God and The Meaning of Life

Angel · Feb 17, 2018

Tim the plumber said:
So when the christian school does not teach half of science because the facts disagree with the Bible you don't call that bad then?

When the Jewish school does the same and deliberatly makes it's pupils none-intergrated with the wider society to perpetuate the separate and vulnerable population it exists to service/exploit that does not trouble you?

When the Madrassa teaches that it is good to die for Allah and that 40 virgins await the martyr you are happy because the poor dumb smuck died thinking he was off to a better place?

When stem cell research is delayed or banned because God says it's wrong somehow even though it has no reference in the Bible and thus the cure for cancer is put on hold you have no problem either?

You're talking about organized religion. The OP is not about organized religion. My arguments throughout this thread have nothing to do with organized religion. The OP thesis, and my arguments in support of the OP thesis, as I've repeatedly pointed out in this thread, concern Generic God, the bare-bones philosophical concept of a Creator God.

Angel · Feb 17, 2018

Tim the plumber said:
Such a philosphical thing is not at all logical.

What do you mean?
Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/necessary-sufficient/
Necessary versus Sufficient Conditions.
Necessary vs. Sufficient Conditions
Necessity and sufficiency
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency

Tim the plumber said:
It is drivel. Both the idea of universal meaning and the idea that God would somehow be necessitated by it.

I don't know how things stand in Sheffield, Tim, but in New York City, where I am, if someone calls what I've claimed "drivel" (in a more vulgar way of course) the burden is on that someone to back up his words, or the conversation is over.

Tim the plumber said:
Then you have not read the posts you have been replying to here.

The few posts that imply negativity in this thread have all, like you, confused the philosophical concept of Creator God with the Personifications and doctrines of organized religion, and in these instances I pointed out just that in my replies.

AlbqOwl · Feb 17, 2018

Tim the plumber said:
So when the christian school does not teach half of science because the facts disagree with the Bible you don't call that bad then?

When the Jewish school does the same and deliberatly makes it's pupils none-intergrated with the wider society to perpetuate the separate and vulnerable population it exists to service/exploit that does not trouble you?

When the Madrassa teaches that it is good to die for Allah and that 40 virgins await the martyr you are happy because the poor dumb smuck died thinking he was off to a better place?

When stem cell research is delayed or banned because God says it's wrong somehow even though it has no reference in the Bible and thus the cure for cancer is put on hold you have no problem either?

How do people believing any of those things harm you in any way? For sure the Islamic terrorist committing mayhem cannot be justified by any reasonable measure, but it is not his belief that created the mayhem but what he does. It is not from awareness of God that he acts but rules coupled with a lack of awareness of God that drives him.

And I would remind you that it is not the anti-religion Atheist types who are running the soup kitchens, homeless shelters, thrift shops, orphanages, agencies providing intervention and a hand up to some of our most down and out citizens, running the leper colonies, providing disaster relief, ministering to struggling families and/or some of the world's most abjectly poor and oppressed often at risk of their own lives. The folks doing that are those narrow minded, unscientific Christians or other religious that you hold so low an opinion of. They also voluntarily give of their material resources at a much higher level than any other groups as well.

And also the communities in which you see lots of churches that are filled with people every Sunday are also communities that are the safest, most aesthetically pleasant, have higher graduation rates in the schools and usually are more prosperous overall.

All a matter of chance? Or is it a presence and awareness of God? I'll go with God on this one.

Tim the plumber · Feb 17, 2018

Angel said:
You're talking about organized religion. The OP is not about organized religion. My arguments throughout this thread have nothing to do with organized religion. The OP thesis, and my arguments in support of the OP thesis, as I've repeatedly pointed out in this thread, concern Generic God, the bare-bones philosophical concept of a Creator God.

The bear bones principal of leading your life based on a none-real idea will mean you make stupid, none-logical, decisions about important things.

Basic philosophy is vital to understanding the world around us. 15th century sailing ships that navigated to the Americas and around the world did so with very poor sails because they had a bad idea about how wind works.

To have a bad idea of how the universe is set up, that there is this fairy up there looking down on you protecting you, will result in poor decision making. The experience of many Western military trainers of Islamic armies is full of tales of soldiers who consider it blasphemous to aim their weapons. Trying to get pilots to deal with problems and not just give up and pray is even harder. An atheist will still be fighting to regain control of the aircraft all the way down, that is likely to save the plane and all those aboard.

