS YOU'LL FIND IT. Cost: $10 Max. Participants: 50Tournament Name: " Gods Balls" Time: 7 PM tonight ( 10 PM on FCP eastern time)Tournament Password: niaboccRemember: If you believe in "God", and you win, then I'll admit, "He" exists. But, since "Divine" intervention is unlikely, I will win, thus proving that "God" does not exist once and for all!Finally, we can stop arguing about this!

[Pupsta 0]

Nope. I'm pretty sure you realize you aren't even considering the fact you can't make absolute statements without absolute knowledge. You do understand that, right?

There is a magical three headed horse that cruises through the universe devouring planets.Is it unreasonable to say im wrong?Or how about this.Are you close enough to being certain that im wrong that entertaining the possibility of me being right is pointless? I dont think anyone will say that it's completely absurd to entertain the notion of a god. Most "atheists" just think that it's so unlikely that they dont need to put it up there on a list of truths they view as probable.

Heres the thing with this kind of argument. It was what woudl be called a "brain in a vat argument." You can make this statemen and u might even believe its true. But now the burden is on your to prove it exists which you cannot prove therefore the argument is not logical.

therefore, it's not logical for you to argue that god knocked up a virgin and we're all cousins from adam and eve because you can't prove it.

thanks for the well thought out post

what is there t othink out? you say someone else is wrong because it can't be proven, but you're right although it can't be proven.is there a fundamental difference i'm missing here?

short answer is yes...im tired and i dont feel like explaining it...take a look at the philosophy definition of knowledge and you will understand...Ill even give you a hint. See what Philosophy says about Justified True Belief as it applies to knowledge...Good luck

the ONLY CLAIM you can have to being "more right" about the christian god being the true deity as opposed to a three headed unicorn is that more people accept your belief, which brings us to "if everybody jumped off a bridge....."i still say the universe was created by massive rabbits having anal sex. prove me wrong.

2 simple words...prove it u cant therefore it isnt logical nice try though

how the hell do you christians get off asking ANYONE ELSE to PROVE their BELIEFS when there's no POSSIBLE PROOF you can have that you're even remotely right?!?

[Loismustdie 0]

It's easy to dicipher that there was a creator to those things. Because they don't occur naturally

this only proves my point. How often do you see earths naturally occurring? the answer...you dont!!!! Therfore we have something that doesnt just naturally come to be without a creator? ur logic is wrong.

The human body is a complex machine, and I've thought about it many times as to how it could have just come to be. The answer is, I don't know. But to say that some supreme being just decided one day to make it makes no sense. If God had the power to create things any way he wanted to, why would he need to make us so complex? Why would we need air, and water, and food to live? Just make us like manicans, with solid plastic bodies, and give us life. Anyway, the complexity of our body is so crazy that it makes sense to assume it derived from chaos. So lifeforce evolved to adapt to the surroundings and environment found here on Earth. That's what I believe.

This is just all over the place and really has no logic behind it at all. Why? b/c if something was random you would expect the easiest simpliest possible thing to occur why? b/c it becomes much more likely since there would be millions less variables to take into account..so do you see where your wrong?

I don't believe in God. If their was an ALMIGHT being who created the Universe he can also destroy it (case in point: The Painter who can destroy HIS creation) You would think with all the hate and violence in the world that GOD would destroy his creation and start over again, I would fold a censored poker hand because I have that choice based on a logical decision. OK, so I can hear posters now saying Well he is a forgiving loving GOD, ok so if he can create something why can't he beam down from the heaven's and stop a murder? Makes no sense at all. God exists because WE exist not the other way around. Can a braindead person worship someone from above? Can a tiger? We created God because we are self-aware and have the ability to think. I'm not saying this is true but that's what I believe. If God created US who created him.

This shows a complete lack of understanding of the bible which leads me to think you havent actually read it. So lets clarify. God has in fact destroyed cities. Sodom and Gomorrah. Second it has already been predestined that the earth will be cleansed of the sin that inhabits it (see the end times prophecies) . Your correct God is a Loving God but what u forget is God is also a Just God. Meaning all who sin will have to face judgement for that sin. Now as for your argument about the murder. Lets think of it this way. Does ur mom let u go out when you are likely gonna go cause trouble? Of course she lets u go...but when u get in trouble u pay a price...

