Er..Boxgum,
You were basically correct in one of your assumptions… however, on the other, I’m a ‘he’ :), despite an effeminate sounding pseudonym.

I think you’ll probably appreciate the following, "the indisposable person is self-preoccupied, encumbered, self-enclosed, incapable of giving himself, of opening up, of giving out. If he listens to me, he gives me only his ear, the outward attitude, but he refuses me himself, for he cannot 'make room' for anyone else in himself."
- Kierkegaard

West,
Much of the reference material I’ve used has come from a lecture given by Dr James Moore on Darwin – a “Devil’s Chaplain”? (Richard Dawkins thanked Dr Moore for his erudite talk, “worthy of Darwin himself”). A myth was promulgated from the spurious account of Lady Hope on Darwin’s supposed deathbed conversion to Christianity – her story is considered highly unlikely. Those who believe it are likely to be grasping at straws.

To totally infiltrate the mind, the doubts and beliefs of another – especially from another time is nigh impossible. Ultimately, we will form our own beliefs from the particular perspective and intuition we have at our own disposal. We can only give ‘witness’ to what we find.

Relda thankyou for the direction.

Boxgum I think your personal insults and attacks toward me are unfounded. Your beliefs are immature, ignorant and ridiculously simplistic but more so your beliefs are your personal fantasy and have no grounding in reality what so ever. You cannot present a real god so you rely on abuse. However your attitude demonstrates that Christian beliefs have no place in the public realm and belongs solely in childish clubs such as churches, bible book clubs or within the privacy of your personal playrooms.

The “fact” is you are wrong because what you say requires proof before you allege your deities of occult superstition. The question is not are we of god or not? For that is a most inane question as is are we of Middle Earth or are we of Star Trek? The question is how far should we tolerate Christians and their dark age superstition or can ‘all’ Christians be trusted to keep their beliefs to themselves?

What Pope John Paul II has to say is totally meaningless to me for I am not superstitious and I am not involved in the occult society of Catholicism. I regard popes as irrelevant figures in debates concerning reality although I also recognise popes influence vulnerable people who are involved in the occult. Pope John Paul II proved himself to be an immoral person of the calibre of Hitler and Stalin as John Paul II was as responsible for as much death and suffering by using his influence (although out of dark age ignorance) to prevent safe sex and so spread AIDs through Africa.

Indeed the current Pope no better by assisting what is in effect the persecution of rape victims in Nicaragua and the murder of Nicaraguan women who need abortions.

Pope John Paul II was not god and his words are not the words of a god. When you judge me it is you Boxgum , not a god. No words of a pope can justify your position.

Aqvarivs,Keiran,

I had hoped my comment concerning Pi was able to show all that something incredibly simple (simple fractions such as 1/3, circ/diam (Pi), 6/7 (days of 'creation'. NB: I am NOT a Creationist!)) can easily result in something infinitely BIG (try writing down the exact decimal value of 1/3 without using the accepted 'shorthand' form).

I do understand the idea of an 'infinite process' for Pi AQ, but the idea was to express the infinite within the simple/observable/easily expressable. Follow me?

I can say with exact certainty that the value of Pi is 'between-3-and-4'. I can increase the accuracy of my statement by using 3.1 and 3.2 as 'limits' and still more by using 3.14 and 3.15 etc. ad infinitum. (process). If i had the computing power and the time to waste i could write the exact value of Pi in a single number, or at least the most accurate (and ginormously long) approximation ever attempted.

The point is: Science gives 'everyman' a number of 'proveable' ideas but that within and between those 'provable', 'real' values are an infinite number of values that science cannot 'define' perfectly and that 'everyman' either cannot understand or has only an imperfect approximation of.

There are many things that science is currently incapable of proving yet those like West will not believe in something unless scientific 'standards' are able to be used to determine it's intrinsic value in some 'provable' (repeatable) way.

Many here are far too willing to denounce as having NO REAL value that which has only been 'shown' to them by those with poor and imperfect understanding.

How well would science stand up to similar 'investigation' if only those who imperfectly understand the principle's are ever listened to/quoted as being The Authority on the subject, as Religion so often is by detractors?