Tim the plumber · Feb 17, 2018

Angel said:
What do you mean?
Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/necessary-sufficient/
Necessary versus Sufficient Conditions.
Necessary vs. Sufficient Conditions
Necessity and sufficiency
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency

But you cannot work it backwards. To say that there must be life because there is water is not logical. To say that it is likely from what we have seen on earth is fine but it is not necessary that life exists on Europa just because we have information that that moon of Jupiter has water within it.

I don't know how things stand in Sheffield, Tim, but in New York City, where I am, if someone calls what I've claimed "drivel" (in a more vulgar way of course) the burden is on that someone to back up his words, or the conversation is over.

Here, in Sheffield, which is a heavily science and engineering orientated city, it is most certainly on the claimant to show that his claim has merrit rather than expecting anybody else to prove a negative. That would be considered ignorance and stupuidity.

The few posts that imply negativity in this thread have all, like you, confused the philosophical concept of Creator God with the Personifications and doctrines of organized religion, and in these instances I pointed out just that in my replies.

You are splitting hairs and talking drivel again.

Tim the plumber · Feb 17, 2018

AlbqOwl said:
How do people believing any of those things harm you in any way? For sure the Islamic terrorist committing mayhem cannot be justified by any reasonable measure, but it is not his belief that created the mayhem but what he does. It is not from awareness of God that he acts but rules coupled with a lack of awareness of God that drives him.

You are unbelievable in you denial of the obvious.

You are much less intelligent than you should be because of your refusal to think about things close to your chosen fairy.

I am harmed by the loss of important research into cancer because it involves stem cells.

I am harmed by my society being segragated by the abuse of education by the religious.

I am harmed by the stupid perception of religious types that they are the only ones who do charity work. Here in the UK there are a lot less religous types and just as much charity. Soup kitchens are often run by people such as I.

Angel · Feb 17, 2018

soylentgreen said:
Angel said:

devildavid said:

In the case when something is completely made up, imaginary, with no basis at all, there is no negative or con side. Otherwise, we waste our time debating nothing. You can't make something up and then make the statement that my pointing out it is made up is a counter negative argument. There is nothing special about the imaginary concept of god that makes it any different than any other imaginary concept.

Click to expand...

What you do here is called begging the question. Your assertion of make-believe is argumentatively worthless. It's just part of the inner monologue you're impressing only yourself with.

You're not debating; you're browbeating. Get real, man!

Make this case or go tell it to the marines.

Click to expand...

Right there in those words of yours in bold. That is where you seek immunity.

As you can see from the full exchange, I challenge devildavid to make good on his claim that the concept of a Creator God is "make-believe."
I am not seeking immunity (As I have pointed out, I am not shy about providing my argument when germane to the topic). I am asking him to support his claim. He made it. He should be expected to make good on the claim in any discussion or debate.
This is not an interrogation, and if someone assumes the role of interrogator, then he is rightly called to account for his claims.

soylentgreen said:
I had already when i jumped into the conversation. The words i pointed out in bold.

I understood you, but I'm the one who made the post; anyone else could mistake the bolding as mine, which is not fair to me.

soylentgreen said:
It is two sided in that it takes two to debate. In this case though the onus is entirely yours.

This is not an interrogation.

soylentgreen said:
All i need do is point out the flaws in your argument not present an argument for the non existence of a god.

This is good, and I never asked for a disproof. I asked for reasons for calling my belief "make-believe." That's fair dinkum, as they say downunder.

soylentgreen said:
But if you start insisting that they must prove a god does not exist as you did with those words in bold or if you start from a basis that we must except that a god might exist then it is you that are demanding that an atheist do more than just point out flaws.

I hope I've answered this above to your satisfaction.

soylentgreen said:
It is not a case of mooting god, it is a case of giving a good reason why we should even consider a god. Which you do not do. Instead you start from a premise that it is possible for a god to exist and then immediately jump to a premise of he does exist.

The OP presents the thesis as a hypothetical -- "with God or the concept"/"without God or the concept of God" -- it was not intended as a case of mooting the existence of God. This tack was imposed on the thread by atheist posters. I am quite ready, willing and able to provide my argument for the existence of God, but am under no obligation to do so by the terms laid down in the OP. I do not seek immunity; I seek fair play.

