Paul B.

Dale, Before I argue Prigogene and his theory as it relates to evolution, can you respond to my earlier statement below, as I will now admit as evidence. For the sake of avoiding a side argument/discussion, I will change the labeling from Fact #3 to Evidence #000.001 Evidence #000.001 Against Evolution: "Lets address the unlikely probability that a living cell would by random process be formed. ...(All life consists of only left-handed protein molecule chains.) The smallest living thing that could duplicates itself would require 239 of these protein molecules. What are the chances that the first protein molecule would form all their amino acids into left handed chains? (The minimum number of amino acids in a protein is 410.) But then, even if this occurred in one protein, it would have to be repeated again 238 times in the other protein molecules. Chances of this occurring are 1:10 to the 29,345 th power. That's a 1 followed by 29,345 zeroes. Flip a coin that many times and see if it will come up as tail that many times in a row."

" I can't say that religion by itself has proven the existence of it (a creator) because belief is different for everyone"..... You seamlessly changed the focus from one of "proof"..to "belief"..and then, as I suggested in my past post, leave the burden of proof in the hands of someone with a different view..this makes little sense.. Let me see if I can explain what I meant: Proof is only proof if someone is willing to believe it. The fact that it's true or not has nothing to do with a person believing it. Can I prove that man has landed on the moon? No, personally I can't. But I can argue it. Are there people that believe that man has not stepped on the moon? Yes there a lot of them. Check around ... there are probably a few on this BB. Is there proof? I believe there are moon rocks, but the people that choose not to believe, will have their own explanation. How can I argue for it's truth? Thru circumstantial evidence.

Dale, The quotes you use "I don't believe in science" and "circumstantial evidence was not a valid method to prove things by"...are not contained in my post...THAT takes things out of context. You are correct and I didn't intend on making it look like a quote from you but to highlight the two statements. I can see they didn't come out that way. But you did post: "You claim the shortcomings of science .....but use it as proof when it suits you ....i.e. useing the law of thermal dynamics...yet seem to claim that it is me useing circumstantial evidence to state my view...You're not?? fill me in please!" This should make my statement more accurate: I never said I don't believe in science and I never said that circumstantial evidence was not a valid method to prove things by. On the contrary, you have somehow twisted things out of context. I believe in science, but science has failed and in many cases can be circumstantially proven to be in error, especially when it comes to evolution. And when I say evolution, I don't mean minute changes or man's growth from an embrio to an old man but the evolving of a single cell to a thinking, capable of talking human being.