Quote:most evangelicals will gladly admit there is many things wrong with catholicismLaughing Laughing LaughingOh man...good stuff.

U laugh but it is true

For starters...how do we know for sure that the body was there to begin with?? Razz

B/c why would Jews allow this new relgion to sprout up unchallenged. These "christians" were making claims about this man named Jesus being the Son of God and u think that the Jews took this lightly?

Matt is the king of standing for nothing and something at the same time in other religous threads. I stopped paying attention to him long ago. As a Christian who believes in God, I have to also say that I could be wrong? That is about as religous as it gets these days- stand for something, but be ready to change at any moment because there are no absolutes. Which would then make religion another version of science, just trial and error and theory, and little else.Of all the people that claim to know anything of religion on this site Matt saddens me the most.

haha...lois lois lois. take a few years of philosophy and you will realize what i mean. Yes from a philosophical point i have to claim that why? B/c you cant make absolutely statements in philosophy and hold any credibility. You mistake this for me being unsure about my faith and that is very wrong. i am very confident in my faith and very confident that I am right about Jesus. I sadden you more b/c i have shown the errors in ur thinkin on multiple occasions to the point that you dont continue to discuss the possibility that you are wrong.

Wrong. You sadden me because you represent a new generation of religion that has nothing to do with Christ or God and everything to do with being as low key and non judgemental as possible, not really accepting sin but not really teaching against it either, there could be a God, there should be a God, but, really, there might not be. The Bible in itself is not enough, you need 3 years of philosophy instead, when God clearly states that the Bible is so simple even a fool cannot ere in it. So, basically your eduacation has rendered you as an individual absolutely biblically useless. You are clearly the worst kind of pseudo christian the religous world has to offer these days. That's o.k., Christ said that this sort of thing would happen, so you do have a place in the grand scheme of things, you are just on the wrong side.

[Loismustdie 0]

Heres the thing with this kind of argument. It was what woudl be called a "brain in a vat argument." You can make this statemen and u might even believe its true. But now the burden is on your to prove it exists which you cannot prove therefore the argument is not logical.

Uhm, i hate to rob you of your thunder, but that's the point. There's a burden of proof on someone who makes that sort of a claim.Hence the analogy.I thought it was pretty obvious. *shrug*I'm not arguing that there's a three headed horse out there.

wasnt saying you did believe that a 3 headed horse existed...but i was just showing how logically it can be proven it doesnt exist thats all...

logically it can be proven that noah didn't build a big ass ark and put two of every animal on earth on it, too.did he have dinosaurs on the ark?

No dinosaurs in the boat.

[Loismustdie 0]

Then don't start now, it just makes you look like a dick.

i am a dick sometimes, when people are either wrong or incoherent dicks themselves. to be honest, i really don't get anything he's trying to say at all except for his point about sodom and gommorah, which seems to be tangential at best.also, again in honesty, i am bothered by anyone who is able to say "From a christian standpoint your g/f should not be with you." that scares the crap out of me, and i find it indicative of a horribly unhealthy sentiment among many fundamentalist evangelicals. moreover, it aspires to knowledge of "what it is to be christian," which a lot of anglicans and catholics would be more than a little pissed about, methinks.so yeah, i was a dick. so was he. meh.and as for your "brag...er," etc., (mis-)interpret my intentions as you will. my advocated form of pluralism takes as one of its fundamental tenets an introduction about things like that before entering into conversations about religion, religion/science, etc. i thus introduced myself, lest i fall into hypocrisy. i suggest others here do the same.

What he is saying is that as a Christian techinically by the bible your girlfriend should not have chosen to be with you, but she has and I will say this, as long as she you are not living in a stae of not being married than biblically God will forgive her for that choice, but it will lead to problems in the relationship, that is inevitable. Do not let that scare you, just realize that there may be times you don't understand something because of who she is and vice versa, and just look the other way. This is true of all relationships but when it comes to household dynamics and religion it can be tricky and painful. If you want some very persoanl stories regarding this I will be glad to email you privately, my wife and I have gone through many things with this.

