Ok Dave, nice try but you seemed to have overlooked a few rather important points. Lets start with "The Christian religion does not condone the *persecution* of other religions or people." Ever heard of the Crusades or the Spanish Inquisition? Just a couple of blimps in history that you should consider. The reason that the line was pronounced unconstitutional is ilustrated by your own words:
"To me that means that God is a higher authority than the Government." Separation of Church and State, now there's a concept. Ring a bell? Government has a responsibility its constituents, the People of the United States of America, not anyone's god. Besides, the issue is reciting the pledge with the words "under god" in public schools, which are state-sponsored, secular institutions. Lastly, as you should know by now, that phrase wasn't always in the pledge, and the man who penned it wasn't an atheist. Nothing offensive about that.

i found jesus just the other day. he was behind the couch the whole time!

I heard that some believe that THE god is almighty and can do anything it so pleases.
That it could make a believer go to heaven and a sinner to hell.
That it could make miracles in forms of parted seas and slaughtered children.
That it could make a chicken without an egg.
That it could make an egg more powerful and wise than itself.
That it could do something it can’t undo and undoing it without it being undone.

Lack of logic is true power. Lack of reasoning is a useful tool. I love humans.

No evidence has been provided for the existence of a god or gods. It is in that respect that I simply lack faith.

By the way, IQ, I find, is not important considering my ability to reason far exceeds those near my age.


-----

"My mountain teacher speaks, pleased at this brief insight, telling me that every person of every race and every partaker of every outlook has a way that is judged by that person as right."

"Suddenly I see the obvious, which for so long has eluded me. Lasting fulfillment can only come from setting goals that do not lose their luster with time. I must perceive and select changeless values to serve as the basis for my personal goals."
This comment was edited on Jul 1, 11:15.

I am still reading this, at least what is left to read. I have primarily avoided the discussion due to the somewhat emotional, one-sided arguments being made and because of my own beliefs (bias :o).

These days, I cannot specifically state that there is no "god." I always run into the "Well, what made X happen or created X" problem, but I am profoundly skeptical of the current "gods" and how they are used today. Regarding religion, I perceive way too many double standards, twisting of words, inconsistencies, and hypocritical statements/beliefs.

Blah blah blah blah blah...I have doubts about many gods/religions, have seen/experienced them in bad ways, and I don't understand the frequent need to force my belief of said "god" or religion. I do not know what is going on, how all of this started, and I am all for people doing their own thing, so long as other people are not hurt or forced to do/believe something. Obviously, that rule cannot be 100% exact, but no rule could be. Hopefully, you get the core idea...

Blah blah blah...I have covered a lot of ranges in my life; being hurt, hurting others, being selfish, et cetera. I do not understand life or its meaning (What are any of us doing right now? Why are we so focused on money and power? Is life just about furthering yourself until you die? We are such a minuscule part of this planet, much less this universe; why not explore them more?) and it is something that I always think about.

However, I do know what it feels like to be happy, have friends, and be loved; I try to both experience these things and help others feel these same things. Likewise, I can primarily figure out what is "good," I know that I prefer having things be "good," and I try to be "good" and do "good."

Lastly, a big part of this is humbling myself; understanding how easy it is to be wrong and how easy it is to want everything *my* way. It is an ideal situation to have everything *my* way :D, but that is neither good nor right-for a number of reasons.

I cannot say there is a god, I cannot say there is no god. About the only thing that I can say is that I do not know. I am skeptical of, essentially hold no belief in, current day "gods" and religions and I do think that they have some inherently negative uses or end results, although frequently having good intentions. Back to the humbling aspect, my I.Q. far exceeds that of the "normal" human, yet I am just as flawed as most other people, if not more so. This leads back to realizing things cannot always be my way, that I can often see or think things incorrectly, and that I must not force my rule/beliefs/whatever on others.

