Prophecies about South Africa

[AllisonW]

Just thought that while we were sharing stories you might like this one: No prizes for guessing who Hank is! Just for fun. Ignore it if you not interested.

This morning there was a knock at my door. When I answered the door I found a well groomed, nicely dressed couple. The man spoke first:

John: "Hi! I'm John, and this is Mary."

Mary: "Hi! We're here to invite you to come kiss Hank's Backside with us."

Me: "Pardon me?! What are you talking about? Who's Hank, and why would I want to kiss His Backside?"

John: "If you kiss Hank's Backside, He'll give you a million dollars; and if you don't, He'll kick the snot out of you."

Me: "What? Is this some sort of bizarre mob shake-down?"

John: "Hank is a billionaire philanthropist. Hank built this town. Hank owns this town. He can do whatever He wants, and what He wants is to give you a million dollars, but He can't until you kiss His Backside."

Me: "That doesn't make any sense. Why..."

Mary: "Who are you to question Hank's gift? Don't you want a million dollars? Isn't it worth a little kiss on the Backside?"

Me: "Well maybe, if it's legit, but..."

John: "Then come kiss Hank's Backside with us."

Me: "Do you kiss Hank's Backside often?"

Mary: "Oh yes, all the time..."

Me: "And has He given you a million dollars?"

John: "Well no. You don't actually get the money until you leave town."

Me: "So why don't you just leave town now?"

Mary: "You can't leave until Hank tells you to, or you don't get the money, and He kicks the snot out of you."

Me: "Do you know anyone who kissed Hank's Backside, left town, and got the million dollars?"

John: "My mother kissed Hank's Backside for years. She left town last year, and I'm sure she got the money."

Me: "Haven't you talked to her since then?"

John: "Of course not, Hank doesn't allow it."

Me: "So what makes you think He'll actually give you the money if you've never talked to anyone who got the money?"

Mary: "Well, He gives you a little bit before you leave. Maybe you'll get a raise, maybe you'll win a small lotto, maybe you'll just find a twenty-dollar bill on the street."

Me: "What's that got to do with Hank?"

John: "Hank has certain 'connections.'"

Me: "I'm sorry, but this sounds like some sort of bizarre con game."

John: "But it's a million dollars, can you really take the chance? And remember, if you don't kiss Hank's Backside He'll kick the snot out of you."

Me: "Maybe if I could see Hank, talk to Him, get the details straight from Him..."

Mary: "No one sees Hank, no one talks to Hank."

Me: "Then how do you kiss His Backside?"

John: "Sometimes we just blow Him a kiss, and think of His Backside. Other times we kiss Karl's Backside, and he pBacksidees it on."

Me: "Who's Karl?"

Mary: "A friend of ours. He's the one who taught us all about kissing Hank's Backside. All we had to do was take him out to dinner a few times."

Me: "And you just took his word for it when he said there was a Hank, that Hank wanted you to kiss His Backside, and that Hank would reward you?"

John: "Oh no! Karl has a letter he got from Hank years ago explaining the whole thing. Here's a copy; see for yourself."

From the Desk of Karl

1. Kiss Hank's Backside and He'll give you a million dollars when you leave town.

2. Use alcohol in moderation.

3. Kick the snot out of people who aren't like you.

4. Eat right.

5. Hank dictated this list Himself.

6. The moon is made of green cheese.

7. Everything Hank says is right.

8. Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.

9. Don't use alcohol.

10. Eat your wieners on buns, no condiments.

11. Kiss Hank's Backside or He'll kick the snot out of you.

Me: "This appears to be written on Karl's letterhead."

Mary: "Hank didn't have any paper."

Me: "I have a hunch that if we checked we'd find this is Karl's handwriting."

John: "Of course, Hank dictated it."

Me: "I thought you said no one gets to see Hank?"

Mary: "Not now, but years ago He would talk to some people."

Me: "I thought you said He was a philanthropist. What sort of philanthropist kicks the snot out of people just because they're different?"

Mary: "It's what Hank wants, and Hank's always right."

Me: "How do you figure that?"

Mary: "Item 7 says 'Everything Hank says is right.' That's good enough for me!"

Me: "Maybe your friend Karl just made the whole thing up."

John: "No way! Item 5 says 'Hank dictated this list himself.' Besides, item 2 says 'Use alcohol in moderation,' Item 4 says 'Eat right,' and item 8 says 'Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.' Everyone knows those things are right, so the rest must be true, too."

