Can anyone help me out

[AFI]

Now I dont normaly hang out here, Im not a beliver.

Can any of you religious types answer these questions for me.

What makes you think god exsists when all the evidence points to the opposite?

Can you be ruled by the good book & still have a free mind?

Is religion the causes of most of the worlds problems or is it the cure?

I hope I haven't offended anyone by asking these questions.

Al

[ANDY-J]

Al.I do not have any interest in religion but I do believe in God.I believe that life by it's very nature is too diverse and complex to have simply 'evolved'out of nothing.I do not believe that anyone who has an excessive adherence to religious dogma can attain a true knowledge of God but certainly they can have a free mind.I believe in Karma and reincarnation and I believe the purpose of life is to reach a state of spiritual perfection.Christians call this salvation while buddhists refer to it as nirvana.I believe that every human being has free will but I also believe that every single action has a consequence and each individual will in time face the consequences of their actions.Religion as such is not I believe the cause of the world's problems but peoples often misguided adherence to religious dogma is.It is often the cause of prejudice and conflict.The reason that I belief in a human soul is because I have read of too many people having 'near death experiences' and I can't believe all of them are liars.Like you I hope I have not offended anyone as I am aware that by discussing religious issues I am walking into a potential minefield.

[AFI]

Thanks Andy, I know what you mean about a minefield.

Al

[explorer]

Al, I definetly feel there is a God, a Son, and a Holy Spirit. Give you proof, I can't. Maybe thats were faith steps in. To believe in something thats not seen. You certainly can have a free will and believe in God. Where is the tests and trials if we don't have free will. I'm probably the worst person in the world to be offering my two cents since me and the man upstairs arent talking. i do think for every action there is a reaction. our trials may be brought on by the simple fact that we took a wrong turn by making a wrong (sinful) choice.

Let me ask you three questions just for food for thought:

Havent you ever been in a situation and come out of it and thought, "boy, that was close, i dont know how i pulled that one off." ?

Have you ever felt like you were being consumed by your emotions (hurt, anger, confusion) and suddenly feel a calmness and peace come over you?

If you have felt either one of this things, what were they?

[TheMinister]

Dear AFI,

I will address only part of your first question in this letter, because as you know, this particular question requires considerable dissection and reflection. I hope to exchange with you soon on your other questions, which I find quite intertesting and reasonable. The problem is, there are no quick answers that I know of. However I do know that the evidences point not to atheism, but to faith.
Here we go! The atheist erroneously believes there exists adaquate evidence to conclude that God DOES NOT exist, hence, they DO NOT believe. Agnostics on the other hand, believe there is NOT ENOUGH information to decide, so they claim no gnosis, no knowledge (of God). Firstly, I reject atheism on the grounds that the entire notion rests on the fallacy that real "evidences" exist which dogmatically "proves" God's NONEXISTANCE. This is sheer nonsense and not possible! However, due to the extreme and bold assertions of the atheists, dogamic "evidence" and "proof" is exactly what they must produce if they hope to remove their belief from the very arena they criticize most, faith (Christianity). They fail to do this because they fail to appreciate the fact that their assertions are completely unprovable, and God's existance is nonfalsifiable! It is by personal FAITH they reject and ridicule Theism. But careful inspection of atheistic thought reveals a premise riddled with internal inconsistancies, and a conclusion that is unlikely to survive any real intellectual challanges. At least the agnostic position is intellectually honest enough to admit that, while the evidences thus far have not convinced them of Theism, the evidences cannot logically rule God out either. Such indecision causes them to place themselves in a type of philosophical hung jury; a religous limbo if you will.
I am persuaded that both positions are fatally flawed and will implode when pressured by the facts. Of course academic prudence and intellectual honesty are neccesary here, otherwise, unproductive bickering over emotionally loaded opinions will be the ugly, undesired result. There are many evidences, and these evidences demand a verdict. To persuade you to consider the Creation model and the Christian explanation of things, I offer the following considerations:

Teleological Argument. The very fact that we see order in the universe and not disorder in itself suggests a Designer. Why? I'm glad you asked. If you were walking in the woods and stumbled across a Gateway Laptop computer, it would be intellectually sloppy to assume that "this laptop has always been here; it was formed and made funtional by a gigantic, violent, unguided explosion." It is obvious the laptop has order, purpose, symmetry, and advanced internal components; there is a reason and purpose for its being. The FACT is massive explosions don't organize anything. I heard it argued once that in order to believe that humanity evolved from lifeless chemicals exposed to an explosion, that same person ought to believe it is possible to crash a single engine plane into the side of a mountain resulting in the formation of a Stealth Fighter. Everything that once worked nicely on that single engine plane was ruined by the violence imposed on it, not enhanced. To believe structural and technological progress can result from such a collision is madness. But if you vigorously appraise the Big Bang theory and all it's implications, it is no less mad. It makes no reasonable sense to believe the big bang for the laws of science, nature, and reason itself proves that massive violence and incredible heat destroys and depreciates anything with orderly, high-level potential. Science has never even come close to causing an orgamism to increase in complexity through extreme heat, nor have they successfully caused macro-evolution to occur under the strictist and most optimal of conditions.

