god of the gaps


	/-/S'pht-Translator-Active/-/

god of the gaps

Posted By: MrHen Date: 8/11/05 8:32 a.m.
In Response To: Re: more on social darwinism (Reiginko)

: Science's aim is to explain the what, how and why. Of course, we haven't
: reached the point where it has explained why yet, since that would need an
: ultimate theory of everything that we just haven't been able to formulate
: yet. It's my opinion that some day (probably not in my life time,
: unfortunately), we will be able to reduce the universe to a single theory
: that does explain why this place exists. We're already pretty close to
: understanding why it is the way it is.
Hehe, I love science...
: that is,
: if God created the Universe, who created God? Which is why I don't think
: that many theoretical physicists could be convinced of God's existence.
Huzzah for circular reasoning. Being mostly a crack philosopher many of the theories of "creation" or where the universe comes from tend to end up in a causal trip backwards until someone finally gives up and says, "I don't know" or "God did it". Which one you choose depends on whether you're religious, usually.
I think a large problem in the idea of a first or prime causer is that we tend to keep thinking about it in the terms of our universe. We can't conceive of something that has always existed or that can exist outside or time or whatever. The problem is that we take a large number of assumptions and build our science around that and eventually we will exhaust all knowledge we can provide with those assumptions. It's now time for different assumptions.
When people say that God couldn't create himself or couldn't have always existed I don't think they are understanding what "God" means. Something supernatural wouldn't have to follow any of the assumptions we take in our study of the universe. This is what sticks God in the realm of religion, because there is no way to study or measure him. He's nothing more than a possibility and for someone who wants hard evidence the best they can do is observe spiritual phenomenon.
: I
: suspect that in most cases it's a source of comfort, a "god of the
: gaps", as you said (which could lead to complacency, but I dunno, I'm
: not a theoretical physicist yet, and I'm not religious so I can't speak
: from experience), or just as some residue from their upbringing, like most
: people.
God of the Gaps seems to be a problem that occurs when people tie a specific religion to God and then try and prove him with science. Watchmaker arguments are a product of this. The supposed design that many creationists believe they see is merely a design they are perceiving. One day our scientists will probably discover a fundamental principle that explains the supposed design and reduce it to a lovely formula.
People who require their God to be backed by science will then run to a new whatever and use that to "prove" God exists. In my opinion it's a sign of weak faith.
: I do know that there are a lot of biologists who are devout Christians,
: though (my father's co-worker for instance). I can see that from the
: perspective of a biologist, who really isn't interested in origins past
: the beginning of life, the explanation that God started it all would be
: much easier to accept.
Sometimes the people who believe in God aren't looking for an explanation to the world. There are other reasons to believe in God.
Something else that is interesting is that any argument that science may happen to produce for a Creator will not produce an argument for any specific God or gods. Christians who point at science as evidence for their God are totally missing the point of science and Christianity.

[ Post a Reply | Message Index | Read Prev Msg | Read Next Msg ]
Pre-2004 Posts

Replies:

Marathon Pfhor D-M.A. 8/2/05 6:01 a.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor John Molloy 8/2/05 6:41 a.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor Vid Boi 8/2/05 9:33 a.m.

tBC's and Frigidman's replies are kinda intriguin *NM* D-M.A. 8/2/05 10:49 a.m.

Yeah, maybe. *NM* Bob-B-Q 8/2/05 11:35 a.m.

that's what i would have done MrHen 8/2/05 2:07 p.m.

Re: that's what i would have done Vid Boi 8/2/05 11:48 p.m.

It's not dead, it's 11 pages long and counting! *NM* D-M.A. 8/2/05 11:54 p.m.

11 pages long, counting, and not about 'Thon... *NM* Vid Boi 8/4/05 1:48 a.m.

*sigh* I'll never get a PC Forge... *NM* reagan64 8/5/05 6:14 p.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor Reiginko 8/3/05 5:31 a.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor D-M.A. 8/3/05 6:01 a.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor Ori 8/3/05 6:33 a.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor Jacke 8/3/05 10:47 a.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor John Molloy 8/3/05 1:17 p.m.

ehh... MrHen 8/3/05 1:57 p.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor D-M.A. 8/3/05 6:06 p.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor John Molloy 8/3/05 6:32 p.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor Forrest of B.org 8/3/05 6:59 p.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor John Molloy 8/3/05 7:06 p.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor Vid Boi 8/4/05 2:15 a.m.