Me: "But 9 says 'Don't use alcohol.' which doesn't quite go with item 2, and 6 says 'The moon is made of green cheese,' which is just plain wrong."

John: "There's no contradiction between 9 and 2, 9 just clarifies 2. As far as 6 goes, you've never been to the moon, so you can't say for sure."

Me: "Scientists have pretty firmly established that the moon is made of rock..."

Mary: "But they don't know if the rock came from the Earth, or from out of space, so it could just as easily be green cheese."

Me: "I'm not really an expert, but I think the theory that the Moon was somehow 'captured' by the Earth has been discounted*. Besides, not knowing where the rock came from doesn't make it cheese."

John: "Ha! You just admitted that scientists make mistakes, but we know Hank is always right!"

Me: "We do?"

Mary: "Of course we do, Item 7 says so."

Me: "You're saying Hank's always right because the list says so, the list is right because Hank dictated it, and we know that Hank dictated it because the list says so. That's circular logic, no different than saying 'Hank's right because He says He's right.'"

John: "Now you're getting it! It's so rewarding to see someone come around to Hank's way of thinking."

Me: "But...oh, never mind. What's the deal with wieners?"

Mary: She blushes.

John: "Wieners, in buns, no condiments. It's Hank's way. Anything else is wrong."

Me: "What if I don't have a bun?"

John: "No bun, no wiener. A wiener without a bun is wrong."

Me: "No relish? No Mustard?"

Mary: She looks positively stricken.

John: He's shouting. "There's no need for such language! Condiments of any kind are wrong!"

Me: "So a big pile of sauerkraut with some wieners chopped up in it would be out of the question?"

Mary: Sticks her fingers in her ears."I am not listening to this. La la la, la la, la la la."

John: "That's disgusting. Only some sort of evil deviant would eat that..."

Me: "It's good! I eat it all the time."

Mary: She faints.

John: He catches Mary. "Well, if I'd known you were one of those I wouldn't have wasted my time. When Hank kicks the snot out of you I'll be there, counting my money and laughing. I'll kiss Hank's Backside for you, you bunless cut-wienered kraut-eater."

With this, John dragged Mary to their waiting car, and sped off.

[Just B]

Allison! Allison,

As stated before this subject has been discussed and discussed since the beginning of time ad nauseum (excuse the spelling). And in the past science has been proven wrong and religion battles to prove they are right. At this point I don't want to go into further points in defense of either. But I think anyone becoming dogmatic about there beliefs (religious, scientific or any other) and getting in peoples faces will serve no one. No offense is meant by this statement but every individual has the right and choice to believe in anything they choose (totally unscientific hey) as long as they don't directly offend or harm others.

After researching further on the internet I realized yet again that the points both for and against are just too extensive to read through all of them and make a reasonable deduction if there is one.

I personally follow a very different route from Science and Religion but enjoy learning from every source available as everywhere there are lessons to be learnt. I just feel that this particular argument, or debate will in the end serve no purpose other than to create bad feelings between people.

I'm still on a journey of discovery or enlightenment trying to understand it all. I think my human brain cannot decipher and assimilate all of the information, disinformation, opinion and emotions associated with our existence. I certainly hope after all the hard work that there is somewhere for us to move onto and not just nothingness.

I have enjoyed reading further information both for and against, but at this point will bow out as I have expressed my opinion.

Thank you, and good luck with your future endeavours and I hope you find what you are looking for.

Regards

Just B

Edited September 29, 2008 by Just B

[Alida]

Alida,

I feel a deep sense of sadness at your response. It must be so terrible to be so non questioning, so stunted in your ability to examine your environment. How dis-empowering. I embrace my intellectual freedom. If there is a god, he is probably shaking his head in disbelief right now! Probably turning to Peter and saying: "Prototype 2 - lets work on that cranial capacity. This model seems to have major malfunctions!"

Have a good - if oblivious day.

Allison

Dear Allison, you know what ? I feel the same deep sense of sadness at your response. I live in my God's power. My own is not able to carry me. He is the great one. He created me, how can I possibly be better, greater or more powerful than He ? And furthermore, say for instance I'm wrong, I'll loose nothing when I die. Say for instance you are wrong, you will have lots of trouble. My intellectual freedom told me there is but only One true, living God. And if He would want to work on my cranial capacity, LET IT BE !!! I can only gain.

