Why is it

[JustAlex]

Yes your Extreme arrogance. It seems to come from your immaturity and insecurity. You are extremely dogmatic and do not listen to anyone else's opinion. Your demeanor suggests a middle teenager. You do not use any logic. I will no longer involve myself in conversation with you.

Are you trying to parody yourself in this comment?

If not, this is very ironic.

[mrveggieman]

Are you trying to parody yourself in this comment?

If not, this is very ironic.

Quote of the day. Double church.

CHURCH!!!
CHURCH!!!

[duwal]

Quote of the day. Double church.

CHURCH!!!
CHURCH!!!

wow, is that the first dual church that has been given out??

[mrveggieman]

wow, is that the first dual church that has been given out??

It happens from time to time but not that often. You have to have an extraordinary post in order to be considered for double church.

[Star_Cards]

All the atheists and agnostics want to believe the founding fathers were very smart men to produce the greatest nation in history. Then go so far as to cherry pick quotes and opinons to make the point that the US is not a Christian nation. You respect the founding father's intelligence and if the left wingers are like me, freely admit 99% of the founding fathers were smarter than me or you. With that preface you completely ignore they were all Christian (please don't start with the Jefferson stuff) . In other words, you believe and give them credit they were very smart to start his country, but they are imbeciles when they believe in God.

I'd always hesitate when using the word all when describing a specific group unless. That said, as an atheist I don't know if I've ever sat down and said that I believed they founding fathers were smarter than me or you. I'd say that it's fair to say they were typically very well educated from what I have heard about them.

As for your point about very smart people being religious... that's pretty typical. I don't know the exact numbers but world wide, most people are religious and a lot of the world's smartest people would be too. I personally don't believe in any religion but do see why people do. I also don't think it makes them stupid or deserving of less respect from me. I respect many people who have different religious beliefs than me and really think of them as separate things for the most part. That is saying that these religious people that I respect don't try to rule by their religion or try to force people to believe what they believe. For me that's the bottom line.

[Star_Cards]

I just find it strange that many of the smartest men in history had a Christian belief and we give them credit fir being smart but atheists and agnostics do not give them any credit about their religion. I have deferred to people smarter than me on many issues. I don't say it is right or wrong, just peculiar that their religious beliefs are ignored. In all honesty you fit the mold perfectly. Rather than answer the question, you try to defer with another totally unrelated question. I understand that is the way of left wingers ,do not answer, but deflect.

saying left winger deflect and no one else does is completely false. lots of people deflect. I'm an atheist and typically left leaning and I answered your question. I have lots of respect for many people who are religious.

[Star_Cards]

And many of the EVEN SMARTER men in history do not believe in religion. Just like today, I am sure back then in order to be a successful politician you HAD to believe in God. If you did not, you would never get elected. Even the smartest mind can trick itself into believing something for no apparent reason. Most of these smart men who use extraordinary logic in all other pursuits of life, throw logic out the window when it comes to religious beliefs. Why, because they have to.

Thats a great point. I assume that most high level politicians, at any point in history, would have issue being elected if they were atheist. Great point that some may not have been totally upfront about their belief of god. Also, do we know for certain they all did? I know a lot of people like to say they are, but I'd have to look into if further to know they were all christian. PLus I bet even if they are all christian certainly they had varying views on different topics even within their shared christianity.

[shrewsbury]

so religion is not logical?

and science having multiple hypothesis on human evolution is logical? they all can't be right, but yet because they all agree on human evolution is somehow makes them all plausible?
some believe in a parallel universe, and some believe in multiple parallel universe's, yet this is logical compared to religion?

Discoveries in astronomy and physics have shown beyond a reasonable doubt that our universe did in fact have a beginning. Prior to that moment there was nothing; during and after that moment there was something: our universe.

so the logic that all came from nothing is ok, but that we all came from one is not?

or even after everything came from nothing that life, as we know it, started again from some unknown source, the basis is usually lightning striking mud, that literally sparked life.

you ask where God came from, I ask where the nothing came from.

and lets go back to the mind, when you want something to fit in with your beliefs you will make it fit, this is also science.

Lucy? 22% complete, most of the skull is missing, no upper jaw, no hands or feet, yet is made into an ape woman and has been accepted as the pinnacle of evolutionary proof. and wth the printing of one book skewed the facts from the real 22.8% to 40%.
how about this quote?

Dr Marvin Lubenow quotes the evolutionists Matt Cartmill (Duke University), David Pilbeam (Harvard University) and the late Glynn Isaac (Harvard University): ‘The australopithecines are rapidly sinking back to the status of peculiarly specialized apes …

KMN- ER 1470 a link to human evolution?cat scans of the inner ear show otherwise

[habsheaven]

Jay, are you implying that religion IS logical? The mere fact that you are able to critique evidence of evolution indicates that there is something behind the theory beyond conjecture. How does one critique the evidence supporting genesis? There is nothing to analyize.

[shrewsbury]

but you are going from the writing of one human being that has been copied and transcribed thousands if not millions of times. What did Jesus say about Creation? He is the only source I care about, (though i will listen to others) and He doesn't say much on it.

I love science but to claim it is all logical, is well, illogical.

My critique is saved for those theorizing on the teachings of Jesus, and I can critique that all day.