That sounds a lot like the Descartes point of view that 2+2 does not equal four, we don't really exist and this conversation never really took place.

Well said..

And yes, I to am now done with this post. I respect everyones opinion, but I end when someone with a failing point becomes aggresive in there debate. I have nothing to loose in my eyes, christians have everything to loose. I choose freedom of thought. No hard feelings here, Yorick. I hope it is likewise.

2. Your facts are getting shady mate. "Every religion out there" doesn't regard the Bible as the inspired word of God. Hinduism doesn't, Buddhism doesn't, Islam and Mormonism believes it has errors, Judaism Includes the first five books of the Bible in the Torah, but rejects the New testament. Zoroastrianism doesn't.

The only world religion that regards the Bible as the inspired word of God - read literally - is Christianity. The Myriad translations have remained consistent.

3. I can't assure you that Siddartha was a historical Prince? Do you reject historical records? Do you disbelieve any historical human existed, or do you pick and choose like this? Why would you refute that Buddha existed despite the mountainous evidence suggesting otherwise?

I suppose Jesus, Julius Caeser, Muhammad, Sun Tzu, Confucious, Hammurabi and Ramesees were all fictional characters and not historical people of influence either??

The Buddhists are divided as to Buddhas existence NOW, not in history.

3b. Regarding my experience, you are in now way able to speak about that which I've experienced. That is presupposing your reality onto me. An impossibility. I do not need to prove you wrong. It makes no difference to my worldview whatsoever.

4. You contradict yourself. You said and I quote: Yet now you've turned around and said: So which is it? Is existence limited to that which is logically proven, or do you allow for the existence of things which can not be?

Regarding this statement of yours: "Trusting my wife is completly different than trusting an invisable god going on nothing but doctrine"
But of course. I never said I trust an invisible god going on nothing on doctrine. I trust the Creator of the Universe, through an ongoing interractive relationship enabled by the death and resurection of Jesus Christ and the presence of the Holy Spirit in my life.

So let's take the comparison to a spousal relationship. I was married seven years. I know a little bit about love, trust and faith in a relationship.

Can you prove your wife loves you? Can you quantify and measure the amount? Do you logically test and measure opposite tests?

She could be lying. her whole life could be a lie. That would not be a unique scenario.

Without TRUST, without taking a step of FAITH, believing that, yes she does love you, and thus making yourself vulnerable and loving her, the relationship would not exist functionally.

As such it is no different than a relationship with God. God gives us the choice to seek him out, ignore him, reject him, love him or remain apathetic. Faith is what gives a relationship with God it's value, just as trust and vulnerability give a spousal relationship it's value.

[ 11-11-2002, 02:59 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

The highest levels of quantum pyhsics just lead to more unanswerable questions. even so lets say the universe as we know it did come about by way of the singularity. What then created the singularity?

Math, being a philosophy, has always been used to uncover truths about our universe. Knowing that, I wasn't too surprised when I heard of this author claiming that he had used math to prove (or disprove... I don't remember) that God exists. I hope this person makes some good money and all, but I (as a mathematician) do not see how this can be done... I tried going through his book once, and just gave up. Interesting idea, though...

What happened to this Dagorion?:

The main benefit of discussion is to oneself. The purpose should be to test ones own belief, not change anothers. Mine gets stronger everytime I am asked to define mine. Every time something is challenged.

One of the best Christian Churches I went to had no minister. It was full of of counterculturalists, artists, computer programmers, musicians, gays and people burned by conventional churches (many like myself were divorced). We basically deconstructed everything. Discussed every aspect of Christian theology, searched it against the Bible and what we held to be true. We encouraged disagreement as a means to finding truth. Did 'Church' differently each week. Set it up in a candlelit, coffee plentiful lounge/Cafe environment. Sometimes it would be an artist sharing their work. Other times three of us speaking, other times simply shared prayer accompanied by music. Other times debate.

It was for a particular season in my life, and I moved on, but it impacted me immensely.

Discussion is not something to be feared. Malicious rudeness shouldn't be tolerated, by passion doesn't equate rudeness.

[ 11-11-2002, 02:55 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

As do I.

Not to pick on you Yorick, but archeologists have found concrete evidence of the existance of all but 1 of the people on your list.Also as far as the bible goes, to the best of my knowedge every denomination has their own version of it.The King James bible is called that because KING JAMES of England had it rewritten to fit his own ends. The mormons followed polygamy,catholics have exorcisms,the Lutherans were founded by a man named...Martin LUTHER, Baptist claim to follow the ideals of John the baptist from the bible. The list goes on and on. All you have to do is go into any book store and go to the religious section and look at all the titles on the bibles. For a real shocker try reading a few of them and see how many of them tell basicaly the same story, but use diffrent wording and phraseology to tell it. This sint an attack and it isnt exclusive to christianity either. Almost all religions have had their tennents modified and changed over the course of history.

As do I.</font>[/QUOTE]No, you are governed by your faith.