Survey for Atheists

[cwcrenshaw]

Oh you're trying to argue against God with the straw-man problem of evil? Fail. You see, God does allow everyone a chance to be saved. It's Christianity 101, and I'm amazed you don't know the answer. God sent His only Son, Christ, to die for our sins so that all who accepted Him as their Lord and Savior will be saved. Those who have not gotten a chance to hear the Word or died quickly during birth or shortly after will - it says in scriptures - be allowed into heaven.

You did not address why he allows it happen though. You will probably throw the old "its God's plan, we can't possibly understand God's plan" argument at me. But what kind of plan includes such atrocities? What good could possibly come of it? Again, it raises questions of his omnipotence and his claim to be all-loving.

Oh you could, but I wouldn't listen to you, and the REAL word of God is always there.

You missed the point completely. How can you tell what the "REAL" word of God is if it has been rewritten several times by man? It doesn't matter if I were the one to rewrite it or some power-hungry man who happened to be ordained rewrote it....it is still man tampering with the supposed word of God. Ever heard of Constantine or the Council of Nicaea?

I disagree. I think that allowing murder actually gives more evolutionary benefit. That way, only the very strongest creatures rise to the top of the clan. Don't you just love this mode of thought?

No, this shows a misunderstanding of how evolution works. Who would typically be the weakest members of a tribe? Women and children. Sure the strongest (men) would kill off whoever was weaker than them but this would not (like i said) allow the group to exist for very long. Suppose he didnt kill the women and children and only killed the males that threatened him. Fine, but this means that eventually all the males members of the tribe would probably be his direct decendents...would they then kill off eachother for dominance? Eventually one or the other has to win out. They either kill eachother into non-existence, or figure out that killing does not help their chances for survival.

Look, I can think of very few cultures that allow murder or rape without special justifications in their cultural tradition, and I don't think that the presence of a culture that allowed these would do very much to discredit Christianity. We do believe that it is a fallen world full of sin and people who do not know God, thus not having His morallity.

You have it backwards, it is not the presence of cultures that allow murder, etc that discredits the morality claims of christianity... it is the fact that (as you said) the vast majority of cultures do not find these activities permissable. The fact that almost all cultures have the same basic morals as christians, but may not be christian, shows that christianity is not necessary for morality. In the few cultures you do find that murder, etc is allowed, it is usually due to sectarian violence or some crazy religious dogma...

"(Religion) With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion"

- Steven Weinberg

That's sad to me. I'll never understand why atheists feel so happy about their very melancholy ideas about the world. It's the only thing in their entire argument I fail to understand.

I go back to what I said earlier about basing my beliefs about the world on what I see, not what I wish to see. We tend to see science as a much better argument to "God did it" and as science progresses and our understanding of how the universe operates becomes more clear...the belief in a supernatural creator becomes more and more optional. We don't use God to explain why things fall to earth anymore, for example....we call it gravity now. The point is, as science advances there becomes less of a gap in our understanding that we humans feel the need to explain by a god. This is not a melancholy outlook, this is a realistic outlook.

We may never have the answers to those questions, cw. God is beyond human comprehension. I can make an educated guess from the standpoint that He is omniscient and benevolent, though. God wanted to create something and give it a choice, because He valued that abillity in His creation, saw that there was something intriguing and superior about creatures with free will. So He created us, but He had something more in mind. He wanted to know if, when giving the choice, His loved creation would love Him back. A human being deciding on their own to love Him would be so much more pleasing, so much more lovable than a machine that 'loves' God because it had to. Thus, we're in a sense the Creators search for company, I suppose.

Again, these are all just the guesses of an average, young human being and I can't verify them, because I would have to be God in order to do that.

So your guessing that he created us because he was lonely. Talk about a melancholy outlook. I always love the "God is beyond human comprehension" argument too. If that was the case, how can religious people claim to know what God wants? "X is ok, but Y isnt." "God wanted this to happen for me" "God kept me out of the way of that stray truck"...if you can't explain why God is not benevolent enough to keep kids from dying, then you can't hope to explain everyday happenings.