There is nothing I can "say" that will "prove to you" that "GOD" exists. "You claim the shortcomings of science .....but use it as proof when it suits you ....i.e. useing the law of thermal dynamics...yet seem to claim that it is me useing circumstantial evidence to state my view...You're not?? fill me in please!" I never said "I don't believe in science" and I never said that "circumstantial evidence was not a valid method to prove things by". On the contrary, you have somehow twisted things out of context. I believe in science, but science has failed and in many cases can be circumstantially proven to be in error, especially when it comes to evolution. And when I say evolution, I don't mean minute changes or man's growth from an embrio to an old man but the evolving of a single cell to a thinking, capable of talking human being. If GOD appeared to "you", would you believe it, or would you call it a holucination? (I'm not looking for an answer - I can guess your arguments.) About your posts being from you or not: My point was that you couldn't prove "factually" that all of "your" previous posts were written by "you". However, it could be proven circumstantially as there are many ways to do that (this would be considered circumstantial evidence). If the circumstantial evidence is strong enough, we will believe it without having to go through extraordinary measures, all of which could still be challanged if someone wanted to challange it. "Claiming there's proof of a creator is..extaordinary claims require extraordinary proof...would you agree?" For a lot of people that is true, for some, it is not. Again I will state that it has been proven to me that there is one GOD. There is enough evidence for ME, as I have spent many, many years over my life time reading and watching programs, searching and developing a relationship with GOD. GOD has (directly or indirectly) guided me enough to make me feel good about what I believe in. ...and my faith in GOD is continually strengthened. Here is a little ditty that some may appreciate: Wally had started to develop a relationship with GOD and thru many conversations, GOD had assured him that whenever he was in trouble, he would save him. One year, there was a flood, and it was devestating. The water was rising and certainly death would come if Wally didn't leave his home. As the water was rising, Wally went to his 2nd story balcony and waited to be saved. A man on a raft floated by and hollered to Wally "Come, jump on the raft so we can go to safety." To which Wally replied, "Go on, GOD is coming to save me!" The flood was rising and Wally had to move to the roof of his home for safety. Along came a boat with a man and a dog in it. The man shouted to Wally "Come, jump into the boat so we can get to safety." To which Wally replied, "Just go on, GOD is coming to save me!" The flood was still rising and Wally was now on the top of the chimney hanging on. From out of nowhere, a helicopter appeared and someone yelled from within. "Grab the rope and climb in for surely you will die if you don't." To which Wally replied, "Go on, GOD is coming to save me!" Upon entering heaven, Wally demanded to know from GOD why he let him down and why he didn't come to save him. to which GOD said, "But I sent you raft, a boat and a helicopter!" "....religion hasn't proven the existence of a creator....would you agree?...." I can't say if religion by itself has proven it, because belief is different for everyone. For some, religion has proof, while for others, all the PROOF in the world will NOT be enough (and this has been predicted and has been proven). I have offered many things in my previous posts as evidence, so you can take those and continue your OWN search to prove to yourself. You state: "if you do we have a "null start"..all preconcieved notions are off the table and the the case for both views starts with rebuilding the case for each view based in the facts..if this is done it seems like evolution has an edge." If we have a "null start", how can evolution have an edge? To quote your words: "There stills seem to be convoluted reasoning going on..maybe I'm wrong but thats the way it seems." You state: "Paul, I haven't made up my mind and have stated this many times in my previous posts.....but it seems to me that you have...the reasonings are just becoming too complacated and convoluted in my opinion." Dale, you caught me, I think! It is true that I have made up my mind. As I said I have spent over 30 years examining, asking, probing, filtering and challanging. I've read hundreds of books, watched many documentaries, listened to many views and challanges. Maybe it's been 40 years or close to 50 years - I can't honestly recall when the first time I asked about GOD. As may be obvious from the above paragraph, "Blind Faith" is not the reason that I believe in GOD. It would have been great if I had "Blind Faith", as my life would have been much less complicated. Here is some of my logic: When you argue FOR evolution, you are NOT searching for creation and GOD, but are searching to strengthen your belief in evolution. The thought process of "If you are not with me, you are against me!" applies as follows in this analogy: In the beginning of WWII, many countries wanted to stay neutral (including the US). At this point the statement in quotes is not very logical and has very little merit for most, except those that are directly affected. The statement applies, but applies to a smaller circle of people. As Hitler exposed his evilness, the statement in quotes became more logical and grew with momentum to a larger group of people. When the autracities were exposed, the quoted statement had moved to its most strength and widest circulation. However, the statement had never changed its meaning to the people that were always directly involved. In otherword, it said: "I'm asking for help because I'm weak agains my opponent, and if you don't come and help me, you will be against me, as I shall perrish." If the above analogy doesn't make sense to you, please don't blame religion for it, but assume that I did not do a very good job of communicating my thoughts and feelings. Are you offering another option or solution to Creation and Evolution? Or could you say that if evolution can be disproved than Creation is the only other option? What do you think will happen to you when you die? What do you hope will happen to you when you die? I will once again say that: There is more benefit to YOU for finding proof then for you to reject it without a thorough search. After all, if you believe and you are wrong, what's the worst that can happen? But if you refuse to search and refuse to believe and you are wrong... I DO NOT need to PROVE to anyone that GOD exists. However, if I can help someone find GOD, it helps me to know that another soul has a chance to have an everlasting relationship with GOD. For we are our brother's keepers. Now, If we want to continue these discussions, I would suggest that we keep each post to one or two specific thoughts. Some of the questions and re-examinations are getting complex and time consuming. I am willing to devote some time, but not as much as this post required. And I'm sure most of you are tired of reading my lengthy thoughts.

John, GOD does not tell you to have "Blind Faith" but he does say to have "Faith in Him". He also does not tell you that you shouldn't question religion but contrary is His direction that you should explore, question and challange. The more you question, the more will come to you, but you should also have some faith and ask for guidance. You will find answers, as long as you keep searching. Godspeed!

