Shotgun 1 #176 June 24, 2008 QuoteIndeed, you could argue that the agnostics are the people with the most open minds; most fundamentalist's minds are completely closed to the possibility that God does not exist. I am open to the possibility that some sort of god exists, but I consider myself an atheist because I don't believe that a god exists. And I don't consider myself agnostic because I believe that if a god does exist, then there must be some way to prove it (even if we don't have a way yet). But as of yet, I have absolutely no reason to believe any of the various myths that have been created by people to "explain" the unknown. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rynodigsmusic 0 #177 June 24, 2008 Quote> For me God has provided the opportunity of knowing much more >about Him than "ya I think He exists, maybe". Have you closed your mind to the possibility of him not existing? >>>When/if you ever did get to the point in humbleness where you would deny yourself and follow Jesus, only then will you find the life in him. I have found that humbleness actually makes us apologize for ever questioning Gods existance, questioning his countless blessings, guidence, love. God only reveals himself to the Contrite and Humble, but he is all the time showing his nature to all of us so that we might turn and learn righteousness. This is all biblical bill. What do you do when you find the truth? How is it possible in your heart to deny it? Would you say that truth has closed its mind simply because it doesnt believe in a lie anymore? What I dont know if you understand is that life is about the search, but finding is the true gift of life. Max used the term Spiritual Universe, and it had an impact on me. If you find what you are looking for, and only you know what that is, then you will stop when you are satisfied, and enjoy your finding. Jesus is exactly what I was looking for, and I enjoy his spirit every moment, as he takes me into the deeper revelations of the creators heart and how mine connects with it. How tragic it would be to search and never find. Because while you may think it is those who have found who were/are close minded, it may just be that those still in the search are still in the search because they are close minded."We didn't start the fire" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maadmax 0 #178 June 25, 2008 Have you closed your mind to the possibility of him not existing*** No, I got that one easily covered. If that is true, then when the meaninglessness of my existence overtakes me with my last dying breath, I won't have missed a thing. My exciting, enjoyable, guilt free, transcendent, wonderful life will just disappear like the early morning mist. But if He does exist, eternity awaits to embrace me. _______________________________________ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rynodigsmusic 0 #179 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuoteHow do you know which one you are in? (the idea of love, or the real thing) I think everyone hs to figure that out for themselves.Quote >>>>Love testifies to us. Simple, yet extremely powerful."We didn't start the fire" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,471 #180 June 25, 2008 Ah, Pascal's Wager! An excellent compromise overall. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites bjjman 0 #181 June 25, 2008 Quote >As it is the quarks in you body and energy that powers your mind has >been rambling around this latest phase of creation for 13.75 billion years >with no loss of spin, charge or mass. Attributing this to blind chance is >short sighted to say the least. Agreed. It is wiser to attribute it to physics. Bill, Does physics have a much better explanation? Quote I am open to the possibility that some sort of god exists, but I consider myself an atheist because I don't believe that a god exists. And I don't consider myself agnostic because I believe that if a god does exist, then there must be some way to prove it (even if we don't have a way yet). But as of yet, I have absolutely no reason to believe any of the various myths that have been created by people to "explain" the unknown. Shotgun that's interesting, I'm on the flip side of you. I would consider myself agnostic if anything, but I do believe in God. I'm just open to the possibility that there isn't one. However, I think my idea of God is far different than most peoples'. I think of God more like the native Americans did, more like "Mother Nature." In any case, I think it's beyond our comprehension. Quote But if He does exist, eternity awaits to embrace me. maadmax, Forgive my ignorance, but I thought Christians believed something along the lines of "though shall not judge" as in, only God can judge. Is that not the case?"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." -Albert Einstein Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,471 #182 June 25, 2008 >Does physics have a much better explanation? Yes - conservation of energy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shaark 0 #183 June 25, 2008 Quote>Does physics have a much better explanation? Yes - conservation of energy. We might have to rethink conservation of energy. The universe is expanding at an increasing rate, contrary to human logic. Maybe dark energy bleeding over from other dimensions? Maybe spontaneous creation of energy? We have a lot to learn. I like that. If there is a god I think he must have a wicked sense of humour. tanstaafl Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #184 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuote>Does physics have a much better explanation? Yes - conservation of energy. We might have to rethink conservation of energy. The universe is expanding at an increasing rate, contrary to human logic. WHAT? Human logic is what enabled us to discover that the rate of expansion is increasing. Humans have got far beyond attributing things we don't yet understand to invisible supernatural beings. Well, the smart ones have.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #185 June 25, 2008 QuoteAh, Pascal's Wager! An excellent compromise overall. But there are thousands of gods to choose from, and choosing the wrong one may be far worse than choosing none at all (jealous god syndrome). Pascal's wager is a sucker bet.