[Guest sabre88]

Why Christianity is invalid:

1) Obviously, a major concept of Christianity is that of Heaven. However, heaven and infinity is not a friendly notion. Consider this small scale example.... Imagine your favorite activity in the entire world. For example: playing golf, or eating chicken wings, etc. Lets consider the latter. You now find yourself trapped in a room with no doors, no windows FOREVER. However, you discover a small vent in the top of the room, which sole purpose is to drop down to you your favorite chicken wings. Although you enjoy eating the chicken wings.... Would they still make you content sitting there in the room eating them 300 million years from now? The answer is most definitely no. But even more unfortunately, 300 million years comes and goes. FOREVER means FOREVER, infinity. Imagine sitting in that room staring at chicken wings to no end. 300 million years, 400 million years, 500 million years. You will probably be quick to point out that heaven is not just a room with chicken wings, but you will have the opportunities to meet with lost loved ones. However, pretend you are stuck in that room with not chicken wings, but grandpa Alfred for an eternity, the same result emerges. Even combining the two yields unfavorable results, where you are now eating chicken wings with grandpa Alfred for infinity.

If heaven were put into a graph, its y-axis (happiness) would have a ceiling (i.e., one cannot achieve lasting satisfaction for infinity from a limited number of sources). However, the x-axis, a.k.a. time spent in heaven, would extend forever. So it really doesn't matter what sort of sources heaven could provide for your unparalleled happiness, when you are dealing with the notion of infinity, a concept incomprehensible in it of itself. Therefore, in conclusion, Heaven (a.k.a. Eternity, Forever, Infinity) is not a favorable concept to humans.

[cwcrenshaw]

Why Christianity is invalid:

1) Obviously, a major concept of Christianity is that of Heaven. However, heaven and infinity is not a friendly notion. Consider this small scale example.... Imagine your favorite activity in the entire world. For example: playing golf, or eating chicken wings, etc. Lets consider the latter. You now find yourself trapped in a room with no doors, no windows FOREVER. However, you discover a small vent in the top of the room, which sole purpose is to drop down to you your favorite chicken wings. Although you enjoy eating the chicken wings.... Would they still make you content sitting there in the room eating them 300 million years from now? The answer is most definitely no. But even more unfortunately, 300 million years comes and goes. FOREVER means FOREVER, infinity. Imagine sitting in that room staring at chicken wings to no end. 300 million years, 400 million years, 500 million years. You will probably be quick to point out that heaven is not just a room with chicken wings, but you will have the opportunities to meet with lost loved ones. However, pretend you are stuck in that room with not chicken wings, but grandpa Alfred for an eternity, the same result emerges. Even combining the two yields unfavorable results, where you are now eating chicken wings with grandpa Alfred for infinity.

If heaven were put into a graph, its y-axis (happiness) would have a ceiling (i.e., one cannot achieve lasting satisfaction for infinity from a limited number of sources). However, the x-axis, a.k.a. time spent in heaven, would extend forever. So it really doesn't matter what sort of sources heaven could provide for your unparalleled happiness, when you are dealing with the notion of infinity, a concept incomprehensible in it of itself. Therefore, in conclusion, Heaven (a.k.a. Eternity, Forever, Infinity) is not a favorable concept to humans.

You made me laugh out loud at work..well done sir.

[Guest sabre88]

Why Christianity is invalid:

1) Obviously, a major concept of Christianity is that of Heaven. However, heaven and infinity is not a friendly notion. Consider this small scale example.... Imagine your favorite activity in the entire world. For example: playing golf, or eating chicken wings, etc. Lets consider the latter. You now find yourself trapped in a room with no doors, no windows FOREVER. However, you discover a small vent in the top of the room, which sole purpose is to drop down to you your favorite chicken wings. Although you enjoy eating the chicken wings.... Would they still make you content sitting there in the room eating them 300 million years from now? The answer is most definitely no. But even more unfortunately, 300 million years comes and goes. FOREVER means FOREVER, infinity. Imagine sitting in that room staring at chicken wings to no end. 300 million years, 400 million years, 500 million years. You will probably be quick to point out that heaven is not just a room with chicken wings, but you will have the opportunities to meet with lost loved ones. However, pretend you are stuck in that room with not chicken wings, but grandpa Alfred for an eternity, the same result emerges. Even combining the two yields unfavorable results, where you are now eating chicken wings with grandpa Alfred for infinity.