[Alida]

Wow!

I never thought that my original post asking an opinion about this "prophecy" would draw such fiery and varied responses!

Thank you also for some of you sticking up for me (after the initial attacks for simply asking a question). I appreciate it.

Wantbetter

Hey, no problem ! I has been quite invigorating this far !

[Alida]

I will no more comment on this thread, I feel I've said what I needed to say. May God be honoured.

[bluebonnet]

Our understanding of the Universe is about to change...

The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is a gigantic scientific instrument near Geneva, where it spans the border between Switzerland and France about 100 m underground. It is a particle accelerator used by physicists to study the smallest known particles – the fundamental building blocks of all things. It will revolutionise our understanding, from the minuscule world deep within atoms to the vastness of the Universe.

Two beams of subatomic particles called 'hadrons' – either protons or lead ions – will travel in opposite directions inside the circular accelerator, gaining energy with every lap. Physicists will use the LHC to recreate the conditions just after the Big Bang, by colliding the two beams head-on at very high energy. Teams of physicists from around the world will analyse the particles created in the collisions using special detectors in a number of experiments dedicated to the LHC.

There are many theories as to what will result from these collisions, but what's for sure is that a brave new world of physics will emerge from the new accelerator, as knowledge in particle physics goes on to describe the workings of the Universe. For decades, the Standard Model of particle physics has served physicists well as a means of understanding the fundamental laws of Nature, but it does not tell the whole story. Only experimental data using the higher energies reached by the LHC can push knowledge forward, challenging those who seek confirmation of established knowledge, and those who dare to dream beyond the paradigm.

LET US WAIT AND SEE WHAT SCIENTISTS COME UP WITH IN CERN,,,,IT WILL BE INTERESTING.

Edwina

[bluebonnet]

Thought I add a little more:

Physicist prepares to prove evolution through 'God particle'

Jordan News.Net

Monday 7th April, 2008

British physicist Peter Higgs has claimed it may soon be possible to prove the existence of a force which gives mass to the universe and makes life possible.

Professor Higgs, an atheist, has claimed to have discovered a particle which originates from the force.

He says the particle will be confirmed when the particle collider at the CERN research centre in Switzerland begins operating early next year.

Scientists at the centre hope the process will produce clear signs of what is being called the "God particle".

Professor Higgs originally tried to explain the force in the 1960’s, when his research was considered to be far-fetched.

Today, the existence of the invisible field is widely accepted by scientists, who believe it came into being following creation of the universe, some 15 billion years ago.

[OZSAFFER]

Just a thought!

Do atheists & scientists "feel"? Things like remorse & conscience.

Do they mourne and feel loss? How do they deal with these feelings? What or whom do they turn to in times of need?

Do they bury their dead and place a tombstone on the grave and why? Do they get married in church?

I am sure that many of them do! Wonder why though? Perhaps a subconcious awareness!

Science can explain a lot of things, but NOT emotion!!!

Also think of other phenomenon such as "Dejavu" for example. It does exist, most if not all of us have experienced it, but is their a feasable scientific explanation for it?

Like I said, "Just a thought"

[OZSAFFER]

Emile,

Nick, i dont get your points:

1. The fact that this is a difficult intellectual process does not mean that we should simply not engage, not question, not ask why.

2. Why do you feel that evolution required a trigger - a human form maker ? Justify that proposal. Nobel peace prize laureates have gone to great length to try and theorise on this beginning. They recently recreated the big bang. Some of the GREATEST minds of our time - people who are putting man into space, discovering medical breakthroughs believe in this. They have thought through the process and accept this as the best possible solution. For someone to scratch their head and say : "Doggone! This doesnt make sense to me so it didnt happen!" borders on arrogance.

Allison

Hi Allison!

On the contrary, I value, enjoy and welcome your scientific opinion /approach extremely. I too have an enquiring mind. Unfortunatley not educated scientifically like you nor theologically like others. It does not mean that I do not seek on a personal level to understand and in doing so, attempt the draw my own conclusions. The concept of meaningful "Purpose" comes to mind immediately!

Your statement:

"Doggone! This doesnt make sense to me so it didnt happen!" borders on arrogance

may just as well apply to people that oppose Creation!

Show me a scientist with the intellectual capacity to create a universe from nothing and I might be more appreciative of statements made by Nobel prize winners and the so-called greatest minds of our time! Until then, I believe in the Divine Trigger! It's the only logical explanation!