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites beowulf 1 #186 June 25, 2008 yeah well There is a sucker born every minute. Was it PT Barnum that said that? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #187 June 25, 2008 Quote yeah well There is a sucker born every minute. Was it PT Barnum that said that? I thought it was Karl Rove... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites maadmax 0 #188 June 25, 2008 Ah, Pascal's Wager! An excellent compromise overall*** Not much of a wager for me. I have nothing to lose and everything to gain. Of course in your case , you have nothing to gain, and everything to loose. _______________________________________ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,471 #189 June 25, 2008 >Of course in your case , you have nothing to gain, and everything to loose. Why do you assume that? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #190 June 25, 2008 Quote I have nothing to lose and everything to gain. That's pretty much what Pascal said.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites maadmax 0 #191 June 25, 2008 As it is the quarks in you body and energy that powers your mind has been rambling around this latest phase of creation for 13.75 billion years with no loss of spin, charge or mass. Attributing this to blind chance is short sighted to say the least. --Agreed. It is wiser to attribute it to physics. Bill, Does physics have a much better explanation?*** NOPE, NADDA, ZILCH, ZERO, NONE! Description is not an explanation. ______________________________________ --maadmax, Forgive my ignorance, but I thought Christians believed something along the lines of "though shall not judge" as in, only God can judge. Is that not the case? Please rephrase your question. Either, I am not sure I understand what you are asking, or you are just establishing background information to preface your next question. As far as your statement you are 100% correct, no ignorance detected. ______________________________________ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites maadmax 0 #192 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuote I have nothing to lose and everything to gain. That's pretty much what Pascal said*** OK, but what would Pascal say about Bill's position? Or should we consult PT Barnum? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shaark 0 #193 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote>Does physics have a much better explanation? Yes - conservation of energy. We might have to rethink conservation of energy. The universe is expanding at an increasing rate, contrary to human logic. WHAT? Human logic is what enabled us to discover that the rate of expansion is increasing. Humans have got far beyond attributing things we don't yet understand to invisible supernatural beings. Well, the smart ones have. I apologize if I was not clear. In our general frames of reference we expect any expansion, without any further input of energy, to either continue in a steady state or slow up due to frictional or gravitic effects. We can relate to these concepts. That was the human logic to which I was referring. I fully agree that human logic also allows us to go much further. Physics lets us theorize unimaginable things. And many such theories allow us manipulate our environment to our advantage: I'm thinking specifically about quantum physics. Our modern electronic world is based on such physics. Can we relate to quantum concepts? I doubt it. Our everyday 'logic', what I was referring to in my post, is no longer useful. Scientific logic (i.e. mathematics, etc.) is now necessary. We theorize about quantum mechanics; we can describe quantum effects; we can make practical use of our theoretical knowledge; but not even our greatest thinkers claim to 'understand' the quantum world. Many experimental results are 'illogical'. Before the discovery that the rate of expansion was increasing, if anyone had postulated such, even scientists would have said that that would not be 'logical'. None of this means that we must introduce a god to explain 'x'. As I indicated before, I consider that doing so generally stifles learning/exploration. Our frames of reference change/evolve. We now have new data. In a scientific sense conservation of energy will likely need to be re-addressed. It might still hold true multi-dimensionally, and what we are seeing is a bleedover from dimensions outside our familiar 4. Ain't science wonderful? tanstaafl Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites beowulf 1 #194 June 25, 2008 QuoteAh, Pascal's Wager! An excellent compromise overall*** Not much of a wager for me. I have nothing to lose and everything to gain. Of course in your case , you have nothing to gain, and everything to loose. There is no evidence that there is anything for you to gain. With out any evidence you are wasting your time believing in a fairy tale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #195 June 25, 2008 QuoteOK, but what would Pascal say about Bill's position? That it's an excellent compromise overall? I think he would have agreed wholeheartedly.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #196 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuoteOK, but what would Pascal say about Bill's position? That it's an excellent compromise overall? I think he would have agreed wholeheartedly. But WHICH god do you subscribe to, and what if you choose the wrong one? You might just really piss off Odin.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #197 June 25, 2008 Quote Humans have got far beyond attributing things we don't yet understand to invisible supernatural beings. Well, the smart ones have. That's actually a rude and unfair comment John. I'm know of quite a lot of VERY intelligent people Biologists and Physicists included that have a believe in God. I don't agree with them but i would never suggest that they are not smart.You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #198 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuote Humans have got far beyond attributing things we don't yet understand to invisible supernatural beings. Well, the smart ones have. That's actually a rude and unfair comment John. I'm know of quite a lot of VERY intelligent people Biologists and Physicists included that have a believe in God. I don't agree with them but i would never suggest that they are not smart. I think you didn't read my statement carefully enough.