We have no way of knowing if it's Dale typing or not. It could be his sister, mother, brother or anyone else. Can Dale prove to me that he typed all the messages? Can Dale prove to me that no other person has access to his computer? There is no way he could ever prove it to me. He has no facts to prove it. Science has not proven the evolution of man from a single cell or even from ape to present day form. They admit themselves that many of their theories are in faith that someday the gaps that are missing will be filled. But for now it's only their faith. Do you believe in the single cell to present man evolution theory? I have a feeling that you have already made up your mind and convicted the accused and now you want us to prove him innocent. That is how I view your perspective. There is nothing unusual about this approach, and the approach by itself doesn't make you a bad person. Are you willing to accept circumstantial evidence? (just as the courts of any state would.) What I can suggest to you is to start or continue reading the Bible, Torah and Qur'an. I have many, many other books I can recommend, along with several television/video documentaries. If you want proof, YOU should start the search for it yourself. No one can convince you, as you must convince yourself. There is more benefit to YOU for finding proof then for you to reject it without a thorough search. After all, if you believe and you are wrong, what's the worst that can happen? But if you refuse to search and refuse to believe and you are wrong... As any judge would say: Ignorance of the law is no excuse. There are a lot of things that are not in the 3 major books I named, but are in other documents that help to validate a lot of things in these books. Many different prophets from different areas, occupations and backgrounds have received the messages of GOD and they wrote them down for future generations. They all wrote very similar stories but from different perspectives. All of these prophets have been scrutinized for hundreds of years for their motives, and their work has been scrutinized. Much information is available in many formats. - Mohammed's Qur'an exists in his original writing and is preserved for all mankind to scrutinize. One of the things that stands out in it to me is the passages about galaxies of the universe and how it conveys the message of the "Big Bang". I don't think science and astronomy was far enough along to talk of the "Big Bang". - In the Old Testament, one story that stands out in my mind is the direction GOD provides man to not deffecate within his camps, but gives very specific directions on what to do. This story also appears in the Torah. - The Qur'an also has the story of Mary and Jesus, and the virgin birth of Jesus. Why would one religion validate another and why would one religion admit that the Jew's GOD and the GOD of Christians is the same as theirs? At least 3 major religions with the same GOD. Does it sound like a conspiracy? Or does it sound like circumstantial evidence. - 003.160 If Allah helps you, none can overcome you: If He forsakes you, who is there, after that, that can help you? in Allah, then, Let believers put their trust. - 003.177 Those who purchase disbelief at the price of faith harm Allah not at all, but theirs will be a painful doom. Lets talk about evolution: Fact #1 Evolution runs contrary to the Second Law of Thermodynamics which describes the universe as a wound-up clock which is slowly winding down. (Do we agree so far?) Instead, evolution has all life being built up from the simple to the most complex. Fact #2: A builder might expose brick, sand, nail, paint, wires, wood and other building materials to heat and energy of the sun and to the refreshing rains, but these objects would never by themselves unite and form a house! (Do you believe it could happen?) Fact #3: Lets address the unlikely probability that a living cell would by random process be formed. (Put your hat on and get out your calculators because we are going for a ride.) All life consists of only left-handed protein molecule chains. The smallest living thing that could duplicates itself would require 239 of these protein molecules. What are the chances that the first protein molecule would form all their amino acids into left handed chains? (The minimum number of amino acids in a protein is 410.) But then, even if this occurred in one protein, it would have to be repeated again 238 times in the other protein molecules. Chances of this occurring are 1:10 to the 29,345 th power. That's a 1 followed by 29,345 zeroes. Flip a coin that many times and see if it will come up as tail that many times in a row. In my next post, lets put science to the test and talk about all the holes in how they calculate the age of the world and man.

Scott, I couldn't have said it any better. A believer's problem arises when man's law is in conflict with GOD's law.