If heaven were put into a graph, its y-axis (happiness) would have a ceiling (i.e., one cannot achieve lasting satisfaction for infinity from a limited number of sources). However, the x-axis, a.k.a. time spent in heaven, would extend forever. So it really doesn't matter what sort of sources heaven could provide for your unparalleled happiness, when you are dealing with the notion of infinity, a concept incomprehensible in it of itself. Therefore, in conclusion, Heaven (a.k.a. Eternity, Forever, Infinity) is not a favorable concept to humans.

You made me laugh out loud at work..well done sir.

Out of me making a good point, or a rediculous one?

[cwcrenshaw]

Out of me making a good point, or a rediculous one?

both.

[damo1]

from damo1

to crwcenshaw Tuesday 16th oct 2007

high this is damo1 thank you for your message you left me and i read what you left me i am sorry to hear this as i sort of know what you are having to face if you tell your family that you are an Atheist as it should not stop them from loving you as their son as i did this and when i told my side that i decided to become a Christian i was almost told never to contact them my side is Catholic Orthodox and i decided not to follow on the path my grand mother and grand father had wanted me to follow as when i was in jail i read the bible and i saw something that struck me then i found my self in a church in Canberra around others who have been threw what i been threw criminals and several close friends also who use to be atheists these guys wear able to answer my questions as i had no one to point out to me what i had read while serving time

sadly you get this to wear people just don't stop to think what the other person is going threw and you will get some that will just ram things down your throat with out thinking is this helping the other person who is wanting to know what i believe in or will it turn them away

i lost both my grand parents grand father passed away in 2004 and grand mother passed away in 2005 and i was told but i was told by my uncle never step foot in Warwick or come any wear near the funeral as i was the black sheep of the family

at one stage in my life i was into the occult due to friends being involved in the occult my best mate was a satanic priest so i decided to get to know him a little better even though i was warned to stay clear from people involved in the occult my best mate ended up turning his life around though and is know a Christian him self and we stay in regular contact with each other

as you i hope to get to know you and i hope others hear give you the same respect with out judging you harshly for what you believe in you will find that not all Christians are like that their are some like my self yet sadly their are some that do not think or even hear what the other person is saying as i have seen this does not help

i am my own person and i decide who i allow into my life as a friend and as i said you will not get judged by me but i would like to get to know you one of the reasons i stick to a Christian forum as this is wear i as a person can grow and i want to see what is going on in the rest of the world as even though you cant see people face to face and learn from them the inter net has opened doors for me to meet other like minded people and what i do is even though that person is communicating threw cyber space i show them the same respect as i would show any one i know hear in my own church and i just don't type away or be rude to no one as many think they can say anything in cyber space knowing they are protected from being attacked if they say some thing out off line

i am still learning how to use this computer as i am old school and computers wear one of my fears hearing how people can hack into your personal stuff you have stored but i have some good friends who have taught me and i plan when i am settled to wear i Will be moving going to a night course as the ones hear are nearly all finished hear in Australia we call them tafe technicall learning collages for adults

so i hope to get to know you as a person and may be even gain you as a friend as well i hope you have a good week you can also pm me any time you want and i can give you my personal email adress if you want to keep in regular contac i am not forcing this but leaving it as an option as with my other Atheist friends i told you about we do things once a month me being 8 hrs from sydney i live in a farming comunity and some times i can not get away so when we plan to meet and catch up i make a weekend out of it as these guys i have grown up with have been appart of my life and they do call me on personal issues they are going threw as they can see i will not beat around the bush and have on times counseld and prayed openly with them this is how close i am with them to wear they can trust me ok i will end this hear and come back later on to this post i am moving to caberra i lived their when i was single got married and my wife wanted to move to the coast so its been 6 yrs since i have been back to canberra

[Grungekid]

You did not address why he allows it happen though. You will probably throw the old "its God's plan, we can't possibly understand God's plan" argument at me. But what kind of plan includes such atrocities? What good could possibly come of it? Again, it raises questions of his omnipotence and his claim to be all-loving.

Actually, I did answer that question. God gave us free will because He desired that, and WE brought evil upon ourselves by acting outside of His moral boundaries. The first sin is what led to the existence we lead and all of its problems. That is a direct effect of our decision, not His.

You missed the point completely. How can you tell what the "REAL" word of God is if it has been rewritten several times by man? It doesn't matter if I were the one to rewrite it or some power-hungry man who happened to be ordained rewrote it....it is still man tampering with the supposed word of God. Ever heard of Constantine or the Council of Nicaea?

