mjpb, you said “I didn't have enough faith to remain an atheist.”

Why do you view a lack of belief in something as faith?
Faith is a belief in something that is not based on proof. Faith is about belief; not about lack of belief.

Of course, I belatedly realised where this whole line of argument started with mjpb:

"Further, the most obvious products of Christianity seem to work better than most major human innovations albeit with some human imperfections. This suggests a solid foundation. Examples include science, Universities, and Churches. These aren't perfect but the problems are overshadowed by wonderful accomplishments."

These 'examples' of 'obvious' products of Christianity are neither, the foundations of them predate Christianity, and have been used in civilisations and cultures parallel to Christian ones, universities and academies were used in ancient civilisations (Greece, Rome etc.) and Islamic cultures (eg Timbuktu). 'Churches', of course predate Christianity, but of course Christian churches don't!

'Christian' nations can lay a lot of claim as to what was invented or developed within their purview, however to attribute much of that to Christianity itself being a guiding force is stretching it a bit. Good ideas have a habit of pushing through and science has pushing through the veil of mysticism for ages, and there was a big shift during the Enlightenment and Renaissance periods, however since there was about 1000 years or more of Christianity beforehand, how much can Christianity really take the credit for? Is not a more likely explanation that technology and philosophy and politics converged to enable great advances in ideas and exchange in ideas? Along with transport and trade links and the invention of the printing press etc? (a nice piece of machinery hat Christians CAN take credit for!)

Philo,

<<“Atheist believe Christians are ignorant and intellectually backward. This is ignorance!>>

Here you go, making assumptions about the positions of others, again.

Not all Christians are intellectually backward. Some Evolutionary Scientists are Christians who believe that God created humans through an evolutionary process. Let's face it, they can't exactly deny it – unless they're intellectually backward.

<<The first and most advanced computer of its time built in Australia for the Government and for early space travel and research was built by a six day creationist...>>

Care to give a name? I can't find one, sorry.

<<He was Manager of electronics at the school of science.>>

What do electronics have to do with Geology?

<<He is a close friend of many American astronaughts who are also Christian.>>

Who said Astronauts couldn't be Christian? Not all Christians are intellectually backward.

Even if these Christian Astronauts believe in a six day creation, what does that prove? Just because they deny the biological and geographical science that conclusively disproves their creationist beliefs, it doesn't mean that they can't still be experts in their own field.

And besides, a pilot could deny physics and still fly a plane, just as a doctor could deny evolution and still treat sick people.

<<He upholds the Earth is fixed in its orbit as the Psalmist states and cannot be moved so pre-planning calculations can be done to advance secure space travel.>>

Are you implying that our Solar System is standing still in the Milky Way? Or that the Milky Way isn't moving through the universe?

Either way you'd be wrong. How do we know that you're wrong?

Parallax;
Main Sequence Fitting;
Cepheid Variables;
Red Shifts.

All of which (among others) are reliable methods of measuring the universe and the movement of the galaxies.

Therefore either you and/or this person you speak of are lying, or you are terribly confused. Because the fact that both the Solar System and the Milky Way

In regards to your second post, here's some information on the Dover Cliffs that may clear up your confusion:

http://www.icons.org.uk/theicons/collection/white-cliffs-of-dover/biography/how-they-formed

Continued...

...Continued

You didn't even bother to look at the links I posted before, did you?

None if the information in them is disputed or disputable. Creation Scientists (the EXTREMELY small amount of them) know the evidence, they simply deny it and push it away because it conflicts with what the Bible says. Consider this statement from Answersingenesis.org:

"No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record."

There is no serious debate going on here, Philo. Just a few fundamentalists making a lot of noise.

There is solid and conclusive proof that literal interpretation of the Bible is undeniably wrong. So considering that we now know for a fact that the Bible is wrong (litterally speaking), how can we know there is a God? We can't.

Hi Celivia,

I was going to pull mjpb up on that one too. But after seeing how awfully confused he/she is, I didn't bother.

As a former Christian myself, I can tell you that the mindset of a Theist makes it impossible for them to see disbelief as being any different from the religious style of belief (yes mjpb, I know you were apparently an Atheist once before, but you were obviously not an Atheist that gave the concept of God much thought).

The scrambled mind of a Theist prevents them from realising that Atheists are not religious, and that they're just individual thinkers (not bound by an old absolutist doctrine) who simply don't believe that a God exists.

It was once suggested to Dawkins that he start an Atheist movement to help dispel the irrationality of religion throughout societies, but he replied by saying that organising Atheists would be like trying to heard cats, they're too intelligent and independently minded to be rounded-up.

Ooops... The second last line of the first of my last two posts should have read:

"Therefore either you and/or this person you speak of are lying, or you are terribly confused. Because the fact that both the Solar System and the Milky Way are moving, are facts that are not disputed."

Celivia: "The only thing that makes sense is the theory of evolution..."
This is only outwardly so. I don't think The Theory of Evolution stands up to scrutiny at all.

AJ Philips: "...the Bible is wrong (literally speaking), how can we know there is a God?"
You made a sweeping statement.
I don't have a problem believing parts that I consider right, but leaving out the rest.