The beauty and limits of words: 10-30-09
A Jewish homeland anniversary: 11-2-09

Religion's role in wars: 10-31/11-1-09


Over the years I have written several times about the Parliament of World Religions -- the first one having been held in Chicago in 1893. (One gathering from that event is pictured here.)

Indeed, somewhere on my bookshelves I have the two-volume record of that event, books I picked up at a garage sale in the 1960s. Go figure.

Anyway, the fifth Parliament of Religions will be held in December in Melbourne, Australia, and the people organizing it have just announced that it will include an important conflict resolution program.

The program, officials says, will feature eight peacekeeping teams from regions of the world affected by conflict. There will be panels that will talk about these conflicts from the perspectives of religion, media, women, Indigenous peoples and other viewpoints.

I invite you to surf around on the Parliament Web site to which I've linked you above to find out what else is going to happen Dec. 3-9 in Melbourne, but I'm glad that some specific attention will be paid to the idea of conflict resolution and the role religion can play in making that happen.

Often, but not always, religion is found as a source of conflict and war, and I hope the people participating in this Parliament program will delve into that history and see what lessons can be learned from it.

Certainly not all wars can be attributed to religious disagreements. But some have religious roots and/or religious overtones, and it's the responsibility of people of faith to figure out why that's happened and to prevent it in the future.

(The photo here today was found at:

* * *


Authorities in Malaysia have seized Bibles because they use the Arabic word for God, Allah. Some Christians there think this indicates a growing move toward a radical interpretation of Islam. The Malaysian officials are making the same mistake a writer for The Kansas City Star made recently in an otherwise good piece about Muslims in KC -- saying that "Allah" is the exclusively Islamic name for God. No, it's the Arabic translation of the word God.

* * *

P.S.: In this entry this past August, I shared with you some thoughts from an area pastor who was taking a trip to the Middle East with a peace group. The evening of Saturday, Nov. 7, that pastor, the Rev. Cindy Howard, will be speaking about her experiences at St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Kansas City. For information, click here.

* * *

ANOTHER P.S.: A Kansas City anti-poverty group called Care of Poor People will hold its periodic giveaway of clothing and other materials from noon to 4 p.m. on Saturday, Nov. 28, at 31st and Baltimore in Kansas City. For details and ways to help, click here for a pdf file: Download COPP. In fact, copy it and share it with your own faith community or other group. 


Will Graham

Bill, a fascinating ariticle. Fascinating because I am almost certain you know your premise is false.

"Often, but not always, religion is found as a source of conflict and war"; on the contrary, the causes of war are almost always political and economic, involving (directly or indirectly) a struggle for land, natural resources, or access to the same. Religion can of course be a covering principle, but seldom the cause.

IN fact, the most influential atheists of the past two centuries did not ascribe religion as the cause of war;

To Marx, the underlying causes were economic. Relgion was simply an "opiate".

To Nietzsche, the cause was "the Will To Power", and the presence of the "unfit"; "Elimination of the weak and defective, the first principle of our philosophy. And we should help them to do it!" (Nietzsche, The AntiChrist, sec 2)

To Freud, the causes involved our our subconscious, repressed, greeds, need to agress, and "the death instinct".

In the past two centuries, all of the most destructive wars were carried out by SECULAR STATES...and managed to kill more people than in all the wars of the previous 2000 years by a several times over.

Moreover, SECULAR SCIENCE has unhesitantly provided the means for more and more advanced methods of destruction to SECULAR STATES...who in turn unhesitantly used better and "better" methods of organization of the sources of the STATE for death.

A "culture of death", if you will.

But, I know you know this Bill, so I am not sure what your purpose is.

Dolores Lear

Bill's referral on Fifth Parliament of World's Religions:
"While much of the violence in our world focuses on the differences between religions, diverse faiths are working together to overcome violence."

There are few skirmish's/wars between religions today. Most are between Governments. Most Citizens are True to their Governments, over their Religion. Soldiers of Diverse Faiths, Kill for their Government, over their Allegiance to their Religious God, that says 'Thou Shalt Not Kill'.

Do All religions teach Not to Kill, or just Christianity? All Religions of History went to war, or their members went to War for their Country. Some members of Religion Kill Humans for a Lifestyle they do not approve of, like Abortion Doctors, thinking they are Serving their God.