Well, I can tell that, even if what you said was true, I would be able to tell the current version from any which you write. What's more, we know the bible has retained its literal integrity for quite some time, since we have a set of documents called the Dead Sea Scrolls which were dated to before the council of Nicaea, which translate very closely to modern versions. If you can prove that the bible has been re-written since it was compiled, then go on, if you cannot bring to light a substantial instance, however, you are saying that it has been re-written out of faith, mostly.

No, this shows a misunderstanding of how evolution works. Who would typically be the weakest members of a tribe? Women and children. Sure the strongest (men) would kill off whoever was weaker than them but this would not (like i said) allow the group to exist for very long. Suppose he didnt kill the women and children and only killed the males that threatened him. Fine, but this means that eventually all the males members of the tribe would probably be his direct decendents...would they then kill off eachother for dominance? Eventually one or the other has to win out. They either kill eachother into non-existence, or figure out that killing does not help their chances for survival.

Ah, but did you know African Lions practice this same routine threat-killing behavior? I am afraid it is you who are mistaken as to the true mechanism of evolution. Evolution favors survival of the individual, and I could go into fringe and say that it favors the phenotype. That does not require, nor does it even favor, moral conduct.

You have it backwards, it is not the presence of cultures that allow murder, etc that discredits the morality claims of christianity... it is the fact that (as you said) the vast majority of cultures do not find these activities permissable. The fact that almost all cultures have the same basic morals as christians, but may not be christian, shows that christianity is not necessary for morality. In the few cultures you do find that murder, etc is allowed, it is usually due to sectarian violence or some crazy religious dogma...

Your completely assuming what it means, based upon the already faulty presupposition that all cultures with a similar set of moral rules proves that Christianity is wrong. Many could say that proves that there is a universal moral code, which actually favors God's existence and absolute truth more than it does evolution, since we have knowledge of other social species, more successful than humans, which do not exhibit any kind of particular moral behavior. Also, as a Christian, I do not believe it is impossible for people from other religions and cultures to do good things. If Christianity sums up the basic code we all live by, to some degree or another but positive deeds are not what Christianity is all about. There is a spiritual side to the problem which cannot be solved through mere actions, but only by giving up one's soul to Christ for purification.

"(Religion) With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion"

- Steven Weinberg

Uhuh, quote another single-minded atheist. Very good at building PR, you folks seem to be. What a complete moron. I have absolutely no patience to argue with a delusional manchild any further. Only a very inconsiderate philosopher and inattentive historian would be able to even attempt such a sweeping statement. I garauntee that non-Christians have killed, cheated, enslaved, and displaced just as many as Christians, in fact I know that they can account for much more 'travesty' than Christians.

Perhaps this is familiar:

"You sir, are a biggot and a liar."

-Richard Dawkins

I go back to what I said earlier about basing my beliefs about the world on what I see, not what I wish to see. We tend to see science as a much better argument to "God did it" and as science progresses and our understanding of how the universe operates becomes more clear...the belief in a supernatural creator becomes more and more optional. We don't use God to explain why things fall to earth anymore, for example....we call it gravity now. The point is, as science advances there becomes less of a gap in our understanding that we humans feel the need to explain by a god. This is not a melancholy outlook, this is a realistic outlook.

'What I see, and not what I wish to see'; bound to contain disappointing information, in other words. Yet we should accept it because you said it was truth. Mr. cw, what you aren't realizing is the final conclusion your argument, nay, your entire worldview, is a concept called 'nihilism'. You believe only in what you see. Do you realize that reduces absolutely all of existence, to pure energy? In which case, nothing has objective moral or spiritual value, and all that exists are analytical facts. Its the ultimate in negativity. You really ought to learn more about it, soon you might find that you can be defined by a single word - and a very dark one at that. There is no doubt the belief you express is depressing, to say it lightly, and if you are really so commited to seeing things 'as they are', you might as well follow this idea to its very core, and grit your teeth and accept all of the very unsettling 'facts' that go along with this idea about life. Prepare to spend the very rest of your life in 'Plato's Cave,' as they say in the business.

Also, I'd like to note that you have yet to cite any convincing evidence that proves that God is merely 'optional'. Tradition isn't always correct, I'll give you that, but it has nothing to do with the truth of God. Your 'realistic outview' is a whole load of over-assertive statements without any real solidity.