With my ridiculously limited scientific knowledge, I also question other scientific concepts, such as "Infinity". Probably laughable, but if the universe is infinately large, then it too is infinately small and such a thing as "the smallest particle" cannot exist, for something that exists can always be halved, subdivided etc.

Enough said.

Cheers

Edited September 29, 2008 by Nick Vos

[Gweilo]

Scientific evidence as requested! (incl graphs)

Pastafarianism

Scientists' comments

Edited September 30, 2008 by Morne and Janine

[SueB]

"Naturalism is self-refuting

Scientific naturalism claims that science is the only true source of knowledge. It is therefore fair to ask whether science itself can be used to justify naturalism. It cannot. The data which science generates can provide no support for or against such a philosophy. Since the truth of scientific naturalism cannot be scientifically demonstrated, it cannot be a valid form of knowledge, and so is hoist by its own petard."

Complete article at the link below:

http://www.jubilee-centre.org/document.php?id=24

[bluebonnet]

Just a thought!

Do atheists & scientists "feel"? Things like remorse & conscience.

Do they mourne and feel loss? How do they deal with these feelings? What or whom do they turn to in times of need?

Do they bury their dead and place a tombstone on the grave and why? Do they get married in church?

I am sure that many of them do! Wonder why though? Perhaps a subconcious awareness!

Science can explain a lot of things, but NOT emotion!!!

Also think of other phenomenon such as "Dejavu" for example. It does exist, most if not all of us have experienced it, but is their a feasable scientific explanation for it?

Like I said, "Just a thought"

"Science can explain a lot of things, but not emotion"

My daughter's boyfriend studies Neuroscience at the Uni. of Zurich and will argue on that one. Interesting topic.

[AllisonW]

Hi all,

Standardly i do not argue religion because i recognise the futlity of the process. So you may ask why did i engage in this thread for the last couple of days:

* While people have the right to their religious views, it is vital that they accept them for what they are - only views, only one set of beliefs. Remember that there are multiple gods. I have been asked why dont i just hedge my bets and believe in god, "just in case". Well firstly, are you sure that you believe in the right god. What if you arrive upstairs and it turns out that you should have been in the Mosque and not the church. Secondly, I could not base my beliefs on a gamble, a bet, a hope. This approach lacks integrity for me.

* If you are religious be aware that you are surrounded by atheists, agnostics or least sceptics every day. They may not talk out because they are used to the withering looks, the put downs, the patronising comments, the fire and brimstone remarks. Yesterday i was at a conference and i was seated at a table of 8 people and i shared some fo the discussion that i was having on the forum. Four other people came out openly as atheists. Two others questioned me attentively. Only one remained silent. Dawkins raises the point. He says that for many atheists the experience of disrespect is the same that gay people experience. You go through life with Christians constantly - perhaps unconsciously - highlighting that they are "normal" and you are "not". What makes it worse is that Atheists are some of the most independant, free thinking, most educated people in the world. As a result of this they are tolerant and allow others their views. This results in a situation where religious people see this as a lack of confidence in their beliefs. I have decided to stop pandering to ideas that dont make sense to me. I have sat with so many christians who will talk about their views as if they are gospel (pardon the pun!) Tolerance and sensitivity cuts both ways. Granted atheists may be accused of being more in your face but Christians undermine our beliefs in a much for subtle way all the time. Be aware that probably half of the people you will meet today are not chrisitians in the true sense of the word.

Nick, if i came across aggressively, that was not my intent. But i dont agree that it is arrogant to question creationisim. Remember i am not saying a person is arrogant to question science, as long as they have a reason to. People will question science and when they are responded to with hard evidence, they get stuck on the faith card. They just respond: "This is not for me to question.". The very premise of science is to question, question and then when you are sure you have the answer, still ask why! Nick, i am not saying that Scientists created the universe as you seem to imply i am. I am saying that scientists seek to understand what did and right now all evidence does not support your view.

