Reader comments
Joseph A. Cannon: God watches over the universe; he 'is not dead nor doth he sleep'
99 comments | Read story
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
To "Duff" | 6:21 p.m. June 29, 2009
Your posts are as good as any I have read denying the existence of God, and
seeking to insult those who disagree with you.
People are not generally stupid however and most, in nations where expression of free thought is not suppressed, do believe in divine creation. I suppose you believe yourself, therefore, to be part of some intellectual elite.
Yet your argumentation is very poor. You claim, as if it is some clearly demonstrated fact, that life came from a "crystal". If you had said that Pinocchio was transformed from a puppet into a "real boy" it would have been at least credible to an untaught child of three or four years of age; at least puppets can crudely and superficially be made to resemble people and animals, though, of course, to think they can come to life is idiotic. A crystal to come to life, though, and gradually take the shape and internal organs of an animal, and have blood coursing through its veins, the ability to digest food, expel waste, and reproduce sexually into other animals like it?
What will you say when you finally wake up and realise how stupid this all sounds and IS?
People are not generally stupid however and most, in nations where expression of free thought is not suppressed, do believe in divine creation. I suppose you believe yourself, therefore, to be part of some intellectual elite.
Yet your argumentation is very poor. You claim, as if it is some clearly demonstrated fact, that life came from a "crystal". If you had said that Pinocchio was transformed from a puppet into a "real boy" it would have been at least credible to an untaught child of three or four years of age; at least puppets can crudely and superficially be made to resemble people and animals, though, of course, to think they can come to life is idiotic. A crystal to come to life, though, and gradually take the shape and internal organs of an animal, and have blood coursing through its veins, the ability to digest food, expel waste, and reproduce sexually into other animals like it?
What will you say when you finally wake up and realise how stupid this all sounds and IS?
For Duff | 6:41 p.m. June 29, 2009
To "Duff":
Your thinking is incorrect.
There IS a god.
I know.
Do I care if you mock me?
Yes.
Do I care so much that I'll sit here and not stand up for what I know to be true?
No.
Again, God lives and someday you'll see this for yourself.
When you know like others of us do, you KNOW.
Best wishes.
Dan Maloy
Enid, OK
Your thinking is incorrect.
There IS a god.
I know.
Do I care if you mock me?
Yes.
Do I care so much that I'll sit here and not stand up for what I know to be true?
No.
Again, God lives and someday you'll see this for yourself.
When you know like others of us do, you KNOW.
Best wishes.
Dan Maloy
Enid, OK
Comments continue below
To Dan Maloy | 6:52 p.m. June 29, 2009
What is God? I would really like a description.
@@John Gilmore | 7:56 p.m. June 29, 2009
There is vastly more evidence that that the solar system was formed by natural
causes than supernatural ones. But yes, it wasn't accidental; physics is
not an accident.
Then you use the stereotypical definition of atheism. Not all atheists say there is no god; they just don't believe in one. Theism/atheism (belief) and gnosticism/agnosticism (knowledge) are not mutually exclusive. Your definition of atheist seems to be a gnostic atheist.
The reason you would think a computer (or watch, airplane, statue, picture, building, etc.) was designed is because it's known to be man-made - it's not alive; it doesn't reproduce with mutation and it's not subject to natural selection. This is an old argument and should be put to rest. Give the components of a computer the capability to combine with each other, reproduce with mutation and subject them to an environment that favors more powerful computers over weaker ones and guess what - you'd get a "natural" computer. Do a youtube search for "blind watchmaker" for an example of a "living" watch evolving.
Finally, if you look at some of the "designs" in nature, you can hardly consider them intelligent.
Then you use the stereotypical definition of atheism. Not all atheists say there is no god; they just don't believe in one. Theism/atheism (belief) and gnosticism/agnosticism (knowledge) are not mutually exclusive. Your definition of atheist seems to be a gnostic atheist.
The reason you would think a computer (or watch, airplane, statue, picture, building, etc.) was designed is because it's known to be man-made - it's not alive; it doesn't reproduce with mutation and it's not subject to natural selection. This is an old argument and should be put to rest. Give the components of a computer the capability to combine with each other, reproduce with mutation and subject them to an environment that favors more powerful computers over weaker ones and guess what - you'd get a "natural" computer. Do a youtube search for "blind watchmaker" for an example of a "living" watch evolving.