AlbqOwl · Feb 17, 2018

Tim the plumber said:
You are unbelievable in you denial of the obvious.

You are much less intelligent than you should be because of your refusal to think about things close to your chosen fairy.

I am harmed by the loss of important research into cancer because it involves stem cells.

I am harmed by my society being segragated by the abuse of education by the religious.

I am harmed by the stupid perception of religious types that they are the only ones who do charity work. Here in the UK there are a lot less religous types and just as much charity. Soup kitchens are often run by people such as I.

So sorry you are harmed. None of those things affects me or anybody I know in any way. I have never been harmed by anybody's beliefs. I can't imagine any circumstance that I could possibly be harmed by what somebody believes. It is only what people DO that can harm me. I have been harmed I believe by those who demand that we remove a symbol of a cross or a work of art including the Ten Commandments or a lovely old creche on the Courthouse lawn at Christmas. I can't imagine how the presence of those things harms a single soul and I can't find any rationale for why those who enjoy them should not be able to have them.

And I am happy to know you are running a soup kitchen. Good for you. Research, however, suggests that Americans tend to be more charitable than the Brits. (I say that being quite fond of all the Brits I know.) Just one example:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2599387/americans-are-more-generous-than-the-british-research-shows/

Americans have a higher percentage of Christians and church goers too. And while correlation is not causation, I still believe the instinct or compulsion to do good, to care, to love something unrelated to you, to respect is God acting on Earth. I think that it is no accident that where God is most pushed aside, you find more rudeness, uncaring, indifference, and even crime along with cruel and baseless judgmentalism as you demonstrated in your post.

Angel · Feb 17, 2018

Tim the plumber said:
The bear bones principal of leading your life based on a none-real idea will mean you make stupid, none-logical, decisions about important things.

What "none-real idea" are you referring to? The concept of a Creator God? That concept is the realest concept of them all. If you assert (as you have) that the concept of a Creator God is a "non-real idea," then you'll have to unpack your claim or you're just begging the question, which you're free to do, of course, but let's call a spade a spade, shall we?

Tim the plumber said:
Basic philosophy is vital to understanding the world around us. 15th century sailing ships that navigated to the Americas and around the world did so with very poor sails because they had a bad idea about how wind works.

To have a bad idea of how the universe is set up, that there is this fairy up there looking down on you protecting you, will result in poor decision making. The experience of many Western military trainers of Islamic armies is full of tales of soldiers who consider it blasphemous to aim their weapons. Trying to get pilots to deal with problems and not just give up and pray is even harder. An atheist will still be fighting to regain control of the aircraft all the way down, that is likely to save the plane and all those aboard.

What you say about bad ideas is true enough, but again you start talking about various doctrines in the Personification of God inherent in all organized religions. You have not made the case that a philosophical inference to the best explanation of the existence of universe, life on earth, and mind -- i.e., the concept of a Creator God -- is in itself a "bad idea."

Angel · Feb 17, 2018

Tim the plumber said:
But you cannot work it backwards.

Of course you can; science does it all the time. Looking for necessary and sufficient conditions is the very basis of science.

Tim the plumber said:
To say that there must be life because there is water is not logical. To say that it is likely from what we have seen on earth is fine but it is not necessary that life exists on Europa just because we have information that that moon of Jupiter has water within it.

No, that's not what is being said. What is being said is that there are certain conditions without which the phenomenon you are investigating cannot exist. It is perfectly logical. The "must exist" of your post applies only to the sufficient condition, not the necessary condition.

Tim the plumber said:
Here, in Sheffield, which is a heavily science and engineering orientated city, it is most certainly on the claimant to show that his claim has merrit rather than expecting anybody else to prove a negative. That would be considered ignorance and stupuidity.

So if I'm in Sheffield and claim that something you believe is "make-believe," it is up to me to make good on my claim, no?

Tim the plumber said:
You are splitting hairs and talking drivel again.

No, you are ignoring an important distinction and supporting your ignorance in this case by way of a dismissal.

soylentgreen · Feb 18, 2018

Angel said:
As you can see from the full exchange, I challenge devildavid to make good on his claim that the concept of a Creator God is "make-believe."
I am not seeking immunity (As I have pointed out, I am not shy about providing my argument when germane to the topic). I am asking him to support his claim. He made it. He should be expected to make good on the claim in any discussion or debate.
This is not an interrogation, and if someone assumes the role of interrogator, then he is rightly called to account for his claims.

