There is no proof God exists, other than faith. God was created by man's ignorance and understanding of natural events.

I have more faith in Stephen Hawkings interpretation of the Universe and Big Bang.

Well, what do you mean by 'God.?' Don't we have to define what He, She or It is, before we determine whether He, She or It exists?

Joe,

Don't you dare use logic in the forum. I'm reporting you.

wag -

Good luck. Anytime a particular gap of knowledge, where many had said "god" was hiding, is closed by science, they retreat to the wishy-washy "god is love" or some other such platitude. Until some other supposed gap in knowledge with significance is shown to be "His" next hiding place.

The whole hide-and-seek thing has gotten a bit boring over the past few millennia.

No one knows for certain, what started the universe, but everyone certainly knows, the Pope and his Shepherds can not be trusted alone with the little sheep.

Does he realize the "Big Bang" does not refer to pedophile priests???

I don't agree with the Pope about much but if his church wants to admit the Big Bang is a fact I can go along with God starting it. Can we get the Creationists to sign on to this too?

"Where did god come from?"

I asked my preacher that when I was 14. He said "God has not beginning and ending. He is the alpha and the omega." I was done with religion after that ridiculous answers. My mom still made me listen to that crap every Sunday up until I moved out.

Well when all else fails, accept the big bang, but claim it as your own because God thought it up. Very cute and innovative approach.

In the over all scheme of things, the relevance of if the big bang is in fact fact, or trying to deal with the questionable reality of the existence of a being superior to all of us, that has always been , without questioning where it came from, as to being the creator of all, is with out a doubt very hard to understand or explain, without entering into basically to different points of view, there is a Superior being, or no there is not one. Those that believe claim faith, those that don't claim lack of proof.

The answers to these question when taken in their total concept as it relates to each one of us, during our very brief stay here in this transitory life, is totally irrelivant to our day to day lives. thus producing the question , why even think about it or discuss it at all.

Hell I don't have the answer and don't worry about it

This is hilarious. You atheists are getting the pants beat off of you...

But not as much as the Creationists.

I do not care what the leader of some mass-murderous organization, that harms humanity to such extent, thinks or believes. Their 'beliefs' lead to the death of millions over things they cannot prove and that is about as bad as humanity can get.

I have always agreed, Joe. Why would anyone choose to believe in something that we cannot prove even exists just popping into existence (or has always existed) over something that we CAN see, touch, hear, measure and prove exists just popping into existence (or has always existed). Some call that.. insanity.

You atheists are getting the pants beat off of you...

...by all that evidence of god?

Ah yes, the Patron Saint of Pedophilia, Pope Bennie the Rat has spoken. Bennie knows that science can't prove the fact that there is no God. Thanks for that, Bennie. Any self-respecting atheist knows it is unwise in the extreme to state there is no god. We know we don't know.

However, you, yes you can tell us without a doubt that God is behind the Big Bang. Yo Bennie, did it ever occur to you that there might actually have been two Big Bangs? Three? Lots of 'em? Did it ever occur to you that there might be Big Bangs going on simultaneously? The universe is a big place. Really, really big. Infinite in fact. Yet you Bennie, yes you can tell us you grasp this infinite thing. You can tell us all about it.

Folks, for years the Catholic Church went on about God and the six-day creation thing. Then.....they changed their minds. Whoa there, big fella. I conclude the earlier Popes had it wrong.

They were wrong then and they're wrong now. Come on Bennie, if there really were a God, please don't insult us and tell us you would understand the mind of this being. Oh yeah, omniscient, omnipresent, all-powerful AND you Bennie, yes you. You get it. That's hubris to the nth degree. That's what got Adam and Eve a one-way ticket out of the Garden, Bennie.

Look, I think this religious thing is beyond silly, but obviously a great many people find comfort and security in their beliefs. However silly I think they may be, I took an oath to protect their right to believe as they do. That oath didn't go away.

So I offer this quote, allegedly from Jesus the Christ in Matthew:

"For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them."

Of the two or three, you don't need a Pope, a minister, a pastor, a priest, or any sort of cleric. Worship as you choose, where you choose, and when you choose. You don't need a guy in a glorified clown suit to tell you he has the inside track to YOUR God.

By 1000 votes, Dave....

I still find it rather strange that in the year 2011 there are significant numbers of grown men who believe in this imaginary god being who is the answer to every question that we don't fully understand. Based on what? Nothing really. Here the Pope just pulls something out of his backside and people are like "yeah, sounds good." I guess I understand the human need to believe, it's just unsettling when such a large number are willing to dismiss science, data and empirical evidence outright.

God exists everywhere. So, He cannot "come from" someplace because He is always everywhere. God always existed. Its more correct to ask where did the universe come from. And we would have to say that the universe came from the mind of God. When He thought of it, it was created.

hwhite1083
By 1000 votes, Dave....

science is not up for popular vote

Once you get past the notion that "time" is an illusion resulting from the nature of our universe, an ever-present God with no beginning or end isn't hard to believe on logical grounds. As creatures of this temporal universe, it's understandable that many would have difficulty thinking outside the box when it comes to the concept of time.

First, the Big Bang must be understood and fully worked out. There are still problems with it. The even dispersal of background radiation, the absence of dark matter and dark energy.

The guy who came up with the Big Bang was very afraid that the Church would latch onto it as proof of a creation myth. Georges Lemaître was a Catholic priest who did not want the church doing this same thing. He wanted the theory to be science, not religion.

I myself do not believe that the symbiotic relationships between so many things can be by accident. To think that everything is here "just because" just makes no sense.

If one chooses not to believe in a creator or God, that is fine. Too many people keep portraying those in ancient times as stupid and ignorant. Example, the Greeks,Egyptians,Mayans,Aztec's were building great things and had great mathematical skills and did so roughly 1000+ b.c. So 3000-5000 years ago those people where not stupid or unskilled or completely ignorant. Had they done some things that were odd, sure...so do we today. Up until the 1400's we thought the earth was flat, yet the knowledge of the earth being round was known way back when. I think that knowledge has been lost and we keep going through cycles in life...We today, do not know how the ancients did the things they have done.

As for the bible itself, more and more is being shown as fact. People,places things. The other day i watched a show that unearthed a city where David slew Goliath and they did find artifacts or manuscripts that did bear the name Goliath.

As the years pass and excavations occur, the validity of the bible stands true. Nothing about it has been proven false or fairy tale fun, so far as in regards to the writers depiction of places, things and people. There is no reason to doubt

Science has helped prove things in the bible, so i would say that they are not at odds. Science is wonderful and done great things, however one must remember a lot of things are speculation and theories and have yet to be proven, so using those things as a defense is not a good example to use.

whether you believe or not, stay healthy, care for your family and others and live right.....

As OZZY wrote " I'll see you, see you on the other side"

I believe Creator created the universe and everything that goes within it. However, I do not believe the 'how it happened' according to the church, bible or any other man written holy book is correct. In time maybe it will be figured out as scientist dig deeper and discover new sciences and new discoveries. To me science and faith do work well together but so many prefer to keep them apart and bicker about it.

By 1000 votes, Dave....

so all it takes is votes to make something true? hold on, i think i can get a 1000 people to vote that you have sex with farm animals, you perv.

This is (finally) a far more sensible and acceptable position. I am not here to state that there IS a God, but just looking about at the marvels of nature here on Earth, and the incredible workings of the universe, I really lean towards some sort of super-intelligence being behind them rather than just random happenstance. The obvious problem with Creationism and the previous church stance that "it could only be the way the Bible says it was" is that rational people KNEW that that was wrong. We KNOW Galileo was correct and the church was wrong, we KNOW that there are fossils of humans from long before the 6000 year mark. We KNOW that there is no mention of dinosaurs in the Bible because the Bible was actually written by people who never knew about such creatures at the time it was written (God would have known, I would think). We KNOW the age of the Earth because we can scientifically date things like rocks, see Eras of Earth history in the strata, etc.. Common knowledge of everything around us was invalidating Creationism day by day. This is what I've thought my entire life, Evolution (in all things, not just man) is an irrefutable fact, why not just be content to say a Divine Power thought it up and guided it? You can still make a solid case for God while not trying to fight solid, undeniable evidence that we can actually see and hold in our hands. The Church refused to officially admit that the Earth actually revolves around the sun until 1994 or 1996. Who did not know that by then? My God, we went to the moon in 1969! I really believe the Pope was quite smart to restate the manner of God's involvement in the creation of Nature, Evolution and the Universe. They are each amazing, and worthy of being called "the Handiwork of God".

ATHEISTS>>>>

What PROOF or EVIDENCE do you have that Atheism is ACCURATE or CORRECT???

science is not up for popular vote

Uh oh... someone tell MSNBC...

The Big Bang is just an unproven scientific "theory", but God is quite obviously real, because the Bible says so and it's the inspired word of, um, God???

Really, that's what you think?

Fascinating. Humans are definitely weird, and since we were made in God's image, so must He be.

HowULikeMeNow:

Your statement that NOTHING in the Bible has been proven false is a BLANTANT falsehood itself. We know for a fact that the earth was not created roughly 6000 years ago. It is BILLIONS of years old. The Earth was NOT created in six (6) days. That is a known fact! The Earth is not the center of the universe, Our sun does not revolve around the Earth. These are in DIRECT contradiction to the Bible. Look, I believe in a 'Supreme Being' but please do not spread the falsehoods that EVERYTHING in the Bible is fact. It is not! I respect your beliefs but you cannot possibly convince others if you do not acknowlege FACT!

Joe, you pose an interesting question, and one, quite frankly no one can answer. However, I believe there is a reason for this: The Creator behind the Big Bang and this Universe's creation (and all others as well) is not a Deity, we as mere mortals could every even hope to understand. Where did the Creator come from? No idea, and it is due to the limitations on the human mortal mind. Even our wildest guesses would fall far short.

I disagree with the Pope, though, as The Creator was not/is not the Judeo-Christian-Muslim Deity AKA Yahweh/Jehovah/God/Allah (That Deity was "created" by the leading Levite priests (The Kohanim) by combining the powers of numerous Hebrew and other Semitic Gods into one being, in a successful attempt to bring the Hebrew Northern kingdom of Judea and Hebrew Southern kingdom of Judea together - they actually wrote about it and archaeologists have those documents/scrolls. It is the reason the Bible has two creation stories in it).

As for Intelligent design, even as a Pagan of nearly 30 years, I can accept that premise. The God and The Goddess, creations of the Creator who watch over this universe most likely dabble in how life began, and how it proceeds. Life would have, and may very well have, begun without their help (wasn't there so can't say what happened), but it isn't hard to imagine a guiding hand now and then. However, the Universe works on scientific principles, so even if they choose not to intervene, evolution still would occur. It is more of The God and The Goddess complementing the laws of Science rather than opposing them. Two systems that co-exist and work together, Science and Divine, as one. Just MHO, but one I see Quantum Physics constantly proving to be a correct opinion.

ATHEISTS>>>>
What PROOF or EVIDENCE do you have that Atheism is ACCURATE or CORRECT???

The burden of proof is on the proponent of a position. Since atheism is, by definition, simply the absence of a belief in god, it is up to those who say god does exist to prove the proposition. It is a logical fallacy to challenge one's opponent to prove a negative.

hold on, i think i can get a 1000 people to vote that you have sex with farm animals, you perv.

Except you can't. :)

scrambolo...We do not know hold the earth is. We can only assume it's age based on what scientific evidence indicates. If a god created the entire universe 6000 years ago, or even 6 minutes ago, with the appearance of having gone through billions of years of evolution, all the radioactive decay elements and measured red-shifts as they would be, there is no known way to measure that. It cannot be scientifically dis-proven, regardless of how absurd it sounds.

Scientific fact is not a certainty.

Even the most intelligent humans alive are not qualified to even have an opinion as to the existence of a god.

It is absurd. It is disproven. Why would God create a world with a made up "history" with made up fossils? Are you saying he's some sort of con-man?

Read a book.

God always was, is, and will be. He did not get created out of nothing, nor did the universe. It is a far greater leap of faith to think that the universe created itself out of nothing than to believe in a God who created such a great miracle as the universe is. It takes faith either way.

well jwhite, my vote is that you are. and since all it takes is votes, you are.

I know you are but what am I? :P

Atheists don't necessarily "believe" in anything, so they have nothing to "prove". What's YOUR excuse?

Bah. All the religio-nuts keep saying "It's a bigger leap of faith..." "It makes more sense..." Blah blah blah. For one thing, I think it's less of a leap of faith to say that we don't understand what there was "before" the universe because, as the universe includes time (time-space continuum and all), and there can be no time without space, we may never know where the universe really came from, because our understanding is based on chronological sequence, because we evolved to fit the universe as it is today. And if we do ever understand it, it will look like absolutely nothing we have conceived of to this point. Or it'll look like a cheeseburger. MMMMMMmmmmm, cheeseburger.

At the same time, I seriously doubt there ever was or is a creator/god/superbeing/whatever, particularly that there is one that continues to involve itself with our lives today in large and meaningful capacity. Not only is there no evidence for this (most of the "evidence" is either faked, made up on the spot, or hearsay. The rest is typically delusion), but the only backup they seem to go to are too predictable.

God of the gaps, meaningless definitions, etc. etc. They are either blatantly wrong when science closes a gap, or they have such a meaningless definition that there's no way anyone could prove them wrong, or right, or even slightly left of center. Which is to say that the definition allows an endless supply of platitudes and actually has no meaning, except those wishing to use it to defend the indefensible or get away with crimes or further their political careers or fleece the credulous.

Oh, and I vote jwhite rapes animals.

Hey Prophecy @ 1.16

theres no reason for the Big Bang THEORYYYY. the bibile doesnt give him the title "Creator" for nothing.

Have you ever been frustrated getting into a circular argument with someone who knows the distinction between belief and opinion, faith and science?

If you are challenged by the term "theory", then you should be challenged by the term "Creator", but amazingly you are not!

"an ever-present God with no beginning or end isn't hard to believe on logical grounds"

Really? What "logical" planet do you live on?

ATHEISTS>>>>

What PROOF or EVIDENCE do you have that Atheism is ACCURATE or CORRECT???

We use the same proof the religious do, except for the reliance on the imagination of someone from a time long before scientific understanding came into play, we think for ourselves, and use common sense (natural instincts which the religious confused with divinity).

Wo to you......

I think it all boils down to what you define as god...perhaps "he" is the super-dense particle or massive amount of energy that kick started the big bang. perhaps "he" is a dude sitting in the clouds stroking his white beard hanging out with Hey-zeus and the angles.

Personally I believe that the big bang was a result of a "god" that was energy or matter. So I would say the universe is the result of that type of "god"...not some flying man who rains fire and brimstone one day and is somehow "loving" the next.

Scrambolo- The Bible actually does not say anything at all about the age of the earth. The 6000 year figure was determined by someone (I forget who, momentarily), but not in the Bible; nowhere does that Bible state that the sun and the earth revolve in any particular fashion; and as far as the 6-day creation story is concerned, you must understand that Genesis was written to be symbolic, not absolute (in fact, the Bible is much easier to grasp when read symbolically and spiritually rather than literally). Hope this helps!

"The pope says God was behind the Big Bang, which scientists believe created the universe."

And I believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the earth being flat and located in the center of the universe.

First a clarification of Christianity:

Bible: A measuring stick of laws/rules to measure yourself up to. The rules could vary from obvious to all (Don’t kill), to the ridiculous (Don’t tie your shoes on Sunday), because the actual rules aren’t the point. The point is that every person on earth when measured finds themselves a “Sinner” i.e. a breaker of the Law/Rules.

God: The ultimate embodiment of Goodness and Perfection. These are tied together. Goodness and perfection can’t be goodness and perfection unless (Sin, law breaking, rule breaking) has consequences. Metaphorically: The darkness cannot dwell in the light. When a darkness (sin) is presented to the light is destroyed (punished).

Mankind: Gods creation which finds itself in a dilemma. Since none are free from being a “sinner” (i.e. a law breaker) they cannot ever dwell with God, and are effectively dead spiritually. There is NO relationship between God and the sinner, and when brought before the light (upon our deaths) we will be punished by the only one that has a right to punish us.

The Solution: Since mankind is in a state of imperfection, we can never do anything to become perfect. We can’t be “good people” and undo even one infraction of the law/rules that were broken. So in our stead God Himself paid the price for us. He took all our imperfections/rule breakings/sin and “placed” them on Himself (in the form of a man) and then took our punishment for us, and by doing so imparted (to those that believe by faith that He did this) his perfection in the Spiritual world. He resurrected the spiritual relationship between Him and His creation for believers. Those people are no longer under the law. None of the rules apply to them anymore. (If these leaves you with questions read “Romans”.) Again Metaphorically: When they stand before the light for judgment, they will be seen as perfect and without flaw.

This is the "purpose of the bible" from a Christian perspective. Which is simply "the tool by which we come to understand our need for redemption"

__________

Those of you that don't believe, are spiritually dead. And just as dead people don't care about anything (since they're dead), the spiritually dead don't care about the spiritual things.

Only by God's grace are you resurrected to a spiritual life. You can't resurrect yourself, so to those unbelievers all things "Spiritual" are silly and unintelligent.