Dale, I am not looking or groping for validation - I am perfectly clear in my beliefs. And your statement in the first paragraph can go both ways. There are a lot of scientific things that people have not proven to me but I have faith and believe them. There is not enough time in one lifetime to question every aspect or detail of life (animals, people, plants, etc.) on earth. There is nothing wrong with questioning and searching for answers and GOD also encourages it. Especially when it comes to finding him and establishing a relationship with him. It is much more important to prove his existance than it is to disprove it. Logic followed a heck of a lot of trial and error, learning and many have died for the word "logic" or in lieu of their logic. Science is a lot of trial and error. We were given the ability to learn, make judgements and decisions and therefore to have or use logic. If we were dogs, we would still use logic for some things, except dogs do not believe in either science or GOD. However, without the initial guidance by the words of GOD, we don't know where human being would be today. Would we be much smarter than dolphins? Faith gives us strength to continue inspite of many failures. It's not always logic that creates success. I'll give you an example of faith (true story): Two brothers took on the challange to set a record for flying a plane around the the world without refueling. One brother built the plane and the other flew it. The one that flew the plane, never questioned his brother on how he was going to make the plane or how it was going to achieve the plan. When the plane was finished, he flew the plane around the world in 9 days and 3 hours. - The pilot had faith in his brother since there was never a plane built before that could accomplish this feat. Logic didn't make him successful. If he would have used logic, he would have never piloted the plane as there was an extremely large risk of dying. I believe, if with an open mind, one reads the Bible, Torah and Qur'an, that person will find enough circumstantial evidence that shows a supreme being (GOD) providing direction to his children. All 3 talk of the same GOD. Some of the direction is scientific enough to determine that people during those time periods would not have had enough knowledge to provide that scientific information by themselves (many at this point will argue for aliens, as this is easier for them to believe than GOD). There is a lot more circumstantial evidence in those 3 documents to prove GOD than most courts use to send a man to prison for life or death row. There were many prophets that were provided the same information by GOD or GOD's angels. Many unrelated prophets telling similar stories provides a great deal of circumstantial evidence. The credibility and motives of each prophet is also questioned to help establish the truth. Knowledge, circumstantial evidence, common sense, logic, faith, open mind and a whole lot of reading can open the door for many to see. I also believe that you can easily rule out a lot of religions as being not of GOD or having distorted GOD's words, but it takes some amount of research and studying. GOD does tell us that there will be many false prophets and he does give guidance on how to identify groups that have distorted his words or perform against his direction. If I can't prove to you that GOD exists, does that mean he doesn't? Each person has to get there for themselves. As long as you search, there is a good chance you will get there. If you stop searching, it's hard to tell where you end up. For the believers and interested ones, I suggest keeping on eye on the events of the middle-east. There are many things that are predicted about the events in that area. The wall that the Jews are building is (I believe) one of those events. Godspeed!

Dale, In response to your hypos: "Hypothetical questions are a valuable tool though...here's one.. would you steal to save your childs life?.." If all else failed, I would borrow (stealing is taking without intent to return or repay - and I'm not talking of man's laws). "heres another...would you send your child to hell for breaking one of your rules?" Is your assumption that GOD will send everyone to hell for breaking one of his commandments one time? That is not my assumption. My assumption is that there would be some form of punishment or accounting for your deviations. The severity will vary by circumstance. Man will continue to sin until we are perfect, dead or our circumstances change where all desire to sin disappear. What would I do? There would be punishment of one type or another for my child. The level of punishment would depends on a lot of different circumstances... knowing your childs heart would be one... - If my child was Hitler, I would not have problems separating myself from that child for ever. In a lot of crimes, several rules are broken at the same time. For example: If a married person murders their lovers spouse (murder, covet, adultery). Back to Creation or Evolution: How many of you know that the Qur'an talks of the "Big Bang"?

What you wear is more important before you get the job. Once you have the job, the quality of the work out-weighs how you are dressed (as long as you don't scare the customer). Being dressed nice will not help you if the job is not satisfactory. They will remember the quality longer than they will the color of your bleach stained shorts.

And the creation is still in progress...