Disagree that it is begging the question. You have started from a position that a god exists without any reason as to why.

I understood you, but I'm the one who made the post; anyone else could mistake the bolding as mine, which is not fair to me.

No, the bolding was mine to ake distinct the words i was pointing to, but the words are yours.

This is not an interrogation.

Correct which does not change the fact that the claimo f a god is yours as is the onus.

This is good, and I never asked for a disproof. I asked for reasons for calling my belief "make-believe." That's fair dinkum, as they say downunder.

As nothing has ever been presented in the way of proof or even good reason for a god then there is no other position for an athesit than that of not having any reason to even consider a god let alone its existence.
You of course start fom a position that a god is possible yet give nothing to back this except faith.

I hope I've answered this above to your satisfaction.

The OP presents the thesis as a hypothetical -- "with God or the concept"/"without God or the concept of God" -- it was not intended as a case of mooting the existence of God. This tack was imposed on the thread by atheist posters. I am quite ready, willing and able to provide my argument for the existence of God, but am under no obligation to do so by the terms laid down in the OP. I do not seek immunity; I seek fair play.

So you are saying you do not take a position?

Without God, indeed without the concept of God, the meaning of the world, and with it the meaning of life, becomes nugatory.

Then you have no reason to be here.

Tim the plumber · Feb 18, 2018

Originally Posted by Tim the plumber View Post
You are unbelievable in you denial of the obvious.

You are much less intelligent than you should be because of your refusal to think about things close to your chosen fairy.

I am harmed by the loss of important research into cancer because it involves stem cells.

I am harmed by my society being segragated by the abuse of education by the religious.

I am harmed by the stupid perception of religious types that they are the only ones who do charity work. Here in the UK there are a lot less religous types and just as much charity. Soup kitchens are often run by people such as I.

AlbqOwl said:
So sorry you are harmed. None of those things affects me or anybody I know in any way.

False; you do know people who have died of cancer. The cure for those cancers may have been found by now if the research had not been stopped by the religious.

I have never been harmed by anybody's beliefs.

False; You have been harmed by the belief that vacinees are bad thus lots of people not getting their kids vacinated which has resulted in, if nothing else, higher taxes to pay for the looking after those with perminent mental disability due to the inevitable spread of the diseases in question.

I can't imagine any circumstance that I could possibly be harmed by what somebody believes. It is only what people DO that can harm me. I have been harmed I believe by those who demand that we remove a symbol of a cross or a work of art including the Ten Commandments or a lovely old creche on the Courthouse lawn at Christmas. I can't imagine how the presence of those things harms a single soul and I can't find any rationale for why those who enjoy them should not be able to have them.

Such symbols are important. Why would I be placed in a position of being second class before the law by having such symbols on a public building and how exactly have you been harmed???

If the symbol was of an Islamic type would you feel confortable in that court room?

And I am happy to know you are running a soup kitchen. Good for you. Research, however, suggests that Americans tend to be more charitable than the Brits. (I say that being quite fond of all the Brits I know.) Just one example:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2599387/americans-are-more-generous-than-the-british-research-shows/

Americans have a higher percentage of Christians and church goers too. And while correlation is not causation, I still believe the instinct or compulsion to do good, to care, to love something unrelated to you, to respect is God acting on Earth. I think that it is no accident that where God is most pushed aside, you find more rudeness, uncaring, indifference, and even crime along with cruel and baseless judgmentalism as you demonstrated in your post.

I have demonstrated in my posts that the reasons I am rude to you are fully supported by actual facts.

Further the lower level of crime in theolocratic societies is far more likely to be the result of extreme punishments for any who step out of line and the under reporting of crimes when they are committed by those with status in such a society. See Catholic priests and choir boys.

Your belief that we should never be rude is an example of the reason why such authority figures are able to coninue to enjoy themselves at the expense of the less powerful. Rudeness and well supported judgmentalism is the answer to the foolish and generally prejudiced bigitory that is always the social rule with religious societies.

Tim the plumber · Feb 18, 2018

Angel said:
So if I'm in Sheffield and claim that something you believe is "make-believe," it is up to me to make good on my claim, no?

That is exactly the point. If I claim that I am building a wind turbine of my own design that if it works will change the way the whole world generates it's electrical power and you challenged me that I am making it up I would be expected to provide supporting evidence that that is happeneing.