Someone thinks I'm bright! Happy joy joy :-) *NM* D-M.A. 8/4/05 3:53 a.m.

if by all men... MrHen 8/4/05 4:55 a.m.

Re: if by all men... Forrest of B.org 8/4/05 6:01 p.m.

I'm curious - are *you* in that photo, Forrest? *NM* Steve Levinson 8/4/05 7:18 p.m.

Re: I'm curious - are *you* in that photo, Forrest Forrest of B.org 8/4/05 8:43 p.m.

Re: I'm curious - are *you* in that photo, Forrest D-M.A. 8/4/05 11:09 p.m.

Re: I'm curious - are *you* in that photo, Forrest Forrest of B.org 8/5/05 7:57 a.m.

Re: I'm curious - are *you* in that photo, Forrest John Molloy 8/5/05 2:28 p.m.

Re: I'm curious - are *you* in that photo, Forrest Forrest of B.org 8/6/05 10:07 p.m.

Re: I'm curious - are *you* in that photo, Forrest John Molloy 8/6/05 11:42 p.m.

Re: I'm curious - are *you* in that photo, Forrest Johannes Gunnar 8/7/05 12:31 a.m.

Re: I'm curious - are *you* in that photo, Forrest Johannes Gunnar 8/7/05 12:31 a.m.

Re: I'm curious - are *you* in that photo, Forrest Vid Boi 8/7/05 12:49 a.m.

Re: I'm curious - are *you* in that photo, Forrest Andrew Nagy 8/8/05 6:46 a.m.

Off! Weirdness... *NM* Vid Boi 8/8/05 4:10 p.m.

I like the fishnets Forrest blake37 8/5/05 3:06 a.m.

LOL! i like your outfit Forrest! :P *NM* Johannes Gunnar 8/5/05 4:32 a.m.

Re: if by all men... Vid Boi 8/7/05 12:56 a.m.

I hate that term. MrHen 8/7/05 6:15 a.m.

Re: I hate that term. Steve Levinson 8/7/05 10:45 a.m.

agreed MrHen 8/8/05 5:01 a.m.

Re: agreed Steve Levinson 8/8/05 6:03 a.m.

Re: agreed blake37 8/8/05 6:50 a.m.

Re: agreed Steve Levinson 8/8/05 8:14 a.m.

Re: agreed MrHen 8/8/05 10:26 a.m.

Re: agreed blake37 8/8/05 4:03 p.m.

Re: agreed Vid Boi 8/8/05 4:32 p.m.

haha, yeah... MrHen 8/8/05 5:39 p.m.

Re: haha, yeah... Tyler 8/9/05 6:41 a.m.

ah, okay MrHen 8/8/05 9:59 a.m.

Re: I hate that term. Dylan 8/9/05 4:28 a.m.

uh... now i'm confused... MrHen 8/9/05 5:17 a.m.

Re: uh... now i'm confused... Dylan 8/9/05 8:59 a.m.

hating terminals? *gasp!* MrHen 8/9/05 9:23 a.m.

Re: uh... now i'm confused... AlfredMordeir 8/9/05 7:00 p.m.

Re: uh... now i'm confused... MrHen 8/10/05 4:52 a.m.

Re: uh... now i'm confused... Dylan 8/11/05 4:39 a.m.

I usually don't copy articles but, Oh well. AlfredMordeir 8/11/05 8:54 a.m.

Social Darwinism Dave 8/10/05 2:53 a.m.

more on social darwinism MrHen 8/10/05 5:10 a.m.

Re: more on social darwinism Reiginko 8/10/05 6:47 a.m.

Ohh... MrHen 8/10/05 8:46 a.m.

Re: more on social darwinism Vid Boi 8/10/05 11:40 a.m.

Haha, that's terrible. *NM* MrHen 8/11/05 5:05 a.m.