So your guessing that he created us because he was lonely. Talk about a melancholy outlook. I always love the "God is beyond human comprehension" argument too. If that was the case, how can religious people claim to know what God wants? "X is ok, but Y isnt."

That actually sounds like a pretty basic ethical premise, definitely not limited to Christians. However, you listed it, so I can only assume that you hold some kind of contempt against similar ethical reasoning. Perhaps I should reword what I said about God's creation earlier. God is a creator, and it is a part of His nature to create. Only in this sense is He relieving loneliness; by creating other beings around Him. I would assume that Creating substances is philosophically productive as opposed to philosophically inert or outright destructiveness, and that that had something to do with His initial reasons for building all of existence. Again, I can't say what is in God's mind for certain, in fact, I can't say what is in your mind, for certain. Guesses are all we have, but I am confident that we can come up with reasonable hypotheses that reveal things about God, since I believe He is real and true in every sense of the word. He even gave us a method by which to directly learn about Him - the bible.

"God wanted this to happen for me" "God kept me out of the way of that stray truck"...if you can't explain why God is not benevolent enough to keep kids from dying, then you can't hope to explain everyday happenings.

I will probably keep repeating the explanation until you and I don't have to argue about this anymore.

[cwcrenshaw]

Actually, I did answer that question. God gave us free will because He desired that, and WE brought evil upon ourselves by acting outside of His moral boundaries. The first sin is what led to the existence we lead and all of its problems. That is a direct effect of our decision, not His.

If God has left us to our own devices though, why do Christians insist that he continues to intervene? If he chooses to intervene on a small scale, why not intervene at a larger scale? You make it sound as though he created us, we sinned, and he walked away to leave us on our own.

Well, I can tell that, even if what you said was true, I would be able to tell the current version from any which you write. What's more, we know the bible has retained its literal integrity for quite some time, since we have a set of documents called the Dead Sea Scrolls which were dated to before the council of Nicaea, which translate very closely to modern versions. If you can prove that the bible has been re-written since it was compiled, then go on, if you cannot bring to light a substantial instance, however, you are saying that it has been re-written out of faith, mostly.

The dead sea scrolls pertain to the old testament, which I would agree is more historically accurate than the new testament. You cannot lump them together. The new testament is of suspect origins to put it politely. Historical accuracy aside, this proves nothing about its claims.

Ah, but did you know African Lions practice this same routine threat-killing behavior? I am afraid it is you who are mistaken as to the true mechanism of evolution. Evolution favors survival of the individual, and I could go into fringe and say that it favors the phenotype. That does not require, nor does it even favor, moral conduct.

Right, but obviously not every male lion is killed off or they would cease to exist. Also, lions travel in small prides naturally, too many members would upset their natural balance...you can not use this same arguments for humans, who obviously have a greater chance of survival in larger groups. And yes you are correct that evolution is only concerned with the survival of the individual...but often times (as in humans), the survival of the group is beneficial for the survival for the individual.

Your completely assuming what it means, based upon the already faulty presupposition that all cultures with a similar set of moral rules proves that Christianity is wrong. Many could say that proves that there is a universal moral code, which actually favors God's existence and absolute truth more than it does evolution, since we have knowledge of other social species, more successful than humans, which do not exhibit any kind of particular moral behavior. Also, as a Christian, I do not believe it is impossible for people from other religions and cultures to do good things. If Christianity sums up the basic code we all live by, to some degree or another but positive deeds are not what Christianity is all about. There is a spiritual side to the problem which cannot be solved through mere actions, but only by giving up one's soul to Christ for purification.

You see this universal moral code as God, I see it as a set of benefial behaviors embedded through evolution...that is probably the essense of our different world views. Of course there are other species who do not exhibit these behaviors, but there also those that do...and this is a far more important observation. About the spiritual side of the argument, I do not feel that belief in the Christian god is necessary for being spiritually fulfilled. I get this same feeling when I look up at the stars at night and think about the magnificence of the universe. I choose not to cheapen this experience by attributing it to God though and instead stand in awe of the beauty of nature itself.

Uhuh, quote another single-minded atheist. Very good at building PR, you folks seem to be. What a complete moron. I have absolutely no patience to argue with a delusional manchild any further. Only a very inconsiderate philosopher and inattentive historian would be able to even attempt such a sweeping statement. I garauntee that non-Christians have killed, cheated, enslaved, and displaced just as many as Christians, in fact I know that they can account for much more 'travesty' than Christians.