I personally think it's non-sequitur to discuss the "side subjects" of the Bible with dead people. Only someone spiritually resurrected can truly fathom the Sovereignty of God such that He could have created this reality (we all perceive as life) only seconds ago. God doesn't operate within the confines of time. All of our existence could have begun with past memories, ancient rocks, and an already expanded Universe. We're linear, we can only look back at the past and divine that the Big Bang would have occurred in the past scientifically. We can use the laws of the Universe of his design to "figure things out" within our paradigm. But God is not linear and he is all-powerful. Why would he limit himself to only a beginning and a linear start? I think he's bigger than that. Bigger than our limited perspective.

Consider this, if a supreme being created the universe He would not be bound by the Time-Space Continuum, like all matter or material things. That God per se would exist in a higher dimension, one that science could only create a hypotheseis to theorize the possiblity. Science can only measure things in the material universe, but not beyond that. There are realities that we do not understand like: What binds the componets of the atom? or Where is all this Dark Energy and Matter that theorist talk about?

Even Einstein had to add a variable to his Theory of Relativity when Hubble came up with his Theory of the Expanding Universe. Our greatest scientific minds do their best with the data they have to work with and should be commended for their efforts. However, it seems that the more doors science opens the more questions become apparent.

Mankind is flawed in so many ways, people are only people, no one is perfect. I wouldn't take for granted anything that someone in power or position tells us, question everything! Today, we are witnessing how humans when combined with control of others will more times than not become corrupted.

I have spent my much of my adult life asking questions of why things are what they are. My conclusions, we don't know everything, people in power can become corrupted and have a propensity to do evil and that there is natural laws and order to the universe.

Those who disrespect the validity of what The Bible have to say to about mankind may have a problem later...

Blaise Pascal a French Mathematician, Philosopher and Physicist, 1623-1662, had some interesting perspectives on the natter of God and Mankind:

“Justice and power must be brought together, so that whatever is just may be powerful, and whatever is powerful may be just.”

“People are generally better persuaded by the reasons which they have themselves discovered than by those which have come in to the mind of others.”

“There is a God shaped vacuum in the heart of every man which cannot be filled by any created thing, but only by God, the Creator, made known through Jesus”

And, there's Pascal's Wager or Gambit:

The philosophy uses the following logic (excerpts from Pensées, part III, note 233):

1. "God is, or He is not"
2. A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up.
3. According to reason, you can defend neither of the propositions.
4. You must wager. It is not optional.
5. Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing.
6. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force, when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain.

I pray for our nation would move away from worldly things and consider God.

There is no viable answer for the creation of the universe, either religion or science.

The fact that "stuff", energy and matter, is here at all is an enigma. The ultimate origin of 'stuff' has confounded me since that summer night drinking in the woods looking up at the stars, and will continue to confound the greatest minds of human kind for eternity.

@HowULikeMeNow
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that science will prove thru investigation of locations that certain historical occurrences mentioned in the bible did in fact happen. The reason for this was that the bible was written during or not long after those historical occurrences happened so thus some things in the bible will be historically true.

Its the magical additives of the bible and the contradictions of the bible that are the problem and which are the proof that the bible was written by man.

After all each gospel was written by a different person so logically each persons telling can be different, similar, or from a completely different perspective.

Proof that historical events in the Bible did in fact happen does not prove that the Bible was written by God, that God exists and that he created Mud Man and Rib Woman and that we should all live in fear of everlasting fire because we didnt join the JC club. The real fact is when you apply Common sense and ask common sense question the Bible starts to fall apart as a serious document.

You dont need God to be a Good person.

@ scrambolo - i never said how old the earth is. I don't know anyone who claims they do either. We can only process what our minds allow, we don't know everything or if what we figure out is even correct or just correct to our understanding.

We have no idea how the radioactive decay was before or if constant to what we view now, lots of things can mess it up. I have seen way to many documentaries that gave scientists artifacts that were indeed fake and made to look old and they dated them incorrectly.

Science is wonderful..but not everything is absolute or perfect in it. that doesn't mean the bible or a creator is wrong. People keep claiming that the bible is fairy tale and made up stories, but more and more proves things in it correct.

If over a extended period of time from numerous writers from different places and times were able to have a constant theme and depiction of their surroundings and life be so harmonious in plot and a guide to how life was meant to be lived, then its the best story and falsehoods from so called ignorant, stupid and unsophisticated rock puller and goat herder people , that every person who denies the bible has always depicted them as.

I can't tell you how many documentaries i have watched within the last few years that are now proving things we thought as folk lore and myths as fact.

@ pirate - being a good person without needing a god has nothing to do with anything. I don't recall jesus or the bible saying you can't be a good person unless yuo read it

Amazing. Where does the pope get his intel from????

jwhite says:

This is hilarious. You atheists are getting the pants beat off of you...

From what I understand, that is the goal of Catholic clergy.

"Those of you that don't believe, are spiritually dead. And just as dead people don't care about anything (since they're dead), the spiritually dead don't care about the spiritual things."

@sybrsean, sorry my friend but I am a very Spiritual Person,I am agnostic and I sure do care about Spiritual Things. A person can be good, do good, and lift other up, provide joy, happiness, Love ect without having to believe in a vengeful God that casts you into fire for not joining his club.
You of course do not understand that because Your "Spiritual Life" Has blinded you to the fact that people can be spiritually evolved without following a religion. I am happy for your faith but please lose your ignorance and self imposed superiority by claiming only those that follow the path that you follow can be spiritual beings.

Well, I am really confused. I thought the big bang was something that wnet on in the priest's rectory.......... I guess 12 years of catholic school did not teach me everything?

Dang,

There goes my theory about it being made from the titans and all the other mythological gods. Maybe Zeus had a huge fart and existence came to be!

@prophecy,if you re going to refer to God,AT LEAST CAPITALIZE!!!Just because the Bible says there is doesn't mean there is.It's Faith-driven.

People, dont question gods power please.

@ eyetoldeweso,I actually looked up his email and wrote him last year about something else.Only his secretary replied because he is quite busy and that was fine with me.

Like I have written time and time again, humans have a real issue with taking responsibility for their own actions. This reality after all the years of Catholicism shoved into my head.

The most important question has been asked and never answered, who or what created the many gods that are worshiped all over the world? Until there can be a concrete answer everyone is using this entity as a crutch and nothing more. Elron Hubbard has proven to modern man how easy it is to create a religion. Anyone with the gift of gab and a convincing argument can create a religion.

It was God's will. WHAT?!?!?!? This is the only entity that does not need to show itself to defend or explain its supposed actions. I am where I am in my life because of decisions and choices that I or someone in my life has made and my constant surroundings, not because of God's will. As a matter of fact my life was better when I stopped going to church. When I learned about the stupid things Catholics believed years ago like, the earth is flat, the sun revolves around the earth, if there was a god teaching them why did they get it wrong for so long? If we were created in god's image why do we all look different, sound different, act different and believe different things?

If believing in God, Santa, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy etc....makes you sleep better at night, so be it. Stop pushing it off as an absolute truth because it has never been proven.

Here are a few examples of the thinking. Let's take a meteor shower. Evolved humans, as we are, know what this phenomenon is and enjoy the show. 2000-2500 years ago a human looks up at the sky and what do they see? Words are written based on mere speculation and you have your first story with the only basis in fact being that they saw streaks of light in the sky.

A random flood turns into stories about Noah and his Ark. A volcanic eruption raining fire and brimstone. The cloud created covering an area in darkness when it should be light. Start thinking with the evolved brains we have and you can probably debunk 90% of the Bible, which is also an interpretation of stories written by someone else.

Now keep in mind that we don't know the mental capacity of the story tellers including sanity, drug use (we didn't discover what all the plants in the world do to our minds), trustworthiness also needs to be factored in. Who knows, if Jesus existed today he might be trying to sell you Viagra via email.

So you believe that man is much different today than he was in the past? How many studies are done to get the result "THEY" want to achieve? How many stories are told altered slightly to make someone look better or even worse? If you want to see great examples of how words can be twisted to your advantage go sit in a courtroom for a day.

Gods exists so people who have no one left to blame have someone to blame. Religion is powerful enough to cause a man to strap a bomb to himself with no proof that those virgins exist. Let's say I am a 60 year old man and I have been going to church every Sunday and Holy Day since I was 10. 52 sundays a year times 50 years gives you 2600 visits to mass. Tack on the holy days---hold on---I need to get my catholic youth memories back, I think it is somewhere between eight and 12 holy days so I will say nine. That is another 450 masses to attended in a 50 year span. 3050 masses in all at let's say an hour each. 3050 hours equals a little over 127 full days of your life spent learning and worshiping an entity that you have never seen and supposedly won't see until you die. How convenient is that. This is not to mention all the CCD classes or Catholic schooling. If you have to keep telling the story over and over you are trying to convince, not teach.

Just like there is no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow there are no pearly gates with a cloud waiting for your arrival. Prayer does work because prayer creates positive energy, not because God answered you. Trillions of people in heaven, billions of people on earth and God just happens to be paying attention to you. BS!! Anyone with a family pay attention to how happy your kids and even your pets are when there is a positive vibe in the room. Look at how they react when it is negative. This is something you can see and reason with. Kids are great because they can sense things. Everything living creates some sort of energy and to the untainted it can be reacted to.

Because my time is limited I will close with this, what would truly happen to the world today if religion was eliminated? If what we believed in was humanity instead of fairy tales? Governments would have to rewrite laws. Money would need to be reprinted. Churches would fold all over the world and the unemployment rate would increase.

I could go on and on but I see that I am all over the place and this wasn't well written but I had limited time. I think I covered a lot of the points I wanted to hit and I hope have some people thinking for themselves again.

Passing the soapbox to someone else.

Science, todate cannot explain what was there before the big bang.

Why is it that when anything written about God or Christ people tend to get angry, rude and defensive. Here it is people - if you are a bible believing christian then you have your answers and they should be sufficient for now. If you are not...then you will be searching the rest of your life with all kinds of unanswered questions. Example: the story we are commenting on now.

The Pope is a man who is also a sinner like all of us. Take his comments as opinions and not the truth. after all, he really only knows what we know as far as the questions like Where did God come from and did He create the world or was it formed with a bang. Sorry - BIG BANG!

@ pirate - No one can say that those who are morally good and just and merciful yet are not sure of a GOD will not be accepted by GOD if he does exist.

Man cannot judge or pluck one from the hand of God. I say, if your unsure of a God yet have morals and are a good person, than i hope there are more to follow your suit.

Both sides should not have a self imposed superiority attitude. Jesus said he came to help the sinners an unrighteous. If one has a conscience and cares for fellow man and family and knows there is wrong in life's actions then ignore the wacko's. But really looking into things and not blindly choosing ignorance doesn't hurt either. Knowledge and understanding is a powerful tool.

The questions and uncertainty man has within his heart and mind are tackled in the bible to help one understand a little better and give some peace of mind. I myself do believe in a creator or God, something more than we are here by accident for no reason

A person can be good, do good, and lift other up, provide joy, happiness, Love ect without having to believe in a vengeful God that casts you into fire for not joining his club.
You of course do not understand that because Your "Spiritual Life" Has blinded you to the fact that people can be spiritually evolved without following a religion. I am happy for your faith but please lose your ignorance and self imposed superiority by claiming only those that follow the path that you follow can be spiritual beings.

Sorry I didn't mean to couch my comment as if to say "what I'm telling anyone is true." I'm simply stating what I believe the Bible teaches through my limited faculties. If you truly are "Spiritual" as you say then seek and you shall find, knock and it shall be opened.

No need to personally attack me (which is against the Vine rules btw) and call me ignorant, acting superior and blind. My eyes are wide open and I am a Mensa with a 142 IQ.

Good luck on your journey, and if you haven't read the bible for yourself...Don't knock it till you've read it.

God didn't pop into existence. It's very simple. Before human kind existed time itself was not a concept that had any meaning or measurement. It may not have existed at all in the period before the creation of the universe. This is not just a Christian argument it is a general theological one.

God is supposed to be ever present and unbound by our concept of time. It is my firm belief that time as we understand it could not have existed until the universe was created. Only once the cycles of planets and stars formed could any meaningful measure of time exist. Anything before or after is merely infinity. Or you could even call it Non-time, the absence of time, or the lack of any meaningful way of tracking the passage of time. I tend to think time itself cannot exist with would the cycles we use to measure it. Without them it simply isn't.

Therefore it is perfectly logical to claim that God existed for an infinite amount of time in what we call the past, and that He will exist for an infinite amount of time in the future. He is ever present and omniscient, existing in all time ALL the time.

I guess that's why it can be extremely hard for us to understand what He is or how He came to be. He just was, is, and will be. He has no end or beginning. The reason that makes so little sense to us is because we have a finite beginning and end. How could we ever hope to truly grasp infinite existence as He does?

It is scientific to say the big bang came out of nowhere and brought matter that formed the stars and planets? And we are supposed to believe everything came from single cell organisms and evolved into millions of different species and sub species? Long before science, there was an explanation that was "dumbed down' enough for humans to understand. Funny thing is the bible says man was formed from the earth and we share the same chemicals that are in the earth, but that is just coincidence right? I do not claim to know where or how God came into being, or how he did all the things he did. Perhaps our universe, vast as it is, is really just a small part of a larger universe; larger than our comprehension; and we in comparison to God are like the insects who's lives are measured in minutes? Scientists have all kinds of theories (educated guesses) and not always much in the way of proof, but people believe them. I put my faith in God.

"an ever-present God with no beginning or end isn't hard to believe on logical grounds"

Really? What "logical" planet do you live on?

I'll respond, phillyfan-2830508, even though you've approached my comment out of context.

A question posed in the form "Where did [whatever] come from?", implies the existence of time (by suggesting there was a "time" when [whatever] didn't exist), something than many people take for granted. The OP asked the rhetorical question concerning an omnipotent being "popping into existence." If you accept time as an illusion, it follows, logically, that there are some things which don't have beginnings or ends (as beginnings and ends are time-dependent). "An ever-present God," or "omnipotent being," being a thing, would fall into this category.

Conversely, if you don't accept time as an illusion, then the questions "where did god come from" or "where did the universe come from?" will be as difficult to grasp as the question "where is the universe?".

I can draw you a diagram if that helps your understanding.

He comes from the creative corners of the Human brain, that's where the entire precept exists, no where else.

I LOVE THIS one...

Johnathon asked:

What PROOF or EVIDENCE do you have that Atheism is ACCURATE or CORRECT???

What evidence could convince you that Zeus and Thor are fictional?

The evolution of man is another example of "which came first, the chicken or the egg".

For the human brain in its almost infinite complexity to develop and survive it must have the 5 senses and a host of other almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running.

Problem is that you can't get those almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running until you have an almost infinitely complex brain in place and functioning.

The evolution process makes sense only if you have somebody with an infinite amount of knowledge tinkering with it.

And my favorite cartoon is Mrs. God chastising Mr. God for going beyond dinosaurs in the process of evolution and screwing up an almost perfectd world by creating man.

My 2 cents worth as an engineer and attorney who wonders why my church didn't officially acknowlege that the world was round until the 1990s - and are we insulting God by claiming that we were made in his image and likeness.

Wait! The year is 2011 and the Pope "decided" there was a big bang and said big bang was created by God. Hmmmm? Is the Pope God? What gave him the power to decide what God did?

I'll tell you...religion is a business and the Catholic church is losing big bucks. So the Pope and his cronies decided that the religion needed a slight tweaking to accommodate those on the fence. By throwing in "God created the big bang", he may get a few million more parishioners, which equates to millions of dollars every year and the ability to maintain or even expand the Catholic church's property ownership and influence on local people and government.

Fear is the only reason people think there is a God. The Catholic church knows people aren't as gullible as they were back 100, 300, 3000 years ago. So it needs to learn to survive in modern times. This alone proves that religion is a farce. If God existed, he, she it, would not accommodate humans by allowing new ideas to be considered his, her, its creation. He, she, it would expect everyone to follow the original rules set forth when the religion was established. And if there was a God, why did God allow there to be so many religions. Why did God cause so much turmoil and war, famine and death across the planet? Because God let humans have free will? What a cop out! What almighty being lets people follow different religions while killing each other in God's name?

If this type of God does exist, it is our duty as humans to see to it this God has no followers. Such a petty being sitting back watching us kill each other in God's name...watching people starve and die of disease while praying to God...watching their children being born deformed...such a being deserves what any mass murderer or leader of genocide deserves. A trial by all humans and the death penalty to be carried out immediately.

In my opinion, there is no such thing as God.

Ok.... a bit of scientific terminology for everyone one here since the meaning of words in science and general speech are often different... I might also add that it's quite a shame the number of people on here that don't understand much if any scientific terminology... What the hell were all of you doing in high-school classes.... staring at the wall?

Pop quiz: When does a scientific theory become a scientific law. Please try answering this before scrolling down.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Answer: Never

Scientific theories will always be scientific theories and scientific laws will always be scientific laws. Scientific theories propose a mechanism for how something works and is supported by evidence. Scientific laws don't actually provide a mechanism for how something works it just tells you what happens under similar circumstances.

Here's an example for you. Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion. They don't actually explain why the motion occurs they simply tell you what happens to planets in a similar situation to ours. Einstein's Theory of general Relativity attempts to explain the phenomenon of gravity.

One could easily make the argument that scientific theories are actually stronger then scientific laws because of the multiple conditions under which you can observe a phenomenon. Kepler's laws of motion don't apply to planets extremely close to a gravitational body nor do they apply to very small objects.