Furthermore, Nick, Science can explain emotions very well: It is called hormones, chemicals. It is the basis of all psychiatric medication. And any man who has ever lived with a pregnant woman or a woman with PMS will know exactly what i am talking about. Your response implies that if you are not religious you are not human. Of course all human beings mourn loss and experience pain. This is not religious. We are social beings and connect to others to survive, as do animals. No, i did not get married in a church. My marriage was about a personal commitment to my partner and not to any supernatural being. If one of my family members die i will gather with my loved ones and mourn their death appropriately. None of this requires religion at all. Burial was not originally a religious concept but was done to stop wild animals from eating the corpse. Other groups burn the body. I feel more remorse and conscience now then before i embraced atheism. The responsiblity for my decisions is mine alone and is not influenced by an outsider - the good father or the bad devil. I have no-one else to blame and so i take more responsibility. Remember that the bible calls for the the stoning of adulterers, the killing of homosexuals. Religion is certainly not always the guidebook for appropriate social behaviour.

Finally, if i came across as offensive that was not my intention. But i will continue to challenge people if they post points that dont make sense to me. I always welcome people challenging me on my opinions and have tried to respond when challenged. This is scientific method at its best.

On a lighter note the Australian atheist society is offering $100 000 to anyone who can prove the existence of god, so if your beliefs are so sure this is a great way to finance your departure, or put your money where your mouth is - so to speak! LOL

Allison

Edited September 30, 2008 by AllisonW

[OZSAFFER]

Please don't get me wrong Allison!

I am not offended by any remarks. I have the emotional maturity to understand the value of objective opinion. I also value your eduacted opinion and probe simply out of curiosity. As I said, I too have an enquiring mind and rely heavily on my ability to arrive at my own conclusions.

[GerhardinOz]

They recently recreated the big bang.

They have??

[AllisonW]

They have??

Hi Gerhard,

There is an error in my wording. They have recreated big bang conditions.

The following is an extract from an article "Physicists recreate big bang conditions": http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/gene..._000209_wg.html

"GENEVA (Reuters) - For the first time, physicists have created a new form of matter by recreating the conditions thought to have existed 10 microseconds after the Big Bang at the start of the universe, scientists announced on Thursday.

The European Laboratory for Particle Physics (CERN), based outside Geneva, said scientists from more than 20 countries conducted a series of experiments which smashed together heavy lead ions in a fireball to prove a theory that had only existed on paper for years.

By generating collisions at temperatures 100,000 times as hot as the sun's center and at energy densities never before reached in laboratory experiments, they succeeded in isolating tiny components called quarks from more complex particles such as protons and neutrons, CERN said in a report.

This provided "compelling evidence'' for the existence of a new state of nuclear matter, a quark-gluon plasma, which CERN described as "the primordial soup in which quarks and gluons existed before they clumped together as the universe cooled down.''

According to CERN, the breakthrough in the project affectionately known as the "Little Bang,'' is an important step in understanding the early state of the universe, created some 12 to 15 billion years ago in a massive explosion, or Big Bang.

"A series of experiments using CERN's lead beam have presented compelling evidence for the existence of a new state of matter 20 times denser than nuclear matter, in which quarks, instead of being bound up into more complex particles such as protons and neutrons, are liberated to roam freely,'' it said.

"Such a state must have existed just a few microseconds after the Big Bang, before the formation of particles of matter as we know them today,'' it added."

This is such exciting stuff and i think will really change our understanding of this phenomenon.

Thanks again for the correction.

Allison

[Dax]

Ever since the CERN experiment made the headlines, something specific has been mulling around my mind.

It involves the work of the Cambridge physicist /cosmologist Stephen Hawking, and I keep wondering whether his work might be vindicated by the CERN experiment?

The thing is, just about all his work and research were in the domain of Theoretical Physics and since the CERN experiment isolated quarks, for the first time, something physical has been generated that ties in with his work, especially i.r.o. collapsing stars (black holes), and particularly in respect of Hawking’s theories regarding the entropy of black holes.

I must admit that I’ve not read up much about the CERN experiment, but the fact that they could replicate the type of matter that existed a few nano seconds after the Big Bang, makes me wonder whether some practical light might be shed in time about matter inside a Black Hole?

For example, just what is the state of matter between a Black Hole’s Singularity and the Event Horizon? There are so many theories, but since no Black Hole have ever been identified beyond question and subsequently studied, Black Holes are still firmly within the theoretical sphere, and the only “practical progress†that seems to have been made was in the domain of science fiction.

So, let’s keep our fingers crossed in the hope that we may see some "more science and less fiction" about Black Holes. If the CERN experiments would provide some practical insights i.r.o. Black Holes a Nobel Prize might still be within Hawking’s’ reach. This is the only major accolade that still eludes him, as the Nobel Prize is only awarded i.r.o. Physics that is verifiable, i.e. work that was done and tested under laboratory conditions, and all Hawking's work was in the sphere of Theoretical Physics.

