| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"JohnV" |
| Date: |
28 Apr 2004 01:40:53 AM |
| Object: |
rules? |
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible. If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
.
|
|
| User: "The other Donald" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
28 Apr 2004 03:24:52 AM |
|
|
"JohnV" <johnvjohnv@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:508a8973.0404272240.cdc1b99@posting.google.com...
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible. If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
According to Legend, the Ark was built by a man, Noah.
This doesn't even address the silliness of fitting and maintaining the
people and animals, as described, onto a boat for 40 days and 40 nights; the
logistics of "The Gathering" of these creatures; a worldwide flood; how said
boat ended up on a mountain; and how a structure made of wood would survive
within the shifting ice on that mountain.
Makes for good children's stories, but is utter nonsense when paid only a
passing amount of skepticism. Scrutiny simply decimates any shred of
credibility to the entire concept.
--
-Donald in Austin
AA #2104
Apatriot #22
Atheist FF/EMT
.....and ordained minister
Stork pin recipient: May 1, 2003 -Madelyn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
28 Apr 2004 09:37:34 AM |
|
|
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach The other Donald:
Makes for good children's stories
I don't know about you, but the story I read when I was little was
illustrated with some very frightening drawings of nearly naked people
desparately clibing some rocks to stay above the rising flood waters.
~~shudder~~
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
______________
Give a man a fish, and you'll feed him for a day.
Give him a religion, and he'll starve to death while praying for a fish.
--Timothy Jones
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Dollar Bill [formerly Bill, The Avender]" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
28 Apr 2004 01:49:30 PM |
|
|
In alt.atheism on Wed, 28 Apr 2004 09:37:34 -0500,
address@withheld.com (Vic Sagerquist) wrote:
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach The other Donald:
Makes for good children's stories
I don't know about you, but the story I read when I was little was
illustrated with some very frightening drawings of nearly naked people
desparately clibing some rocks to stay above the rising flood waters.
~~shudder~~
Jack Chick, perchance? That imagery is exactly what he used.
--
L8r,
Uncle Dollar Bill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brenda Nelson" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
30 Apr 2004 04:47:06 PM |
|
|
(Uncle Dollar Bill [formerly Bill, The Avender]) wrote in message news:<40a5fca9.61954246@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>...
In alt.atheism on Wed, 28 Apr 2004 09:37:34 -0500,
address@withheld.com (Vic Sagerquist) wrote:
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach The other Donald:
Makes for good children's stories
I don't know about you, but the story I read when I was little was
illustrated with some very frightening drawings of nearly naked people
desparately clibing some rocks to stay above the rising flood waters.
~~shudder~~
Jack Chick, perchance? That imagery is exactly what he used.
The imagery is as old as the printing press, if not older. When I was
a widdle bitty Babtist, lo, these many years ago (45+), the normal
illustration of the Noah's Ark/Flood story was one of two: animals
going 2 X 2 into the ark, or sinners clinging to wet rocks as the ark
floated by. Jack Chick is behind the curve.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
Chief Wrangler and Ramrod Emeritus
(and Professor of Feline Thermometrics)
EAC Equine Transportation Command/Carne Seca Division
in the Prefecture of Baja, Arizona
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
28 Apr 2004 07:03:35 PM |
|
|
"JohnV" <johnvjohnv@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:508a8973.0404272240.cdc1b99@posting.google.com...
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible. If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
You are absolutely right.
If there is a god and if it made the rules then it can do what it wants.
That's why I belong to the Church Of Last Thursday.
That is when the universe was created.
Or perhaps it was done a pico-second before you hit return to send the
message you thought you wrote.
At best it makes your god a liar by both commission and omission.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
02 May 2004 08:18:42 PM |
|
|
"JohnV" <johnvjohnv@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:508a8973.0404272240.cdc1b99@posting.google.com...