[Pupsta 0]

Heres the thing with this kind of argument. It was what woudl be called a "brain in a vat argument." You can make this statemen and u might even believe its true. But now the burden is on your to prove it exists which you cannot prove therefore the argument is not logical.

Uhm, i hate to rob you of your thunder, but that's the point. There's a burden of proof on someone who makes that sort of a claim.Hence the analogy.I thought it was pretty obvious. *shrug*I'm not arguing that there's a three headed horse out there.

wasnt saying you did believe that a 3 headed horse existed...but i was just showing how logically it can be proven it doesnt exist thats all...

logically it can be proven that noah didn't build a big ass ark and put two of every animal on earth on it, too.did he have dinosaurs on the ark?

No dinosaurs in the boat.

so i assume dinosaur fossils are just a figment of our imagination, right?

[LongLiveYorke 38]

so i assume dinosaur fossils are just a figment of our imagination, right?

I feel like we've already had this discussion...It was fun, remember?

[Pupsta 0]

so i assume dinosaur fossils are just a figment of our imagination, right?

I feel like we've already had this discussion...It was fun, remember?

as if we haven't already hda the rest of this discussion in the thread 8723648723 times?

[Loismustdie 0]

Heres the thing with this kind of argument. It was what woudl be called a "brain in a vat argument." You can make this statemen and u might even believe its true. But now the burden is on your to prove it exists which you cannot prove therefore the argument is not logical.

Uhm, i hate to rob you of your thunder, but that's the point. There's a burden of proof on someone who makes that sort of a claim.Hence the analogy.I thought it was pretty obvious. *shrug*I'm not arguing that there's a three headed horse out there.

wasnt saying you did believe that a 3 headed horse existed...but i was just showing how logically it can be proven it doesnt exist thats all...

logically it can be proven that noah didn't build a big ass ark and put two of every animal on earth on it, too.did he have dinosaurs on the ark?

No dinosaurs in the boat.

so i assume dinosaur fossils are just a figment of our imagination, right?

No, it's just that they cannot prove what they are. They are just bones, but come on, we have already done this. It's akin to me finding a piece of pipe, maybe three, and then constructing an imaginary building that the pipe was part of, with nothing more to go with than just three pieces of pipe. No pictures. No written history. No full skeletons as reference. No DNA. Just imagination. It is basically Willy Wonka science, and so unreliable that no one cares. It's not like there are dinosaur exhibits everywhere, because no one cares. The only people that care are scientists trying to either uphold or disprove already unproven theories. It's a joke, and litteraly useless science, but it does make for some cool movies.

[Suited_Up 2]

Heres the thing with this kind of argument. It was what woudl be called a "brain in a vat argument." You can make this statemen and u might even believe its true. But now the burden is on your to prove it exists which you cannot prove therefore the argument is not logical.

Uhm, i hate to rob you of your thunder, but that's the point. There's a burden of proof on someone who makes that sort of a claim.Hence the analogy.I thought it was pretty obvious. *shrug*I'm not arguing that there's a three headed horse out there.

wasnt saying you did believe that a 3 headed horse existed...but i was just showing how logically it can be proven it doesnt exist thats all...

logically it can be proven that noah didn't build a big ass ark and put two of every animal on earth on it, too.did he have dinosaurs on the ark?

No dinosaurs in the boat.

so i assume dinosaur fossils are just a figment of our imagination, right?

No full skeletons as reference.

We have some that are pretty damn close. Come to Chicago, we have one here... and it sure as hell isn't an Elephant.

[Steppin Razor 0]

No, it's just that they cannot prove what they are. They are just bones, but come on, we have already done this. It's akin to me finding a piece of pipe, maybe three, and then constructing an imaginary building that the pipe was part of, with nothing more to go with than just three pieces of pipe. No pictures. No written history. No full skeletons as reference. No DNA. Just imagination. It is basically Willy Wonka science, and so unreliable that no one cares. It's not like there are dinosaur exhibits everywhere, because no one cares. The only people that care are scientists trying to either uphold or disprove already unproven theories. It's a joke, and litteraly useless science, but it does make for some cool movies.