Dax

[Stepchook]

The probability of our universe having come into existance from a big bang is ridiculously miniscule. It's like taking a manual for an F16 fighter jet, chucking it onto the floor and telling the book to build the jet itself. It's like taking a pile of wood, sticking dynamite under it, detonating it, then expecting to see a perfect little wooden house - complete with windows. The probability of all the protein chains within a DNA strand to bond correctly and precisely by chance is virtually zero.

Honestly, I simply cannot understand how people choose to believe evolution over creation. But, I suppose each to his own.

[louw.pretorius]

Pygmalion, I think it all boils down to faith. Those that has more faith believe evolution - the rest of us lagging behind have to take God at his Word....

[Alida]

Sorry to be back, just have to ....

There was a reward of $ 250 000 for anybody to absolute prove evolution, but it was never claimed. You can see if the offer is still valid at www.drdino.com, maybe you'll be the one.

If the Big Bang did happen, it was the first, only and last constructive explosion. No other explosion after that ever created anything but chaos.

Does hormones make you appreciate (feel good about) a sunset ? Is it hormones that makes you feel the emotion of restfulness the moment you enter for example a library ? Is it hormones that can make a baby feel happy or lonely ? I agree that hormones can influence your basic emotions: happy, angry, irritated, etc. But what about a 'higher' or 'secondary' emotion like loneliness ? If hormones could make you feel lonely, then you could just pop the necessary pill to alleviate your feeling of loneliness. And that's just one of the bunch.

Having emotions explained by hormones, means that we are basically at the mercy of our bodies and not accountable for our feelings and most probably not accountable for our reactions upon our emotions. If your hormones is upset, so will be your emotions and everyone near have to tread lightly otherwise ... (a destructive explosion ... )

Quote: People will question science and when they are responded to with hard evidence, they get stuck on the faith card. They just respond: "This is not for me to question.". Well, we are a unique bunch of Christians here, then, for 'luckily' up till now, we've stood our ground.

Quote: Granted atheists may be accused of being more in your face but Christians undermine our beliefs in a much for subtle way all the time. This 'undermining', or casting doubt in other words, we Christians call the working of the Holy Spirit of God. We testify, He work in the receptor of the messages' heart, seeing if there is fertile soil for the message.

Quote: Remember that the bible calls for the the stoning of adulterers, the killing of homosexuals. Religion is certainly not always the guidebook for appropriate social behaviour. Please read the WHOLE Bible for the COMPLETE picture. You will find it in the second part, the New Testament. There's a reason behind the OLD and the NEW. Amazing story !

Keep on searching, you might find ...

Edited September 30, 2008 by Alida

[Dax]

I'm a Christian, yet I also believe that there are more to Creation than what we can glean from the book of Genesis.

There may not be much support for my belief from either religion on the one hand, and science on the other hand, but i choose to believe that the cosmos as we know and observe it, once existed in an infinite hot and dense state. If there was a big bang, (and i can't think of any other physical way how the cosmos as we know it came into being) then it was not a random event, in a simple sense, i believe that "a switch was flipped" in a rather divine (?) way.

I tend to digress from the Bible in respect of 6 physical,24 hour periods of creation, rather, over time i've come to accept for myself that creation in a sense was also evolution, from the big bang to our present state. For this belief there is no scientific basis, it's only my own paradigm with which i make sense of both my religious and scientific principles. In a sense i believe that the 6 days of creation described in the Bible, were actually six evolutionary periods interspersed through the 15 billion years from the Big Bang up to present. (There's probablly not much empirical scientific proof for this belief, but it cannot be discounted out of hand either)

From a philosophical angle i also reason that there are just too much order and mathematical precition in the universe to ascribe it to physical-geometric accident. I know that i leave myself open for crisism here but i feel that powers bigger than the human mind, and more complex than scientific method is at work with the continious-developing cosmos.

The scientist in me will forever be in perpetual awe and wonder (not to mention curiosity) about life, creation & evolotion. I will forever be intrigued especially by the intricate manner in which carbon forms the building blocks of all life as we know it, for example.

Cheers,

Dax

[BasinOzson]

Allison I think that God loves you very much. He made you. Hope you meet Him someday.

Greetings

Anmarie

[celeste]

Nice one Louw.Pretorius - made me smile

Yes, it is true Allison the Lord Jesus does love you. I am one who used to resist Him but when He revealed His love to me that was the beginning of my new life in Him! He died for me and you on the cross taking all of God's punishment for the sin of the world. So amazing that God himself in His Son paid the price that we all deserved to pay for sin. "For there is no greater love than this that a man should lay down his life for his friends." "the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord" because "the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin" and saves us from eternal separation in hell just like the passover lamb and the blood on the door posts saved the first born children in Egypt from the angel of death. On the third day Jesus rose from the dead because He had remained sinless and holy and death could not hold him, he had laid down His life and became obedient to death to save us. Truly amazing story and one that is true.

God is holy and he can only allow those who have been cleansed and made pure into His heaven. We sure don't want to live with the sin problem for ever do we? Just look around at the world, it all boils down to sin - "the love of money is the root of all evil."

On the remark about long hair and tats etc (a few pages back now) I was not condemning such people but merely illustrating a point that it is wrong for people to be puffed up in self righteousness because at the end of the day we are all the same, sinners who need to repent and believe the gospel.

P.S Just for the record am an ex metalhead/ gothic reveler who can't point a finger at anyone...hah! Meet me now and I'm just a regular mom who still sometimes wears doc martens.

Nice to engage in some meaningful discussion guys.

Edited September 30, 2008 by celeste

[AllisonW]

Your last few posts are just an example of the complete disrespect that you display to atheists all the time. People, get off your crosses! It is quite clear that you have no real evidence to support your views. I am not suprised that you now resort to the pseudo comfort game - I frankly dont care what your non existent deity thinks of me or feels for me. I would rather believe in father christmas - at least i may get presents.

Dax - respect your manner of engagement even though i do not agree with your views. It is positive for me that you support evolution and the big bang but i cannot support the "divine trigger" in any way. There is no evidence for this at all.

Alida - i really pondered whether i should bother at all. But anyway here goes..... There are other tertiary issues around emotions but they do still boil down to a complex concoction of chemicals. I suggest that you educate yourself on psychiatry and neuro science, as suggested by another member.

Also Alida please clarify for me: Is the bible completely true, non questionable and the word of god or is it NOT? You either buy all of the bull or not. When i quote something all of a sudden it is not relevant because it is from the old testament. Do you just pick and choose? So is Genesis crap? Ten commandments? These come from the old testament, dont they? So are you saying that parts of the bible (such as the stoning of adulterers bit) is wrong? Are you sure god knows about this? Who decides what part of the bible are okay and which are not PC?

Your suggestion that your insensitivity cause me "doubts" is laughable. I feel only irritation that i need to deal with people who dont have an appropriate grasp of reality.

Finally to all the people who think that god loves me - Why doesn't he love all the children who have cancer or all the babies who die of AIDS every year? What about all the victims of rape and violence?

So let the crap begin to spout: If you wont argue with me on a level of rationality, answer this question for me: If god is all powerful, why does he allow people to suffer? Either he cant do anything about it or he can and he doesn't care? Your belief in this protective father figure just doesn't work - even if we leave science out of it. The bottom line is that even if i and the scientific community are wrong, he is still is an altogether nasty character - judgmental, punishing, a bully. He is supposed to be all knowing - he knows what you are going to do even before you do, according to the chrisitians. So why does he test you? Doesn't he know what you are going to do already?

As a mental health professional i can understand the need to have a eternal father figure that will "look after" you. It is nice to think that someone is one your side and setting up the odds in your favour. But the bottom line is: Something is not true just because you want it to be true. I want to believe in the easter bunny, but there is not one even if it would be great. That is the essence of emotional maturity - being able to face the truth and make peace with it.

There is a reason why Dawkins calls it the God Delusion.

Allison

Edited September 30, 2008 by AllisonW

[Carrie]

Alison...

When I, some time ago, saw a post from a forumite looking for information on the locale and 'availability' of pagan churches in Perth... I stayed away. I knew that there was absolutely nothing in that post that would be of interest to me. I also realised that the contents of that thread would probably anger me...

so...

I stayed away...

I would have thought the topic of this thread would have done the same for you... as you confess to being an atheist, I am puzzled what you are doing participating in this thread... unless it is to stir up the pot and get people upset...