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible. If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
Sure, He could, but the book doesn't say that He did. And in the last
chapter of Revelation, it warns folks from "adding to" the Bible, so mon
petite, if I were you, I wouldn't go around saying that God did X or Y or Z
anywhere in the Bible just to make it more palatable, because you'd be
"adding to" and your salvation would be in peril.
-Tock
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Liz" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
28 Apr 2004 01:33:40 PM |
|
|
(JohnV) wrote in message news:<508a8973.0404272240.cdc1b99@posting.google.com>...
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible. If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
Out of curiosity, what rules of nature do you see being broken?
Liz #658 BAAWA
.
|
|
|
| User: "JohnV" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
29 Apr 2004 01:21:26 PM |
|
|
Out of curiosity, what rules of nature do you see being broken?
Well, realistically, for the earth to be completely under water by 40
days of rain would take an amazing amount per day. Also, ofcourse,
there's the issue of fitting all of the animals in the ark. Then
again, I also believe Christ fed the masses with a few loaves of
bread. It takes a lot of faith. Becoming a Christian really requires
the faith of a child... absolute trust in God.
Best,
John
.
|
|
|
| User: "Liz" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
30 Apr 2004 06:38:26 AM |
|
|
On 29 Apr 2004 11:21:26 -0700, (JohnV) in news
message <508a8973.0404291021.38701c21@posting.google.com> wrote:
Out of curiosity, what rules of nature do you see being broken?
Well, realistically, for the earth to be completely under water by 40
days of rain would take an amazing amount per day. Also, ofcourse,
there's the issue of fitting all of the animals in the ark. Then
again, I also believe Christ fed the masses with a few loaves of
bread.
I see. So you do think that the ark story and the story of the loaves
and fishes are impossible, albeit you believe these stories represent
reality because GodŽ can accomplish the impossible.
It takes a lot of faith. Becoming a Christian really requires
the faith of a child... absolute trust in God.
Yes, I can see where one would need absolute faith to believe in the
impossible.
I am not able to believe things that contradict physical reality.
Liz #658 BAAWA
Liz, you like most people do not want to have faith in
things which have no basis in reality. -- josalt
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
02 May 2004 11:22:23 AM |
|
|
On 29 Apr 2004 11:21:26 -0700, (JohnV), Message ID:
<508a8973.0404291021.38701c21@posting.google.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
Out of curiosity, what rules of nature do you see being broken?
Well, realistically, for the earth to be completely under water by 40
days of rain would take an amazing amount per day.
Which would sterilize the planet.
Also, of course,
there's the issue of fitting all of the animals in the ark.
Don't forget the animals getting there (and the insects and the
burrowing creatures, and the diseases, and the fish, whales, plankton,
etc.
Then
again, I also believe Christ fed the masses with a few loaves of
bread. It takes a lot of faith. Becoming a Christian really requires
the faith of a child...
Faith=gullibility of stuff many children are smart enough to reject.
absolute trust in God.
How can one 'trust' in a fictional figure?
If you actually read your bible you'd see 'god' lies, and such is, by
definition, good.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew Lias" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
28 Apr 2004 07:35:40 PM |
|
|
(JohnV) wrote in message news:<508a8973.0404272240.cdc1b99@posting.google.com>...
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible. If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
Sure. If you want to just wave your hands and say that it was a
miracle then, really, there's nothing further to say. Of course, if
you're going to do that, the whole point of debating the subject comes
to a screeching halt.
Of course, if you are going to invoke miracles then one might well ask
what the point of building and ark, in the first place, was. God
could have just as easily have put Noah and the rest of the biosphere
(none of this two by two nonsense) into suspeded animation, or gave
them temporary residence on the moon (where the would miraculously
survived the vacuum conditions up there) or, for that matter, he could
have snapped his omnipotent fingers and simply made all the allegedly
bad people simply disappear.
There are parts of the Bible that do read a bit like history. A very
partisan history with a heck of a lot of embellishment, to be sure,
but a history all the same. I would not be surprised, for instance,
if there's some kernal of truth to the story of Abraham. The story of
the flood, by constrast, reads like a myth. You could easily re-write
it as a fairy tell with the final line being, "And that's why there
are rainbows after a storm."
When people try to literalize the story, you end up with a lot of
necessary hand waving even if you just decide to go the way of simply
proclaiming miracles left and right. You are also left with a picture
of a very peculiar God. One who deliberate inflicts not only an act
of genocide on humanity (one that he seems to regret by the end of the
tale) but who chooses a remarkably cruel way of going about it. One
might well wonder why he didn't just sterlize and sequester all of the
people that he didn't like. One might certainly wonder why huge
chunks of the biosphere were also exterminated -- whence the evil of
the kine? One must, finally, wonder at the very baroque method of
saving his choosen few.
If you choose to read it as a just-so story, it reads just fine. As a
literal story, it's just plain weird. Or so I think.
--
Andrew Lias
http://andrewlias.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Marc Fleury" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
29 Apr 2004 11:23:21 AM |
|
|
(JohnV) wrote in news:508a8973.0404272240.cdc1b99
@posting.google.com:
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible. If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
If God made nature, why did he make it in such a way that he had to later
break its rules? If he's so great, couldn't he have made nature so that it
did what he wanted, instead of having to stick his grubby little fingers in
there whenever things turned to *****?
--
Marc.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
02 May 2004 11:24:51 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 16:23:21 GMT, Marc Fleury <marcfleury@sympatico.ca>,
Message ID: <Xns94DA7E16CD89Emarcfleurysympaticoc@207.35.177.134> wrote
in alt.atheism;
johnvjohnv@yahoo.com (JohnV) wrote in news:508a8973.0404272240.cdc1b99
@posting.google.com:
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible. If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
If God made nature, why did he make it in such a way that he had to later
break its rules? If he's so great, couldn't he have made nature so that it
did what he wanted, instead of having to stick his grubby little fingers in
there whenever things turned to *****?
***** is the only concept.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Dollar Bill [formerly Bill, The Avender]" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
28 Apr 2004 01:48:46 PM |
|
|
In alt.atheism on 27 Apr 2004 23:40:53 -0700,
(JohnV) wrote:
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible. If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
If you're going to go that route, then you have to hold your god
accountable for not providing a much more humane death for all those
people. Assuming a global flood occurred, there aren't many more
horrifying ways to die when it comes to sheer terror. If your god
likes inflicting terror for no good reason, then your god is an
***** in a _BIG_ way.
--
L8r,
Uncle Dollar Bill
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
02 May 2004 11:23:20 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 18:48:46 GMT, (Uncle
Dollar Bill [formerly Bill, The Avender]), Message ID:
<40a4fc52.61867572@newsgroups.bellsouth.net> wrote in alt.atheism;
In alt.atheism on 27 Apr 2004 23:40:53 -0700,
(JohnV) wrote:
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible. If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
If you're going to go that route, then you have to hold your god
accountable for not providing a much more humane death for all those
people. Assuming a global flood occurred, there aren't many more
horrifying ways to die when it comes to sheer terror. If your god
likes inflicting terror for no good reason, then your god is an
***** in a _BIG_ way.
Hell, that was demonstrated in Genesis 2 and have been in 'free-fall'
ever since.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
28 Apr 2004 07:28:17 AM |
|
|
In article <508a8973.0404272240.cdc1b99@posting.google.com>, JohnV says...
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible. If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
You're assuming that this god exists and created anything - I'm not.
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo & EAC Spellcaster
#1557
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Willett" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
28 Apr 2004 04:52:12 AM |
|
|
JohnV wrote:
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy
it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible. If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
Big if.
Of course if you define your god as capable of doing anything he
chooses to do and make him immune from logic then you can believe
whatever you want about him. But believing things does not make them
true, not in this universe.
Quantum effects might be influenced by *observation*, I don't know, I
haven't got fifteen years spare to learn the maths, but nobody has
ever come up with a plausible theory that believing in things changes
reality.
Also my requests for the map references of mountains moved by faith
continues to fall on deaf ears.
--
Martin Willett
http://mwillett.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "JohnV" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
28 Apr 2004 12:24:07 PM |
|
|
Martin,
I checked out your website. Pretty interesting stuff. Thought
provoking at the least. There's one article where even being a
socialist, I'm surprised you believe this way.... it's about
destroying (eliminating) the lower class. In any society, there will
be a cast system... even socialism. Based on greed (which makes
capitalism viable), there will always be the poor. Many are there by
misfortune. Others are there because they won't work. Socialism is
based on everyone who is capable doing their share... like a family.
In the former Russia, the government dropped off grain at farmers
property. Some of the farmers let it sit there until it was useless
because they were too lazy to plant it. Is it right that this farmer
reap the same level of benefits as a hard working person? Also,
what's the motivation in this society for someone to study for years
to become a doctor? In any society (even families, to some extent),
there are those who abuse the system, both on the upper and lower end
of the social ladder. My son does his chores around the house so he
gets his weekly allowance. An 8 year old doesn't have much of a
social conscience yet. Neither does a portion of the underclass, who
will go to any length to work the system to their benefit.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
02 May 2004 11:18:01 AM |
|
|
On 28 Apr 2004 10:24:07 -0700, (JohnV), Message ID:
<508a8973.0404280924.1906fe22@posting.google.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
Martin,
I checked out your website. Pretty interesting stuff. Thought
provoking at the least. There's one article where even being a
socialist, I'm surprised you believe this way.... it's about
destroying (eliminating) the lower class. In any society, there will
be a cast system... even socialism. Based on greed (which makes
capitalism viable), there will always be the poor. Many are there by
misfortune. Others are there because they won't work. Socialism is
based on everyone who is capable doing their share... like a family.
In the former Russia, the government dropped off grain at farmers
property. Some of the farmers let it sit there until it was useless
because they were too lazy to plant it. Is it right that this farmer
reap the same level of benefits as a hard working person? Also,
what's the motivation in this society for someone to study for years
to become a doctor? In any society (even families, to some extent),
there are those who abuse the system, both on the upper and lower end
of the social ladder. My son does his chores around the house so he
gets his weekly allowance. An 8 year old doesn't have much of a
social conscience yet. Neither does a portion of the underclass, who
will go to any length to work the system to their benefit.
You forgot about the 'no class' (cough) 'upper classes' as well as the
church.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Graham Kennedy" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
28 Apr 2004 12:57:52 PM |
|
|
JohnV wrote:
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible. If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
Absolutely. If there is indeed an omnipotent god, then he
could make the story of the Ark true. No argument there.
The argument comes about purely because certain religious
types aren't happy with this idea. They don't want to
just handwave it away as "god did a miracle", they want
to try and pretend that the flood story actually happened
as a real event goverened by the known laws of physics.
They want to claim that the scientific evidence supports
it.
Of course it doesn't, not by a long shot, and that's where
the argument starts - but that argument is based in the
real evidence, by choice of the fundamentalists.
Personally, I think stuff like this and creationism is
an attempted backlash against science. Science has been
so masively successful over the last few hundred years,
people have become used to the idea that it gives real,
true and testable answers - something religion usually
fails to do. The Fundamentalists are trying to dress
themselves up as scientists in the hope that this will
rub off on them.
Of course, in reality they are doing no more than a
vague imitation of real science, and even that badly.
--
Graham Kennedy
Creator and Author,
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
http://www.ditl.org
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
02 May 2004 11:15:36 AM |
|
|
On 27 Apr 2004 23:40:53 -0700, (JohnV), Message ID:
<508a8973.0404272240.cdc1b99@posting.google.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible.
True.
If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
An effectively undefined letter string (g-o-d) can't do anything.
Secondly, there are no 'rules of nature.' There are common
observations, but they are not 'rules.'
Thirdly, the objective supporting evidence nature was manufactured is?
