Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (19866)	4/29/2005 2:48:21 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28931

The existence of light does not really require argument. The nature of light does. But this is unrelated to the humourous efforts of people to argue (endlessly) about the nature of God and what He wants or Wills--when there is no evidence for His existence. We can experiment with light to determine qualities and principles. How do you experiment with an imagined Creator? You simply go into tortuous ruminations where all the premises are imaginary and may be switched or interchanged at the caprice or the prejudice or the superstitious leanings of the arguer. Certainly, to read a Mathew Henry as he substitutes a river of words and invented meanings while charting an imagined universe of an inerrant bible--well, that is both amusing and extremely painful at one and the same time. Your comment seems to suggest that if one can imagine a "God" and discuss His attributes, then he necessarily exists in the same way that light exists. However, you miss the distinction between the methodical ability to judge and critique the natural...with the tortuous ruminations of those who discuss the supernatural with invented premises that are as fluid as water and as insubstantial as the melting mist before the sun.