You're not serious.... are you? Are you saying that if I gave a doctor 118 human bones, he can't come to the conclusion they are human, or what a human looks like? Aside from the absurdity of that notion, they have found full skeletons of dinosaurs.BTW, if god created the lights in the dome of the sky, etc. on the fourth day, how long were the first three days?Because I don't see anywhere in the bible that suggests god couldn't have created the dinosaurs. Only the time line suggests otherwise, but we may measure time differently.

[clowneyas 0]

did he have dinosaurs on the ark?

No dinosaurs in the boat.

Not for sure sure who I'm quoting here, but these last two lines are my new favorites!Please play in the $10 tourney tonite. I know that it would please "Him" if we have a 50 person, $500 tourney tonight at 10 EST, 7 Pacific time.THE TOURNAMENT PITTING "GOOD" vs. "EVIL""GOD" vs. "SATAN" (or "atheists")GO TO FCP, AND UNDER "PRIVATE" TOURNAMENTS YOU'LL FIND IT. Cost: $10 Max. Participants: 50Tournament Name: " Gods Balls" Time: 7 PM tonight ( 10 PM on FCP eastern time)Tournament Password: niaboccRemember: If you believe in "God", and you win, then I'll admit, "He" exists. But, since "Divine" intervention is unlikely, I will win, thus proving that "God" does not exist once and for all!Finally, we can stop arguing about this!

[Suited_Up 2]

did he have dinosaurs on the ark?

No dinosaurs in the boat.

Not for sure sure who I'm quoting here, but these last two lines are my new favorites!Please play in the $10 tourney tonite. I know that it would please "Him" if we have a 50 person, $500 tourney tonight at 10 EST, 7 Pacific time.THE TOURNAMENT PITTING "GOOD" vs. "EVIL""GOD" vs. "SATAN" (or "atheists")GO TO FCP, AND UNDER "PRIVATE" TOURNAMENTS YOU'LL FIND IT. Cost: $10 Max. Participants: 50Tournament Name: " Gods Balls" Time: 7 PM tonight ( 10 PM on FCP eastern time)Tournament Password: niaboccRemember: If you believe in "God", and you win, then I'll admit, "He" exists. But, since "Divine" intervention is unlikely, I will win, thus proving that "God" does not exist once and for all!Finally, we can stop arguing about this!

WE KNOW THERE IS A FUCKING TOURNAMENT.... SHUT THE HELL UP ABOUT IT, YOU'RE GETTING EXTREMELY ANNOYING!!

[Mattnxtc 0]

Nope. I'm pretty sure you realize you aren't even considering the fact you can't make absolute statements without absolute knowledge. You do understand that, right?

There is a magical three headed horse that cruises through the universe devouring planets.Is it unreasonable to say im wrong?Or how about this.Are you close enough to being certain that im wrong that entertaining the possibility of me being right is pointless? I dont think anyone will say that it's completely absurd to entertain the notion of a god. Most "atheists" just think that it's so unlikely that they dont need to put it up there on a list of truths they view as probable.

Heres the thing with this kind of argument. It was what woudl be called a "brain in a vat argument." You can make this statemen and u might even believe its true. But now the burden is on your to prove it exists which you cannot prove therefore the argument is not logical.

therefore, it's not logical for you to argue that god knocked up a virgin and we're all cousins from adam and eve because you can't prove it.

thanks for the well thought out post

what is there t othink out? you say someone else is wrong because it can't be proven, but you're right although it can't be proven.is there a fundamental difference i'm missing here?

short answer is yes...im tired and i dont feel like explaining it...take a look at the philosophy definition of knowledge and you will understand...Ill even give you a hint. See what Philosophy says about Justified True Belief as it applies to knowledge...Good luck

the ONLY CLAIM you can have to being "more right" about the christian god being the true deity as opposed to a three headed unicorn is that more people accept your belief, which brings us to "if everybody jumped off a bridge....."i still say the universe was created by massive rabbits having anal sex. prove me wrong.

2 simple words...prove it u cant therefore it isnt logical nice try though

how the hell do you christians get off asking ANYONE ELSE to PROVE their BELIEFS when there's no POSSIBLE PROOF you can have that you're even remotely right?!?