Why? Because they do not get punishment from God, unless they get Killed in the line of Duty to their Government, and that is not because of God. Humans can also get punishment of jail time from the Government, if they do not Serve when drafted.

With the population explosion from 1 billion Humans to 7 billion today, there is not a shortage of Soldiers today. But in WW1,2, men were drafted. And some Citizens of the USA chose jail for their God, over war for their Country, like Casius Clay/Mohamed Ali.

So what does Allegiance to God mean in everyday living? Going to Church and Mouth Worship for 1 hour, and then living like the rest of the world, 7 days a week?

So what has the Fifth Parliament of Religion accomplished for Human Peace since 1893? Christian USA, and other Religious Nations, Soldiers and Chaplains, are the God believers in Wars today, for their Governments.

Life is for the Living Humans, not the Dead. It is Not up to God's Children to Decide, 'Who should Live and Who should Die', in War and Peace.

Dolores Lear

What do Radical Right Wing Christians believe?

Ann Coulter: "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity." September 14, 2001.

Is this what God/Us in Genesis and Jesus taught?

How can the World Religions ever Unite when they all have Radical Members, that think Killing and War with Other Humans, is Serving their God and Blessed by their God?

What happened to Love of God and our Brothers/Sisters of Life, that Jesus taught? Male-Made Killer Misbred Humans by Body Birth, that started Hate, Greed, Killing and War?

God/Us, in our Human Image in Genesis, made Equal Copies of Purebred Females from the Male Rib. God/Us did not just Reproduce One male and Female but a Colony.

No High Tech Human Society when they Colonize a Planet, would leave only one Couple, to be the Caretakers of all the other Species of Life.

Cloning a Female from the Male Rib would not be Impossible today with our High Tech Science, except for Religious Protest.

We already make a Human Fetus in the Lab and Clone Animals. What is Supernatural about this High Tech Science?

Eternal Physical Life is for High Tech Perfect Human Clone Caretakers, not Defective Body Birth Killer Humans that Die, and return to GODs Elements.


Happy Halloween to Everyone!

In the spirit of the holiday... This morning I came across this "scary" piece from the Kansas City "Pitch" - a rather funny writup reminiscent of the "Committee on UnAmerican Activities" and "Jim Crowe" era.

Good Night, and Good God - As darkness descends over the state of Kansas ...


After spending two months searching for un-Christian activities in university departments, the legislature turns its gaze on nonfaculty employees.

Rep. Landwehr, chairwoman of the Kansas Committee on UnChristian Activities: Good morning. Would you state your name and job title, please?

Miss Wedgwood:Emma Wedgwood. I work in housekeeping.

Rep. Landwehr: Miss Wedgwood, are you now, or have you ever been, an atheist?


This morning I was looking through Mark and came across this from Jesus directly.

3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.

So, from this it is "very clear" that there is "never" a forgiveness for anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Ghost, even if you were an atheist/pagan when you were a teen ager and later became a priest, Bishop, Pope. But then on the other hand, Jesus says "I am the way, the light and the Truth, nobody comes to my father but through me."

Can these things be rectified at all? What is this but not "completely" opposite theological statements from the same man/son of god/god? Some "mental juggling" is needed to put these things together. It is not even "theological" understanding that is required in my opinion but "switching tracks" completely and "compartmentalizing" and "keeping inerrancy" as the primary concern in the Bible.

In today's "real world" things like this would be picked up pretty quickly and parsed and exposed for what they are by some. While others, will just close eyes on the "literal" "evolution of confusion".

Daniel Dennett has a new lecture "Evolution of Confusion" from October 4th, 2009 at Atheist Alliance International Conference - Dan Dennett talks about purposely-confusing theology and how its used. He also describes his new project interviewing clergyman who secretly don't believe anymore, and introduces a new term: "Deepity."

Dan Dennett is the author of many excellent books, including "Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon" and "Darwin's Dangerous Idea". He is also featured in the video "The Four Horsemen" along with Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens.,4547,The-Evolution-of-Confusion,Dan-Dennett-AAI-2009-RDFRS-Josh-Timonen

Will Graham

Some posters are trying to claim that Greg Swartz has said that he has not said the universe is the product of mindless forces.