So when you make the claim the God exists I expect you to be able to support it with evidence.

Angel · Feb 18, 2018

soylentgreen said:
Disagree that it is begging the question. You have started from a position that a god exists without any reason as to why.

It's not a matter of agreement. It is classic textbook question begging. And that's not where the OP starts; I've corrected your misconception two or three times now, What gives?

soylentgreen said:
No, the bolding was mine to ake distinct the words i was pointing to, but the words are yours.

Yes, I know the bolding was yours, but you did not indicate this with a bracketed [bolding mine], which would have been the proper way to go about altering with my post.

soylentgreen said:
Correct which does not change the fact that the claimo f a god is yours as is the onus.

No the claim of "make-believe" is the atheist's and the onus is his.

soylentgreen said:
As nothing has ever been presented in the way of proof or even good reason for a god then there is no other position for an athesit than that of not having any reason to even consider a god let alone its existence.

This is false on its face. The Atheist Delusion.

soylentgreen said:
You of course start fom a position that a god is possible yet give nothing to back this except faith.

Are you not reading my replies to you. I've corrected this misconception pf yours and you just keep re[eating it. Again, what gives?

soylentgreen said:
So you are saying you do not take a position?

No, that's not what I said,

soylentgreen said:
Then you have no reason to be here.

I have as much reason as you.

Quag · Feb 18, 2018

Angel said:
Post #240. You were quoted in it, so you should have been notified.

Hmm must have missed that one.
Not sure if it conveys meaning but if you like the melody it can convey a feeling.
But assuming there is an unknown meaning
What if the meaning of the song is that all who are not of the same ethnicity must be enslaved? Or conversley that we should all live together in harmony despite our differences? Would that make a difference? If it is either of those or something totally different does that change anything for you if you are unaware?
But as I said you still dont even know if there even is a universal meaning as you claim.

Quag · Feb 18, 2018

Angel said:
You're telling me what my belief is about? Suppose you restate my arguments then. We go back months on this topic, and lately in Dragonfly's God thread. So let's hear your version of my arguments. If you cannot do this, and I expect you can't, then you're just defaulting to the usual anti-theist boilerplate reply in the forum.

I am not telling you what your belief is about I am telling you that your belief is a belief

Quag · Feb 18, 2018

Angel said:
Yes, I did. Here:

#225

And I am saying that is subjective because a creator can exist and there still not be a universal meaning. I am also saying that even if there is a universal meaning you cannot know what it is. Plus I am saying that if there is no universal meaning you can still believe there is one but will live your life without knowng that your belief is wrong.
Thus since the existence of the universal menaing and its actual meaning if it exists are unknown and unknowable to you it is meanignless in any way except whatever belief you place in it.

Quag · Feb 18, 2018

Angel said:
Look, Quag, I posted both statement and restatement, yours and mine, noted our disagreement on their compatibility and suggested we move on. You won't move on.
So let me put this to you. Is the following a fair statement of your view?

See previous post

Quag · Feb 18, 2018

Angel said:
The word proof is commonly used to mean "evidence." Is this the way you're using it? If you're using it in a stronger sense, after my post on that sense, then we can hardly carry on, can we?

I woudl accept evidence as proof but you have only belief not evidence

And I have gotten the impression that you don't understand your own assertions.
So strike two against us.
Let's see how we do with posts #266 & #267. They're softballs.

Your belief is not knowledge even using your definition of the term knowledge it is merely belief.

Angel · Feb 18, 2018

Welcome back, Quag.
I see a new mess of misunderstanding to sort through.
Right now I'm off to Pret a Manger for Sunday morning coffee klatch.
I'll pick up our conversation after lunch.
Namaste.

Angel · Feb 18, 2018

Tim and the Angel

Int. A Sheffield pub. Day.

Barkeep: Another round, mates?

Tim nods. Angel flutters a wing.
The barkeep sets them up.

Barkeep: Onus probandi.

Tim: Cheers!

Angel: Down the hatch!

A beat of silence.

Tim: The one who makes the claim.

Angel: Huh? What's that?

Tim: The one who makes the claim bears the burden. Onus probandi.

Angel: It's only fair.

Another beat of silence.

Angel: But by God that goes for nay-sayers as well as yea-sayers, both.