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rynodigsmusic 0 #199 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuoteAh, Pascal's Wager! An excellent compromise overall*** Not much of a wager for me. I have nothing to lose and everything to gain. Of course in your case , you have nothing to gain, and everything to loose. There is no evidence that there is anything for you to gain. With out any evidence you are wasting your time believing in a fairy tale. Hope is empowered by love. Our love comes from the testimony of Gods love through Jesus. Believing in something as a child is different than believing in something as an adult with the heart of a child. The love has proven itself real in my life, seems to make sense that it is real."We didn't start the fire" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites beowulf 1 #200 June 25, 2008 >Hope is empowered by love. No it is not. One has no affect on the other. >Our love comes from the testimony of Gods love through Jesus. That is only your belief based on what you read in a book. >Believing in something as a child is different than believing in something as an adult with the heart of a child. No it is not any different. Age has no affect on this belief. >The love has proven itself real in my life, seems to make sense that it is real. That is only your perception that has no tangible evidence to go with it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next Page 8 of 15 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
billvon 2,471 #180 June 25, 2008 Ah, Pascal's Wager! An excellent compromise overall. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bjjman 0 #181 June 25, 2008 Quote >As it is the quarks in you body and energy that powers your mind has >been rambling around this latest phase of creation for 13.75 billion years >with no loss of spin, charge or mass. Attributing this to blind chance is >short sighted to say the least. Agreed. It is wiser to attribute it to physics. Bill, Does physics have a much better explanation? Quote I am open to the possibility that some sort of god exists, but I consider myself an atheist because I don't believe that a god exists. And I don't consider myself agnostic because I believe that if a god does exist, then there must be some way to prove it (even if we don't have a way yet). But as of yet, I have absolutely no reason to believe any of the various myths that have been created by people to "explain" the unknown. Shotgun that's interesting, I'm on the flip side of you. I would consider myself agnostic if anything, but I do believe in God. I'm just open to the possibility that there isn't one. However, I think my idea of God is far different than most peoples'. I think of God more like the native Americans did, more like "Mother Nature." In any case, I think it's beyond our comprehension. Quote But if He does exist, eternity awaits to embrace me. maadmax, Forgive my ignorance, but I thought Christians believed something along the lines of "though shall not judge" as in, only God can judge. Is that not the case?"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." -Albert Einstein Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,471 #182 June 25, 2008 >Does physics have a much better explanation? Yes - conservation of energy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shaark 0 #183 June 25, 2008 Quote>Does physics have a much better explanation? Yes - conservation of energy. We might have to rethink conservation of energy. The universe is expanding at an increasing rate, contrary to human logic. Maybe dark energy bleeding over from other dimensions? Maybe spontaneous creation of energy? We have a lot to learn. I like that. If there is a god I think he must have a wicked sense of humour. tanstaafl Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #184 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuote>Does physics have a much better explanation? Yes - conservation of energy. We might have to rethink conservation of energy. The universe is expanding at an increasing rate, contrary to human logic. WHAT? Human logic is what enabled us to discover that the rate of expansion is increasing. Humans have got far beyond attributing things we don't yet understand to invisible supernatural beings. Well, the smart ones have.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #185 June 25, 2008 QuoteAh, Pascal's Wager! An excellent compromise overall. But there are thousands of gods to choose from, and choosing the wrong one may be far worse than choosing none at all (jealous god syndrome). Pascal's wager is a sucker bet.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #186 June 25, 2008 yeah well There is a sucker born every minute. Was it PT Barnum that said that? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #187 June 25, 2008 Quote yeah well There is a sucker born every minute. Was it PT Barnum that said that? I thought it was Karl Rove... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maadmax 0 #188 June 25, 2008 Ah, Pascal's Wager! An excellent compromise overall*** Not much of a wager for me. I have nothing to lose and everything to gain. Of course in your case , you have nothing to gain, and everything to loose. _______________________________________ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,471 #189 June 25, 2008 >Of course in your case , you have nothing to gain, and everything to loose. Why do you assume that? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #190 June 25, 2008 Quote I have nothing to lose and everything to gain. That's pretty much what Pascal said.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maadmax 0 #191 June 25, 2008 As it is the quarks in you body and energy that powers your mind has been rambling around this latest phase of creation for 13.75 billion years with no loss of spin, charge or mass. Attributing this to blind chance is short sighted to say the least. --Agreed. It is wiser to attribute it to physics. Bill, Does physics have a much better explanation?*** NOPE, NADDA, ZILCH, ZERO, NONE! Description is not an explanation. ______________________________________ --maadmax, Forgive my ignorance, but I thought Christians believed something along the lines of "though shall not judge" as in, only God can judge. Is that not the case? Please rephrase your question. Either, I am not sure I understand what you are asking, or you are just establishing background information to preface your next question. As far as your statement you are 100% correct, no ignorance detected. ______________________________________ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maadmax 0 #192 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuote I have nothing to lose and everything to gain. That's pretty much what Pascal said*** OK, but what would Pascal say about Bill's position? Or should we consult PT Barnum? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shaark 0 #193 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote>Does physics have a much better explanation? Yes - conservation of energy. We might have to rethink conservation of energy. The universe is expanding at an increasing rate, contrary to human logic. WHAT? Human logic is what enabled us to discover that the rate of expansion is increasing. Humans have got far beyond attributing things we don't yet understand to invisible supernatural beings. Well, the smart ones have. I apologize if I was not clear. In our general frames of reference we expect any expansion, without any further input of energy, to either continue in a steady state or slow up due to frictional or gravitic effects. We can relate to these concepts. That was the human logic to which I was referring. I fully agree that human logic also allows us to go much further. Physics lets us theorize unimaginable things. And many such theories allow us manipulate our environment to our advantage: I'm thinking specifically about quantum physics. Our modern electronic world is based on such physics. Can we relate to quantum concepts? I doubt it. Our everyday 'logic', what I was referring to in my post, is no longer useful. Scientific logic (i.e. mathematics, etc.) is now necessary. We theorize about quantum mechanics; we can describe quantum effects; we can make practical use of our theoretical knowledge; but not even our greatest thinkers claim to 'understand' the quantum world. Many experimental results are 'illogical'. Before the discovery that the rate of expansion was increasing, if anyone had postulated such, even scientists would have said that that would not be 'logical'. None of this means that we must introduce a god to explain 'x'. As I indicated before, I consider that doing so generally stifles learning/exploration. Our frames of reference change/evolve. We now have new data. In a scientific sense conservation of energy will likely need to be re-addressed. It might still hold true multi-dimensionally, and what we are seeing is a bleedover from dimensions outside our familiar 4. Ain't science wonderful? tanstaafl Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites beowulf 1 #194 June 25, 2008 QuoteAh, Pascal's Wager! An excellent compromise overall*** Not much of a wager for me. I have nothing to lose and everything to gain. Of course in your case , you have nothing to gain, and everything to loose. There is no evidence that there is anything for you to gain. With out any evidence you are wasting your time believing in a fairy tale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #195 June 25, 2008 QuoteOK, but what would Pascal say about Bill's position? That it's an excellent compromise overall? I think he would have agreed wholeheartedly.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #196 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuoteOK, but what would Pascal say about Bill's position? That it's an excellent compromise overall? I think he would have agreed wholeheartedly. But WHICH god do you subscribe to, and what if you choose the wrong one? You might just really piss off Odin.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #197 June 25, 2008 Quote Humans have got far beyond attributing things we don't yet understand to invisible supernatural beings. Well, the smart ones have. That's actually a rude and unfair comment John. I'm know of quite a lot of VERY intelligent people Biologists and Physicists included that have a believe in God. I don't agree with them but i would never suggest that they are not smart.You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #198 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuote Humans have got far beyond attributing things we don't yet understand to invisible supernatural beings. Well, the smart ones have. That's actually a rude and unfair comment John. I'm know of quite a lot of VERY intelligent people Biologists and Physicists included that have a believe in God. I don't agree with them but i would never suggest that they are not smart. I think you didn't read my statement carefully enough.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rynodigsmusic 0 #199 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuoteAh, Pascal's Wager! An excellent compromise overall*** Not much of a wager for me. I have nothing to lose and everything to gain. Of course in your case , you have nothing to gain, and everything to loose. There is no evidence that there is anything for you to gain. With out any evidence you are wasting your time believing in a fairy tale. Hope is empowered by love. Our love comes from the testimony of Gods love through Jesus. Believing in something as a child is different than believing in something as an adult with the heart of a child. The love has proven itself real in my life, seems to make sense that it is real."We didn't start the fire" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites beowulf 1 #200 June 25, 2008 >Hope is empowered by love. No it is not. One has no affect on the other. >Our love comes from the testimony of Gods love through Jesus. That is only your belief based on what you read in a book. >Believing in something as a child is different than believing in something as an adult with the heart of a child. No it is not any different. Age has no affect on this belief. >The love has proven itself real in my life, seems to make sense that it is real. That is only your perception that has no tangible evidence to go with it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next Page 8 of 15 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