Well, in fact he has.

He said, "I believe the universe is undirected.".

That does not sound like mind, or, if you will, intelligence, is involved.

But the trouble is, he said he BELIEVES the universe is undirected.

EXACTLY. That is his belief.

(And keep in mind that the context of the discussion is the existence of God.)

Since he has MADE A CLAIM, he shares the burden of proof, but he can't provide any. In fact, the mathematical order of the obsevable universe, which can not even be fully described by basic Calculus, is inconsistent with his claim that the universe is undirected...a product of mindless forces.

I REPEAT THE CHALLENGE...give me an example of something that would falsify your claim, since you believe our present existence can be explained without any intervention by intelligent forces...and I men the existence of human beings, not their techology, which, of course, required MIND.

Your attempt to prove it by saying God appearing at a "ribbon cutting ceremony" would "do it for you" FAILS as you would, in that event, simply fall back on Iggy's SPACE ALIEN theory.

Dolores Lear

Happy Halloween All. Boooooooooo! Trick or Treat!
Now with the H1N1 Flue, it Will Be Scary for Children going from house to house, and getting treats from others hands.

On Earth's population numbers:
"The debate remains contentious as ecologists insist that the capacity of the Earth to sustain more people and more affluent behavioral patterns is at, near or beyond its limits with often only trade, technology or other social policies able to extend the carrying capacity of wealthy regions."

How many of the Earth's Population are Religious Humans?

This looks like most of the 7 billion Humans on Earth are Religious to some version of GOD.

So why is Earth a Killing Planet If, Humans Love GOD/LIFE Above All 'Things'? Because Human Allegiance was divided 'in the beginning, against God/Us Humans, our High Tech Ancestors, who Reproduced Purebred Human Male and Female Clones.

The Clones began Reproducing ImPure Misbred Children. The Human Children of Generation Birth, Death, and Rebirth, lost the High Tech Knowledge of their High Tech Human Purebred Ancestors.

High Tech was called Supernatural, and Fallen Humans gave their Allegiance to Human Leaders, and their Countries, instead of to GOD/LIFE.

And the 'Heart Beat of our Planet Goes On'. So what is Next. The Planet is Out of Living Space, from the Sexual Revolution.

The Armageddon Nuclear War, is set up, and the Killing of Earth's Eco System and Ozone Canopy is at Hand?

What do 7 Billion Fallen Humans do now? Finish Killing our Home and All the Life on it, with a Nuclear War for 'GOD'?


This “getting along” has been happening for along time. It is what it is. Talk. How are we alike? How are we different.?

Teach this in school. Let kids make up their own mind. Is this horrible? Allowing people their own thoughts?

Once we see that science is our way out will we realize that the natural world is what we live in.

Until we know “how and why” we think the way we do will we realize we are on our own.

It’s not a bad thing. We have known this for a very long time, way before jesus, the golden rule. It is better to get along than not get along.

re: origin of religion

Beyond Belief '06 - Neil deGrasse Tyson (Part 1/5)

Peace For the Sake of Goodness Cole

Just Thinking

What you say about the unforgivable sin is not a pardox,, but you don't understand what the unforgivable sin is, and that's why you are confused. You don't understand that it takes an entire lifetime to commit the unforgivable sin. You have to die in that sin to commit it. So what is it?

We are told that there is only ONE sin which cannot be forgiven. Only ONE, and that is key, If there is only ONE, and if I can tell you one, then that is it. And there can be no other. But I can tell you one which cannot be forgiven: for your entire life, to your last breath, you deliberately turn away from God. That sin will not be forgiven. And it's the only one. That's blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. Anything else is questionable and, in fact, anything else can be forgiven. The mere act of sincerely seeking forgiveness takes you out of that sin, and moves you into a different place.

Jesus deliberately spoke in parables, so you wouldn't get it if you didn't want to get it. You are not reading the Bible,, looking for answers. You are reading looking to condemn God, condemn religion, and to condemn Christians. So the first thing that you find which is difficult to grasp becomes an excuse to believe that it's wrong. You're not seeking answers; you're looking for excuses. That's why you don't find answers.

If you assume a Scientific theory is wrong, then you'll look for excuses to refute it. But if you are honestly, genuinely examining a valid theory, then you'll have to work hard at it once in a while. That proves you WANT to understand.

God wants YOU to 'prove' something: that you are seeking Him. That's proved in effort and striving, not excuses.

Greg Swartz


It is pretty obvious that you have no proof that God exists as you continue to move the discussion away from the initial point. As I said more or less before, over the millennia, thousands of people have claimed to know the mind of God, be the oracle of God or the gods or to have had their prayers answered. Some have even claimed to be a god or be a son or daughter of a god. God is supposed to be omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent, so one would think God should be easily proved. Yet, when asked what they rely on when proving there is a God, no one uses evidence. Some use philosophy; some use faith. You haven't used anything except deflective tactics.

Between now and Monday afternoon, my time is fairly well packed with family and freethought events, so I will not have time to engage in this discussion for a while. Perhaps in that time you can come up with some proof.

adam harrison

The atheist, Greg, claims the universe is undirected. That reminds me of Iggy earlier claiming that existence is explained by CHANCE operating on NATURAL laws...those were HIS words. (Of course, Greg will say it is not chance...he is in denial about that...and that he does not like the concept of NATURAL LAWS, so instead he says SCIENTIFIC PRINCIPLES to make it more palatable to atheism.)

But anyway, Iggy further claimed, after making these assertions, there IS NO TRUTH and that morals are in fact relative.

Why some claiming to be believers keep rushing to defend those positions, while at the same time claiming to believe in "TRUTH" is puzzling.

My own view is that it is simply a form of disinformation.

Why? Who knows? At least the moral relativist Militant atheist KC"FREE"THINKER has the guts to come out and say WHAT HE THINKS.

It seems like the others just think it is cute or politically correct to be coy about just coming out in the open about their belief that mindless, or UNDIRECTED, forces can explain it all, and that morals are relative.

After all, if you believe in TRUTH, why wouldn't you teach your kids that? Pretending that they are "free" to choose is absurd, since you can be certain plenty of others will be trying to tell them there is NO TRUTH and that MORALS ARE RELATIVE.


Iggy, I went through a phase of being really worried that I might have blashphemed the Holy Spirit. But what comforted me were the Scriptures saying that even our faith comes from God. And I knew in my heart that for me to even WANT God, He must be drawing me to Him. So I quit worrying that I might have committed the unpardonable sin.

And now when I think about the context in which Jesus said that -- people were seeing His miracles and saying that it was Satan who gave Him the power, not God -- it seems pretty clear that He was admonishing these people, saying that if they see the wonderful things God does and attribute God's work to Satan -- then what hope is there of them ever recognizing God?

I John 3:14 provides a good litmus test for knowing that we haven't committed the unpardonable sin (I actually don't think there is such a thing as "unpardonable sin," but rather that remaining in a blasphemous mindset prevents people from feeling God's love and receiving His forgiveness; once someone stops blaspheming they are no longer in the state of not being able to experience God) --

I John 3:14: "We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love our brothers. Anyone who does not love remains in death."

Bill, I believe the "us versus them" mentality is the main cause of violence in the world. And religion does often seem to be tied up with this exclusivist mindset. Yet when Jesus was asked who we should include as our neighbor, He told the story of the Good Samaritan to demonstrate how He did NOT want us to sit around dividing people into the categories of "neighbor" and "non-neighbor," but rather He wanted/wants us to strive to BE a neighbor to anyone and everyone we encounter who has a need.

Greg Swartz

If anyone is interested in some serious Biblical scholarship, the Skeptical Religion Study group that I organize will be showing some more DVD clips from last December's Jesus Project conference. It will be in room 309 of Haag Hall at UMKC starting at 10:30 a.m. until 12:30 p.m. The speakers shown will be:
- Robert Eisenman – An Inquiry into the Sources of Certain Sayings of Jesus
- Dennis MacDonald – An Alternative View of Q
- Bruce Chilton – Aramaic Jesus Traditions: Evidence and Reconstruction

Robert Eisenman has some interesting theories about the connection between the very beginnings of Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Several years ago, he was instrumental in getting the Dead Sea Scrolls released for wide-spread use and public viewing.

Dennis MacDonald is the author of an interesting book ("The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark") which links much of Mark’s story of Jesus to the Homeric tales, particularly the Odyssey. He has some interesting thoughts about the Q document.

Bruce Chilton has written a number of books, including "Rabbi Jesus" which talks about Jesus in his first century environment.

Everyone is welcome - skeptic or believer! We will have a little time for discussion and you will not be kicked out of the room at 12:30 if you do become ingaged in a conversation.


Goldstein Squad Member, am I the person you are calling "coy" and cowardly (afraid to come out in the open)? I'm just asking, since I'm the only poster here I know of who has said that I never heard Greg say that he believed all existence is the product of mindless forces.

Goldstein Squad Member, or Adam, I've gone around in circles with you and Will here so many times before, about the whole moral relativism-thing, and also about your continuous accusations that I don't really belive what I say I believe.

What it all boils down to is that when you are in such a hurry to peg the people you disagree with, and are so busy gleefully inserting words into their mouths, and saving their statements "for posterity" -- you have no energy left to listen and grow in your understanding of people who think differently from you.

According to Adam/Will/Goldstein Groupthihnk, people who differ from you in their views on abortion, are really just people who "put choice ahead of life." People who share their faith with their children while providing their children with free access to information about alternative views, are really just "moral relativists who don't really believe there is any such thing as truth."

And people who aren't Theists are really just people who "believe all life is the product of mindless forces."

If there ever comes a day when you guys grow beyond your need to simplify everyone else's beliefs -- then I think we might be able to have a decent discussion. As it is, it seems like I've been sharing so much stuff from my heart, only to have you guys respond that YOU know I don't believe in Truth.

adam harrison

Greg, Will has clearly stated that proof of the existence of God is found in an observable material universe that is ordered according to mathematical laws, which are an abstract mental concept and thus the product of MIND.

Combine this with the Natural Laws of Science and Morality, which you try to deny as you in fact rely on them, and you have your proof.

Further, the mathematically ordered universe, which obeys ABSTRACT MENTAL PRINCIPALS, is not consistent with your claim that the universe is undirected.

Of course you will not admit this, and you will not state what you would, then, at least in principle, accept as proof.

(By the way, I have had prayer answered. Will you accept it? Of course not, you will make an excuse...again, MY CHALLENGE REMAINS, WHAT PROOF COULD YOU IN PRINCIPLE ACCEPT? I have already shown that your example of God appearing at a RIBBON CUTTING CEREMONY would not "do it for you". But please TRY AGAIN!)

But if you want to run away, fine, but I would request that you quit making OTHER CLAIMS you can't support like JUST THINKING and I, or Will, are he same person, etc.

I find it ironic, also, that you have to attack over here since your own forum collapsed.


Greg, I'm sure you've noticed that Goldstein Squad Member and Will set the bar really low when it comes to what they think "proves their claims" about other people.

For example, Will recently said that Sam Harris was my hero ... and when I asked him to prove this claim, he said his proof was that I thought the ancient Jews were just as sexist as the surrounding cultures of the same time period. By not elevating the Jews ABOVE the surrounding cultures, he felt I was taking a swipe at them, which he apparently saw as unequivocal proof that Sam Harris was my hero.

With logic like this, ANYONE can prove ANY claim they want to prove.

But, let's cut to the chase: why all this going in circles regarding proving or disproving the existence of God? I don't think any of us who believe, are open to letting anyone "disprove" our faith. So why all this going on to Atheists about how "I know there's nothing you'll accept as proof that God exists" -- when I feel pretty sure there's nothing that those same Christians would accept as proof that God doesn't exist?

Why can't everyone just concede that belief or disbelief in God is beyond the realm of science -- and move on to talking about how belief affects behavior, especially treatment of those most different from us?

Dolores Lear

"You don't understand that it takes an entire lifetime to commit the unforgivable sin - We are told that there is only ONE sin which cannot be forgiven. - That's blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. - You are not reading the Bible, - looking for answers."

God/Us in Genesis Reproduced Perfect Equal Asexual Celibate Male and Female Clone Humans, in a High Tech Science Lab.

This Type of Reproduction is Supernatural, to Natural Humans. Today Humans Know this is possible.

The Male and Female Clones took over Reproduction from God/Us, and Made Imperfect Children, which started Generation Birth, Death, and Rebirth Misbred Human Children.

Male Celibacy has always been in Religion, since the Purebred Clone Males Seeded the Females. Jesus also taught Celibacy for the Male.

Original Sin was always a Mystery, Until today. Humans again Know Humans can be reproduced in the Lab, without seeding the Female.

Human Male Lust took over the Reproduction, from Male and Female High Tech Clone Ancestors, and ever since in Religion Male Celibacy was a requirement, and the married people were only to use sex for procreation, not for pleasure.

Our High Tech Ancestors withdrew from Earth, so Humans could go through the Living Experience of Body Birth, Death, Inequality, Inhumanity, Killing all Species, and War. They did keep track of our progress, like we do our Space Probes.

How did the expression come about that the Original Sin of Humans was Blasphemy to the Holy Spirit. What does that mean 'Literally'. Cursing, Disbelief, or ?

Like J.T. said, You don't understand that it takes an entire lifetime to commit the unforgivable sin.

The Male Lust does last the whole Male lifetime. They can impregnate the Fertile Females. What else lasts a Lifetime? How did we get a Population Explosion?

Red Biddy

Interesting information, about the Parliament of World Religions, Bill, but they don't seem to meet very often, do they, if this years gathering in Melbourne, is only their 5th since 1893 ? By my calculation - that is a meeting every 23 years. Maybe this years conference will produce more positive results than previous ones - one can only hope....

Will Graham
I don't know where you are coming from - religious background, social position, age whatever - but I've noticed you consistently criticize Bill's well meaning efforts in regard to interfaith dialogue in the cause of peace.
Your posts, it seems to me, are always about be protecting religion (any religion) from responsibility for its contribution to so much conflict in the world and you totally ignore Bill's caveats like " "Often, but not ALWAYS" as if he'd never written them !
Your statement that most of the destructive wars of the last 200 years were caused by secular states is completely erroneous.
You need to study history, really study it - without hysterical bias in regard to Marxism (a belief system when all said and done !) the mad Nietzsche and Sigmund Freud about whom you don't seem to have a clue as to what he was about !
I've just watched a documentary "God grew tired of us" about the "lost" boys who had to flee Sudan because the northern Arab government was killing them. They were very religious group Christian mostly, but some animists among them, but the Arabs who are all Moslem wanted them exterminated - no doubt about it. We are talking, millions of people here, many who are waiting out for this genocide to stop in refugee camps in Darfur and Uganda.
You can't deny that the different religions in the area have a lot to do with this wretched situation.

Dolores Lear

" God is supposed to be omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent, so one would think God should be easily proved. Yet, when asked what they rely on when proving there is a God, no one uses evidence."

The Three Os do describe the Evidence of the GOD that No Human has ever seen, that made the LIFE Elements Visible and Invisible. The Elements: Atoms, ElectroMagnetic Force, etc., that make Life as we Know it, are always omnipresent or there would not be LIFE.

Most of the weird answers Humans without High Tech accepted as 'super'natural, Can Now Be Understood with High Tech Science.

The God/Us in Genesis in our Image, was seen and did talk to Humans. They are Not the Unknown GOD that made LIFE.

God/Us did Reproduce Humans 'Supernaturally by High Tech', not by Body Birth, and did Travel in Space 'Supernaturally by High Tech' in Spaceships.

All the 'Supernatural' Traits of God/Us in Human Image, started Life as we Know it on Earth, in Genesis. High Tech 'is' Super'Natural' to Natural Humans.

Humans did see and talk to God/Us in Genesis. But No Human made from GODs Elements can Know or See GOD. What or Who could make the LIFE Elements? GOD is a good word to use, since it has been used and misused for 6000 years.

Is there Any other Word, beside GOD or ONE GOD, that can be used to explain the Maker of the LIFE Elements? The Three Os? Would that make another Man-Made Trinity God?

Will Graham

But Susan, you DID say that the Jews were just as sexist as the surrounding cultures, which was demonstrably false. As strict as they were, they were far ahead of surrounding cultures practicing everything from infanticide to "man/boy" love.

But your remarks about the Jews are they same type of thing Sam Harris says in the end of faith.

Oh, and by the way, I think Daniel Dennet is your hero too!

But seriously, why are you always going on about how TRUTH exists but praising people who tell us, like Greg and Iggy (they are pals) that there is NO TRUTH and that we are simply the products, as Iggy says, of Chance acting on Natural Law, or in Gregs case "Scientific Principles".

Beyond that, he knows that the operations of a material universe in a mathematically ordered way...mathematics being an abtract mental consistent with MIND but NOT conistent with Greg's declaration that that "the universe is undirected".

What I think is that you are so angry at us that no matter what we argue, you will find a way to side with the opposition, even if they are diametrically opposed to what you say you believe.

But I DO agree that with the logic that our existence can be explained by statements that "the universe is undirected" then ANYONE can prove ANYTHING they want to prove.

And that is why Greg's position is an UNFALSIFIABLE CIRCULAR ARGUMENT.

Will Graham

Greg, your claim that your Suday studies represent "serious biblical scholarship" are falsified by the FACT that you are simply supporting your agends; you have already made your decisions about the Bible.

You aren't investigating anything.


Will, if you think ancient Jewish women had a higher status than women in the surrounding cultures, then why not expound on that? I'll see if I can find more information about women's rights in ancient Israel as compared to the surrounding cultures (or read any links you want to provide on this), and consider revising my opinion.

See, if someone expresses an opinion that you think is false -- why not just provide the information that proves they are false? That's much more productive than accusing the other person of "taking a swipe" or of hero-worshipping people that you've made it pretty clear you hold in low esteem (but are conversely obsessed with). :)

I guess you think I pick on you -- but I just keep seeing, time and again, that you guys snatch up any little tidbits you can from people's posts, and then hold up these comments as proof ("for posterity") that the people really don't believe what they say they believe, and they really believe what YOU thought they believed all along, and are really just "sock-puppets," etcetera, etcetera.

It doesn't matter whether I share the same world view as the people you are maligning, or not. I just know what it feels like when you do this to me, so I feel empathy for the others, too.

One big difference between you and me is, I don't see anyone as "the opposition." I really think everyone, even you and Goldstein Crew Member, wants peace and fairness. So I see you all as people I'd like to understand better so we can be more united in bettering conditions for everyone. When I point out unfairness, I'm not "taking sides" -- I'm on the side of everyone being more fair.


What proof would a believer require to agree that God does not exist?

What proof would an atheist require to agree that God exists?

Answer to both questions – There is none.

Gregg, et. al. admit that there is no proof you would accept. If you met God face to face you would have an alternate explanation.

Will, et. al. admit that there is no proof you would accept. If you were presented with the scientific evidence or formulas you would have an alternate explanation.

Both sides simply believe what they believe because they believe it. It is the common thread between the believers and the atheists. It is called faith. Were there any proof, it would not be faith. Interestingly, atheists claim to have no faith. They claim they have facts; completely ignoring the simple truth that there is no proof that God does or does not exist. There is evidence but there is no proof.

Yet watching the two sides tilt at windmills is somehow morbidly fascinating.

Will Graham

Susan, I have provided a great deal of information that proves the atheist positions are false.

But what do they count as proof? They argue in a circular fashion, and make assertions such as "the universe is undirected", "there is No Truth", and "morals are relative".

They simply ignore many of my posts and refutations, and simply repeat the same assertions.

And, for that matter, you usually do the same.

But at least you are not accusing us all of being, along with Just Thinking, the same people as Greg did yesterday.

And yes, I pretty much believe that what I thought all along is correct.

If you want to side with people who believe "there is no truth" and "morals are relative" then thats your problem...your suggestion that "even you and Goldstein Crew member" want peace and fairness is proof that you are willing to side with them when they obviously are NOT about peace and fairness.

I mean, you are kidding about them in that regard, aren't you? After all, you pointed out some time ago that you thought KCF really DID want people to SHUT UP and do you know what.

And, as I said, if you want to side with that because you are angry with us, then that is your problem.

I agree, a theist. With your last sentence,

Peace For the Sake of Goodness Cole.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)