Alas, my rambling must end. Once more, I try to follow what is in essence a "To each his own..." philosophy so long as it is not hurting people and/or forcing them to be a certain way. Again, this rule is inherently incapable of being exact, but the core idea is there...

Off to bed, hoping this still makes sense in the morning %),
Ray

------------
Mooooo!

Clearing up a few issues:

The United States was not founded as a 'Christian Nation'. The U.S. Constitution is a secular document. It begins, "We the people," and contains no mention of "God" or "Christianity." Its only references to religion are exclusionary, such as, "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust" (Article VI), and "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" (First Amendment). The presidential oath of office, the only oath detailed in the Constitution, does not contain the phrase "so help me God" or any requirement to swear on a bible (Article II, Section 1, Clause 8). If we are a Christian nation, why doesn't our Constitution say so?

In 1797 America made a treaty with Tripoli, declaring that "the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." This reassurance to Islam was written under George Washington's presidency, and approved by the Senate under John Adams.

And What about the Declaration of Independence? We are not governed by the Declaration. Its purpose was to "dissolve the political bands," not to set up a religious nation. Its authority was based on the idea that "governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed," which is contrary to the biblical concept of rule by divine authority. It deals with laws, taxation, representation, war, immigration, and so on, never discussing religion at all. The references to "Nature's God," "Creator," and "Divine Providence" in the Declaration do not endorse Christianity. Thomas Jefferson, its author, was a Deist (which is distinct from Christianity), and he was opposed to orthodox Christianity and the supernatural.

These are the LEGAL precedents which show that the Unites States was not founded as a 'Christian nation'. It is true that since our founding, religious people have attempted to include their religion in public life. For example, a added 'In God We Trust' to some currency in 1861, nearly a hundred years after the country was founded. The religious mottoes that litter our currency are not proof of our 'Christian heritage' -- they are only proof that some religious people dont care about the Constitution.

Most of this post is quoted from Dan Barker. See http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/xian.html for more details.

Personally, I just don't know... I just TRY (try) to treat everyone as I would like to be treated, not so I won't go to hell, but because it's simply the right way to live.

Yes, yes, excellent, carry on.

~Jedi

Anyway, we're obviously the only two still interested in this, and I'm afraid the number is about to drop to one...

Not at all. I'm reading all these posts with great interest. This is great stuff - an argument over a very "hot" issue conducted with respect and intelligence (shhhhh, don't wake the trolls).

Personally, I just don't know... I just TRY (try) to treat everyone as I would like to be treated, not so I won't go to hell, but because it's simply the right way to live. It's just that there's so much absolute horror in the world and I hear my good Christian friends give God credit for the most insignificant things in their lives. Like I said, I just don't know...

*** As usual, I could be wrong. But really, what are the odds of that happening twice? ***

"A man didn’t understand how televisions work, and was convinced that there must be lots of little men inside the box. manipulating images at high speed. An engineer explained to him about high frequency modulations of the electromagnetic spectrum, about transmitters and receivers, about amplifiers and cathode ray tubes, about scan lines moving across and down a phosphorescent screen. The man listened to the engineer with careful attention, nodding his head at every step of the argument. At the end he pronounced himself satisfied. He really did now understand how televisions work. "But I expect there are just a few little men in there, aren’t there?"

- Douglas Adams

Lots of little men designed and built the TV though :-)

David

"A man didn’t understand how televisions work, and was convinced that there must be lots of little men inside the box. manipulating images at high speed. An engineer explained to him about high frequency modulations of the electromagnetic spectrum, about transmitters and receivers, about amplifiers and cathode ray tubes, about scan lines moving across and down a phosphorescent screen. The man listened to the engineer with careful attention, nodding his head at every step of the argument. At the end he pronounced himself satisfied. He really did now understand how televisions work. "But I expect there are just a few little men in there, aren’t there?"