Re: more on social darwinism MrHen 8/11/05 5:19 a.m.

Re: more on social darwinism Dave 8/11/05 7:10 a.m.

Re: more on social darwinism Reiginko 8/11/05 7:49 a.m.

god of the gaps MrHen 8/11/05 8:32 a.m.

Re: more on social darwinism Forrest of B.org 8/11/05 9:19 a.m.

Re: more on social darwinism Forrest of B.org 8/11/05 9:17 a.m.

not a fan of the link MrHen 8/12/05 12:56 p.m.

Re: not a fan of the link Forrest of B.org 8/12/05 1:16 p.m.

meh MrHen 8/12/05 2:24 p.m.

Spirituality vs Rationality Forrest of B.org 8/12/05 3:34 p.m.

Re: Spirituality vs Rationality MrHen 8/13/05 10:42 p.m.

Re: more on social darwinism Ben A. Potter 8/11/05 11:20 a.m.

truth MrHen 8/12/05 12:05 p.m.

Re: truth Ben A. Potter 8/12/05 12:40 p.m.

agreed MrHen 8/12/05 1:01 p.m.

Re: more on social darwinism Ben A. Potter 8/10/05 9:04 a.m.

Re: more on social darwinism Steve Levinson 8/10/05 12:25 p.m.

Re: more on social darwinism Ben A. Potter 8/10/05 1:12 p.m.

Re: more on social darwinism Dave 8/10/05 6:35 p.m.

Re: Social Darwinism Dylan 8/11/05 5:02 a.m.

Creationism MrHen 8/11/05 5:15 a.m.

Re: Social Darwinism Ben A. Potter 8/11/05 11:10 a.m.

Re: Social Darwinism Enkidu 8/11/05 4:20 p.m.

"Fundamentalists" and slippery-slopes MrHen 8/9/05 5:27 a.m.

Has anybody noticed.... blake37 8/9/05 7:06 a.m.

and talk about off-topic . . . *NM* Steve Levinson 8/9/05 7:30 a.m.

:P MrHen 8/9/05 7:52 a.m.

Re: Has anybody noticed.... D-M.A. 8/9/05 7:58 a.m.

Re: "Fundamentalists" and slippery-slopes Vid Boi 8/10/05 11:53 a.m.

Re: "Fundamentalists" and slippery-slopes blake37 8/10/05 12:53 p.m.

oops... *blushes* *NM* MrHen 8/11/05 5:16 a.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor Forrest of B.org 8/3/05 6:54 p.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor John Molloy 8/3/05 7:02 p.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor Forrest of B.org 8/3/05 7:13 p.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor John Molloy 8/3/05 7:20 p.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor Forrest of B.org 8/3/05 7:40 p.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor Reiginko 8/4/05 12:19 a.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor Vid Boi 8/4/05 2:19 a.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor Forrest of B.org 8/4/05 6:19 p.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor Reiginko 8/5/05 6:57 a.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor Forrest of B.org 8/5/05 8:14 a.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor Vid Boi 8/4/05 2:24 a.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor MrHen 8/4/05 5:06 a.m.

oh... that makes much more sense... MrHen 8/4/05 5:11 a.m.

Re: oh... that makes much more sense... Steve Levinson 8/4/05 1:04 p.m.

Rumor update ukimalefu 8/4/05 7:49 p.m.

Re: Rumor update RedMage13 8/5/05 3:49 p.m.

Re: Marathon Pfhor Andrew Nagy 8/8/05 7:53 a.m.