Finally, if you look at some of the "designs" in nature, you can hardly consider them intelligent.
mark | 12:35 a.m. June 30, 2009
Ifandbut, not that I am particularly against pot, and drinking, sex or rock, but
if you think sex, drugs and rock and roll bring joy well, you should see some of
the stuff I have seen. Leave out rock, that is silly, many religions don't
even care about rock anymore. But drugs and drinking can cause life situations
that are anything but joyful. Now I am not a teetotaler, but I do recognize that
it is silly to try to find joy by using drugs or alcohol, and that they are
potentially very dangerous substances.
Of course I don't try to find joy using religion either.
Of course I don't try to find joy using religion either.
mark | 12:43 a.m. June 30, 2009
@John Gilmore | 6:03 p.m. June 29, 2009
I'll say it to you, your post makes absolutely no sense.
To think that a god created everything based on no evidence whatsoever, merely the fact that some one told you that he did is what I would call absurd.
And to say that things are complex therefor there must be a god? Nonsense.
I'll say it to you, your post makes absolutely no sense.
To think that a god created everything based on no evidence whatsoever, merely the fact that some one told you that he did is what I would call absurd.
And to say that things are complex therefor there must be a god? Nonsense.
JanSan | 8:41 a.m. June 30, 2009
I believe in God - NO I cannot phyically prove it to you.. that is the job of
the Holy Ghost.
It makes me sad though that there are so many negitive comments on this thread. It makes me wonder if it is just one or two people writing them all.
I am truly sorry for all of you who have not felt the peace in troubled times, the comforter, the knowledge that there is truly something more when you deal with the death of a loved one.
That there is so many that believe that there is no God saddens me, it is still one of the signs of the times.
It makes me sad though that there are so many negitive comments on this thread. It makes me wonder if it is just one or two people writing them all.
I am truly sorry for all of you who have not felt the peace in troubled times, the comforter, the knowledge that there is truly something more when you deal with the death of a loved one.
That there is so many that believe that there is no God saddens me, it is still one of the signs of the times.
@@@John Gilmore | 8:55 a.m. June 30, 2009
ATHEISM: noun, the theory or belief that God does not exist.
Origin from Greek atheos, from 'without' + theos God.
Oxford Dictionary, Tenth Edition, Oxford University Press 1999
Origin from Greek atheos, from 'without' + theos God.
Oxford Dictionary, Tenth Edition, Oxford University Press 1999
Roy Rogers McFreely | 9:41 a.m. June 30, 2009
re: @Duff | 2:21 p.m. June 28, 2009
//You issued a challenge. Here is my response for all who are interested.:
3. The Book of Mormon explains the origin of the former inhabitants of the Americas.//
Really? What about DNA evidence that says Navajos are more related to Siberians while its more likely Zunis are more closely related to Near Eastern people.
I agree w/ the 12:57 poster in the fact that we will eventually receive complete enlightenment. In the meantime, I'm just working at being better today than I was yesterday.
//You issued a challenge. Here is my response for all who are interested.:
3. The Book of Mormon explains the origin of the former inhabitants of the Americas.//
Really? What about DNA evidence that says Navajos are more related to Siberians while its more likely Zunis are more closely related to Near Eastern people.
I agree w/ the 12:57 poster in the fact that we will eventually receive complete enlightenment. In the meantime, I'm just working at being better today than I was yesterday.
It is simple | 10:02 a.m. June 30, 2009
Some of you are just lousy know it all's on here who actually know nothing.
We all come from the energy of God. God is energy and light, and as we age and
grow old our energy gradually creeps back to God, and we die, and then our
energy matter is rearranged once again with God. Then we start the life process
all over again. It is called the energy light of LIFE.
Fred | 12:26 p.m. June 30, 2009
Science can only explain what can be observed over and over. A law of science is
only a law because the result happens over and over and someone was there to
document it. In science, anything that cannot be observed is called a theory--a
scientist's best guess. The fact that people pray is evidence that there is
a God. There is no such thing as blind faith. Faith is the evidence of things
not seen. There is hope and trust. If you trust God, you will obey God's
laws. God is a rewarder of those that seek him. People can be taught to pray or
not to pray but whether you pray or not is a choice. If you choose not to
believe in God, whatever your basis is, then you are trying to absolve yourself
from the responsibility of following God's commandments--saying, "I
don't believe so I can do what I want, not what God wants." It is a
choice, but you cannot choose the consequences. Salvation is free and because
everyone will be judged, we will be rewarded according to our choices. Good for
good, evil for evil.