Pupsta please take a second and think about it. It will really help the situation. All your life you have taken things on varying degrees of faith. When in science class and the teacher holds up the periodic table and says these are all the elements, did you question her and force her to show u each element so that you would believe? of course not. the degree of faith necessary was low. Now when a freind tells you something it may take a higher or lower degree of faith to believe in what they say depending on what the situation is. Do you still follow? Now I tell you that the bible is true. You can either have faith that what i say is true or not. It depends on how high ur proof of burden is in order to believe me. It can be as low as what it takes for you to believe in the periodic table or as high as beyond a reasonable doubt. I can show you that the Bible is proves itself, i can show you how the NT lines up correctly with history, i can show you that the british used battles from Davids time to win battles during WWI, i can show u how God changed my life. I can show you how God changed DN's life. But i cant physically show you God and so if ur proof of burden is that high then I cannot meet it. That is where the faith comes in. Do you understand now? You rely on faith with just about everything you do in life. When u get in a car you rely on faith that the car will start. You have faith that when u go to sleep the sun will come up. I can go on but i think u will get the point. It is all about what level of faith you have and if urs is "beyond all reasonable doubt" then yo uare correct I personally cant get you there.. and while that is sad there isnt much i can do.

[Mattnxtc 0]

BTW, if god created the lights in the dome of the sky, etc. on the fourth day, how long were the first three days?Because I don't see anywhere in the bible that suggests god couldn't have created the dinosaurs. Only the time line suggests otherwise, but we may measure time differently.

actually lets think about this. Is light necessary for us to count a day? The easy answer is no. We dont base our time on the light but instead off of the rotation of the earth. So you can still have a day without light. I believe and please correct me if im wrong that some places can go up to like 4-6 months without seeing the sun. So light isnt a necessity to have a day. As for the dinosuars. People make a big deal about dinosaurs and im not exactly sure why. Genesis doesnt not give a detailed description of all the animals that were created so why are we putting dinosaurs into an exclusive category? How many species do we know that at one time existed but no longer do? Dinosaurs arent unique. And to stem off the debate over say the humanoids. Yes there are a few that have come to light that are pretty interesting. But Many many have turned out to be frauds. Even then no more than 40% of a skeleton of any creature has been found so we can only guess as to the other 60% and sometimes up to 90% of the creature/humanoid. Scientists do not have a clear idea as to even the date of those and it can vary from person to person as to how old they think the fossils are...Just wanted to toss that out to avoid a continuation of that.

[GodOfEntropy 0]

Pupsta please take a second and think about it. It will really help the situation. All your life you have taken things on varying degrees of faith. When in science class and the teacher holds up the periodic table and says these are all the elements, did you question her and force her to show u each element so that you would believe? of course not. the degree of faith necessary was low. Now when a freind tells you something it may take a higher or lower degree of faith to believe in what they say depending on what the situation is. Do you still follow?

This a very bad analogy, and by that I mean you should be ashamed of it. To suggest that the faith required to believe in Biblical 'truth' is somehow related to believing in scientific theory is absolutely ludicrous. If you are not a radical skeptic, and believe that our senses give us what amounts to a valid perception of the physical universe, then all one needs to do is spend 10 years studying your scientific discipline of choice in order to perform the experiment you are interested in. If you are not willing to do this, then think about the peer review system in science. Every week thousands of scientific articles are rejected by peers, and every year ideas that had developed great followings and enthusiasm in the previous one are sent to the trash heap. In fact you may have read of the South Korean stem cell scientist whose findings have now been rejected by the community because the experiment could not be repeated. He subsequently stated that he was less than honest in his publishings. This is a great accomplishment for the scientific community as negative results are also seen as progress.Where is there a parallel in religion? How do I go about changing water into wine or generating a great bounty of bread and fish from nothing? In two millenia no one has yet to repeat this 'miracle' - am I supposed to place this in the same epistemological hierarchy as the existence of Boron?Can you repeat all the experiments in the history of science? Of course not in a finite lifetime. However, if you have observed the rigorous training required of scientists, and have spent time in the community, it becomes difficult to believe that there is a centuries long conspiracy to present a worldview in conflict with a true approximation to reality. Again, where is there a parallel in religion? Can you reasonably compare the training of the priesthood to that of a physicist? I would like to hear your argument.

[chester97 0]

first time back on this site in about, oh, 6 months or so. my how things have changed. my soul hurts. if there is a soul. ack! being......sucked.....back.......in.........