[ Post a Reply | Message Index | Read Prev Msg | Read Next Msg ]
Pre-2004 Posts

Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Message:
: Hehe, I love science... : Huzzah for circular reasoning. Being mostly a crack philosopher many of the : theories of "creation" or where the universe comes from tend to : end up in a causal trip backwards until someone finally gives up and says, : "I don't know" or "God did it". Which one you choose : depends on whether you're religious, usually. : I think a large problem in the idea of a first or prime causer is that we : tend to keep thinking about it in the terms of our universe. We can't : conceive of something that has always existed or that can exist outside or : time or whatever. The problem is that we take a large number of : assumptions and build our science around that and eventually we will : exhaust all knowledge we can provide with those assumptions. It's now time : for different assumptions. : When people say that God couldn't create himself or couldn't have always : existed I don't think they are understanding what "God" means. : Something supernatural wouldn't have to follow any of the assumptions we : take in our study of the universe. This is what sticks God in the realm of : religion, because there is no way to study or measure him. He's nothing : more than a possibility and for someone who wants hard evidence the best : they can do is observe spiritual phenomenon. : God of the Gaps seems to be a problem that occurs when people tie a specific : religion to God and then try and prove him with science. Watchmaker : arguments are a product of this. The supposed design that many : creationists believe they see is merely a design they are perceiving. One : day our scientists will probably discover a fundamental principle that : explains the supposed design and reduce it to a lovely formula. : People who require their God to be backed by science will then run to a new : whatever and use that to "prove" God exists. In my opinion it's : a sign of weak faith. : Sometimes the people who believe in God aren't looking for an explanation to : the world. There are other reasons to believe in God. : Something else that is interesting is that any argument that science may : happen to produce for a Creator will not produce an argument for any : specific God or gods. Christians who point at science as evidence for : their God are totally missing the point of science and Christianity.

If you'd like to include a link to another page with your message,
please provide both the URL address and the title of the page:
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:

If necessary, enter your password below:
Password:

Problems? Suggestions? Comments? Email maintainer@bungie.org
Marathon's Story Forum is maintained with WebBBS 5.12.