I won't address your ad hominem attacks, they are unneeded and childish. I do agree with your guarantee that non-christians have killed, cheated, etc....this is the "evil people doing evil things" part. You have done nothing to prove the quote invalid besides attack the man.

Perhaps this is familiar:

"You sir, are a biggot and a liar."

-Richard Dawkins

Richard Dawkins rocks.

'What I see, and not what I wish to see'; bound to contain disappointing information, in other words. Yet we should accept it because you said it was truth. Mr. cw, what you aren't realizing is the final conclusion your argument, nay, your entire worldview, is a concept called 'nihilism'. You believe only in what you see. Do you realize that reduces absolutely all of existence, to pure energy? In which case, nothing has objective moral or spiritual value, and all that exists are analytical facts. Its the ultimate in negativity. You really ought to learn more about it, soon you might find that you can be defined by a single word - and a very dark one at that. There is no doubt the belief you express is depressing, to say it lightly, and if you are really so commited to seeing things 'as they are', you might as well follow this idea to its very core, and grit your teeth and accept all of the very unsettling 'facts' that go along with this idea about life. Prepare to spend the very rest of your life in 'Plato's Cave,' as they say in the business.

If you believe that looking at things from a humanistic and realistic point of view only leads to nothing but disappointment and negativity, then I would say you have a very sad view of humanity. I appreciate your assumption of knowing how I think about the world...as I assume you probably think all atheists see the world...but again, you are wrong. To call myself an atheist does not mean that I do not have faith. My faith is in mankind and the ability of man to do good. I see the world around me and I constantly think how lucky we are to exist and that we should make the best of it. Yes there are people who seek to do nothing but bad things in the world, but my faith is that the number of good people in the world far exceeds that of bad people. Furthermore, I think that the belief in a creator fails to allow mankind to recognize the fact that we control our own existence and ultimately stands in the way of human advancement. I think that you have a very sad grasp of reality and I wonder what has made you lose your faith in the goodness of mankind.

Also, I'd like to note that you have yet to cite any convincing evidence that proves that God is merely 'optional'. Tradition isn't always correct, I'll give you that, but it has nothing to do with the truth of God. Your 'realistic outview' is a whole load of over-assertive statements without any real solidity.

The proof that God is optional is the fact that we are not forced to accept him. Even he did exist he would still be optional...this is called free will. The fact that atheists are the fastest growing minority in the USA is proof that God is optional. I have lived a great life up to this point without God and will continue to do so into old age thanks to mankind's advancement in medicine...not out of God's benevolence.

That actually sounds like a pretty basic ethical premise, definitely not limited to Christians. However, you listed it, so I can only assume that you hold some kind of contempt against similar ethical reasoning. Perhaps I should reword what I said about God's creation earlier. God is a creator, and it is a part of His nature to create. Only in this sense is He relieving loneliness; by creating other beings around Him. I would assume that Creating substances is philosophically productive as opposed to philosophically inert or outright destructiveness, and that that had something to do with His initial reasons for building all of existence. Again, I can't say what is in God's mind for certain, in fact, I can't say what is in your mind, for certain. Guesses are all we have, but I am confident that we can come up with reasonable hypotheses that reveal things about God, since I believe He is real and true in every sense of the word. He even gave us a method by which to directly learn about Him - the bible.

yes, saying that one things is ok while something else is not, is a basic ethical premise...claiming to know the mind of God is not. It disturbing to me that you are ok with not knowing why it is that God would put us here...but I guess that is the problem I have with religion in general...it teaches us to be ok with those things that we do not understand...this is not how I operate.

I will probably keep repeating the explanation until you and I don't have to argue about this anymore.

Repeat the explanation? You haven't yet offered a single valid one...how can you repeat? And no, you don't have to argue about any of this if you don't want to.

[cwcrenshaw]

Richard Dawkins rocks.

for all his high brow posturing, Dawkins isn't impressive...his escape hatch for any tough question is always "science will figure that out someday"

sure....

actually he has painted many a theological scholar in a corner only to have them play the faith trump card...which is that they believe because they believe it because they believe it...there is nothing left to debate at that point.

[cwcrenshaw]

edit

Edited October 16, 2007 by cwcrenshaw