- Douglas Adams

Lots of little men designed and built the TV though :-)

"That's a nice thought"
thanks :-)

David

That's a nice thought, but as has been stated, that's not what it means. It was added in 1954 to combat communism. Honestly I'm offended saying the pledge at all. Furthermore, saying that God is a higher authority than the government in the pledge also implies that one must believe in the existence of "God." The U.S. is based on many principles, many of which coincide with Judeo-Christian principles. I think you'll find these principles in other places as well. There are some concepts that tend to transcend time and place; we like to refer to some of these as morals. They are independent of religion and have nothing to do with God or the fact that many of the founders of this nation happened to believe in "God" and use that terminology.

~Jedi

I think that the inclusion of "under God" is a good thing even if you are an atheist. It say's that there is a higher power than the government. The US is based on Judeo-Christian priciples. The Christian religion does not condone the *persecution* of other religions or people. Also, the "Creator" clause in the Decleration of Independance says that all men are created equal: in God's image. No race is more evolved than another.

I would be offended by having to say the pledge without saying "under God". To me that means that God is a higher authority than the Government. My pledge is conditional to the US being "under God". If the nation outlaws the gathering of people of a religion, I would go against the law.
So, how do you satisfy both me and the athiest?

David

I posted another reply but must have accidentally closed it. Anyway, we're obviously the only two still interested in this, and I'm afraid the number is about to drop to one...

However...

"Well, those nations were and are atheistic nations. There governments were founded on that ideology, just as this nation was founded by Christians upon Christian principles. The words of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and George Washington are clear. "

The Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China were hardly founded in order to be atheist. Again, you're bringing up issues of little relevance... this government was not founded entirely by Christians and was founded largely on principles of the Enlightenment thinkers, notable Voltaire. Speaking of Voltaire...

"Every sensible man, every honest man, must hold the Christian sect in horror."

"What! Have you no monks to teach, to dispute, to govern, to intrigue and to burn people who do not agree with them?"

"f we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities."

"The truths of religion are never so well understood as by those who have lost the power of reasoning."


- Voltaire

~Jedi

I don't have time to read half the posts made after my last one (I'm at my job >_< ) so sorry if my arguments are irrelevent to the current discussion. This will also probably be my last cuz I realize I can no longer work and keep up with this...

1) You say no one has ever observed one species evolve into another. This is true, but mankind has been around a mere few thousand years and has only been paying attention to evolution for a faction of that. This is infantessimal on the evolutionary scale. It would be inconceivable for a species to evolve into an entirely different one in that time period. We HAVE observered the minor, gradual changes one would expect with the theory of evolution (changes in coloration, minor genetic adaptation etc). As I said, evolution does not happen overnight. A chicken does not spontaneously give birth to an eagle.

2) You say life has never sprung from nonlife. This is tricky because "life" is well neigh impossible to define, but getting around that, the answer is pretty much the same as the last one. These things don't happen in a day, a month, a year or even a century. Scientists HAVE caused amino acids to form from basic elements by simulating the conditions they believe existed on early Earth. These serve as simple building blocks that can form into early life (singled celled organisms) with the elements present in the environment which react under heat and sometimes electicity from lightning. It is feasible but, of course unprooven.

3) You constantly remind us that no scientist has ever SEEN this or that in a controlled environment... I gave you the reasons, but has anyone ever emperically "seen" God? Do you have a photo? Do not ask for that kind of proof when you cannot offer any of your own.

4) Tiny mistakes are not all defects and they usually do not kill the host. They are not all noticible either. Genetic mutation is always occuring. That is how mankind is so diverse. Different genes produce different pigments in our eyes and hair. They give us different frames and growth rates etc. Everything is evolving. Even man.

I would remind you that I am not trying to disprove the existance of God. I am not even trying to proove that evolution is, in fact, the way species developed. I simply argue that the given arguments do NOT necessarily proove that God exists. They neither, however, disproove him.

I generally believe those that attempt to "scientifically" proove the existance of God have the wrong idea...