Marathon Pfhor	D-M.A.	8/2/05 6:01 a.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	John Molloy	8/2/05 6:41 a.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	Vid Boi	8/2/05 9:33 a.m.
tBC's and Frigidman's replies are kinda intriguin NM	D-M.A.	8/2/05 10:49 a.m.
Yeah, maybe. NM	Bob-B-Q	8/2/05 11:35 a.m.
that's what i would have done	MrHen	8/2/05 2:07 p.m.
Re: that's what i would have done	Vid Boi	8/2/05 11:48 p.m.
It's not dead, it's 11 pages long and counting! NM	D-M.A.	8/2/05 11:54 p.m.
11 pages long, counting, and not about 'Thon... NM	Vid Boi	8/4/05 1:48 a.m.
sigh I'll never get a PC Forge... NM	reagan64	8/5/05 6:14 p.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	Reiginko	8/3/05 5:31 a.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	D-M.A.	8/3/05 6:01 a.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	Ori	8/3/05 6:33 a.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	Jacke	8/3/05 10:47 a.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	John Molloy	8/3/05 1:17 p.m.
ehh...	MrHen	8/3/05 1:57 p.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	D-M.A.	8/3/05 6:06 p.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	John Molloy	8/3/05 6:32 p.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	Forrest of B.org	8/3/05 6:59 p.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	John Molloy	8/3/05 7:06 p.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	Vid Boi	8/4/05 2:15 a.m.
Someone thinks I'm bright! Happy joy joy :-) NM	D-M.A.	8/4/05 3:53 a.m.
if by all men...	MrHen	8/4/05 4:55 a.m.
Re: if by all men...	Forrest of B.org	8/4/05 6:01 p.m.
I'm curious - are you in that photo, Forrest? NM	Steve Levinson	8/4/05 7:18 p.m.
Re: I'm curious - are you in that photo, Forrest	Forrest of B.org	8/4/05 8:43 p.m.
Re: I'm curious - are you in that photo, Forrest	D-M.A.	8/4/05 11:09 p.m.
Re: I'm curious - are you in that photo, Forrest	Forrest of B.org	8/5/05 7:57 a.m.
Re: I'm curious - are you in that photo, Forrest	John Molloy	8/5/05 2:28 p.m.
Re: I'm curious - are you in that photo, Forrest	Forrest of B.org	8/6/05 10:07 p.m.
Re: I'm curious - are you in that photo, Forrest	John Molloy	8/6/05 11:42 p.m.
Re: I'm curious - are you in that photo, Forrest	Johannes Gunnar	8/7/05 12:31 a.m.
Re: I'm curious - are you in that photo, Forrest	Johannes Gunnar	8/7/05 12:31 a.m.
Re: I'm curious - are you in that photo, Forrest	Vid Boi	8/7/05 12:49 a.m.
Re: I'm curious - are you in that photo, Forrest	Andrew Nagy	8/8/05 6:46 a.m.
Off! Weirdness... NM	Vid Boi	8/8/05 4:10 p.m.
I like the fishnets Forrest	blake37	8/5/05 3:06 a.m.
LOL! i like your outfit Forrest! :P NM	Johannes Gunnar	8/5/05 4:32 a.m.
Re: if by all men...	Vid Boi	8/7/05 12:56 a.m.
I hate that term.	MrHen	8/7/05 6:15 a.m.
Re: I hate that term.	Steve Levinson	8/7/05 10:45 a.m.
agreed	MrHen	8/8/05 5:01 a.m.
Re: agreed	Steve Levinson	8/8/05 6:03 a.m.
Re: agreed	blake37	8/8/05 6:50 a.m.
Re: agreed	Steve Levinson	8/8/05 8:14 a.m.
Re: agreed	MrHen	8/8/05 10:26 a.m.
Re: agreed	blake37	8/8/05 4:03 p.m.
Re: agreed	Vid Boi	8/8/05 4:32 p.m.
haha, yeah...	MrHen	8/8/05 5:39 p.m.
Re: haha, yeah...	Tyler	8/9/05 6:41 a.m.
ah, okay	MrHen	8/8/05 9:59 a.m.
Re: I hate that term.	Dylan	8/9/05 4:28 a.m.
uh... now i'm confused...	MrHen	8/9/05 5:17 a.m.
Re: uh... now i'm confused...	Dylan	8/9/05 8:59 a.m.
hating terminals? gasp!	MrHen	8/9/05 9:23 a.m.
Re: uh... now i'm confused...	AlfredMordeir	8/9/05 7:00 p.m.
Re: uh... now i'm confused...	MrHen	8/10/05 4:52 a.m.
Re: uh... now i'm confused...	Dylan	8/11/05 4:39 a.m.
I usually don't copy articles but, Oh well.	AlfredMordeir	8/11/05 8:54 a.m.
Social Darwinism	Dave	8/10/05 2:53 a.m.
more on social darwinism	MrHen	8/10/05 5:10 a.m.
Re: more on social darwinism	Reiginko	8/10/05 6:47 a.m.
Ohh...	MrHen	8/10/05 8:46 a.m.
Re: more on social darwinism	Vid Boi	8/10/05 11:40 a.m.
Haha, that's terrible. NM	MrHen	8/11/05 5:05 a.m.
Re: more on social darwinism	MrHen	8/11/05 5:19 a.m.
Re: more on social darwinism	Dave	8/11/05 7:10 a.m.
Re: more on social darwinism	Reiginko	8/11/05 7:49 a.m.
god of the gaps	MrHen	8/11/05 8:32 a.m.
Re: more on social darwinism	Forrest of B.org	8/11/05 9:19 a.m.
Re: more on social darwinism	Forrest of B.org	8/11/05 9:17 a.m.
not a fan of the link	MrHen	8/12/05 12:56 p.m.
Re: not a fan of the link	Forrest of B.org	8/12/05 1:16 p.m.
meh	MrHen	8/12/05 2:24 p.m.
Spirituality vs Rationality	Forrest of B.org	8/12/05 3:34 p.m.
Re: Spirituality vs Rationality	MrHen	8/13/05 10:42 p.m.
Re: more on social darwinism	Ben A. Potter	8/11/05 11:20 a.m.
truth	MrHen	8/12/05 12:05 p.m.
Re: truth	Ben A. Potter	8/12/05 12:40 p.m.
agreed	MrHen	8/12/05 1:01 p.m.
Re: more on social darwinism	Ben A. Potter	8/10/05 9:04 a.m.
Re: more on social darwinism	Steve Levinson	8/10/05 12:25 p.m.
Re: more on social darwinism	Ben A. Potter	8/10/05 1:12 p.m.
Re: more on social darwinism	Dave	8/10/05 6:35 p.m.
Re: Social Darwinism	Dylan	8/11/05 5:02 a.m.
Creationism	MrHen	8/11/05 5:15 a.m.
Re: Social Darwinism	Ben A. Potter	8/11/05 11:10 a.m.
Re: Social Darwinism	Enkidu	8/11/05 4:20 p.m.
"Fundamentalists" and slippery-slopes	MrHen	8/9/05 5:27 a.m.
Has anybody noticed....	blake37	8/9/05 7:06 a.m.
and talk about off-topic . . . NM	Steve Levinson	8/9/05 7:30 a.m.
:P	MrHen	8/9/05 7:52 a.m.
Re: Has anybody noticed....	D-M.A.	8/9/05 7:58 a.m.
Re: "Fundamentalists" and slippery-slopes	Vid Boi	8/10/05 11:53 a.m.
Re: "Fundamentalists" and slippery-slopes	blake37	8/10/05 12:53 p.m.
oops... blushes NM	MrHen	8/11/05 5:16 a.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	Forrest of B.org	8/3/05 6:54 p.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	John Molloy	8/3/05 7:02 p.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	Forrest of B.org	8/3/05 7:13 p.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	John Molloy	8/3/05 7:20 p.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	Forrest of B.org	8/3/05 7:40 p.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	Reiginko	8/4/05 12:19 a.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	Vid Boi	8/4/05 2:19 a.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	Forrest of B.org	8/4/05 6:19 p.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	Reiginko	8/5/05 6:57 a.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	Forrest of B.org	8/5/05 8:14 a.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	Vid Boi	8/4/05 2:24 a.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	MrHen	8/4/05 5:06 a.m.
oh... that makes much more sense...	MrHen	8/4/05 5:11 a.m.
Re: oh... that makes much more sense...	Steve Levinson	8/4/05 1:04 p.m.
Rumor update	ukimalefu	8/4/05 7:49 p.m.
Re: Rumor update	RedMage13	8/5/05 3:49 p.m.
Re: Marathon Pfhor	Andrew Nagy	8/8/05 7:53 a.m.