The commandments are absolute! They do apply to everyone and they do apply always. It's the punishment for breaking them that we are unsure of. I do have a good sense of how others live, as I grew up under communist oppression and without the opportunity or the freedom to worship openly. I've also been to many countries... however, you totally missed my point. My point being that people are always too quick to excuse their actions before trying to find other options. I'm not keen on hypothetical situations because they are always presented as absolute black and white which is not always or hardly ever is the case in real life but here is my hypothetical question: If you could save your child's life by murdering an innocent person, would you do it? I agree, "Logic is a valuable tool", but it is limited by the persons knowledge base. A few bad ones always spoil it for the rest! How many of you know that Mary and Jesus are in the Qur'an? How many of you know that the Qur'an encourages people to question and discover? The Qur'an is a Message from Allah to humanity. It was transmitted to us in a chain starting from the Almighty Himself to the angel Gabriel to the Prophet Muhammed. This message was given to the Prophet in pieces over a period spanning approximately 23 years (610 CE to 622 CE). The Prophet was 40 years old when the Qur'an began to be revealed to him, and he was 63 when the revelation was completed. The language of the original message was Arabic, but it has been translated into many other languages. The Qur'an is one leg of two which form the basis of Islam. The second leg is the Sunnah of the Prophet. What makes the Qur'an different from the Sunnah is primarily its form. Unlike the Sunnah, the Qur'an is quite literally the Word of Allah, whereas the Sunnah was inspired by Allah but the wording and actions are the Prophet's. The Qur'an has not been expressed using any human's words. Its wording is letter for letter fixed by no one but Allah. Prophet Muhammad was the final Messenger of Allah to humanity, and therefore the Qur'an is the last Message which Allah has sent to us. Its predecessors such as the Torah, Psalms, and Gospels have all been superceded. It is an obligation - and blessing - for all who hear of the Qur'an and Islam to investigate it and evaluate it for themselves. Allah has guaranteed that He will protect the Qur'an from human tampering, and today's readers can find exact copies of it all over the world. The Qur'an of today is the same as the Qur'an revealed to Muhammad. (Muhammed was a descendent of Abraham.) Here is the link where you can find the Qur'an translated to English and judge for yourself if it encourages murder. www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/

By the way, Christ had the option to not die if he would deny his faith and stop his teachings. Pontius Pilate made several attempts to allow Christ to live. Christ also had many opportunities to flee and save his life. The law of man and man crucified Christ. Lets address LOGIC: - Where does logic come from or how does it originate? - Is there good and bad logic? - Is there punishment for using bad logic? - Is not logic sometimes an adjustment after punishment or pain is suffered? - Is logic not based on (in a broad sense) and did it not grow out of the 10 commandments? - Was America not a home of persecuted people who used religous based logic? - Was American law not created based on the 10 commandments (plus more)? (We chose to omit a few from man's laws.) - Did Hitler use logic to for persecute and murder Jews? - Did Saddam Hussain use logic in obtaining and maintaining control of Iraq for over 30 years? - If the Romans ruled the world today, would we have gladiators? - If the Chinese ruled the world what rules or logic would be considered good logic? - If we had no laws and no rules of GOD, would we have the same good logic? My point here is that without GOD's laws and guidance (BLIND FAITH) our good logics could be so very much different today.