So, for future reference, when someone says something like "It's a scientific theory not a scientific law and therefore not a fact" call them and idiot and encourage them to seek sterilization...

@scrambolo - this is what i said about the bible as far as it being not proven false from the writer of the bible "so far as in regards to the writers depiction of places, things and people" - have not been proven as false.

@ pirate -yes the places are true and people are true and events are true as history has shown that events during certain ruler ship of kings has corroborated events in the bible...so why should not the other events be as worthy or correct? There is really no reason or evidence to not think things did in fact happen that way.

man has always wondered and had uncertainty and the bible has depicted God trying to show man what life has been about and what it holds for us.

First with prophets tried to lead the peoples..when they were persecuted and killed, jesus came to show us and teach us how to live and what is in store for man as the will of God. Why is that so far fetched and crazy? why is that so bad? Is it that hard to think that it had happened

Pretty simple as a message really, bible is a moral code on how one should live, those with a conscience can see that they are common sense things, and that there is more to life than just the earthly existence before us as we see.

When man was created he was put to a very simple test and that test was that he should refrain from eating a fruit. Based on the story there was another creation that was opposed to man and that creature told man the reason you have been told not to eat this is that you will become a god. The result was man wanted to become a god and eat it without any hesitation. Now if god give you the details of his own creation then indeed he will be very very stupid god for man from the beginning of time has proven to be evil and corrupt. Whether any body belief or don't believe in god it doesn't make a difference by an atom. Man have been given knowledge to destroy his own world nothing beyond that. And if you want to know why you are here it is all about the evolution of intelligence this god is expanding his creation and the reason is he is making him self more smarter and more perfect by creating you and more.

I'm from the year 4011 and I just invented a starship engine that has a nasty emissions problem - every 10 seconds its running it creates a new universe.

Does that make me a God?

Should I grow a beard?

Legally, do I now own these universes?

@ markus - thanks for the NO VALUE to discussion comment

Amazing how the so-called educated can sound so silly. Where did God come from? You have a hard time believing that God was already here, but you have no problem believing that a BANG generated all forms of life? Science requires facts in order to be believe. God requires FAITH. Naturally that would create a difference. Also, if you have facts then you don't need to believe. Finally, if you believe that a BANG started the universe and things as we know it. Where did the BANG come from? Something must have already been here in order for a BANG to occur. If you can believe that why is it so hard to believe that God created this? I'll tell you why. Man would rather believe a bang is smarter than he is rather than to accept the existence of an intelligent Creator.

I don't know where he came from, I never had his address.

WHAT ARE THE CHANCES???......

That recent declarations of the Vatican is evidence that they, for what ever reasons, now believe that life exists on other planets?

After all, they did also release,

"...there could also be other beings, even intelligent ones, that were created by God. That doesn’t contradict our faith, because we cannot put boundaries to God’s creative freedom."

OMG, in the past people would be burned at the stake for suggesting such things.

OMG, in the past people would be burned at the stake for suggesting such things.

so what, we used to burn women for adultery, now it's glorified on tv shows. times change. nothing to see here, people.

Could some "believer" please explain how millions of years of dinosaurs fit into God's master plan? If god wanted humans to have fuel for their cars, couldn't he have done that without wasting millions of years?

And please explain without using these trite, recycled excuses:

Dinosaurs never existed. It's all a hoax.

Dinosaurs existed at the same time as cavemen.

Who are we to question god's plan?

@ pirate - No one can say that those who are morally good and just and merciful yet are not sure of a GOD will not be accepted by GOD if he does exist.

The bible says that, John 3:16 is one and the other; I don't remember what passage atm (don't have the bible with me) but it says that only thru Jesus accepting him in your heart and asking for forgiveness will you find salvation or something like that. Thus if you don't follow the bible you are damned regardless of how Good a person you are
@ pirate -yes the places are true and people are true and events are true as history has shown that events during certain ruler ship of kings has corroborated events in the bible...so why should not the other events be as worthy or correct? There is really no reason or evidence to not think things did in fact happen that way.
Jjust because science has proven that some historical events in the bible actually did happen doesn't mean everything else in the bible is true such all that magical parts of the bible and other events happened , like a world wide flood and all species of the earth and 40 days and nights of food for them on one boat,? Sure there was a flood in that region science has theories on that (how the black sea was created) but not a world wide flood. Just because some stories have a kernel of truth in them doesn't make the whole store and all element in them true.

By the way one can have good morals and values without following a religion.

@sybrsean if I came across too strong I am sorry, I tend to take all things literally, but as someone who is agnostic I seriously am burnt out with those that make claims as absolutes. People claim to know Gods will but no one knows God will and unfortunately the Bible was not written so it can be interpreted as God intended (if it were in fact written by God which I don't believe) I have read the bible cover to cover, I have gone thru my journey and found my path, I cant believe in the bible and what is says and that it was written by God, it is just way too imperfect and inaccurate. It is stuck in the time of 2000+ ago. I would expect something that is supposed to be the the written word of God to at least reflect his perfection. I knock the bible because I ask hard questions of it and of religious leaders and when they cannot answer I get you don't know Gods plan, or you need to have more faith. Or worse blank stares and the "I cannot answer that, but I will get back to you". I could go on but I wont the end case is I am a very happy person; I have great hope for humanity and its future. All it will take is for us (as a species) all to grow up.

@willie-2287551 The Big Bang didn't start from nothing, I don't think you really understand the whole theory of the Big Bang. Believing in the Big Bang make way more sense than believing in a guy in the sky waving his hands and creating everything.
Please take a few hours to read up on a current educational book about the Big Bang, or even better check out the history channels min TV series the Universe. Its a really awesome TV series

Whatever you may want to name it, even Einstein came to the conclusion; that the order in the Universe could only be explained by some supernatural force underlying all of the Universe !

RetiredVet1-49, Yes, but why dinosaurs? Did they have souls and free wills? I just don't buy the ever-changing theories trying to morph ancient mythology to fit modern day knowledge.

"The Big Bang", as we now perceive it, probably wasn't the start of everything, it was likely only the start of the CURRENT universe that we now live in. It seems quite possible that there were perhaps an infinite number of predecessor universes before the "last big bang" created THIS one. Current thinking in physics shows that our universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. But eventually, it will run out of steam, and begin contracting back. All space, time and physical particles will likely compress back into their "original", constituent elements, or perhaps some new elements. The Big Bang can thus be thought of as the "mother of all black holes". The process then starts all over again, beginning with a new, massive explosion and eventually resulting in an entirely "new universe", which may or may not bear any resemblance to ours right now. Lather, rinse, repeat.

The last Big Bang, and the next one, define the outer limits of everything we could ever possibly know. Any intelligence created before or after those bookend events is unknowable and fundamentally irrelevant to our existence now.

That's what I have faith in.

RetiredVet1-49, Because for the past 2000+ years, and only until recently, the Catholic Church and others taught that people had domain over the earth and all the life on it. Everything on earth was put there for the benefit of people. Then it was, oops, maybe not; people have been on earth for only a tiny fraction of earth's history. Another oh-well moment for religion where they try to change their ages-old philosphy to fit the modern day, hoping no one will notice.

@ pirate - i also said that one can be good and have morals without following religion, not sure why you said it again like i was arguing against it.

I also said that only God knows who is worthy and man cannot tell you if your not worthy. Yes i also mentioned that the bible stated that Jesus is the way to everlasting life, but to me i think that since he said he came to help the sinners and the unrighteous, that those who are trying to lead a moral life are doing just fine.

He did say that those who have faith in him that have never seen him are truly blessed.. i would not say one is doomed due to being unsure but lives a good moral decent life.

I don't hold the idea that if you are good and have morals but are unsure of God and Christ that your evil or going to hell. We will see or not when we die.

As far as the flood, there is evidence of sea dwelling fossils on top of the highest mountains, so at one time they were covered. who knows really

just the other day i was watching the history channel and they are finding cities and structures 500 ft and more under water. That's pretty dang far. So at one time settlements have been much lower than our water levels. Who knows what lies further down or covered.

With all the truth to people places and times within the bible, i myself have no reason to think its fake. Somethings might be more literal than others and possibly parables to a meaning, but so far i wouldn't call it fairy tale and fake.

If the Pope accepts the Big Bang Theory then he must also accept the theory of evolution and admit that the Bible is wrong on this topic!

I would like to clarrify one thing that the article wrongly states, and that I have seen mentioned in this discussion. No where in the Bible does it say anything about the sun rotating around the earth or otherwise.

This pope is making an attempt to modernize Catholicism because their numbers are declining hugely while others are climbing. Religion is politics, and therefore thrives on membership and the associated money. All the sudden, condoms are gaining acceptability, a fashion designer is involved in his ridiculous wardrobe, and the single most blasphemous scientific theory is being coveted by Catholicism. What's next ... phat rims on the popemobile?

maybe we are living inside a black hole and that is why the universe is ever expanding...if a black whole sucks in everything around it then its possible that our universe is what is inside the black hole and thus ever expanding and growing. They say a black hole can absorb another.

:) who knows , food for thought.

@PirateC

I am fallible. I don't personally feel like people can trust others 100% to teach them about spiritual things. Even those whom might study the Bible all their lives will still not have "the truth" in it's entirely because we are all fallible and deal with these things subjectively rather than objectively.

But I personally believe God is infallible and all-powerful. I think He could easily write the destiny of His creation such that a book would be created by these fallible men to say EXACTLY what he wanted it to say, word for word.

From that I think that each person that reads it will take something different from it, but that the universal message is the same to all that read it:

1. It has Jesus declaring, "I AM GOD". People either believe that statement or they don't. If they don't nothing else it says really matters, it will all seem ridiculous. But this is a powerful point. Some dude declared "I Am God, and here's what I have to say".

2. It universally shows when read that mankind is not living in a state of spiritual perfection and because of that is worthy of spiritual death.

3. It shows that not by works righteousness (being a good person and doing good deeds), but by belief alone in the Salvation by God Himself as the only redemption that is offered to once again become alive. Since "the dead can't make themselves walk" as it were.

As I said in post 1.43 I don't think the laws are rules are literal, which means people are missing the point when they take literally "don't eat pork", or give rules that aren't socially acceptable today and are dated like "Homosexuality". The rules you think are "dated" aren't the point.

Their only point is to show that no matter what you do no matter where you look, everyone is sinning; By sinning are imperfect; By being imperfect can not dwell with God and ultimately are in need of divine intervention via the Salvation of the dude who declared himself God, Jesus.

Again, I'm fallble. I don't purport to have any answers. I just know the answers I was given when I went looking on what has been and will continue to be a life long journey.

Jwhite1083
By 1000 votes, Dave....

Not really. If you read most of the BLUE comments, they don't exactly support god either. So that's roughly 18,000 - 14,000 against you.

I like how those most critical of science, are the ones who never took the time to understand it, or learn to apply it; this idiot pope included. The pope is in no position to attack scientific theories he never even begun to try to understand. And, in order for him to demonstrate how these laws and theories of the physical world are wrong, he would need to show the academic world, by demonstration and application, why these are wrong (because that's how we got to the point of understanding these concepts; not by just having faith in them - they actually work). Just because he doesn't want to come to terms with these scientific realities, doesn't mean they are wrong. It means he is wrong.

I find him to be a simultaneously arrogant and disgusting figure, really. This a-hole just said - a few weeks back - that raping children isn't that bad of a crime. Who in the hell does the pope think he is? Why do people listen to this jerk? Makes me wanna throw him in front of a speeding bus and ask him to pray his way out of the laws of physics. I'll bet money he can't do it. All he can do is talk empty crap. He's a liar and a cheat.

The universe is a material construct and mired by physical laws. We cannot say the same for the nature of God.

@HowULikeMeNow

You should check out this book. It's not too heady and was a very interesting read on just that subject.

http://www.amazon.com/Black-Hole-War-Stephen-Mechanics/dp/0316016403

Psalm 14:1 The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”
They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds,
there is none who does good.

2 The Lord looks down from heaven on the children of man,
to see if there are any who understand, [1]
who seek after God.

3 They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt;
there is none who does good,
not even one.

It's possible.

It's also possible that man has created the idea of a masculine omni-potent spirit(God), to ease our fear of death and the unknown.

Most faith is based on our wanting to believe we have the answer or truth to life and afterlife. We put faith in beliefs that sooth our fears and tell us what we would like to hear and believe.

It's too scary for most to admit that we just don't know, or admit that no living person have a shred of verifiable proof for their beliefs.

The Pope doesn't know any more about "God", than any other person on Earth.

If you listen to those who run organized religion(and take their word as gospel), then you need mental help.

Fancy robes, abstinence and prayer, doesn't make you a spokesperson for God.

I suggest you all read Genesis and the Big Bang by Dr. Gerald Schroeder. It's quite enlightening.

Why is everyone hung up about dinosaurs? Cats exist, too. Why did God make them? Cause He felt like it, and they're cute. God works in processes. This is plainly seen in the Genesis account of creation. It doesn't explain what the process is, but there's definitely one there. So, then, why couldn't that process of creation be the processes we call Big Bang, stellar formation, super novae, planetary formation, evolution, etc.? If God didn't just snap us into existence, which the Bible clearly says He didn't, then we had to get here somehow. Science studies that, the How.

And if you start jumping up and down about how 5,000 =/= 13,000,000,000 years, go back and read my first line again. Especially the 'it's quite enlightening' part.

I don't want to hear the "bible says this or that" excuse. Men wrote the bible(and portrayed God as masculine), not God.

For aquatone: Actually that's not quite correct. The theory you're referring to is the Big Crunch and has problems. A big expansion and big crunch would violate the second law of thermodynamics. After each crunch you would have an increase in entropy eventually reaching what's known as the heat death. Every bit of energy in the universe is random slow movement of particles. This big crunch model also requires what is known as a closed universe. Basically space shaped like the surface of a sphere instead of being flat. Current evidence points to a saddle shaped universe.

Also, the universe is expanding at an accelerated rate. This acceleration appears to be larger then the deceleration of gravity (Dark energy problem). So you have two scenarios here. In the first, the universe continues to expand but the expansion reaches a steady rate. All of the stars die out and every bit of energy in the universe reaches maximum entropy (Heat Death). In the second scenario the expansion speeds up to a point where galaxies are no longer visible (receding from one another at the speed of light), then other stars in the galaxy are no longer visible, then the solar system is torn apart and eventually the fundamental components of matter are moving away from each other at this speed. This is known as the Big Rip. If I recall correctly, the Big Rip is less likely then the Heat Death version because it's less supported by evidence.

There is a version of the big crunch that could get around the 2nd law of thermodynamics problem. But... it requires some fancy things with quantum mechanics and additional dimensions that the entropy can go to.

Another version of the big crunch involves a single point in space creating another universe. This point would contain only dark energy (no quarks, leptons, and force carriers). That point then expands into a new universe in place of the old one.

I would recommend reading about the cyclic model for more information.

Bend your Science vs Religion minds around this:

In Schrödinger's thought experiment he hypothetically places a living cat into a box, along with a device containing a vial of poison gas. Also in the box is very small amount of a radioactive substance. If even a single atom of the substance decays during the test period, a relay mechanism will trip a hammer which will in turn break the vial and kill the cat.

Since observer cannot know whether or not an atom of the substance has decayed, and consequently, cannot know whether the vial has been broken, the poison gas released, and the cat killed. Since we cannot know, the cat is both dead and alive according to quantum law. It is only when we break open the box and learn the condition of the cat that the superposition is lost, and the cat becomes one or the other (dead or alive). It’s called quantum indeterminacy or the observer's paradox and means the observation or measurement itself affects an outcome, so that the outcome as such does not exist unless the measurement is made.

We know that superposition actually occurs at the subatomic level, because there are observable effects of interference, in which a single particle is demonstrated to be in multiple locations simultaneously. i.e. You can’t measure the speed if you know the location of a particle, and vice versa you can’t know the location of the particle when you measure the speed. What that fact implies about the nature of reality on the observable level (cats, for example, as opposed to electrons) is one of the area’s most puzzling in Quantum Physics.

Not being a Physicist myself (so not having a complete understanding) I still find it interesting that the “electron cloud” basically doesn’t become a “reality” until it is observed. Was this what was meant by “With even a Mustard seed of faith you can move mountains”?

If reality isn’t measurable (visable) at the Quantum level until it’s observed, what IS reality? At this quantum level everything is “hocus pocus” and “magic” So believe Science, believe in Creation, or believe in both, you’re doing all three by “Faith”.

I am surprised at how many people here take the Bible word-for-word. Historians and scholars at the Vatican have already commented on this. The stories from the Old Testament were actually spoken stories, passed down generation to generation until someone had the literary knowledge to write them down. Everyone knows that stories get changed, translated, and altered as they are passed down through the centuries. Thus, the overall message may prevail but the exact events are not 100% true.

Furthermore, people here keep quoting passages from the four gospels. Well those gospels were written 15 - 30 apart from each other, and the remaining books were written hundreds of years after the death of Christ. In fact, there were over a dozen gospels written by the disciples of Christ, but most of them were not included in the Bible. Why? Well the original Christian followers met in homes, just to worship. Centuries later, a group decided that the Christian religion needed a hierarchy of power, so a group of men came together and appointed themselves the leaders. These self-proclaimed leaders then granted themselves the power to decide what is holy doctrine, and what "rules" need to be followed. Thus, only 4 gospels were picked. This group of leaders even changed the history of Mary Magdalene, even though the other gospels portray her as the favored disciple (I guess men can't handle a woman being the favorite).