	Your Name:
	Your E-Mail Address:
	Subject:
	Message: : Hehe, I love science... : Huzzah for circular reasoning. Being mostly a crack philosopher many of the : theories of "creation" or where the universe comes from tend to : end up in a causal trip backwards until someone finally gives up and says, : "I don't know" or "God did it". Which one you choose : depends on whether you're religious, usually. : I think a large problem in the idea of a first or prime causer is that we : tend to keep thinking about it in the terms of our universe. We can't : conceive of something that has always existed or that can exist outside or : time or whatever. The problem is that we take a large number of : assumptions and build our science around that and eventually we will : exhaust all knowledge we can provide with those assumptions. It's now time : for different assumptions. : When people say that God couldn't create himself or couldn't have always : existed I don't think they are understanding what "God" means. : Something supernatural wouldn't have to follow any of the assumptions we : take in our study of the universe. This is what sticks God in the realm of : religion, because there is no way to study or measure him. He's nothing : more than a possibility and for someone who wants hard evidence the best : they can do is observe spiritual phenomenon. : God of the Gaps seems to be a problem that occurs when people tie a specific : religion to God and then try and prove him with science. Watchmaker : arguments are a product of this. The supposed design that many : creationists believe they see is merely a design they are perceiving. One : day our scientists will probably discover a fundamental principle that : explains the supposed design and reduce it to a lovely formula. : People who require their God to be backed by science will then run to a new : whatever and use that to "prove" God exists. In my opinion it's : a sign of weak faith. : Sometimes the people who believe in God aren't looking for an explanation to : the world. There are other reasons to believe in God. : Something else that is interesting is that any argument that science may : happen to produce for a Creator will not produce an argument for any : specific God or gods. Christians who point at science as evidence for : their God are totally missing the point of science and Christianity.
	If you'd like to include a link to another page with your message, please provide both the URL address and the title of the page:
	Optional Link URL:
	Optional Link Title:
	If necessary, enter your password below:
	Password: