I'm sure Chief Dan George is gone by now, the last time I saw him was in "The Outlaw Josey Wales," and that was an '80's movie, when Eastwood still had a full head of hair.
The concept of a supernatural being zapping the universe into exostence is so preposterous, I don't know why we rational human beings are even having this discussion. But I agree with you.
Let me know when it's "Be Kind To Fronkeys Week" -- I'm sorry, that was insensitive of me, one should always be kind to Fronkeys --
The concept of a supernatural being zapping the universe into exostence is so preposterous
By the same token, I find it a little embarrassing sometimes to have to explain to someone why popular science keeps repeating that the universe did indeed pop into existence "from nothing", or that it's reasonable to assume there actually could be a distinct "parallel universe" in a bubble out there, just like ours.
But at least it's not scientific dogma! Maybe the hard part is explaining how science is humble enough to admit that it doesn't really know everything well enough to produce eternally unquestionable dogma after all, or why it takes so long after proposing a theory about gravity to prove the existence of gravity waves or Higgs bosons, or why does aspirin mitigate inflammatory diseases and some cancers so people can live twice as long as they did a few centuries ago, and... oh jeez, there's just no end to the unsolved scientific "mysteries" to be explained or solved!
You just can't explain a quantum creation to a theorist - the explanation is so complex, that you quickly lose them, so I don't even try. They, on the other hand, have only to say, "God did it!"
"No end to the scientific mysteries --" But wouldn't life be boring if there were? I mean, if we really knew it ALL? I wouldn't know what to do with myself. That could explain the reason for the religious creation - boredom, ergo, instant sea monkeys! Zap! Ah, much better --
(I think you mean theist, not theorist?)
If I may add to your point, a huge, practical problem with the simple "God did it" dogma is that it gives religionists the permission to discount the progress of properly applied science in modern times, and it gives (e.g.) creationists the excuse to invent and apply pseudo-science in order to appear more valid.
Wow! I DID say "theorist," didn't I? I usually do a much better job of editing. Should I go to confession?
Every week is "be kind to the fronkey week". They do actually exist on my farm..:-). They tend to dislike neutrality though. It must be evolution gone mad.
Too much inbreeding? Maybe it's something in the water --
Everything about this is completely preposterous. This why it is written "we understand that by faith he ... etc. etc.) Yet when confronted with so much illogical claims one still tip toes through field of mouse traps of snap judgment as it could be a trap with our eternal well being on the line, that's if we even care at all. And many don't give a hoot. But I appreciate a good Novel, and if this all is true, it is only something that eternal purpose could crankout. In the scientific world we can crank out global weather patterns days into the future. We can simulate the big bang and form a universe virtually similar to the one we live in. Thus it is not a far stretch to humor the notion of something doing these things on an universal level using a vast mainframe beyond reckoning, that is their mind. .
Have you considered a class in English as a Second Language?
I have always seen faith as more believing in a specific religion. Faith is believing in Jesus' or Muhammad's religion but believing in the most general form God e.g. heavenly being, creator doesn't really count as the faith you are talking about. You have to believe in Jesus's god not just a god. If god was proved to exist religions would still exist and argue over who's god it is.
Truth is, if there was solid evidence for the existence of God, it then would be a point of fact with no room for faith.
Therefore is it possible that the continued neutrality is being sustain by God for our benefit?
Truth is, if there was solid evidence for the existence of God The Great Pink Unicorn (peace and blessings be upon Her), it then would be a point of fact with no room for faith.
Therefore is it possible that the continued neutrality is being sustain by God The Great Pink Unicorn (peace and blessings be upon Her) for our benefit?
Thank you so much, Pope Paul - Unicorns come in many lovely colours, my Unicorn, peace and blessing be upon Her, is White, the colour of Coitus - a much sort after virtue, by people in Australia :D
She now is under the Cloak of Invisibility, and comes out for me, and people who truly believe, but as you can see, my White Unicorn, peace and blessing be upon Her, I did take a photo of her, with a little help from on high, also known as Photoshop. So Michael must believe in my White Unicorn, as I have undeniable proof. And if one listens very very, carefully, one can hear her lovely clop, clop, clop, the swishing of her tail, her gentle neighing, but one must be careful not to be speared by the magic horn :D
This is also undeniable truth and proof.