Let me use your unsupported assertion as an example. (If you were
capable of thought you wouldn't need this kindergarten stuff spelled
out)
If Tiamat the Dragon (who has senority) made nature, why wouldn't
she be able to break the rules of nature?
If The Elves of Underhill made nature, why wouldn't they be able to
break the rules of nature?
If faerie folk made nature, why wouldn't they be able to break
the rules of nature?
If Santa Claus made nature, why wouldn't he be able to break the
rules of nature?
If Cat made nature, why wouldn't s/he be able to break the rules
of nature?
Continue substitution ad nauseum.
However, working within your fictional world.....there are several
problems.
1) Do you take precautions against gravity reversing tomorrow?
2) What precautions do you take against the food you eat may become
poisonous-"breaking the laws of nature?"
3) What precautions do you take against "every scenario that can be
considered?"
4) The Bible itself demonstrates 'g-o-d' is not only stupid, but is
unable to learn, is malevolent, childish, throws tantrums, vindictive,
terminally ignorant, and more.
5) The Bible indicates g-o-d was beaten by primitive iron chariots on a
level plain. In spite of knowing; the enemy battle plan, the
capabilities of each enemy soldier, how each enemy soldier would react
under any situation, exactly where and when each enemy soldier would be
at the most vulnerable. The sole reason stated in the Bible for the
defeat was because those primitive chariots were made of *iron.*
The end result is fictional characters are only restricted by the
imagination of their writers. The Bible is a ***** poor first draft
written by terminally ignorant bronze age barbarians.
A Superman(tm) or Supergirl(tm) comic book is much closer to reality and
has morals, unlike the Bible.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
28 Apr 2004 09:58:55 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 23:40:53 -0700 in episode
<508a8973.0404272240.cdc1b99@posting.google.com> we saw our hero
johnvjohnv@yahoo.com (JohnV):
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it is
to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't possible.
If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the rules of nature?
Then you can believe anything and everything you happen to feel like at
any moment about this "god" thing.
Oh, wait, people *do...
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism,
because it is a merger of State and corporate power."
- Mussolini
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
28 Apr 2004 09:32:46 AM |
|
|
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach JohnV:
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible. If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
It must be because the people that posted all that internet stuff you've
seen lately do not assume nature was made by a god.
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
______________
Give a man a fish, and you'll feed him for a day.
Give him a religion, and he'll starve to death while praying for a fish.
--Timothy Jones
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
02 May 2004 03:07:24 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 09:32:46 -0500, (Vic Sagerquist) wrote:
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach JohnV:
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible. If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
It must be because the people that posted all that internet stuff you've
seen lately do not assume nature was made by a god.
That's not answering the question. In fact, if there was no God, where would nature come
from?
duke
*****
John 6
53Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless
you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his
blood, you have no life in you. 54Whoever eats my
flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I
will raise him up at the last day.
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
03 May 2004 11:37:09 AM |
|
|
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach duke:
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 09:32:46 -0500, (Vic
Sagerquist) wrote:
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach JohnV:
I've seen a lot of internet stuff lately that talks about how crazy it
is to believe that there was an ark for Noah, because it just isn't
possible. If God made nature, why wouldn't He be able to break the
rules of nature?
It must be because the people that posted all that internet stuff
you've seen lately do not assume nature was made by a god.
That's not answering the question. In fact, if there was no God, where
would nature come from?
Nature is "natural". Gods are not required.
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
______________
Give a man a fish, and you'll feed him for a day.
Give him a religion, and he'll starve to death while praying for a fish.
--Timothy Jones
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "FlamingoMike" |
|
| Title: Re: rules? |
02 May 2004 06:54:11 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
snipped.........
That's not answering the question. In fact, if there was no God, where would nature come
from?
"Nature" never required the presence of an invisible sky daddy
duke
*****
--
Regards,
Mike
Alas! those good old days are gone, when a murderer could wipe the
stain from his name and soothe his trouble to sleep simply by
getting out his blocks and mortar and building an addition to a church.
Mark Twain - The Innocents Abroad
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