What is funny is that the leaders of the Church know all this, they even talk about it and write books. It is common knowledge, if you are willing to do the research and read about it. Yet people here would rather ignore facts and believe that the Bible is a word-for-word, exact account of actual history. Sadly, many of these people are actually following the "rules" and passages of self-appointed men, not God.

Its ok for universes to just pop into existance, but not omnipotent beings?

Where did the materials that supposedly started the bing bang come from? They just happened to be there? Where did space come from? how can it have no end?

People who point to pure science, no possibility of God are ignorant and foolish - you can only prove what happened - now how, why, what was here before the big bang, etc etc so you arguments are just as sound of someone who believes in God.

Sybrsean. Differentiate between reality and observed. You can't observe the electron cloud however you can observe it's effects regardless of knowing it's momentum and position exactly.

Secondly, one can easily take the objective collapse theory approach. By the time you open up the box the cat was already dead or alive since it observed itself or your testing device observed it for you.

Also, quantum mechanic effects and probabilities reduce to Newtonian mechanics at the size of a cat.

Another approach would be to define the probabilities as the result of multiple tests. Stick 1000 cats in different boxes with particle and it's chance of decay will equal #of dead cats/1000

The Kid.

I once again site the flying spaghetti monster of epsilon 351. You can't prove me wrong so I'm clearly correct.

You can't prove me wrong so I'm clearly correct.

By that logic:

My cat recently died
my grandmother died as well
hence I can safely assume my grandmother was a cat

What Sybrsean is describing is explained very understandably in a movie called "What the Bleep - Down the Rabbit Hole". It's like a beginner's guide to quantum physics - worthy of watching - so much so that I bought it.

@doggysaywhat

None of your points take away from the fact that under quantum mechanics there is a possiblity (however impropable) that the cat will turn into a bowling ball instantaneously.

More of a chance for all the air molecules in you room to suddenly coalesce into one side suffocating anyone on the other side. The cat won't turn into a bowling ball in the age of the universe due to the improbability of that event in the given time. So, you won't see it. And this is why Newtonian mechanics takes over for objects the size of a bowling ball or cat but not for atoms.

Also the point before about not being able to prove me wrong was meant to illustrate the absurdity of The Kids argument. I simply replaced the term god with flying spaghetti monster to show the silliness in taking the lack of proof to the contrary as proof of existence.

Out of the stick which I shoved up your @sshole

Its ok for universes to just pop into existance, but not omnipotent beings?

This is clearly missing the point.

It is CHRISTIANS who claim that their god has no beginning, and no ending. They claim this knowledge as absolute fact, even though none of them can possibly know The Truth.

Those of us who do not believe in creationism are merely -speculating-, using the same "no beginning and no end" criteria as Christians, that perhaps the matter that makes up the universe has always existed, as well.

The difference is that we don't profess to know for a fact. Christians do. Therefore, the burden of proof is on the ones making the positive claim.

To put it more simply: Either give us the evidence, or quit comparing apples and oranges. 8).

@ HowULikeMeNow -

ME - "I'm from the year 4011 and I just invented a starship engine that has a nasty emissions problem - every 10 seconds its running it creates a new universe.
Does that make me a God?
Should I grow a beard?
Legally, do I now own these universes?"

YOU - "thanks for the NO VALUE to discussion comment"

ME, Now - This was an analogy. Since you're obviously superstitious I see I'll have to spell it out for you. I made 3 points here:

1) Our universe might have been CREATED, true. But it may have been by accident, not premeditation.

2) Just because there may have been a creator doesn't mean he CARES about this or any other universe but his own, especially if he were creating multiple universes by accident, or any other scenario that's more likely than magic.

3) Just because the universe MAY have had a creator, he may have been an average Joe where he comes from. There's absolutely NO reason for thinking he has magical powers, omniscience, omnipresence, or lives outside of time in his all-powerful body. Saying your God MUST be all-powerful is what volcano-worshippers do.

I concede there may be higher-dimensional beings that would APPEAR to us as Gods every time they chose to interact with us, but they would have their own built-in limitations, especially with each other.

Magic is for morons, and children. And for the ignorant. And for cowards who cannot accept death.

@ HowULikeMeNow - "maybe we are living inside a black hole and that is why the universe is ever expanding...if a black whole sucks in everything around it then its possible that our universe is what is inside the black hole and thus ever expanding and growing. They say a black hole can absorb another."

Since a normal black hole doesn't have any more gravity than a star, in fact less, your hypothesis sucks. Our own sun sucks in everything around it, as does our planet.

Living inside a black hole has WHAT to do with an expanding universe?

You cult-followers are always spouting nonsense pseudo-science and expecting to be taken seriously when its OBVIOUS you wouldn't know scientific method from missionary-style.

My own analogy could be changed to read "ET's from Galaxy X use a starship engine that creates multiple universes as an unwanted byproduct..." and my points would still be the same.

Now go back to quoting verses from your Bible - as if it were the only religious text on the planet - its just one of many - and its followers have the absolute worst morals of ALL the cults.

Your get-out-of-jail-free-card called Grace (forgiveness of sins) is responsible for more evil than all other cults combined. History tells.

The fact that your dogma states that evil men can repent-in-their-hearts and reach Heaven if they only 'believe' is nothing but a unique recruitment tool that's been extremely successful. I don't think I'd want to share Heaven with murderers.

If the existence of God were somehow proven then I certainly wouldn't worship the Christian God. She makes too many mistakes, obviously doesn't value human life, and has crappy morals.

Your religion is determined by where you were born. Unless you made a determined effort to study all religions and THEN made an informed decision as to which made more sense to you, you're no different than a Muslim born in Indonesia following the cult of his parents.

I've done just that, and the ONLY religion that has my respect is Theravada Buddhism of SE Asia. These people actually try to live their lives pretty much as Jesus is said to have lived his - without the magical miracles, of course. I've yet to meet a SINGLE Christian do that. They won't, either, because of that easy mass-recruitment tool called Grace.

I'm NOT a Buddhist, they just get a speck of my respect.

Why do people assume there was no 'time' before the big bang?

Time is nothing but the relative speed of causality.

May have been a different speed 'before', but I'd bet causality exists in all universes. I'd also bet their physical constants are all pretty much the same.

Just because we're living in the dark age of technology right now (Thank You Christians) doesn't mean that future generations won't have a MUCH better handle on physics and cosmology. They'll eventually figure it out, and start their own experiments. Of course Christians will use their best lies to slow down future scientists from 'playing God', but I have faith that we'll eventually overcome superstition. Hopefully we can get it done before Christians destroy our home planet.

I asked my fundamentalist sister why Christians were the worst polluters on the planet and she said, and I quote, "Don't worry about pollution because Jesus is returning anyway."

If there was a quick intelligence test for voter-eligibility I wouldn't concern myself with Christians AT ALL.

There IS proof that "God" exists - THE LAWS OF PHYSICS.

Energy can not be created or destroyed. It can only be transferred.

So, how did we get the first "energy?"

I call that supreme source of energy - God.

Karen, an interesting position to take, and one I could back, except that in a Quantum state energy can be created out of nothing. However, on the premise, you have it right. It is just that the First law of Thermodynamics doesn't hold true in the Quantum universe. None the less, The Creator was the progenetor of all things, though the how and the why will forever remain a mystery.

I trust you don't mind if I call what you call "God" The Creator, as I have no idea who/what this entity was/is, nor do I have any way of figuring it out. I am but a mere mortal, and sthus subject to being unable to grasp the totality of the Divine. Did the Creator make this and the infinite other Universes with some grand scheme in mind, or were they simply reactions to the Creator's presence? Can't say, as who can know the mind of the Divine? Divinity grants many thing, not least among them a mind beyond the understanding of a mere mortal. If people would stop being so damn literal when it comes to Holy texts, and be just a bit more open minded, they would see that Science and Spirituality compliment each other in so many way.

Karen in Los Angeles- that is such a typical answer from a thumper. Plus, you need to brush up on your physics because it can be neutralized destroyed and amplified. There is no proof of god nor in our explanation of the big bang "yet". So why is god so much more believable from a book heavenly flawed mind you, that was written a few thousand years ago when text go far beyond it. Its a crutch for the weak minded, in need of something to believe in. I think its funny that so many christian try to say science and religion complement each other. 1st issue(and a big one) is evolution, second is age of our planet (lets forget the center of the universe thing), third life in the universe and to toss a funny one in there forth, there is not that much room in the core of the earth for all those people who go to hell ;-)

Who cares how long it took the Catholic Church to come to this position, I believe it is a very good position to take. Those who argue that people should only believe what is proven, will at some point face a problem with imagination and creativity. Imagination and creativity are the foundation of all that is good and beautiful about humanity. Not only that, imagination and creativity are also the foundation of 1/2 of the scientific method or process -- the creation of a hypothesis. In order to prove or disprove a hypothesis, in order to validate a theory, a scientist must first take the position of thinking something that is not yet proven. And then, in the end, nothing is ever proven. Scientific theories only fail to ever be dis proven. So in truth, none of us know anything. All any of us ever do is chose to believe.

Why can't people accept that the big bang theory could be god's work?

Why can't people accept that god and evolution can exist together?

Why do people believe in a bonze-age book that has been so translated that it has no meaning?

The Native Americans believed in a "Great Spirit" long before the missionaries shoved religion down their throats.

Why do people have to be so closed-minded?

Daily Lexicon:=

Open-minded == agreeing with me
Closed-minded == disagreeing with me

What, you don't agree with that? How closed-minded of you.

Larry, I have said this before. The universe could have very well been created by God. Scientist don't know what happened before the Big Bang, so it's possible that a higher intellegence created it. The problem however is that proving God exist does not prove that the God of the Bible exist. In fact, if God created the Big Bang, then the Bible becomes nothing more than a book.

In other words, even if you can prove that God exist, you still haven't proven he's your God.

The problem however is that proving God exist does not prove that the God of the Bible exist.

That's exactly the point. I believe like the Native Americans, in the Great Spirit. Too many things have happened in my life to believe that man is the finally authority on anything.

But I'm not the least bit religious.

In fact, if God created the Big Bang, then the Bible becomes nothing more than a book.

I don't understand this statement. It seems slightly at odds with your earlier point:

The problem however is that proving God exist does not prove that the God of the Bible exist

As if you're trying to say that "if you can prove that God exists [by virtue of God creating the Big Bang], then you've proven that the God of the Bible does not exist ["the Bible becomes nothing more than a book"]." I don't see how the possibility that our universe arose from a Big Bang diminishes the status of the Abrahamic God.

I don't see how the possibility that our universe arose from a Big Bang diminishes the status of the Abrahamic God.

It doesn't.

It doesn't.

Yes it does.

As if you're trying to say that "if you can prove that God exists [by virtue of God creating the Big Bang], then you've proven that the God of the Bible does not exist ["the Bible becomes nothing more than a book"]." I don't see how the possibility that our universe arose from a Big Bang diminishes the status of the Abrahamic God.

Now for a more in depth response to a statement with some substance behind it.

It means that God not only created the Big Bang, but the physics that created the universe. Once you acknowledge the Big Bang you have to acknowledge evolution. Everything is connected. At best the creation myth becomes a parable. Even the story of God could be a parable. How can you separate the story of Adam and Eve with Moses on the Mountain? Perhaps the way Moses got the 10 commandments was nothing but a parable.

In the Bible, God learns and changes. He regrets the flood and promises not to do it again. This makes God fallible and imperfect. In fact, the story of the Bible is not how God has grown, but it’s the story about how man has grown. The story stopped 2000 years ago and so did the story of man. The God of the Bible is rather small, the God that created the Big Bang is magnificent.

Okay, I see where you're coming from. I would say that my own faith is already based more on what I witness than on the Bible itself (the "God of the Bible" I see as filtered through the human experience), which is why I was a little confused by your statement.

Petunia, read your history. It was the Catholic Priest Georges Lemaitre who first proposed the theory of the Big Bang. 3-4 yrs or so later, Hubble confirmed it.

Basic Physics says you cannot creat matter from nothing. Big Bang proved otherwise. Sounds like the Hand of God to me.

Hell Petunia, even scientists don't agree with anything immediately. You want peope agreeing with everything? What would be the fun in that?

During the 1930's and 1940's, a priest (whose name I forget) was one of the leading cosmologists and he was always in communication with the Vatican during those years. He debated with Einstein and other astro-physicists. The Church is not a late-comer to the field of cosmology.

Hey Petunia - Quantum physics (unlike basic physics) DOES say you can get matter out of nothing. Gotta keep up with the discoveries! We live in a flat universe and it came from nothing -- without the aid of anything. You and all living things on this planet are reformed star stuff. The iron in your blood, the calcium in your bones came from exploding stars. Stars, not some crazy prophet, gave up their existence so you and I could be here today. Awesome!

Ahhh, LL, but the problem is when we try to define "time" and exactly what the term "before" means.

In other words, we keep running into the problem of trying to figure out "what was before what". For example-

I ask: "Where/How/When did life begin?"

You say: "From the primordial "soup" of pre-history"

I ask- "When did the Earth begin?"

You say: "About 4.6 billion years ago"

I ask- "What was BEFORE that?"

You say- "The Big Bang....roughly 13 billion years ago"

I ask- "OK, but what was BEFORE that?"

You say- "Ummmm, nothing, I guess"

Then I ask- "So we came from....nothing?"

You say- "Sure! It's quantum physics"

I ask- "So Newton was wrong? Energy/matter CAN be created?"

You say- "Uh....yup"

I ask- "Then WHAT "made" matter to be created?"

You say- "I already told you! The Big Bang!"

I say- 'B-but.......huh?"

Hmmm? It's hard being human and having to figure out all these phiosophical questions. Logic is as much a human fallacy as it is a benefit.

I find it easier to logically understand the universe if we remove "time" from the picture.

For example, God may be "timeless" (this Bible DOES state this) or the universe itself may be "timeless". If we determine that "time" is a construct of human experience, then it becomes easier to see how the Big Bang may simply be another cog in the wheel of omnipresent existence. I feel atheists may still have a hard time with this notion, however. Do the best you can.

Maybe there is no "before" or "after", but instead simply "present".

Often, when people have near-death experiences, they return with profound spiritual beliefs that typically are life-altering. One of the common things NDE people report is that while they are beyond the "veil" of physical life, there is NO time. It simply does not exist. They see the "beginning" and the "end", but are constantly "in the now", so to speak. They often cannot determine how long they were in "heaven" because, again, time does not exist in that state of being. It's interesting stuff.

Check out www.near-death.com for some wonderful insight. Many blessings to all!

PS- Sorry for all the quotation marks, it was the only way I could separate the semantics.

I God was brilliant enough to create life, why didn't he give us any of that intelligence? We know how the human body works but yet we don't know how the human body works. On top of that the claim is he created all living things, that's quite an accomplishment when you consider the billions of cells needed for the project.

If carbon dating is accurate, God's creation is billions of years old and this is the best he/she/it could do? I'm sure Dino is pretty angry about being erased.

Faith does not pay the bills. Dealing with humans is what we do day in and day out. If someone is watching over all of us they are doing a really lousy job. That's right, almost forgot that lame "free will" excuse that was written into THE book.

Janine wrote:

Basic Physics says you cannot creat matter from nothing.

Actually, quantum mechanics says exactly the opposite. Research "virtual particles" and follow up with the implications for black hole evaporation, etc.

All these negative anti God comments, God does not exist, etc... No wonder why this world is falling apart before our very eyes. I choose to believe in God, and Jesus Christ is my hope. For all of you who choose to not believe in God, that is your choice, I can't and won't try to change that, but I will not allow any of you to try and change my choice, nor will you ever be able to take away my hope and faith in Jesus Christ my Lord and Savior. He even said "Be not of this world" and now I know why. Satan exists as well, and he is having a great time knowing how he has deceived and deprived so many.

For Indy-Patriot. I could claim the exact same things and put flying spaghetti monster at the end. You can't prove me wrong so I must be correct right? Or maybe I'd use giant purple dinosaur instead. Clearly that's true as well since you can't prove me wrong.

For Jim, yeah... Quantum mechanics is very strange and comes up with some very odd counter-intuitive true results that make your head spin and question things you thought you knew about reality. Talk about a mind trip.

My post said nothing in regards to what you're flaming me for, "Doggy". I was discussing the semantics behind "time", and why we humans have a hard time answering these questions of "what came before what".

Would you like to try again, since you obviously mistook me for someone else?

my cosmologist does a great job on my hair.

lol @ indy patriot, um no he doesnt need to try again. I think he was pretty clear the first time. Plus we all enjoyed your little convo with yourself, nice to be able to put words in someones mouth isnt it?

Indy Patriot -

There is a problem with this - if time is a "human construct," as you purport, then you must also count space (the three dimensions most people are familiar with) as a human construct. This leads to the path of the illusory universe, a tree falling in the woods (or a bear crapping in the woods if you prefer).

There is the anthropic principle, of which there are the weak and strong forms. Neither one really does anything other than say "we are here," when boiled and tanned. For instance, the strong principle says that the universe was specifically formed for our existence (the fine-tuning argument). It is used by theologians in this sort of crap about god being the big bang or whatever. It requires a consciousness to actually decide on the 6 (is it 6?) fundamental properties without which our universe would not be capable of supporting life. The weak anthropic principle states that if the universe were not as it is observed, we wouldn't be here to argue the point. It's more of a stop-gap to preclude those who wish to debate physics with biologists.

One thing I don't quite understand - the Big Bang is always treated by religionists as if it was done by god (assuming they don't buy the 6000 year old one, and don't count those people out, they make up at least 48% of America). But why should it be treated as a unique event?

Time is a human experience in that we can only experience it in one direction. Space is space, we can travel in it, we can move in any direction. Time, however, is vectorized. Only one-way travel. That's what makes it so interesting, to my mind.

To Indy-Patriot. No I'm pretty sure my post got the point across quite well. I'm pointing out the absurdity of your argument by replacing the words god with flying spaghetti monster (FSM for short).

Here's an example:

Your quote "For example, God may be "timeless" (this Bible DOES state this) or the universe itself may be "timeless". If we determine that "time" is a construct of human experience, then it becomes easier to see how the Big Bang may simply be another cog in the wheel of omnipresent existence."

My new quote "For example, FSM may be "timeless" (this Quiznots DOES state this) or the universe itself may be "timeless". If we determine that "time" is a construct of human experience, then it becomes easier to see how the Big Bang may simply be another cog in the wheel of omnipresent pasta existence."

To many the argument with the flying spaghetti monster seems like the rant of a crazy person. You can't prove my new quote wrong so it must be true. Just like yours. Hence the absurdity of the argument.

Laugh all you want, SmallTownPete, but it is your reading comprehension skills that are suspect. Again, I was not making an argument for or against the existence of God necessarily (though I am a Christian), but to provide a thought-provoking suggestion that it is our experience of Time that may be creating the confusion.

If it is easier for you, I'll pose it a different way- "What was here before the Big Bang, and if there was "nothing", then how do you get "something" out of "nothing" spontaneously?" Answer that, and you have the gist of my post.

Further, Pete, I was not putting words in anyone's mouth. The conversation I posted was meant to be an example of the metaphysical debate between opposing sides. It was not specific to anyone here.

AND FOR DOGGY- Once again, you (and Pete) completely missed my point altogether. To throw your own deliberately offensive argument back at you, even if you replace the word God with your "FSM", it does not change the intrinsic purpose of my post. No matter "who" you choose to worship, (or none altogether), it still leaves the questions that humans have been asking since the dawn of time, namely "Where did we come from", "Why are we here", and "What is the purpose of life". Some people choose to answer these questions with spirituality, some choose to answer the questions with science. Either way, the questions remain. To make the argument that our mental roadblock to these questions is really just a function of our understanding of Time, is not absurd (as you offensively put it) nor ranting. I was simply suggesting a metaphysical notion to consider. The fact that you and Pete chose to jump all over my post with your vehement anti-religious worldview, only shows that you cannot be reasonable enough to have a serious debate.

Janstince was the only one who actually responded with an intelligent retort. He/she understood the point of my post. TO that note, Janstince, science has theorized for a long time that the space-time continuum may be much more complex than we realize, and that in some examples (black hole theory, for example) the "rules" of physics become altered. Your statement about time only going in one particular vector is correct, thus the basis behind my suggestion that the "one-way-ness" of time may be the human construct I was referring to, and that time may not actually be unidirectional at all, but only as we humans perceive it to be such in our limited human experience. Thanks for the serious response, though.

Lucy and the rest of the "believers". This is 2011... not 3000 BC. They actually have drugs now that can cure you of your mental illness and delusional psychosis.

We are certainly one of the YOUNGEST universes in OUR galaxy. There are infinite amounts of universes and galaxies. How do we know that we aren't just the product/creation of a more advanced civilization ? There's been plenty of indication that lifeforms of superior intelligence w/advanced technology have been visiting this planet since the days of the cave men.

For all we know there are MILLIONS of different intelligent life forms inhabiting millions of other planets in millions of other galaxies. To assume that WE are the only ones, the most intelligent ones, the superior ones, etc etc is pure arrogance and ignorance.

For all we know we are nothing more than an alien science project... much like an ant farm. PERIOD.

Smc31569, I think you meant "solar system" when you said "universe," since universes (as far as we know) don't exist inside of galaxies.

And I have a serious problem with the "aliens did it" notion of human origins. If we were created by aliens, then who created the aliens? I'm sure some would like to apply this question to the concept of "God," but it's not the same situation. What are extraterrestrials but humans with advanced technology? Did more aliens create the aliens that created the aliens that created us?

It's like the old lady, when asked what the giant turtle holding up the Earth was standing on, replied: "It's turtles all the way down!"

@Smc31569 I also have a problem with the "aliens did it" concept.

One of my friends tells me aliens must have tampered with the human race to produce our present form. He reasons that it is because no other species on Earth has matched our technology and progress. He also says that other animals don't think. They just react and respond automatically to events around them. Even though I have given him many examples of self-awareness, thought, planning, tool making, and other things, in animals, he still holds out. He says the test subject animal was trained by humans to do these things. Or in the case of tool use among wild animals, they stumbled on the stick and the termites mound, no real thought is involved.

Statements like the "aliens did it", or trying to make out like humans
have corned the market on thought, is absurd. It is no more than an effort to
set mankind apart from the Earth and its creatures. It is a bowing down to the
idea that life on our planet and man could not have evolved on its own.

They forget that humanity is special, as is all life, and doesn't need any
device of thought or instrumentality to make us special.

@james

Your point reminds me of a quote from card in speaker for the dead when referring to the Hierarchy of Exclusion. I laugh all the time when people say that morality needs to catch up with technology. Since before Mary Shelly, we have been contemplating the ethics of things far out of our reach through the medium of fiction.

"The difference between ramen and varelse is not in the creature judged, but in the creature judging. When we declare an alien species to be ramen, it does not mean that they have passed a threshold of moral maturity. It means that we have."

—Demosthenes, Letter to the Framlings

For Indy, 3rd time. You talk in your original post about atheist having a difficult time grasping the concept of timeless. They don't... It's often the religious folk that want to put a bearded man in the sky that created things instead of trying to figure out facts.

Second, you then talk about a near death experience, a state of timelessness and that person being "in heaven". Hate to break it to you.... but... during a near death experience blood flow to the brain is often slowed or interrupted creating all sorts of crazy feelings and thoughts in the person. A blacked out person also doesn't have a concept of time... Clearly they're in heaven as well right?

Third. I'm showing the absurdity of your points in the last 2 paragraphs by replacing God with flying spaghetti monster. Here''s the same questions of where do we come from, what is our purpose here, what is the purpose of life... Here's an answer. Flying Spaghetti Monster. That answer to those philosophical questions is just as valid as yours.... and just as absurd.

To Indy Patriot,

The only thing I commented on was that Doggy was very clear in post 2.9, and I laughed at the fact that you told him to try again. When did I jump all over you with a vehement anti-religious worldview? Im not sure what I wrote that made you so angry to have you put my name in your post four times but it made me feel special, so thank you =)

Karma58,

Do remember these words when you stand before a Holy God at His return.

Karma58, actually there is scientific support for some of the biblical requirements. How about trichinosis in pork? We learned you need to cook it well. How about plain cleanliness issues with female periods? How about some of the diseases today carried by shellfish? Much of the bible is allegorical, but how about some of the things described that could relate to aircraft or other flying objects? Take it with a grain of salt.

You seem to know everything here Karma Almighty. Do you know the cure for AIDS and Cancer as well? You poor lost soul. God doesn't have to prove Himself to you or anybody. You say the Bible is full of complete wrongness? Did it ever occur to you that you could be the one full of complete wrongness? You say religious people are whacked? Then just stay away from them, you don't need to worry about depriving them of your company. And BTW, not all people think they are the center of the universe. God is the center of the universe. The ones that think they are the center of the universe are people like yourself.

What we choose will always determine our outcome.

How about we dont take that ridiculous fairie tale seriously at all?

How about you and the gang of lunatics you pray with eash sunday are so whacked you shouldnt be allowed to vote?

How about we learn that most of the organized violence and depravity in this world comes not from atheists and ags... but from good old xtians jews and muslims?

You abrahamists are exponentially the most violent people ever on the face of the earth... You talk a good game about peace- but if anyone isnt willing to go along with your fairy tale- you are perfectly justified in killing him (your religion says its ok)... totally ignoring reality and putting your own spin to it is you peoples' kick.

I find it amusing that the people who don't believe in God seem to feel the need to insult those of us who do calling us weak minded and such.

Yes, while I will admit that the Catholic Church has made its mistakes over the course of its 2000yrs of existence, but then what culture/group hasn't? Ask the families (if they exist) of the victims of Nagasaka and Hiroshima. Of the victims of the gas chambers in Nazi Germany, if they feel that scientific achievement is necessarily a good thing.

Jesus speaks of Love and Peace. Of living a just life and the blessings of an afterlife shared with him.

Science has brought us Nuclear weapons, AIDS, abortion. While I can accept the good that science has brought to our life, I think I'll stick with Jesus.

Bernette Callender

Karma58,

Do remember these words when you stand before a Holy God at His return.

Oh, Karma won't have to remember, God knows exactly what was said.

Then Karma will be eating his/her own Karma.

And here is the definition of Karma:

The total effect of a person's actions and conduct during the successive phases of the person's existence, regarded as determining the person's destiny.

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/karma#ixzz1AGyhCF46

lucy, you say if i think religous people are whacked to stay away from them. that's kind of hard with those morons constantly knocking on my door at 8 am asking me to come to their church cause spreading their religion is part of their religion. it's a giant pyramid scheme.

First off , the soul is an imaginary object it is in your mind not in your body therefore it can only be lost in your mind,The center of my universe is the sun without it game over.The center of my earth is my family.I do not believe in myth nor fairy tale,I also do not condemn those that do .Whatever gets you thru the day.

Janine, I don't agree with insulting those that do believe in a God any more than I like be called soul less, or other names for not believing. I do agree that all organized religion has had it's problems over the years, but mostly because it has been hijacked by those who practice it to justify their own impulses and lack of humanity. Last time I checked, no Atheist Army ever declared war on anyone. I would like to think that if Jesus truly existed and was blessed with the ability to bring people together, that he would at least recognize that current day religion is way outside of what he desired people to be a part of.

I'm fairly certain that the current organization of religion is quite different than what was intended and has led to a majority of the chaos that has enveloped the world. Last time I looked, most of the faults that you listed were as a result of our inadequacies as Humans and are directly a part of our human failings.

Janine-1645002

Bombing / killing people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki SAVED millions of JAPANESE people, (and up to one million American soldiers) and killed / wounded far less. These bombs ended the war. The US was fire-bombing Japanese cities nearly on a daily basis with so much firepower that several of these air raids killed more than the 2 bombs you refer to. Japan could have surrendered any time, but that was not going to be anytime soon (as evidenced by the individual battles on several other islands on the way to Japan). Only one Japanese leader ever surrendered (Phillippines?), AFTER depleting his army to nothing and fighting to the very end. Had the war lasted even one more month, WAY more Japanese would have been killed by the subsequent air raids than were killed by the 2 bombs. If an invasion happened, we're talking millions more dead. The ends justified the means, not only for the US, but for Japan's well being too.

There is hardly much science needed to pipe gas into a room. Science has so far saved my, my mother's, and my father's life. My brother can walk because of science. You are welcome to go live in the woods, but I'll bet you don't (nice computer, huh?). I'm sure a lot of people were praying to Jesus during WWII. I know my uncles were. Jesus did not stop the war. Science did.

Now queue the pope to claim "The bombs that ended WWII were good, and created by god... by... working through the faithful humans that... also created the bombs... through god. Yeah, that's it."

You say religious people are whacked? Then just stay away from them, you don't need to worry about depriving them of your company.

Not defending Karma but I do have to say....staying away from them isn't always easy. Depending on where you live you can run into people who shove religion down your neck every day. My ex-mother in law used to tell me every time I saw her that I was going to hell for not going to church. She was a hateful mean woman who stole from her own father on his deathbed....but because she went to church she believed she was better than me and I would be punished. Ya gotta understand....the majority of the people out there pushing religion actually are freakin whack jobs. I'm not saying all religious people are......but I can't remember the last time I had a conversation with a religious person who didn't look down at me for being Agnostic and quickly start to try to convert me before I burn.

Bernette Callender and Lucy1, I have to ask what kind of joy do you get from pointing out to people how they will supposedly have to endure everlasting fire and damnation just because they don't believe in the God that you do?

Can you tell me why you seem more interested in pointing out how people will burn then trying to "save" their souls? I am agnostic but I grew up in a Christian household, I don't remember anything about Jesus standing over people and telling them to remember what they said when they stand in front of God.
It just sounds vindictive to me.

I used to date a girl that would go to church every Sunday but the life she lived didn't follow the path.

If you are Catholic I guess it is okay to do what you please so long as you confess it to your priest at the end of the week. Then the slate is clean and you can start over.

Why is it that Catholics try to persuade you to believe by using pain if you don't? That's the loving God you describe?

The evolution of man is another example of "which came first, the chicken or the egg".

For the human brain in its almost infinite complexity to develop and survive it must have the 5 senses and a host of other almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running.

Problem is that you can't get those almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running until you have an almost infinitely complex brain in place and functioning.

The evolution process makes sense only if you have somebody with an infinite amount of knowledge tinkering with it.

And my favorite cartoon is Mrs. God chastising Mr. God for going beyond dinosaurs in the process of evolution and screwing up an almost perfectd world by creating man.

My 2 cents worth as an engineer and attorney who wonders why my church didn't officially acknowlege that the world was round until the 1990s - and are we insulting God by claiming that we were made in his image and likeness.

@ Chris

"Last time I checked, no Atheist Army ever declared war on anyone."

Really? Ever heard of the godless Joseph Stalin? Chairman Mao? Pol Pot? Last time I checked, they weren't exactly friendly towards religion!

PirateC: Where did I say that? You have all chosen your ways, and voice them and defend them quite well. Am I not entitled to the same without being called vindictive?

And by the way, the anger and mockery from many of the non believers here shines brightly. Again, aren't we all entitled to defend our own beliefs?

Also, all churches are not Christian, even though they say they are. I was raised Catholic, and I have to say, I got away from the Catholic Church quite some time ago. I have my own relationship with God. Things are so confusing in this world, but I won't let go of my faith in Christ. Faith will see me through.

it wasn't ok for people to sin, after Ham sleept with his father, Ham and his people were cursed.

Lucy1 Your comment had implied meaning. You didnt say the exact words but your comments pretty much said the same thing.

Bernette Callender

Karma58,

Do remember these words when you stand before a Holy God at His return.

Oh, Karma won't have to remember, God knows exactly what was said.Then Karma will be eating his/her own Karma.
And here is the definition of Karma:
The total effect of a person's actions and conduct during the successive phases of the person's existence, regarded as determining the person's destiny.

Read more: #ixzz1AGyhCF46

I am glad for you and your faith but please be aware you yourself will be judged for your actions on this earth according to your faith. I am not trying to attack you but the tag team action was not really neccisary to point out a non believers sin so to speak

For Lucy1. Last time I checked prayer or belief in a god didn't cure cancer or AIDS either. Also it doesn't seem to cure or prevent Polio, the flu, leprosy, or smallpox. Mmmm 4 out of 6 for science vs 0 out of 6 for religion. I think we're winning.

For Ken, you need to go back and take a look at infinite again.... Just because something is very complex doesn't mean it's infinitely complex... People used to think the motion of the sun the stars and planets was "infinitely complex" and could only be understood with a divine creator. Turned out it was pretty easy when you didn't consider yourself the center of the universe.

All the atheists that participate here on MSN doesn't surprise me a bit, concerning the views I read here every day. Very disheartening!!! Hopefully, the majority of you are young and you haven't yet acquired wisdom! I was there myself in my youth.

I am in agreement with what the Pope said in this article. I have come to realize that for either faith and science to be truth, they cannot be at odds!

AngelP

A bit arrogant of you to imply you have more wisdom than an athiest or anyone else over an unprovable subject. You should perhaps gain wisdom by discovering the difference between believing and knowing (while implementing honesty).

In my younger days, I believed the brainwashing I experienced since before I could even say "mama." It was knowledge and wisdom (history, philosophy, psychology, religion, science, etc...) that made me question the unprovable fairy tale.

You are right that faith would require science to be true. However, science doesn't require faith. In fact, the scientific method (when used properly) is pretty much the exact opposite of faith.

Finally someone who understands the scientific method. I thought I'd never find one. Faith is when you believe something with proof to the contrary or no proof whatsoever. Anything stated by a scientist is immediately assaulted to prove it false by other scientists.

Okay, so god created the rules for the universe. Until we find out that the rules were inevitable due to some other construction, like the multiverse or something. Then where is god?

And, if god created the rules for the universe, who created god? Super-god?

While there may not be objective evidence to either support or dispute the existence of god or higher being or whatevername you wish to use, there is certainly enough evidence to dispute the validity of most if not all dogma propagated by the worlds religions.

I tend to believe religion tries to answer the mysteries of the universe with superstition and mythology.

There is a contradiction though.

You forgot all the scientists your religion burned at the stake already haven't you? You blithely ignore anything at anytime that doesn't fit how you feel at the moment... And now you and your boy the pope are tired of looking like head in the clouds jackasses- denying the obvious for another few centuries got old huh?