"A man didn’t understand how televisions work, and was convinced that there must be lots of little men inside the box. manipulating images at high speed. An engineer explained to him about high frequency modulations of the electromagnetic spectrum, about transmitters and receivers, about amplifiers and cathode ray tubes, about scan lines moving across and down a phosphorescent screen. The man listened to the engineer with careful attention, nodding his head at every step of the argument. At the end he pronounced himself satisfied. He really did now understand how televisions work. "But I expect there are just a few little men in there, aren’t there?"

- Douglas Adams

"More? I don't know. A Christian is commanded by God to uphold truth and refrain from falsehood. As a whole, I don't think atheists or agnostics have the same amount of motivation to do good.

What a person believes affects what they do."

"Heaven help us," said the old religion; the new one, from its very lack of that faith, will teach us all the more to help one another."

- George Eliot

Atheists don't have motivation to do good? So the only reason a Christian would do good is because God told them to, and because they know if they don't, they'll be punished? Since we know that there are plenty of ahteists who do good, I don't think that speaks well about Christians in relation to them.

~Jedi

"First, "nurturing environment"? Evolution says that by random genetic mutations life developed. Most genetic mutations result in terrible suffering and death. I wouldn't call that nurturing."

By nurturing environment I meant the unlikely situation which has ocurred on planet earth; an environment so readily able to sustain life.

"Your last point about God not existing without a creator is actually something that supports God and is opposed to naturalism... etc."

The point was not to suggest any conclusions about the origins of the universe. The idea was to point out a flaw in your logic. Being an atheist doesn't entail some set alternate idea about the origin of life. There was a quote I was looking for but couldn't find, but this has the same general idea...

"The agnostic does not simply say, "l do not know." He goes another step, and he says, with great emphasis, that you do not know..."

-Robert G. Ingersoll

~Jedi

#97

Jedi,

"Again, I think it was clear that their intention was that the pledge be altered and that it continue to be recited."

I have not read the actual decision, so you may be right!

I still see the court as unconstitutionally infringing on individual citizens' rights.

*******

"'I was making the point that Christianity is responsible for those things in our nation.'

"Hardly. This is only if you assume that morality and goodness is an exclusive quality of Christianity. Since it is clear that it is possible to be moral and good without Christianity, this argument falls apart. While many people responsible for great things may have been Christian and may have been inspired to do things because of Christian ideas, good people do good things. Christian does not necessarily mean good, and vice versa."

You are right in the abstract about non-Christian and non-religious people doing good. I agree. I never argued that only Christians do good. I would say the most truly good person was and is Christ, though.

My point is that in this specific context (our nation's history), in a real time and place, Christians did it, and it was founded upon their Christianity.

*******

"Ok, sure. I meant that to call oneself an intellectual, one should imply that one is seeking truth. I think we all know that no group is free from "bad people," and it was not my intention to imply otherwise. However, if you're trying to say that there are more Christians seeking truth than atheists or agnostics, I'm inclined to disagree."

More? I don't know. A Christian is commanded by God to uphold truth and refrain from falsehood. As a whole, I don't think atheists or agnostics have the same amount of motivation to do good.

What a person believes affects what they do. I won't argue numbers, though.

*******

"What nation of atheists have accomplished such good? The Soviet Union? The People's Republic of China?"

Again, that's completely irrelevant. Bad governments make bad nations. Those nations were atheist because they were totalitarian and wanted the people to value nothing more than the state. The accomplishments and religions of nations are completely irrelevant. And need I bring to your attention again that we are not and have never been a nation of Christians?"

Well, those nations were and are atheistic nations. There governments were founded on that ideology, just as this nation was founded by Christians upon Christian principles. The words of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and George Washington are clear.

Patrick

#87

"I'm not sure what you call "historical, archaeological, and literary evidence," but I'd be inclined to disagree.

I respect your disagreement.

I am referring to the written history of God's intervention, direction, and providence in the first 1200 years of Israel's very existence.