Religion tries to reach out to everyman/woman in a way THEY can understand whether they can read, write or speak above a pre-school level. Science remains unattainably elitist for most of mankind even if adherents think it can 'reach' such by being 'explainable'.(depending upon the explainor/explainee).

" Religion tries to reach out to everyman/woman in a way THEY can understand whether they can read, write or speak above a pre-school level. Science remains unattainably elitist for most of mankind even if adherents think it can 'reach' such by being 'explainable'.(depending upon the explainor/explainee). "

Braindrain you have just described the assertions of the Taliban.

Those who say they are religious believe in a god. They have never come eye to eye with said god. They have never had confirmation that any information they claim of that god. They have no true evidence let alone proof of that god. They don’t even know if their wild baseless guess that their god exists was right and he did exist that it would be an honest god. To put it simply even if the bible was true the believer does not know if god is the creator or Satan. To put it another way if Jehovah actually existed the believer does not know if Jehovah is a liar and a loud mouth and the moss rock on mars created the universe. It is all nothing but baseless conjecture and fantasy. No true god has ever been claimed by anybody ever. Worst still the con-men in history have convinced people that immoral codes of exclusionism, persecution and prejudice such as found in the Bible and Quran are somehow good. People are also belittled into trying to grasp the irrational Mumbo Jumbo of somebody else’s fantasy. Explaining the unexplainable such as Intelligent design, immortality and ‘miracles’ in vacuums.

What you believe Braindrain is your personal belief, no two beliefs in god are exactly the same. God is your personal fantasy; god is what you make up, what you want to believe. You have a right to believe what you want as long as it does not harm other people. Religion certainly harms others because it puts personal beliefs before others. You have a right to believe what you want but you do not have a right to try and con others to live by your beliefs. Cont.

For a public belief in god to hold credibility and justify any sort of religious value god then requires to be proved. God must be proved before you speak of him because proof is a presentation of truth. Without proof you have no truth, you have no real information to share, all you have is your fantasy about a god. Science has to satisfy that same requirement; simply coming up with a theory does not make it true, nor is it accepted as truth. You talk of intrinsic divinity, then where is it if not only in your mind, your point of view? Religion is not honest about its history, its origins or the sources of its information, nor is it honest about the validity and credibility of its information. Religion is presented with truth. When was the last time a pastor said the heathen was going to hell because he likes to think so, because he is prejudiced? When was the last time a minister quoted the Bible and said of course it is only a book and its fiction and we must keep that in mind? Religion is not honest, it’s a con game.

Braindrain you believe in god and obviously you believe everybody else should too and just as bad you believe people should live by your values. You have no truth, no proof of god to support it. Why should you be taken seriously, why should others live as you dictate? From my point of view your prejudices are obvious, your beliefs are foolish, your religion immoral. Your beliefs would be harmful to people I love. Why should I accept your assertion that I must be as you are? Why must many sacrifice themselves for you to appease what you have no truths to believe in?

Go and chant to the air. Evoke your god through the magical spells of prayer. Eat symbolic products. Please do not burden others by trying to convince them of your beliefs. Let your god speak for himself.

"God must be proved before you speak of him because proof is a presentation of truth." - West

I would tend to adopt an even stricter method. One needs to sequentially ask:

1. Where does it all come from?
2. Was/Were the universe/multiverses created or have always been?
3a. If created, expain?
3b. If uncreated, explain
4a. If created by a God(s), what is a God?, A real God or devised God? i.e., real or a virtual creation
4b. If physical, what are the physics?

Discussion on "How does God(s) exist" and theism versus secularism need to consider sider first causes, first ;-). We need know, when did Gods come to exist?

Debate is likely to divide into the natural versus the supernatural:

-- If NOT supernatural entities, then, we need to study physics and mathematics and undiscovered(?) sceinces to explain the creation of the universe or multiverses. Herein, theology remains instructive and valuable under the umbrella of antropology, history and helpful cross-disciplinary metaphors: e.g., design and organisation... POLE ONE.

--If supernatural entities are how do we KNOW, Moses contacted, "The" Creator? If Jesus calls from the Cross how we KNOW he communicated with God, and not some deceiptive substitute? If Mohammed "made contact", how do we KNOW (a) it was with God and (b) Islamic verbalisations are from god, not a substitute... POLE TWO.