Nevertheless, they believe in evoltion only because the possibility for the existance of God is not an option for them. Even if accepting the Creationist explanation makes more sense, and it does, some scientist are unwilling to consider the evidences. They don't want to believe, so they accept the most unlikely and implausible theories; what ever happened to objectivity? What ever happened for the search for truth? Because the possibilty for the existance of a Creator is not welcome in their philosophy, the result is bad science!

However, recently many scientist have abandoned evolutionary thought, admitting the theory has little and sometimes no scientific proof or support; here is a short list: Dr. Albert Flesschman, Professor of Zoology at the University of Eriangen, Germany. Sir John Ambrose Fleming, F.R.S., President of the Victoria Institute of London. Dr. Clark Wissler, curator-in-chief, American Museum of Natural History. Dr. Austin Clark, American Geophysical Union, Oceanographer. Dr. Gerrit Miller. professor L.T. More, Cincinnati University. Professor A.C Seward, Cambridge.
The list is long, but my point brief, many scientific minds accept the Creation model as "MORE SCIENTIFIC" than the unguided evolution theories we have been lead to believe in grammer school. You would be wise to give a hard look at the facts that caused these great minds to break ranks with collegeues who still have an ax to grind with the Creator.

Throughout all civilizations, including ours, complex and sopisticated architectures always implied an architect. So it is with the human architecture. Exhaustive study a DNA molecule forces one to logically realize that such incredible sophistication and data organization makes the possibility of random chance as wishful thinking. Containing more information than many, many, many of the world's most intelligent computers, it smacks of intelligent design. You would not look at a six foot tall computer in the Pentagon and conclude, "These components randomly fell together, gathered information and grew into a six foot tall, 200 lb. computer." Such reasoning is crazy; its even crazier to asssume this is how a human being was formed. (See Romans chapter 1.)

I could go on and on with the evidences, and will if you want at a later date. Until then, God bless you in your search for the truth. I will be in touch soon Scotland. From the United States.

I would like to close this letter with a quote from Dr. Arther I. Brown, M.D., C.M., F.R.C.S.E.

"Evolution (as a theory)has utterly collapsed from the weight of its own inherent absurdities and impossibilities."

[Edited by TheMinister on 1st February 2001 at 09:22]

[AFI]

Thats a lot for a sutpid Scotsman with a hangover to get his head round, I'll get back to you.

Ex'p - You too

[TheMinister]

Dear AFI,

You asked the question can one be ruled by the "good book" and still have a free mind? Your question assumes that our minds are completely free before reading the "good book" - not so fast my Scottish kinsman.

Who we are is not merely the result of genetics, but also a collection of experiences which have assisted in the shaping and molding of certain aspects of our psyche over the years. Most, if not all of these experiences, whether good or bad, were imposed on us during the formative years of adolescence. These experiences were like the engine builder, and our minds were the engine.

With this engine shaped by genetics and life experiences, we motor toward identity, and this is a good thing! We feel free, so we must be free. But let's not under estimate the influence of all the instilled affections, proclivities, and sometimes dysfunctional baggage in the trunk, because it does effect our present decision making processess. This raises the question of how free are we ever? Having these "leanings" in our inner man can be a good thing, if the engine builder was a good one.

God is good!

The Christian faith is the perfect philosophy that has no equal, including alleged "free thinking." I would rather think like God than independent of Him anyway, it's wiser and healthier for the body, mind, and soul.

Having said that, the answer to your question is no. But neither are we free thinking if we don't follow the good book, because we will inevitably latch on to something else. We at some point must align ourselves with SOME established school of thought, you and I already have.

Because we are not completely free thinking creatures, that is, independent of all other influences, the question we should ask is, "With what established school of thought do I side with?" Since I must pledge allegience to some established philosophical position, what set of beliefs do I pledge my allegience to?

Scripture has the Keys to eternity; that's a pretty potent philosophy...so I signed up.

Peace from the Fruited Plains. God bless.