I am referring to His delivering Israel from slavery in Egypt, His giving them a land of their own and making them a nation, His protection and judgment, and the extraordinary number of specific prophecies of the Messiah contained in those documents (written centuries before Christ's birth).

I am referring to the eyewitness testimonies of numbers of people to what Jesus said and did, including fulfilling those ancient prophecies, performing miracles, and rising from the dead.

[Those eyewitnesses were slaughtered for what they knew to be true. The Roman and Jewish authorities would have produced Christ's body if He had not risen, and Jesus followers would not have died for something they knew to be a lie. They all testify that they saw Him, talked to Him, touched Him, and ate with Him after His resurrection.]

I am referring to the fact that every archaeological discovery pertaining to the Old and New Testaments demonstrates the veracity of the Scriptures (or at least offer no contradiction).

I am referring to the fact that we have a multitude of evidence that the copies of the writings of the Prophets and Apostles we have today are reliable copies of the ancient original texts.

*******

"But that's beside the point... if humans cannot exist without a creator, how can an even more complex being, God, exist without a creator?"

I addressed this earlier, but being the un-caused Cause would be a necessary characteristic of Deity, and it is still farther up the chain of causation than an un-caused Nature.

*******

"...you assume that as a species we began our existence in exactly our current "complex" form, an idea against which science has shown mounds of evidence.

What evidence? I have studied quite a bit about this, and I have been called names by some of the best and brightest adherents of evolution I can find, but the only "evidence" they have produced that we developed accidentally from inanimate muck is the similarity that may be observed among fossils. They combine that with the observable fact that minor, random genetic mutations occur within organisms, and voila! you have man.

However, we know from experience and experiment that life only arises from life and its programs. We have observed that program only arises from a programmer or his/her program.

No evolutionist has ever observed life arise apart from life or its program. No evolutionist has ever demonstrated experiementally that life arises from non-life, apart from pre-existing life or its program.

*******

"'The complexity and order of the physical universe and of life itself must lead to the conclusion that there is an intelligent and powerful Creator.'

That just seems like a pretty faulty leap of logic to me. I don't see how any knowledge of the physical universe could at all lead one to make that conclusion."

The evolutionists alternative explanation for the beauty, order, complexity, and wisdom observable in Nature is Nature itself, or randomness. To say that Nature caused Nature makes Nature God. To say randomness creates anything, especially living, metabolic, Von Neumann-type machines is irrationally devoid of any empirical evidence.

I would say what we observe fits much more the idea of an extraordinarily intelligent and powerful Creator.

Patrick

"Since the court ruled the recitation of the Pledge in public schools unconstitutional, doesn't that mean that it can't be recited in public schools?"

Again, I think it was clear that their intention was that the pledge be altered and that it continue to be recited.

"I was making the point that Christianity is responsible for those things in our nation."

Hardly. This is only if you assume that morality and goodness is an exclusive quality of Christianity. Since it is clear that it is possible to be moral and good without Christianity, this argument falls apart. While many people responsible for great things may have been Christian and may have been inspired to do things because of Christian ideas, good people do good things. Christian does not necessarily mean good, and vice versa.

"Many intellectuals and people of science are not seeking truth, but in propagating their own naturalistic, atheistic, self-serving philosophy. This is done at the expense of truth."

Ok, sure. I meant that to call oneself an intellectual, one should imply that one is seeking truth. I think we all know that no group is free from "bad people," and it was not my intention to imply otherwise. However, if you're trying to say that there are more Christians seeking truth than atheists or agnostics, I'm inclined to disagree.

"What nation of atheists have accomplished such good? The Soviet Union? The People's Republic of China?"

Again, that's completely irrelevant. Bad governments make bad nations. Those nations were atheist because they were totalitarian and wanted the people to value nothing more than the state. The accomplishments and religions of nations are completely irrelevant. And need I bring to your attention again that we are not and have never been a nation of Christians?

~Jedi