Mike Williamson, I agree with all of what you said and you said it very well. I also believe that the correct translation is murder and not kill. Truly defending ones self, family or country would not be considered murder. Dale, Your statement: "What is THE point of religion ? I think you nailed it... try to pass on a little good and a little caring evey day..." minimizes religion. Religion is much more than that including the development of a relationship with GOD. If you can justify breaking all ten commandments, can you not see how people with bad intent can justify breaking them for many, many reasons? I think GOD intended for us to find other good options rather than breaking his laws. Example: Go to the emergency room for your child’s treatment rather than stealing medicine or work to pay for medicine. The key here is that you look at all other options available. I believe willful sinning is what we are told to avoid and will also be one of the things we’ll be judged on. The question is what the judgment will bring for willful sinning. John T., I think you are correct (by mans law) when you say: “You are either good or bad by your ACTIONS whether you are religious or not. Sounds logical.” However, GOD’s law also considers what is in your heart (the reasons) you are doing good or bad things. I personally think that somewhere in the equation is also the refusal to learn to be good even though the opportunity is there. For example: I believe that the bad acts of a retarded persons will not be judged solely on action, but will consider mind and heart. The big difference between man’s court and GOD’s judgment is that man’s court can not truly and always see what’s in the heart. Most religions do not make man bad, but man often can make their religion look bad by what they do. (How you represent your religion.) GOD gave directions from the beginning to guide man in how we were expected to behave. Initially, the Jews were selected as GOD’s chosen people because all others were pagans (were not following his laws). I don’t believe religion is totally built on “Blind Faith”, but we were given the ability to make choices. Most people will question their religion at one time or another. We are given many chances to discover GOD and GOD’s laws. GOD said there will be many false prophets among people and it will be our job to make sure that we are not following the direction of false prophets (CHOICE). In other words, if Jim Jones comes along and tells you he’s GOD and tells you to give him all your money and to give him all the women and children for sexual pleasures and commit suicide or he will kill you – it is up to you recognize that he’s a false prophet, rather than to follow on “Blind Faith” (as many unfortunately did). In the early 1500’s Christian Roman Catholic Church was the main religion in Europe. The church was powerful force in society and dominated people’s thinking. But within 50 years, almost half of the population of western Europe had left the Roman Catholic Church to worship in other churches to protest the corruption of the Roman Catholic Church and its priests, and a demand for reform (CHOICE vs. Blind Faith). Martin Luther wrote a list of 95 complaints that were circulated in Europe. However, the church refused to consider reform and excommunicated (expelled) Martin Luther. That is when Martin Luther set up his own reformed church. Similar churches followed throughout Europe (Anglicans, New Lutherans and Calvinists. In order to regain control, the Roman Catholic Church began to reform itself. King Henry the VIII made himself the head of the Anglican Church to grant his OWN divorce (chose one sin over another, but he broke another by seizing the wealth of the richest landowners). Again, if I can reiterate that my belief is that we are born with innocence rather than a tendency to be good. Where we are at each stage of our lives is largely determined by our environment and the choices we make as we learn that other options are available to us (CHOICES). Natural tendency to be good is relative to what is perceived to be good or what is approved by people around you. It also depends on how you define Relatively good. Is the standard: Abraham, Ghandi, Mother Theresa, Billy Graham, Roy Rodgers or is it Castro, Kruschev, Ron Jeremy, J. Paul Ghetty, O.J. Simpson I’ll mention a few other key words that I think are relative to choices of good or bad and show how people can be considered good, while practicing: - Prostitution - Pornography - Greed

John T., He has also raised his caliber by being a non-practicing homoxesual. Not knowing the man, I have to believe there is an 80% chance that a religious decision was involved. (There are of course other possible reasons.) Religion is not always to blame. However, you can be sure that man is.

Water is normally the preferred method. Acid in coke is fairly mild but would help neutralize the alkaline faster than water. Syrup in Coke would also make your eyes very sticky. Personally, I would only use Coke if no water was available (in case of emergency).

I understood your point. I do disagree on the natural tendency to be good, since I believe it is all relative on how you are raised (environment), what you learn, and how others behave around you. Natural tendency to be good is relative to what is percieved to be good or what is approved by people around you. A child abused will have tendencies to abuse others unless the problem is corrected. Gangs in New York and L.A. would not have their reputations if they had the tendencies to be good. A large group of gypsies raise their children to steal and pick pockets as a vocation. They have no guilt feelings about their jobs. Even after many arrests, they don't think they are doing bad things. Large group of Palastinians that raise their children from birth to believe that Jews are their enemies and that the only Jews are dead Jews and that suicide killing are OK because it's self defense or an eye for an eye justice approved by GOD. How many pictures have we seen of children in suicide outfits. Also look at the muslim groups that are raising their children to hate the infadels (which they believe is justified by their religion). And the poor souls who believe that there will be 12 virgins waiting for them in heaven if they kill an American during a suicide bombing. The hit man did what he did because the people around him influenced his behavior. He was around bad people more than he was around good. He used rationalization that was accepted and promoted by his peers. It's also not easy to break addictive habits (addictions) - ask thousands of serious drug users that have tried to kick their habit even with help. I believe every person has some sort of an addictive trait or tendencies. For some it's cigarettes, for others it's ***, for others it's lying or stealing (cleptomaniacs). If tendencies were so natural, we wouldn't need so many laws and our jails would not be so full and constantly growing. As for the common sense part of people's brains - I think that's treading on light ground. LOL Look at people around you driving down the road. How many break the common sense guidelines. Mothers with children driving 80mph one car length behind - children not fastened in. I see at least one of these every day. (Not so funny.)