Tim: No one gets a free pass!

Angel: For nay-sayers and yea-sayers both.

Long silence.

Tim: I"m the nay-sayer.

Angel: Yes, you are.

Tim: And you're the yea-sayer.

Angel: Yes, I am.

Another long silence.
The two look at each other.

Tim, Angel: Two more pints?

...

Tim the plumber said:
That is exactly the point. If I claim that I am building a wind turbine of my own design that if it works will change the way the whole world generates it's electrical power and you challenged me that I am making it up I would be expected to provide supporting evidence that that is happeneing.

So when you make the claim the God exists I expect you to be able to support it with evidence.

devildavid · Feb 18, 2018

Angel said:
I can see why you'd think that this is a purely personal judgment, Tim, but without presuming to speak for AlbqOwl, I think she is relying on the logical notion of neccessary condition, and at any rate that is what I intended in using the term "necessary." Oxygen is a neccessary condition for fire. A sine qua non. Just so, God, or the concept of God, is a necessary condition for universal meaning.

How does belief in the existence of God impact the world negatively? I don't follow you in this.

The concept of universal meaning is possible without relying on the concept of god. Imaginary concepts are not reliant on other imaginary concepts. Universal meaning is a vague concept that anyone can make up if they want, and like all such concepts does not have to have another vague concept to back it up. I could say that universal meaning is reliant on an invisible force located in a black hole in the center of reality.

Quag · Feb 18, 2018

Angel said:
Welcome back, Quag.
I see a new mess of misunderstanding to sort through.
Right now I'm off to Pret a Manger for Sunday morning coffee klatch.
I'll pick up our conversation after lunch.
Namaste.

I have no clue what the bolded means but have a good time

AlbqOwl · Feb 18, 2018

Tim the plumber said:
That is exactly the point. If I claim that I am building a wind turbine of my own design that if it works will change the way the whole world generates it's electrical power and you challenged me that I am making it up I would be expected to provide supporting evidence that that is happeneing.

So when you make the claim the God exists I expect you to be able to support it with evidence.

Then why are you not expected to support your claim that God does not exist when Angel or I claim to have experienced God?

AlbqOwl · Feb 18, 2018

Tim the plumber said:
False; you do know people who have died of cancer. The cure for those cancers may have been found by now if the research had not been stopped by the religious.

False; You have been harmed by the belief that vacinees are bad thus lots of people not getting their kids vacinated which has resulted in, if nothing else, higher taxes to pay for the looking after those with perminent mental disability due to the inevitable spread of the diseases in question.

Such symbols are important. Why would I be placed in a position of being second class before the law by having such symbols on a public building and how exactly have you been harmed???

If the symbol was of an Islamic type would you feel confortable in that court room?

I have demonstrated in my posts that the reasons I am rude to you are fully supported by actual facts.

Further the lower level of crime in theolocratic societies is far more likely to be the result of extreme punishments for any who step out of line and the under reporting of crimes when they are committed by those with status in such a society. See Catholic priests and choir boys.

Your belief that we should never be rude is an example of the reason why such authority figures are able to coninue to enjoy themselves at the expense of the less powerful. Rudeness and well supported judgmentalism is the answer to the foolish and generally prejudiced bigitory that is always the social rule with religious societies.

Sorry but I generally do not respond to chopped up posts that destroy context and and/or a complete thought as well as them being tedious to read and too often invite non sequitur and derail the argument being made. Just my personal preference.

Scanning over it I will say that I and my husband have battled cancer and do not believe that anybody's Christian beliefs have interfered with our treatment in any way, but Christian prayer has helped enormously in the treatment process. We are always greatly comforted to know our surgeon is a praying person.

I know one Christian out of the many hundreds of Christians that I know very well who is suspicious that vaccines are causing many of the problems children are having. That one happens to be a medical doctor and I doubt her opinion is anywhere near as detrimental to medical science as is the Atheist who insists prayer is useless.

And while any Christian might believe something I don't support or believe, so will any given person of any other faith or the agnostic or Atheist most likely believe something I don't support or believe. That I disagree with them does not make them evil or even necessarily wrong, most especially in their unique point of view.

So I will have to say you have not supported any of your diatribe and negative statements about Christians and, in my opinion, you are dead wrong. Which is your right to be.

I will concede your admission that you are rude however.

God and The Meaning of Life

Phlegmatic