From: Michael Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Tue Apr 10 2001 - 08:58:12 MDT
Brian D Williams wrote:
>
> >From: Michael Lorrey <mlorrey@datamann.com>
>
> >Yes. Religion today that has any hope of retaining credibility
> >restricts itself to completely undisprovable claims. Anything else
> >is for boobs. Of course, that doesn't say much for most of the US
> >anyways... ;)
>
> I find the tendency to be religious to be a fairly easy thing to
> understand.
>
> For those who don't understand their purpose or place in this
> universe it's only natural to seek it out. Then they have the
> notion of death to consider.
>
> It's an easy thing at this point to consider that there is
> intelligence behind all this, and that somehow we will survive our
> departing from this world.
>
> Then along comes somebody with a fairly good self healing tautology
> who say's "Hey check this out! All the answers you need!".
>
> Besides we do not know enough about the universe to say with
> certainty that there is not a God. (hence agnosticism)
Agnosticism and modern religion run in the same water of dealing in
undisprovables, as opposed to those who prefer several thousand year old
claims about easily disprovable stuff to believing the disproof.
Creationists are as empty of faith as agnostics, because they rely on
material proof. Where they differ is that they don't do good science.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:06:55 MST