Small claims vary by state, but I would venture to say that you will not be compensated for your time, your employees time or gas expenses (Ohio doesn't). Anything uncollected can be written off as bad debt. You're generally not repaid for all your efforts put forth in collecting amounts under $1000. (my opinion) Your better bet is to go thru collection agency and find out how you can impact her credit. When credit is impacted, they will normally pay up faster to clear their credit. In the future, make sure a contract is signed for one and all jobs as this makes any potential court decisions a lot easier and faster.

Dale, I agree with the premise that people generally try to be good or for my taste, described as "not necessarily intent on being bad". Being bad or evil is generally a choice or path people decide to take. For some, being bad is habit that can't be broken or something they can't seem to control. With some others, it's the lack of ability to recognize the things that they do as being bad. Like the hit man that went to church and as long as he confessed, and said his hail Mary's, he thought he was OK to do it again. Some see their actions as a job and not a personal thing therefore they are not evil. That premise is however not enough for GOD, according to the old testament, as it pertains to the 10 commandments: - Have no other god before me - Do not take GOD's name in vain - Keeping Sabbath day holy - Honoring your mother & father - Not killing (or is the translated word Murder?) - Not committing adultery - Not stealing - Not bearing false witness - Not to covet. Breaking any of these commandments makes a person a sinner (not necessarily a person that intends on being bad, but still a sinner). This is why Christ gave his life, so that all human beings that believe in him can keep their lives in heaven. This is not to say that there will not be recourse for our sinful actions, but rather that we will not be separated from GOD. What could be worse than your soul floating in space for ever with no one to love you or for you to love. Now that could be described as hell! Keeping track of people for a week is not necessarily a way of finding out if people are good or bad as most will show their good face in public. How many child molesters do we know in public? If that person is good all week but molests one child for one minute, is that person a good person? How many adulterers can you see at the grocery store? I knew a man that was the kindest and gentlest man at work and in public, but beat his wife at home. So to say people are generally good is somewhat misleading. How many commandments can I break and still be considered to be generally a good person? Or which one would make me a bad person if I broke it? Or how many times can I steal office supplies from my employer before I am no longer considered a good person? What would I have to do to be considered generally bad or evil - torture one puppy or a kitten? Can we imagine where we would be without the 10 Commandments, Prophets from GOD and Christ? The issues we have been discussing are very complex, as I said in one of my earlier posts.

My thoughts concerning whether people are inherently good or not. Mankind is born without knowledge and the ability to distinguish difference between good and bad. We are all born innocent. People are born indifferent and have to learn everything. There are physical limitations (some of which are hereditary) along with limitations that we impose on ourselves that limit our learning. Example: Little boy sees a bicycle on the neighbors lawn, goes over, gets on and rides it. When he’s finished riding it, he takes it home with him. Is the boy evil and a thief? I don’t think so, not at that time. He has not yet been taught the meaning of stealing. An extreme example: Two very young children are playing. One picks up a rock and hits the other on the head with it, killing the other. Is the one yielding the rock a murderer, and or evil? I don’t think so. The child just has not yet learned the dangers of rocks and the fragileness of a human being, or even the meaning of hitting another.

Mary was a virgin and she was also young (thought to have been about 15 at time of conception of Jesus). An Angel conveyed to her about the events to unfold. An Angel also informed Joseph about the events to unfold and to confirm that Mary will conceive as a virgin. Mary was promised (or if you wish, was engaged) to Joseph. They were married prior to the birth of Jesus (but the timing is not discussed). They were in Bethlehem to pay taxes as were many others and most likely had to stay in the manger because all the inns were full of tax payers. All the details are not written in the Bible, but there is a lot of circumstantial evidence. Mary being a virgin is important as it was one of over 100 points of the prophecy regarding Christ’s arrival and life on earth. Many argue the points of the prophecies as the test of a true prophet is if any predictions are not accurate. One inaccurate prediction disqualifies you from being a true prophet. Jews (non-Christian Jews) do not believe all the points of the prophecies have been fulfilled and therefore have not accepted Christ born to Mary. The definition and description of evolution varies by many, as you can see on these posts. The evolution of major argument is the perfect gradation from the lowest to the highest in plant and animal structures. For example: Evolutionists have theorized that reptiles by several minute steps have gradually evolved into birds. Yet the fossil records reveal that birds made their presence suddenly and dramatically with full feathers and wings; and no intermediate types of creatures between reptiles and birds have thus far been found. In other words, there should be evidence of evolution in small or smaller steps. The same missing links exist between anthropoid ape and mankind. Darwin and many evolutionists have admitted that geology does not support their theories. Darwin himself made this frank admission: “Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory.” Darwin and many other evolutionists have admitted to relying on faith, that with time, these links of the chain will be discovered in the future. In the time from Darwin’s death (over 100 years ago) the gaps have not yet been filled. Yet they still have faith in evolution. Another scientific point of argument against evolution is the existence of sponges, echinoderms, mollusca, and worms (along with many others) that exist today in the same form they existed millions of years ago without evolving. If you are an evolutionist, spend some time and study arguments on it and you will find many major gaps in the theory. You will also find many scientists that have spent lifetimes and have admitted not being able to (scientifically) prove their evolution theories.

Happy B-Day Reed! :bday:

Saddam Hussain was captured alive today in Iraq. A great day for Iraqi's that persue democracy and a great day for our forces.

Beth, I like humor and laughter - couldn't live without it! Glad you are getting back to your norm. Tim, I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "Back brushing is a word that I never use." Do you mean: You never say it, but you do it. ??? or Do you mean: You always apply the exact amount necessary and never more. ???

I'll grant that there are translation issues, but they are not as large as some assume it to be. I agree that there are major differences in languages and some languages have no words that directly translate, however, translations have been and are continually studied by large groups of language and religious scholars not by a single individual, making translation errors not impossible, but less likely. Keep in mind that a lot of original documents exist to study which makes it less of a word of mouth communication process. The Dead Sea scrolls for example, confirm a lot of the papers published earlier. If for example, you read the 3 page "Preface" to the "New International Version" of the "Holy Bible", you will find information on how over 100 scholars of many denomination and languages worked direct from Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic texts over 5 years to assure correctness of translation to English. The translations were reviewed 3 times by groups and some minor changes were made even after the 1st publication on 1973. Areas where language is fuzzy are marked with footnotes to highlight it for the reader. I believe (as I have learned over the years) the items left out of the Bible were because either they did not add significance or were contrary to what was confirmed by many. The important and key focus should be that nothing of significance was subtracted. I also believe that by studying, (in most cases) the differences between what are literal vs. figurative can be clarified. Studying and reading the Bible many times also helps in the understand of it. Kind of like when you watch a movie and say, "I never saw that before", or "now I understand the joke". Someone mentioned the translation of "virgin" (virgin meaning untouched). Mary may not have been a virgin since she was a married woman and Christ did have a brother and possible other siblings, but rather the word "virgin" referring to the conception in which case it would mean that Mary conceived without contact. Hence the tag of "immaculate conception". Also, we must not be distracted from the key points being conveyed by all the side stories, but rather focus on how the side stories strengthen the basic and KEY messages. In context and in defense of organized religion I must emphasize the main reason for organization is the strength in numbers as it relates to learning, prayer, and family. An example would be if your home was on fire, would you want to fight the fire by yourself or would you have better results with an organized group. (I'm sure you can substitute other examples of advantages have over individuals, such as unions, organizations, etc.). Since humans were given choice to decide, you have to also use common sense in distinguishing differences between good and bad (such as recognizing cults and bad groups or organizations). As for science, ...you can point to all kinds of examples of mistakes and areas where people were mislead for many years. I'll note a couple of examples to amplify why science is no more reliable than the bible: - Nutrition: they just recently turned the nutrition pyramid upside down saying they have made a mistake. - Dinosaur: museums have been displaying the head of one with the body of a different type claiming they were from one for 40 years after discovering error. Few museums have still not corrected the error. - Carbon dating: we have no way of knowing what our atmosphere was like over a 5000 years ago and how fast changes occured, We relied on present rates and interpelate to get to the numbers. You can read several articles on scientists disagreeing on carbondating and dicrepancies of 50% to 100%. - Speed of light: For how long have we said the there is nothing faster than the speed of light. Low and behold, last year scientist measured speeds in access of light. Maybe in another 500 to 1000 years science will be out of the dark ages. Everyone should seriously study and consider Christianity regardless of your mindset or final conclusions.