So now your jumping on the band wagon as you type up your denials of science on your HTC EVO 4G and upload it onto the internet via your cell network to the millions that can see what you type in (or "voice to text" in if you have an EVO)...planetwide- as you are caught in a traffic jam in your Cadillac CTS on Highway 95 going to work at the pharmaceutical company that makes the drugs that keep crazy people from acting out so spectacularly...

Dude just stop. The universe is an even bigger miracle than your goofy god.

It just happened with no plan! Thats even more awesome than your god thing man.... No plan... we have free will... we can make and do stuff!

Well until the next big bang! Then who knows what - (no one knows what).....

Yep KWHOO I guess morals are superstition and mythology. So I shouldn't take the life of another based on superstition and mythology.

Anyways, I see people still use the same baseless argument against religion by throwing in Galileo and the 6000 year history of the world. Galileo was under house arrest, but was treated better than the common folk. He made some outrageous pronouncemts that even the scientific community would ban him as a cook. The 6000 year history was based on the genealogy of the bible. This was back int the Medieval times. There was no scientific evidence to support otherwise until the concept of plate tectonics came along. The catholic church does not believe anymore that the Earth is 6000+ years old. It's usually fundamentalists and baptists who do. And belive it or not science was stillborn across many different nations. The Chinese made progress but stopped, so did the Arabs. The Jesuits made many scientific and mathematical contributions and helped resart science. Does anyone know that cathedrals were built in such a way to study the motions of the Sun. Probably not.

drkmaurader

I went to church with my parents over christmas. CATHOLIC church - which told me AGAIN that the world is only 6000 years old AS THEY (wrongfully) DO EVERY YEAR. So far as Galileo was concerned, you said it best, they put him under house arrest (to quiet him). The simple fact is the church claimed to KNOW things that were later proven false. Guess they should have taken their own advice. Thou shallt not lie sound familiar???

You shouldn't take the life of another because it causes pain and suffering to others, not just including the one you kill. If humans choose to live that way, our entire species will die (and religion hasn't helped much to keep us from living that way), and our quality of life will completely suck until we all die. One can be "good" without religion, and morals could actually be based on logic instead of fairy tales. Let me give you an example: I have no religion. I have not killed anyone.

The evolution of man is another example of "which came first, the chicken or the egg".

For the human brain in its almost infinite complexity to develop and survive it must have the 5 senses and a host of other almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running.

Problem is that you can't get those almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running until you have an almost infinitely complex brain in place and functioning.

The evolution process makes sense only if you have somebody with an infinite amount of knowledge tinkering with it.

And my favorite cartoon is Mrs. God chastising Mr. God for going beyond dinosaurs in the process of evolution and screwing up an almost perfectd world by creating man.

My 2 cents worth as an engineer and attorney who wonders why my church didn't officially acknowlege that the world was round until the 1990s - and are we insulting God by claiming that we were made in his image and likeness.

Ken

A monkey came first (well, we'll start there). Discovered remains next show us an ever slightly different monkey, slightly closer to a man. Repeat thousands of times (for the thousands of remains we have discovered). There's a man. Not a chicken / egg question, and the bible didn't say god slightly manipulated monkeys (and other animals) time and time again until the current species existed.

2057059: This is some kind of riddle? You in or out on evolution? And why the arbitrary selection of a monkey?

Ken

Where am I riddling? I am in on evolution (mostly - long discussion - we definitely came from monkeys). Monkey is not an arbitrary selection. If you trace the thousands of skeletons we have for human evolution, they clearly goes back to monkey. The "well, we'll start there" comment is because I didn't want to have to say what monkeys evolved from, or what that evolved from, all the way back to the first single cell in existence.

And again, where does this magical 'creator' come from? If the universe can't pop into existence out of some sort of infinite recursion then surely omnipotent beings can't pop into existence...

Our civilization needs to get past this religious nonsense.

Isn't he coming back in mid May this year? We'll ask him then.

Believers will continue to believe and non-believers will continue to not believe.

Where I live, most stores can't open until 1:30PM on Sunday and you can't buy alcoholic beverages (except by the drink at private clubs). When I lived in Lubbock, TX, stores could open on Sunday, but certain isles were closed, so that you couldn't buy non-essentials.

Do you suppose that religion may have had a hand in these "Blue laws".

And should religious fanatics have legal control over a woman's reproductive system?

Our biggest concern should be to keep the Believers from imposing their religious doctrine upon us in the form of laws.

the creation of the universe was a bunch of random events that worked, if they didn't work we would not be here to discuss any of this in the first place

It's called critical thought. The problem is that it's anathema to all religions, so religions refuse to allow it to be taught.

If you had been taught the concept of critical thought, or better yet, if you had bothered to figure it out on your own, instead of going along with the rest of the sheeple, you'd have long since figured out that god is an ancient human creation, needed by people who whose lives preceded scientific searches and explanations, but who did understand the literary concept of allegory. That's important because it's a form that's extremely poorly understood today, but is the form in which most people's "holy books" are written.

Again, it's about critical thought, a skill that you seem to completely lack. It's time for you to WAKE UP!

If our existence is proof of God's existence, then what is God's existence proof of?

The universe was wished into existence by leprechauns. Want proof? Look around! There's a universe, isn't there?

It's called evolution! Wake-up.

I've heard the universe rests on the back of a giant tortoise; can you dispute it?

To: Joe-321806

God exists everywhere. So, He cannot "come from" someplace because He is always everywhere. God always existed. Its more correct to ask where did the universe come from. And we would have to say that the universe came from the mind of God. When He thought of it, it was created.

WestSidePB

I am not proof God exist. I am proof that I was created by my Mother and Father. God didn't create me, they did. They pro-created to form a new life.

We are just a bunch of complex nature of cells that have created self awareness and individualism.

Just like Santa was a lie, the Easter Bunny is a lie or any other fictional characters are lies that we been told as kids. How do we know God isn't a lie? Cause we like to have faith. We have to wait when we are dead to find out if it is a lie or not? That's even if there is the so call life after death?

Also why does it have to be that you are judge by God when we pass off? If you are a giving person and a good human to others but didn't believe in him, why would this so call God commend you to the fire pits for eternity? He doesn't have emotions and watches as these poor souls be tormented?

Sounds like a dictator to me.

Just remember..thousands of years ago many people believed in a god named Zeus..How many today do?

nevermind

PuddleDuck

And should religious fanatics have legal control over a woman's reproductive system?

No, and neither should the government. And don't think that they aren't working on population control.

From the sounds of some of these posters who say God does not exist, you do make it quite clear that satan does, and he probably applauds you as well.

joe, your argument is pathetic. you can't have it both ways. either nothing can come from nothing as you say with the universe is true or something can come from nothing as you say is god's case.

Tiger,

I find it amusing that you don't believe in "creation" but you use the term "pro-created" by your parents. Oops.

^^^i find it amusing you can't figure out the difference between believing in the theory of creationism and creation that can be seen.

You are wrong. I am proof that God DOESN'T exist.

Hey, if YOU can just make stuff up and pretend it means something real, so can I. Touche!

Yes yes, the 'theory' of evolution. Don't believe it because it's a 'theory'. Just like disbelief in the 'theory' of gravity is going to stop you from falling when you jump off that skyscraper.

Tiger, since we're on the subject of philosophy, I have a question.

You mentioned that you were not "created" by a God, but by your parents. OK, I understand that. But where does Life come from? If I am alive one moment, but dead the next, with no physical changes, what is the difference? If I cut my finger, it will heal, but the same cut on a cadaver will not heal. So what is the difference, exactly?

The difference is "Life" itself. Whatever you wish to call it, it is the "force" that allows us to "be". But please define this.

What is "life"? What is this energy that animates us? More importantly, where did it come from? We cannot create life in a laboratory (and no, only organic compounds have been created by emanating the primordial earth conditions in a lab, not actual life), nor bring dead people back to life, so what is the actual force that creates us?

Hmm, something to think about, no?

Yes yes, the 'theory' of evolution. Don't believe it because it's a 'theory'. Just like disbelief in the 'theory' of gravity is going to stop you from falling when you jump off that skyscraper.

dumbest argument ever? i said theory cause there is no hard evidence for it. till there is all it is is a theory. gravity has been proven and is not a theory.

The evolution of man is another example of "which came first, the chicken or the egg".

For the human brain in its almost infinite complexity to develop and survive it must have the 5 senses and a host of other almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running.

Problem is that you can't get those almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running until you have an almost infinitely complex brain in place and functioning.

The evolution process makes sense only if you have somebody with an infinite amount of knowledge tinkering with it.

And my favorite cartoon is Mrs. God chastising Mr. God for going beyond dinosaurs in the process of evolution and screwing up an almost perfectd world by creating man.

My 2 cents worth as an engineer and attorney who wonders why my church didn't officially acknowlege that the world was round until the 1990s - and are we insulting God by claiming that we were made in his image and likeness.

There are different types of christians:

1) The disciples of Jesus of Christ during His time on Earth. Those who actually witnessed the events in this order of his Birth, Life, Ministry, Trial, Execution, Burial, Resurrection, Appearance to Disciples in his Risen Body and Ascension to Heaven to be with God the Father.

2) Those who received The Gospel from Paul, Peter and other Apostles/Disciples after Christ's shortly after the appearance among mankind.

3) Those who through the centuries who received the Gospel through evangelism and attending church.

4) And those who questioned the existence of Jesus Christ and pursued their own study to find the answers. Through their study of what the world had to offer and study of The Bible in whole context, not just passages here and there.

If you say you are a christian, then I would challenge to read, study and apply what the Bible is teaching through it's account of historical events, life applications and prophecy that has been fulfilled. Fulfilled prophecy and archeological evidence will be the most compelling explanation of why we believe we found the truth about the world.

If you are an atheist or agnostic I would challenge you to do the same in an objective and open-minded manner. Christians can be the most open-minded people in the world for many reasons, they believe in miracles, know their are things the can't be explained by man and believe their is a spiritual element to their existence. Not just body and mind.

I for one didn't want to put my support in mankind, history has proven over and over that many human leaders and followers have a propensity to do evil and turn away from being responsible to a higher power.

In your life you'll need to make decision, to believe or not believe, it's all up to you.

Be careful, if you are professing athiest, though. The Bible has a great example with Pharoah (who delared himself a God), God allowed him to harden his heart through repeated disobedience. The more you take the position of being atheist and discounting God's existence the more likely you will become hard hearted and close-minded... and not allowing yourself to see the Truth out there.

God will show us in the end.

HATR_HURTER

^^^i find it amusing you can't figure out the difference between believing in the theory of creationism and creation that can be seen.

So??? You believe in the latter HATR? Show us where creation by a supreme being can be seen. Prove to all of us here that god exists.

^^^you misread or i just didn't get my point across clearly. i don't believe in god.

I maintain that if people are not interested enough to earnestly read the Bible then they will never be able to argue these points. I pray these discussions will lead many to find out what the Bible says for themselves.

Well, I just hope that these discussions make some people see reality for what it is, and stop pretending they believe in God. But..speaking of reality...I'm not holding my breath on that one.

The Pope is NOT God!

The Pope is not God, and neither am I nor Lucy1 nor Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Timothy, and other authors (& editors) of the Bible. Yet we may all strive (or did strive) to live lives of goodness, illumined by our parents & other various sources.

The fact that different human cultures throughout history have developed various modes of discussing & experiencing God(s) does not make them all invalid. Analogy: The fact that different human cultures throughout history have developed different languages does not make them all ineffective. It seems to be conceited, or at least disrespectfully dismissive, to harshly judge all those thousands of years of varied cultures' lived religious experience calling it all non-sense. I'd rather hold a perspective that different cultures' approaches to God are like different languages, different music styles, striving to have a relationship with some Divine.
Sure, the current Pope & the current Roman Catholic hierarchy are severely tarnished by the sex scandals as well as situations of materialistic luxury while many people struggle to survive. Plus the Church does not have the best track record when it comes to the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, slavery & genocides, respect of other religions/cultures, and out-of-touch dictatorial directions given to families regarding sexuality. But all those sins of the Church don't make the Pope's current words absolutely wrong. [Besides, the article paraphrases selected statements of the Pope, and it does not give us the full text of the Pope's remarks.]
Some posters have remarked that the Church changing its take of the validity of Big Bang theory (etc.) is a sign of weakness or a sign that none of the previous papal positions were valuable. That's weak reasoning: Physicists change their minds too -- no physicist accepted quantum mechanics 110 years ago, no physicist accepted big bang theory 200 years ago, no physicist accepted electro-magnetic theory 1000 years ago. Changing theories --continually revised over the centuries-- that interpret, make sense of , & predict the future are the nature of science. It is appropriate that religion also changes over time too. For those who subscribe to Christianity, Jesus & Mary & the disciples were change agents for religion 2000 years ago. Islam did not exist 2000 years ago; Judaism did not exist 10,000 years ago.
The big distinction to be made is that science and religion operate on two different planes -- science and Faith can co-exist.
Some posters mock religion as childish, saying it can't be scientifically or logically justified. Yet human love, whether between spouses or between parents & children, etc., also can't be scientifically analyzed nor can love be scientifically proven to exist. Does everyone out there who is eager to rid humanity of religion also want to rid the world of love? I'd rather keep both, even if we need to work at them to help them thrive a bit.

Wouldn't it be logical to think that older cultures, from 1000's of years ago would have had a better grasp of a "God" than we would? Im not judging anyone's beliefs but the fact that those cultures believed in different "Gods" than the Bible preaches tells me the entire system of religion is solely based in...for lack of a better word, falsehoods.

Prosperity,

Physicists didn't exist 1000 years ago. Science is about rigorously trying to disprove hypotheses using peer reviewed testing, facts and conclusions. This approach is the antithesis of religion, which is generally very unwilling to subject itself to any form of self-scrutiny or reversal. More remarkable to me is that by admitting the allegorical nature of the Genesis story, while simultaneously embracing evolution, the Vatican has essentially fatally undermined the central fable of the Bible, which is that God sent Jesus down to save mankind from Adam's original sin. If there was no Adam--and no original sin--then why did we need a Messiah to be brutally murdered to save us? This of course ignores the obvious point that an omniscient being could fling open the doors of paradise without the intervening necessity of torture, angry mobs, corrupt rulers and geysers of blood, but trying to reason with believers in this manner only results in the sputtering of specious Sunday school talking points. Christianity is borrowed myth--borrowed from the pagans, who had a variety of god-men who were also sacrificed to save mankind. Interestingly, many were also born on December 25th. The Vatican's official explanation for this? Satan did it to confuse us. All those other gods were mere ruses. Jesus is the REAL DEAL--never mind the fact that there were no shortage of self-described Messiahs wandering around the desert in 1 A.D. Well, no matter. If the Pope says it, it must be true, right?

The evolution of man is another example of "which came first, the chicken or the egg".

For the human brain in its almost infinite complexity to develop and survive it must have the 5 senses and a host of other almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running.

Problem is that you can't get those almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running until you have an almost infinitely complex brain in place and functioning.

The evolution process makes sense only if you have somebody with an infinite amount of knowledge tinkering with it.

And my favorite cartoon is Mrs. God chastising Mr. God for going beyond dinosaurs in the process of evolution and screwing up an almost perfectd world by creating man.

My 2 cents worth as an engineer and attorney who wonders why my church didn't officially acknowlege that the world was round until the 1990s - and are we insulting God by claiming that we were made in his image and likeness.

Here's the problem with your argument about the Catholic Church and Pope changing there minds. According to Catholic Dogma, specifically Papal Infallibility, when the pope dictates a statement as binding, it is infallible and can never be contradicted, even by later Popes.

So with that in mind, we move on to a list of Papal Infallibility Statements that the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith wrote up in 1998. Keep in mind that Pope Benedict (Then Cardinal Ratzinger) was prefect of that group at that time and helped compile the list.

http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFADTU.HTM

Please read number number 5. Basically it says all of the written words of God are True.

So with that as a guide, the Bible (The Written Word of God) says a lot of stuff that is in complete contradiction with the Big Bang theory, we all know that. So the church itself can never adopt the big bang theory, or even simple evolutionary creationism as a teaching, because to do so would be heresy as decreed by Papal Infallibility.

Noelle,

A. Your statement regarding the differences between science and religion is blatantly wrong, and reflects a lack of understanding of the deveolpment of Christian thought/belief. The various ecumenical councils that took place hundreds of years after Jesus's death were called together precisely to sort out differences in teaching and dogma among Christian believers. The councils not only discussed their differences using faith, but also applied their own logical thought processes to any discussion of the nature of Jesus, the role God played in the universe, etc. Much of this stemmed from the enveloping of Christianity into new cultures (Hebrew, Greek, Roman, Assyrian, etc.), as well as new and innovative understandings of the way in which God works in the world.

B. The Vatican's "embrace" of Evolution in absolutely no way undermines the central tenets of Christianity, at least in the way you pose the argument. To begin, the word "Adam" by definition means "Man," this definition coming from the Hebrew Torah. This is a fact that was quite possibly overlooked in the translation of the Bible from Hebrew to Greek to Latin to English. From this point, then, we can determine that there was indeed an Adam, all of mankind, and that there also existed original sin - to be defined (correctly or incorrectly in accordance with Catholic teachings, I'm not entirely sure) as an individual's desire to see himself equal to God. It is from this desire that all "sin" emerges. Jesus, therefore, who in Catholic teaching is taught to be 100% human and 100% divine (a teaching developed in early Christian times through the afore mentioned councils) represents the human manifestation of God on Earth, and serves as an example of how to live one's life free from this burden of original sin. His sacrifice and Resurrection therefore not only represents God's triumph over original sin, but also mankind's.

C. To attack Christianity for "borrowing" certain aspects of other faith's is ridiculous and frankly, ignorant. Christianity itself had to adapt as it spread throughout the world, and fuse itself with other cultures and traditions - hence Dec. 25th, which was a pagan holiday but was adopted by Christianity as it grew (don't really see what's so wrong with that). Of course, it wrongly attempted to assert itself over other cultures and beliefs as well, to the detriment of both the faith and the true message. But just as often, particularly in the Early Church and in more contemporary times (given the rise of Catholicism in Asia, Africa and Latin America), the Church had to adapt and fold itself into the culture in which the Gospel was spreading. In no way does this take away from the overall message, it just reflects a different way in which a given culture chooses to communicate with God - still through Jesus and the Church, but also through their own norms and customs

It would seem from the posts in this discussion that atheists, especially in modern discourse, are far more assertive and literal than many (certainly not all) people who claim to be believers. I've experienced far more vitriol and statements of assertion on the part of atheists than I have from reasonable, liberal Catholics. If you want to read a great book on the history of Jesus - if you're interested at all in educating yourself on the subject and not simply spewing derisive comments - read Albert Nolan's "Jesus Before Christianity," one of the best books I've ever read on the subject of the person of Jesus - the man who lived from 7BC to 33AD. Maybe then in some small way you'll understand why I love my faith.

billsfan,

My statement regarding science and religion is in no way wrong. Science demands evidence and proof. Religion most certainly does not, so your pseudo-intellecutual discourse is way off the mark and not even responsive to the point. Man did invent religion; I'll give you credit for admitting that much, but peppering your commentary with words like "logical," "new" and "innovative" or defering to authoritative-sounding "ecunemical councils" in no way breathes new life into primitive belief systems that existed largely to explain the origins of man and to terrorize the masses into compliance. A bunch of men got together and made it all up. That is all that happened.

With regard to Adam and Eve, they were very much intended to be regarded as literal, living, breathing creatures who brought about the downfall of mankind. The problem of course is that this story cannot be reconciled with our current understanding of science and the origins of our species, thus necessitating it's reinterpretation by believers. This to me seems to be a classic example of making it up as you go along, much in the way the monstrous God of the Old Testement has been reinvented as some avuncular old chap who just wants to gather his children around the fireside and give them all new puppies. Of course he will still condemn you to hell for nothing more than professing some skepticism as to his existence. I'm glad the Vatican is slowly catching up with the rest of us in the 21st century, but that doesn't mean the institution can keep reinventing itself like Madonna every step of the way. Either the Bible is the inerrant word of God, or it's a work of fiction. It can't be both.

To acknowledge my point that Christianity's evolution as a belief system is a result of fused, plagarized mythology and then go on to call me ignorant is, well, ignorant. The fact that so many other god-men that were born of virgins, sacrificed to save mankind (some on crosses made of wood), and were born on December 25th doesn't give you pause? Really? More than anything this strikes me as just how far some believers will go to stick their heads in the sand, ignore reason and logic, and cling to false belief. Christianity is pure, unadulterated, unoriginal myth. Period.

Now as to the Bible itself--it is a towering achievement of literature, and the New Testement has many messages worth absorbing. Allow me to now recommend a book: The Jefferson Bible: The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth, which was written by Thomas Jefferson, a Deist and no fan of Christianity. He went through the Gospels and edited out the supernatural elements, as well as the miracles, and anything else he considered nonsensical and the result was simply an achievement in philosopical literature. Here's a quote that might shed some light on his motivation to pen this tome: "Among the sayings and discourses imputed to him (i.e. Jesus) by his biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others again of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism, and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same being."

@Noelle
Good points. It seems to me that if there is goodness to be found in a religion it is invariably interwoven with narratives carried over from less mature eras of human culture, or (to use Biblical imagery) a mixing of the wheat & the chaff. Part of the responsibility of communities of believers is to refine, over time, their religious perspectives -- gradually separating the wheat from the chaff. This is difficult for some religious congregations because tmany of their preachers or members seize to every last detail of their history as if it were perfect, basically idolizing their past and/or their Scriptures instead of maturely seeking goodness & godliness.
You remark about the sad nature of Jesus's death. To pursue your point about God, as Jesus, spending a lifetime among us that would shower us with blessing -- we can imagine that God, when observing a person struggling with temptation, is always there in the background hoping that (& offering the strength of God's grace) the individual would in the critical moment choose the path of goodness -- so when Jesus lived, God's hope was that Jesus would be well-received and that Jesus would die a natural death; had Jesus died a natural death, it would have still been possible for God to share the fullness of grace with us through the course of Jesus's life. There is no need to idolize crucifixion as the ideal, or only, way that God could shower us with redemptive grace. Jesus is recorded as having prayed "Father, it it be possible, let this cup pass from me" -- it WAS possible, but the course of history was determined by the free-willed choices of those in power then (perhaps together with the effects of crowds of agitated demonstrators). Would that history had been different and that people then had chosen better paths.

@Martin Seattle
When the Church discusses what is 'True' She is addressing matters of the heart/soul, morals, ethics, holy action; She is not addressing scientific fact. Big Bang Theory does not claim that God does not exist, Big Bang Theory does not claim that Satan does or does not exist, Big Bang Theory does not promote unethical or hateful human behaviour. There is no conflict between the Bible & science, as each addresses a different realm. When we face judgement at the 'pearly gates', God or God's agent is not going to administer to us, as an entry requirement, some science test about how old the Earth is, etc.

@BillsFan
I agree with most all you say, but I do think that Noelle is close to perfect on the differences she notes between science & religion.
You write: "[Jesus's] sacrifice and Resurrection therefore not only represents God's triumph over original sin, but also mankind's." It seems strange to discuss God's "triumph" over anything-- for one who believes in God, is there any fear that God is not infinitely good? ... in other words, is there any fear that God could ever ever suffer a "defeat"? Also, using the word "therefore" raises red flags -- when we use such words of logic, it feels like we are willing to tell God what must be logically so, rather than leaving God creative freedom; logic resides partly in the realm of science, and love is bigger than logic.
I dispute Noelle's response that claims that in the writing of Genesis Adam & Eve were originally meant to be historical figures. Noelle also objects to "making it up as we go along" (something that science, by its very nature, does). I have no trouble with humanity's view of life evolving throughout history, and even making use of myths to probe the depths of our existence. Poetry, myths, music, stories with a moral, historical anecdotes all have a place in facilitating people's becoming the best they can be. If Noelle resigns us to never evolving our views of life (& God) then we are stuck -- Jesus & Mary & His companions could not have been innovators had their community rejected the possibility for evolution of religious perspectives. Life is not stagnant. A marriage relationship is not stagnant. Love is not stagnant. While evolution for evolution's sake is not sufficient, love without dynamic growth is sort of like a heart without a heartbeat. Humans in our religious perspectives need to deepen, purify, & evolve our views, striving to grow closer to holy behavior and frames of mind. It is not an insult to our pasts to grow, change, & develop -- it is the fulfillment of our pasts to do so.

Prosperity,

Science doesn't "make up" anything; science reveals facts about the universe we live in. A fact is simply a fact whether one is cognizant of it or not. America always existed, even before Columbus beached the Mayflower on its shores. Religion is what is invented as we go along (although it purports to reveal the "Truth", and, unfortunately, one thing Christian religions tend to have in common is that that they profess to alone hold the path to true salvation. Certainly that's the case with Catholicism. It appears that less than half of the people in this country accept evolution as fact, which it is; it hasn't been "made up" by science. That is a frightening statistic, but understandable given how religious this country is, and given the fact that the Bible is considered the literal, inerrant, static word of God. The creation myth is intended by many Christian sects to be taken literally, as is the assertion that the earth is 6000 years old, flat, and will eventually be invaded by giant locusts. All the inartful backpedaling in the world by Christian apologists can't undo this embarrassing fact. Finally, with regard to your comments about my resigning anyone to never evolving our views of life, that is a remark that makes very little sense in the context you give it. I fully appreciate music, literature and art, but I fail to see the connection between the ability to do so and the simultaneous need to believe in God. It's as if believers think all atheists see the world through a narrow, blurry, black and white lens, and only by becoming a Christian can the true technicolor majesty of nature and everything it offers actually penetrate their collective retina. Absurd. As far as wrong-headed, phony, charismatic speakers who've captured the imagination of a gullible public are concerned, they are legion. The majority view isn't always the correct one. I'll offer up slavery (something the Bible wholeheartedly approves of) and segregation as the obvious examples and move on. The rest of your post seems to deteriorate into that generic piffle that love=God, life=God, and, of course, the gaps in our scientific knowledge=God. Again, all absurd. Evolution for evolution's sake may not be enough for you, but like it or not that is the reality of human existence. It's up to you what you make of your life; beyond that, unfortunately, neither you nor I has any cosmic significance. I agree with you that humans need to evolve, but in the opposite direction you're advocating. We need to grow up enough to recognize that we don't need to believe in supernatural entities to behave morally towards one another. Any other outcome is not only an insult, but dangerous to our continued existence, particularly in this age of 21st century weaponry.

@Noelle
I'll agree with roughly 60% of what you write. While science doesn't make up the facts, science does make up theories, and it is in the natural course of testing & re-thinking of those theories for them to undergo revision and sometimes rejection. Consider, e.g., the evolution of theories of the structure of the atom. I'm saying that human religious frameworks can also benefit from such evolutionary revisions. Indeed it seems that you are proposing a similar evolution for religious/philosophical thought, namely that human culture should entirely grow out of religious thinking. So we're both speaking of evolving human religious frameworks. I'm not ready to discount all past millenia of human experience & thought in such matters as but a passing stage of adolescence in our history of human culture. You say that future other than disposing of religion in human society is dangerous in this age of 21st CCE weaponry -- I don't know which path has greater chance of success: eliminating all religions of the world, or trying to contribute to a purification of religious frameworks to make them more open-minded, accepting of the existence of other cultures' religions, and not in conflict with scientific progress. It is frightening to see our world, including the U.S., destabilized by increasing religious extremism that includes condemnations of others and blind rejections of advances in scientific knowledge. The items you cite about U.S. opinions regarding biological evolution and attempts at literal and/or stagnant interpretation of Scriptures are emblematic of the dire threats facing our world. My remarks about the dynamic evolutionary aspect of spousal love, etc., indeed are an argument against stagnant interpretations of Scriptures & ancient religious experiences. My reference to poetry & stories with a moral, etc., was meant to maintain that its possible for the body of the Bible, including inconsistencies or allegories, etc., to be able to convey to its readers valuable messages that can guide a community toward more ethical & effective living. Agreed that the majority isn't always right; I'll add that the hierarchical powers-that-be aren't always right (if forced to choose between these two I'd cast my lot with the majority; still, the minority voice, the prophet calling a community to change, may be more reliable than the majority opinion). Agreed that communities of believers come up terribly short in how they regard atheists (or believers of a different stripe) --this is a severe indictment against religious communities! I'll disagree with your claim that I said that gaps in scientific knowledge are filled by magical explanations via God; I don't see God & science as incompatible in any way. Hopefully, for the future of our world, both atheists & believers of various stripes can engage in respectful dialogues; too many of the other posters resort to name-calling and insults.

Tell me you dont believe that. Most of the people that contributed most to science were religious men. Galileo, Newton, Edison, Einstein....

I love the quote, but I'd appreciate it being properly attributed.

carmel88, Einstein didn't believe in religion. He in fact referred to the idea of god playing dice with the world. Where's your evidence that Edison had any particular religious commitment? And just how much can any of the physicists and astronomers of the middle ages be said to have believed in a god when they spent their adult lives disproving what had until then been attributed to a fictional magic man in the sky?

Why would Nicolas Copernicus have continued to defy the church and go on to prove that the world revolves around the sun, rather than the other way around? Why would Gallileo have worked so hard to invent the telescope, an instrument that was used to prove that Copernicus was correct, if he really believed in a supernatural ghost story?

The self-deluded person here is yourself.

Einstein wasn't religious, Newton was an alchemist. How about all the scientists of Hindu faith? Muslim? Do their beliefs make them true?

Atheism has been punishable by death for most of humanity's written history. Of course the smart people kept their heads down. Does it make one hypocritical or disengenuous to claim that all the contributers were believers when most of them would have been killed otherwise?

Keep in mind also, the discoveries and knowledge scientists have come up with over the years came from observing nature, not from the Bible. Testable knowledge speaks for itself, regardless of what the discoverer personally believed.

Carmel, according to who? Let's not kid ourselves, in the past it was not exactly acceptable to admit to being an atheist or agnostic, as that is kinda what led to Copernicus's little run in along with glimpses of it with Galileo.

Most scientifics are of the mind that faith is less inspiring to them than actual scientific proof and data. Once the religious folks realize that not everyone has to think like them, the world will be a better place to live in. Until such times, we will continue to have greed, war, and many other human catastrophes that can all be attributed to the 95% of folks who say that they are religious and believe in some form of a God, but can't seem to correctly interpret right from wrong in their daily actions.

@carmel-were they really religious or were they pretending to be religious so that they would not be persecuted and that their ideas would have more merit? just a thought

Their scientific studies did not disprove that there was a God. Just that the Church was wrong.The world is round. The bible says that itself. The Church was wrong. Einstein said the more he studied mathematics, the more he believed in a design and a designer.

I'm not a defender of the Catholic Church by any means...you couldn;t get me to step into one of those places. But I am a firm believer in God as Creator and in the validity of the Bible. I have found nothing in science that disproves or even refutes what true Bible based religion stands for.

Why would Nicolas Copernicus have continued to defy the church and go on to prove that the world revolves around the sun, rather than the other way around? Why would Gallileo have worked so hard to invent the telescope, an instrument that was used to prove that Copernicus was correct, if he really believed in a supernatural ghost story?

Copernicus did not go out to prove the church was wrong. It wans't the church but certain members in it that held on to the geocentric universe, but there were others that were adopting the heliocentric system. But hey, let's go back to that time period when the motions of the universe were barely comprehended by many men. It was through astute observations by the likes of Tyco and Copernicus that started to open the eyes of men. That is how God works, through mystery. Much remains in secret until man through sweat of the brow begins to understand the universe he/she lives in. Look at the concept of light. Even the best physicists still do not have full knowledge of what light is, but they know it's behavoir by studying it and thus make hypothesis based on their observations. The most humble physicists admit that and I talked to a few. it is there humility that keeps them in wonder and awe of this universe and all contained within it.

religion, the world's most widely accepted superstition.

Going to church and believing are 2 different concepts. We are raising our son in a Christian church, but quite frankly, I struggle to believe in God. However, we live in a Judao Christian society and I think it's important for my son to learn our traditions.

Is it possible that the aforementioned religious scientists were merely going thru the motions to fit into the norms of society?

It's possible. But I dont believe that these great scientific minds, that had discovered so much and risked so much, would conform just to fit into society's norms.

^^^but they would to avoid persecution.

Except, they didn't. Because they were persecuted.

The evolution of man is another example of "which came first, the chicken or the egg".

For the human brain in its almost infinite complexity to develop and survive it must have the 5 senses and a host of other almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running.

Problem is that you can't get those almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running until you have an almost infinitely complex brain in place and functioning.

The evolution process makes sense only if you have somebody with an infinite amount of knowledge tinkering with it.

And my favorite cartoon is Mrs. God chastising Mr. God for going beyond dinosaurs in the process of evolution and screwing up an almost perfectd world by creating man.

My 2 cents worth as an engineer and attorney who wonders why my church didn't officially acknowlege that the world was round until the 1990s - and are we insulting God by claiming that we were made in his image and likeness.

Obviously I am jumping in way late here- but, back to Einstein:

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."

- Albert Einstein

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.
-Albert Einstein, 1954

Soylent-

Thank you- I have always believed that quote to express not Einstein's belief in God- but to be more a statement that the two must acknowledge and respect each other in the pursuit of truth- to deny the existence of science or religion (not belief in a religion) is to completely handicap one's self

hold on now, why bring santa into this where you on the naughty list

Of course, the logic of the religionists dictates that we believe in Santa Claus, too. I mean, there are presents under the tree - that proves He exists!

NOW you've done it... The Easter Bunny is REALLY p*ssed.

All my life I been searching for that Keebler Elf & Tree. How do they pack so many chips in a cookie!?! I need to find out!

The operative word there is blind. Some of us are a wee bit slower on that enlightenment thing....

Isn't "blind faith" a redundancy?

The Age of Enlightenment was the beginning of critical thought, a concept and process that disproved reltions. Blindness to that allows for the continued, unquestioned and ignorant belief in fairy tales.

The evolution of man is another example of "which came first, the chicken or the egg".

For the human brain in its almost infinite complexity to develop and survive it must have the 5 senses and a host of other almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running.

Problem is that you can't get those almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running until you have an almost infinitely complex brain in place and functioning.

The evolution process makes sense only if you have somebody with an infinite amount of knowledge tinkering with it.

And my favorite cartoon is Mrs. God chastising Mr. God for going beyond dinosaurs in the process of evolution and screwing up an almost perfectd world by creating man.

My 2 cents worth as an engineer and attorney who wonders why my church didn't officially acknowlege that the world was round until the 1990s - and are we insulting God by claiming that we were made in his image and likeness.

show me actual proof of god and i will believe, i want to believe but no one has been able to give me actual proof of god. i have been told i just have to believe that i must have faith. sorry not good enough

Have you tried reading the Bible? Honestly, it may help. and pray. Say God if you really do exist. Prove it!

If the RCC is now saying that science created the heavens and the Earth, doesn't that bring the credibility of the entire bible into question? After all, the RCC is retracting the very first book of the bible.

Who knows what other sections of the bible will be altered yet again to suit the needs of younger generations.

the bible is the word of man, i can write a book that said my cat created the big bang and the universe. i have asked god for proof and all i get is silence why do we need a big payoff ( heaven) to do the right thing. we should just do the right thing becasue it is right and not becasue some alien ( god is not of this world right) told us to.

proof there is none why sould there be. You want proof you came from a monkey look in a mirror a real long look.God made the world but he had no idea that man could turn out like it did. Crawl back in your bottle hell waits on you.

You mock and scorn leprechauns by denying their existence. Leprechauns are not mocked!

One of the best insurance policies of all time was to acknowledge that there will be people of reason who will not believe.

"Even though we know God had to nail a meat puppet of Himself up in order to change His own mind, there will be those who will laugh at this. When people come a'mocking, remember that I predicted this, and true predictions mean it must be truth!"

someone comes along and asks for proof of god and all you can do is insult them WWJD. i take pity on you for you have lost the way

I'm not insulting you, jed. As I'm sure you probably know most "christians" aren't true believers in God. What they forget to tell you is that while the Bible warns about those who would not believe, it also warns about those who call his name and he would answer because of their rotten works.

If you truely want to believe in God, don't stop searching. And actively search. Test religion, so that he sees you're actually trying and not just sitting there waiting on a miracle.

And you're right. People don't need heaven to do the right thing. But the promise of eternal life (the bible says) was placed in the heart of man. Humans can help but to not want to die and so everyon has a belief of afterlife.

The Bible is inspired by God, though not physically written by him. Try reading it with an open mind. And I would suggest reading it before testing any religion. then you'll see which is following what they claim to believe.

carmel- sorry i did not mean you my last post was directed at w

Jesus did not know calculus, semi-conductor electronics, and quantum mechanics. The Bible is not a science book, it is a book that speaks to the heart & soul, regarding leading a life of love. The Bible doesn't record Jesus ever saying "After it is written, believe every word of the New Testament literally, using those words to judge the hearts & souls of others. The Bible is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father, except through the Bible."

"The Bible itself talks about man becoming scornful and mockers. People who say there is no God are being both scornful and mockers of God. The same Bible also tells us to beware for "... God is not mocked ...""

The authors of the Bible were smart enough to realize that there would be future mockers of God. It's a good thing they had the foresight to inoculate themselves from this future mocking. How else could they keep the faithful in line if they allowed their God to be mocked?

Math Sci Justice - I believe Jesus is firstborn son of God and taught directly by him. So Jesus would have known calculus, semi conductor electronics, etc....

And how would you know about anything Jesus said if it weren't for the Bible?

carmel

You certainly wouldn't know what Jesus said from the historians living in the area and during the supposed time of Jesus. Some of their works remain. Unfortunately, they somehow decided Jesus wasn't important enough to document. Odd considering all of the miracles he performed, isn't it?

w-wasjik

I take it you haven't seen a skeleton of a monkey, and the thousands of skeletons scientists have found, each with slight differences until one is slightly different from modern day man. Look in the mirror again. Now, where is your soul?

The evolution of man is another example of "which came first, the chicken or the egg".

For the human brain in its almost infinite complexity to develop and survive it must have the 5 senses and a host of other almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running.

Problem is that you can't get those almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running until you have an almost infinitely complex brain in place and functioning.

The evolution process makes sense only if you have somebody with an infinite amount of knowledge tinkering with it.

And my favorite cartoon is Mrs. God chastising Mr. God for going beyond dinosaurs in the process of evolution and screwing up an almost perfectd world by creating man.

My 2 cents worth as an engineer and attorney who wonders why my church didn't officially acknowlege that the world was round until the 1990s - and are we insulting God by claiming that we were made in his image and likeness.

@Carmel88
I was taught, & I think it rings true, that Jesus was like us in all things but sin. So I think it very weird that one could imagine the He had essentially infinite IQ, that He knew calculus, semi-conductor electronics, quantum mechanics, etc., long before those realms of knowledge had been developed by humanity. (Did He also know how to use iPods and plastic explosives??)
We know Jesus today through a few channels: the trail of personal relationships that extended from His circle of contacts into subsequent generations, including the word-of-mouth and the spirit-of-heart that persists to this day; New Testament Scriptures; ongoing personal experiences of individuals through the centuries (including ourselves today) with Jesus, ever-living. The Bible is not the ONLY channel; if one takes the Bible out of the context of the other two channels here, then there is danger of misinterpretations. Indeed, the actual Bible was of course not written in English, and it was written in the context of the culture & the time of a couple generations after the earthly life of Jesus, in an age when Christianity was a nascent religion, a minority, and in an age when global cross-cultural communications were minimal.

Which institutions have killed many many millions? I'm not trying to be sarcastic, I'm just curious. I know that Stalin and Mao together murdered tens of millions, but I don't believe that the Catholic church is responsible for anywhere near those numbers. Just curious.

faith is a wonderful thing but don't confuse it with the truth. yuo have faith in god but no proof in god

Did my time in church, and concluded it was all BS. This, of course, takes away none of my joy and wonder when I regard the magnificence of the Universe or the beauty here on earth. Like being a good person, these things do not require faith in things we cannot prove; they only require that we appreciate what we have and what we are.

Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld,

You can have faith without proof.

don't be afraid, once you pass from this world there is no fear or pain. you don't need a book to tell you that or a made up belief system

So if I say I have faith you're an idiot, does it make my claim valid and true?

Note: I don't think you're an idiot, but was making a point about how faith can be discredited.

Carmel your're simply right.

i agree. The Pope is just confusing people to believe that they can believe in god and theorys to destroy ones faith in God himself.

Please dont be confused by my statement.

There must be an evident demonstration for real faith.

Let's not confound Truths of the heart and facts of science. There is no scientific proof of a friend's or spouse's love. I imagine there would be a lot fewer marriages, and a few fewer babies born, if every couple demanded proof of their love's existence & authenticity, before they would ever commit to each other.

Just because a lot of people who claim to adhere to religious authenticity haven't yet learned to respect other people whose religious experiences & perspectives are different, doesn't mean that there's no hope for humanity to gradually grow into more purified or authentic religious frames of mind & heart.

The evident demonstration that your spouse or friend loves you is what they say to you, how they act towards you. That's the proof.

If my husband dives into a burning building to save me, no one would deny his love for me.

Why must God do so much more?

The evolution of man is another example of "which came first, the chicken or the egg".

For the human brain in its almost infinite complexity to develop and survive it must have the 5 senses and a host of other almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running.

Problem is that you can't get those almost infinitely complex bodily functions up and running until you have an almost infinitely complex brain in place and functioning.

The evolution process makes sense only if you have somebody with an infinite amount of knowledge tinkering with it.

And my favorite cartoon is Mrs. God chastising Mr. God for going beyond dinosaurs in the process of evolution and screwing up an almost perfectd world by creating man.

My 2 cents worth as an engineer and attorney who wonders why my church didn't officially acknowlege that the world was round until the 1990s - and are we insulting God by claiming that we were made in his image and likeness.

If my husband dives into a burning building to save me, no one would deny his love for me.

Why must God do so much more?

Because your husband can't raise an eyebrow and put the fire out, or blink you a hundred miles away from it, or put fire-proof shields around everyone.

The idea of a God who has no alternative but to kill himself, or his child, or a goat, or whatever in order to appease itself enough to make it do something it wants to do in the first place is laughable on the face of it.

It's not that people want God to do more than your husband, it's that we would like to see a god do something godlike in order to believe it's there in the first place, rather than basing such a decision on bronze-age myths with silly plotholes.

@Carmel88
Yes, I agree with your remarks about evidence of marital love. But such evidence is NOT scientific proof, like that "proof" which some doubting posters keep soliciting for the existence of God & God's love. Honest doubt can be good, it can be a condition of mature pursuit of paths of goodness/grace -- but one doesn't need "scientific proof" when commiting oneself to another person or when commiting oneself to paths of good action.

Saint Bernadette--you are not at church. There are non-believers in this very secular forum. So when you keep quoting from your bible as thought it were some sort of proof --its not really strengthening your position.

Exactyly, AP... I can quote from the Betty Crocker Cookbook...That doesn't mean that it's proof of anything.

it is proof that betty crocker is a fine cook :)

I hate betty crocker recipes :\ You people need to move on to better cuisine.

do you deserve to see , what have you done that you should be endowed with this gift, the Creator dislikes idiots, but shows kindness. lets see you do that

then he must hate all of his followers. hey look someone wrote gullible on the ceiling^^^^

Sailor,

If you give me 10% of your income for the rest of your life, I'll show you something AWESOME right after you die. You just don't deserve to see it until after you die. Then you'll deserve it just barely enough for me to show you. I totally promise it's there and you will love it.

Your statement is so full of crap I have no idea where to start. That quote that there are no atheist in a fox hole is someones wishful thinking. I have been shot at bombed and other close encounters and never have I turned to some mythical being to save me. I relied on my own skills, and my buddies that were there with me. There were plenty of non believers there with me as well. US Army - 1986 - 1992

show me proof of god and i will believe

oh please...you have to resort to foxhole analogy and COMMUNISM to make your point?

Scott ... what can I say except you are in my prayers.

jed001-I got up this morning, had thoughts, was able to move, saw the sun and snow, saw my children, watched birds fly. That is my proof of God. However, I am sure you don't and won't ever see it that way. Sorry.

AP ... dido.

look in a mirror

eb- i am glad your faith sustains you, but i can not put blind faith into something. i feel the need for truth so my journey continues

EB-481598, that's proof that YOU exist, but of nothing else.

Sun, snow and birds flying are explained in full by science, and by rather simple levels of science, too. Ditto for your being able to think and move. And your children exist because you and your partner do. There is nothing magical in any of it. Again, that's science, not magic.

The only real question to be answered here is this one - when will you really wake up?

You pray to God and I will have faith that my weapon and combat experience will save me. A prayer can't stop a bullet, but kevlar can.

Why are you using the Chinese as some sort of evil entity? Doesn't God teach love and tolerance? Isn't that a direct contradiction of Marine training? Last I checked, marine training included killing without mercy, but nothing about praying as a means of victory. U.S. Army 1978-2001 HHB 4/1 FA

Over65, first you insult atheist veterans by saying they never served their country, then you tell them they're in your prayers. What an a-hole.

US Army, 31V. High speed cable layer.

With all due respect, sir, I am both a veteran and an atheist.

Mike in NY ... it was a bit different in the Korean War "no body armor"and the command "fix bayonets" was when I started to pray. It was not a prayer to stop a bullet it was a prayer to give me the strength to face whatever was coming. Hand-to-hand combat was something that was normal ... we didn't fight from a thousand yards away from the enemy.

I must admit there weren't many atheists back then. Atheism has grown over the years and is as I said the result of a progressive liberal educational system. Sorry if I've offended any vets.

Over65, I agree with you. I am only 34, but I have spoken with many college grads that have shared with me the fact that studying at these institutions made them question their faith. I think we're far too spoiled at times. And, I also believe Science can be used to prove the existence of God, rather than discredit it. I mean, how do we explain all the marvels of our universe, including ourselves? How do we explain things like a single cell, a tiny universe in itself?

Pat Tillman was an atheist. Perhaps you've heard of him Over65? As far as praying in foxholes goes, if I were in that situation, I wouldn't want my fellow soldiers or marines talking to their imaginary friends; I'd want them to be fighting back. Which is how I suspect it usually works in a foxhole.

The atheist aren't praying in the foxhole, they're shooting at the enemy (screaming Chinese or whoever). If you're in foxhole praying during a fire fight you're not helping. Pick up you weapon and fire it man! If you're praying and not shooting then you are a coward.

Over65, I find your statement offensive and quite hilarious. I am an Atheist and have served in the military for well over 18 years. At no point do I use the term god seriously as someone of religion would (Besides, he would likely be pissed with how I used it anyway). I treat people fairly, am charitable, believe in the goodness of others (Although that is scarce as of late) and do my best to live a good life that helps inspire others.

Unfortunately, I see people around me who claim to be so religious and full of faith doing terrible things, all the while people like yourself tell me and others like me how diluted and wrong we are. I hold no grudges against people of faith.......until they try and tell me how to live my life. As I would likely put them to shame with how righteous my behavior has been during my lifetime when compared to them. I just don't need to pretend to be someone that I am not or espouse how pious I am to an empty religion.

Noelle, Capt and Chris ... I invite you to read my post to "Mike in NY" above perhaps it will answer your questions ... or maybe not.

Like your post Over65, you hit the nail on the head!

Science made airplanes fly. God crashed them into buildings.

No. The people that hijacked the planes did.

Because God told them to.

I knew if I searched hard enough I'd find someone blabbering the ignorant premise that "there's no athiests in foxholes". To answer your ridiculous question...I like to think that when the Chinese do come, I'll be using all my powers of logic, reason, and problem solving to figure out how I'm going to stay alive. You it seems, would prefer to use magic! That's your prerogotive, but it seems like it has a miserable track record of success.

Call it my "progressive liberal education" that's keeping me alive if you want...but common sense seems to be the more likely culprit.

Whatthedeuce ... here is what I said earlier in a post to Mike in NY I hope it answers your concern about "atheists in foxholes"...

it was a bit different in the Korean War "no body armor"and the command "fix bayonets" was when I started to pray. It was not a prayer to stop a bullet it was a prayer to give me the strength to face whatever was coming. Hand-to-hand combat was something that was normal ... we didn't fight from a thousand yards away from the enemy.

I must admit there weren't many atheists back then. Atheism has grown over the years and is as I said the result of a progressive liberal educational system. Sorry if I've offended any vets.

"jed001-I got up this morning, had thoughts, was able to move, saw the sun and snow, saw my children, watched birds fly. That is my proof of God. However, I am sure you don't and won't ever see it that way. Sorry."

If you believe that birds do exist and that they fly, then you must believe in Evolution, since the birds are the only living direct descendants of the dinosaurs.

God must have created the dinosaurs and then allowed them to evolve into birds, while destroying all of the rest of the dinosaurs.

Kinda makes you wonder why Noah took all of those dinosaurs on the Ark, since God was going to destroy them all, eventually.

It would have made more sense for Noah to take that one species of dinosaur that was going to evolve into birds. Would have made Noah's life a lot easier, including a smaller Ark.

"I mean, how do we explain all the marvels of our universe, including ourselves? How do we explain things like a single cell, a tiny universe in itself?"

Yes, that's right. Anything that you can't explain should be attributed to a supreme being, until such time as it can be explained.

So, basically, what you are saying is that the belief in a supreme being is really a place to store all mysteries until they are solved.

Once a mystery has been solved, it comes out of God's mystery box and joins the world of facts.

To take that last point one step further: just because certain scientific principles are outside of any given individual's intellectual understanding and depth doesn't mean that individual shouldn't defer to those who have the native intelligence to master and expand upon these subjects and have devoted years of their lives to doing so. i've seen alot of "well it doesn't make sense to me that...therefore god exists." whether it makes sense to you is irrelevent. what is relevent is that it makes sense to many who have earned the right to speak authoritatively on the subject.

To OVER65 and SCOTT-2874698 et al

I’m "One of the Boys of 44". Hint, D Day and the Battle of the Bulge.

Thus I’m over 85. I’ve dug fox holes and cowered in them. Yes,

by that I mean, ( dictionary definition "To cringe in fear " )

But although time is dimming my memory I did not ask God to protect me.

In fact, as I recall, it was shortly after being wounded that I became a

"devout" atheist.

valeat quantum valere potest

Sorry Mr. over65 but I served 4 years and saw combat in Viet Nam.

I knew then and I know now there is simply no evidence for any gods.

You, apparently don't like that but it is still true none-the-less.

Get over it.

The big challenge that religiously-hearted people and formal religious governmental hierarchies face today is finding some ways within their theologies & dogmas to fully respect the lives & spiritual experiences of people who are different from themselves. Religions should be able to say "While we find great grace in our community's religious experience, we respect that others can experience true Goodness through other paths". It seems to me that any unwillingness to forge such a perspective suggests an insecurity: "it's my way or the highway!". I think that God is multi-lingual. God's love extends to all. God is not so conceited as to be pissed that not every culture on Earth conceives of God in the same way (if at all), and calls God by the same Name (if at all). God is love.

Kieth,

Adam and Eve didn't have faith. Abraham didn't have faith. Moses didn't have faith. The Bible says God spoke directly to them. If God spoke directly to me or you, there is no need for faith. Why did they not need faith?

Also, if you told people that God spoke directly to you, how many people in your church would believe you? Does that mean they are lying about having faith?

"one thing for sure we die and id like to leave this planet knowing i tryd to help people in need and that is what really matters to me"

So heaven and faith don't really matter, just trying to help people in need? I don't disagree, I'm just trying to figure out what your post was trying to say. I agree that being a positive influence on the world is a good way to leave it. You don't need to be religious or even spiritual to feel that way, either.

Bang!