shaark 0 #193 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote>Does physics have a much better explanation? Yes - conservation of energy. We might have to rethink conservation of energy. The universe is expanding at an increasing rate, contrary to human logic. WHAT? Human logic is what enabled us to discover that the rate of expansion is increasing. Humans have got far beyond attributing things we don't yet understand to invisible supernatural beings. Well, the smart ones have. I apologize if I was not clear. In our general frames of reference we expect any expansion, without any further input of energy, to either continue in a steady state or slow up due to frictional or gravitic effects. We can relate to these concepts. That was the human logic to which I was referring. I fully agree that human logic also allows us to go much further. Physics lets us theorize unimaginable things. And many such theories allow us manipulate our environment to our advantage: I'm thinking specifically about quantum physics. Our modern electronic world is based on such physics. Can we relate to quantum concepts? I doubt it. Our everyday 'logic', what I was referring to in my post, is no longer useful. Scientific logic (i.e. mathematics, etc.) is now necessary. We theorize about quantum mechanics; we can describe quantum effects; we can make practical use of our theoretical knowledge; but not even our greatest thinkers claim to 'understand' the quantum world. Many experimental results are 'illogical'. Before the discovery that the rate of expansion was increasing, if anyone had postulated such, even scientists would have said that that would not be 'logical'. None of this means that we must introduce a god to explain 'x'. As I indicated before, I consider that doing so generally stifles learning/exploration. Our frames of reference change/evolve. We now have new data. In a scientific sense conservation of energy will likely need to be re-addressed. It might still hold true multi-dimensionally, and what we are seeing is a bleedover from dimensions outside our familiar 4. Ain't science wonderful? tanstaafl Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #194 June 25, 2008 QuoteAh, Pascal's Wager! An excellent compromise overall*** Not much of a wager for me. I have nothing to lose and everything to gain. Of course in your case , you have nothing to gain, and everything to loose. There is no evidence that there is anything for you to gain. With out any evidence you are wasting your time believing in a fairy tale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #195 June 25, 2008 QuoteOK, but what would Pascal say about Bill's position? That it's an excellent compromise overall? I think he would have agreed wholeheartedly.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #196 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuoteOK, but what would Pascal say about Bill's position? That it's an excellent compromise overall? I think he would have agreed wholeheartedly. But WHICH god do you subscribe to, and what if you choose the wrong one? You might just really piss off Odin.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #197 June 25, 2008 Quote Humans have got far beyond attributing things we don't yet understand to invisible supernatural beings. Well, the smart ones have. That's actually a rude and unfair comment John. I'm know of quite a lot of VERY intelligent people Biologists and Physicists included that have a believe in God. I don't agree with them but i would never suggest that they are not smart.You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #198 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuote Humans have got far beyond attributing things we don't yet understand to invisible supernatural beings. Well, the smart ones have. That's actually a rude and unfair comment John. I'm know of quite a lot of VERY intelligent people Biologists and Physicists included that have a believe in God. I don't agree with them but i would never suggest that they are not smart. I think you didn't read my statement carefully enough.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rynodigsmusic 0 #199 June 25, 2008 QuoteQuoteAh, Pascal's Wager! An excellent compromise overall*** Not much of a wager for me. I have nothing to lose and everything to gain. Of course in your case , you have nothing to gain, and everything to loose. There is no evidence that there is anything for you to gain. With out any evidence you are wasting your time believing in a fairy tale. Hope is empowered by love. Our love comes from the testimony of Gods love through Jesus. Believing in something as a child is different than believing in something as an adult with the heart of a child. The love has proven itself real in my life, seems to make sense that it is real."We didn't start the fire" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #200 June 25, 2008 >Hope is empowered by love. No it is not. One has no affect on the other. >Our love comes from the testimony of Gods love through Jesus. That is only your belief based on what you read in a book. >Believing in something as a child is different than believing in something as an adult with the heart of a child. No it is not any different. Age has no affect on this belief. >The love has proven itself real in my life, seems to make sense that it is real. That is only your perception that has no tangible evidence to go with it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