Spiffy | 12:49 p.m. June 30, 2009
Umm, you guys are scaring me.
Spike | 1:02 p.m. June 30, 2009
So where was God during the big bank. Was he wrapped up in the tiny ball of
energy that exploded into a universe. Think people, religion is man's
biggest invention, but thinking can set you free.
@ Ifandbut | 1:13 p.m. June 30, 2009
Yeah! Drunk driving, STD's, unwanted pregnancies, and drug abuse sound real
fun! Have a great life!
A. C. | 1:34 p.m. June 30, 2009
One, and arguably the most fundamentally important aspect of learning and
accepting any "TRUTH", is, DESIRE.
If you do not have the desire to know "God" governs His creations, your desire is accepted based on the principle of free agency, and the philosophy that there are different levels of theological and 'scientific' intelligences.
It is not only fruitless to testify of a truth to an individual whose energy of light, (reciprocating intelligence) is tossed to and fro, it serves only to be divisive and argumentative in the absence of desire.
To testify that God exists is to freely reiterate intimate knowledge learned through the Gift of the Holy Ghost and substantively cannot be dis proven. Just like sound scientific theory cannot be intellectually dis proven.
So, when you intellectual superiors prove under the tutelage of the Gift of Holy Ghost that you understand and can testify to the 'truth of all things', IE: GOD does not exist, or who and what He is, we will just simply learn how to live with the intellectual, theological differences and try to get along.
If you do not have the desire to know "God" governs His creations, your desire is accepted based on the principle of free agency, and the philosophy that there are different levels of theological and 'scientific' intelligences.
It is not only fruitless to testify of a truth to an individual whose energy of light, (reciprocating intelligence) is tossed to and fro, it serves only to be divisive and argumentative in the absence of desire.
To testify that God exists is to freely reiterate intimate knowledge learned through the Gift of the Holy Ghost and substantively cannot be dis proven. Just like sound scientific theory cannot be intellectually dis proven.
So, when you intellectual superiors prove under the tutelage of the Gift of Holy Ghost that you understand and can testify to the 'truth of all things', IE: GOD does not exist, or who and what He is, we will just simply learn how to live with the intellectual, theological differences and try to get along.
Happy and HOT! | 1:54 p.m. June 30, 2009
God is energy that dwells within the hot sun. None of us can enter there until
we are hot stuff down here, and full energy, so as to contribute to the suns
energy which is God. Then we will all become one in the sun of pure energy.
To the freethinker | 2:27 p.m. June 30, 2009
Returning to the discussion of planets:
1. In our own solar system we have accumulated much knowledge through our moon landing, landing robot vehicles on Mars, scanning space with giant telescopes including one "in space".
2. From what we currently know, in THIS solar system, no evidence is apparent, of any life on any planet but our own. In the case of the moon this seems certain; on Mars, very likely. There are no human beings, animals, plants, of any known kind, nor are the conditions now such as would make that possible or likely.
3. Not only is there no evidence of familiar forms of life, but no creatures have been detected that do not need the kind of conditions such as those on earth.
4. Venus is virtually invisible for thick clouds, but any life on Venus would have to be capable of living in very high temperatures indeed.
5. Earth, in our solar system, alone has suitable climate, suitable atmosphere, water circulation supporting myriad forms of life. The other planets, in THIS solar system, appear formless and empty.
6. Surely Earth has been deliberately positioned and organised for intelligent life and such life placed upon it.
1. In our own solar system we have accumulated much knowledge through our moon landing, landing robot vehicles on Mars, scanning space with giant telescopes including one "in space".
2. From what we currently know, in THIS solar system, no evidence is apparent, of any life on any planet but our own. In the case of the moon this seems certain; on Mars, very likely. There are no human beings, animals, plants, of any known kind, nor are the conditions now such as would make that possible or likely.
3. Not only is there no evidence of familiar forms of life, but no creatures have been detected that do not need the kind of conditions such as those on earth.
4. Venus is virtually invisible for thick clouds, but any life on Venus would have to be capable of living in very high temperatures indeed.
5. Earth, in our solar system, alone has suitable climate, suitable atmosphere, water circulation supporting myriad forms of life. The other planets, in THIS solar system, appear formless and empty.
6. Surely Earth has been deliberately positioned and organised for intelligent life and such life placed upon it.
Sarah | 2:30 p.m. June 30, 2009
There are other religions out there people. So many of you seem set on
disproving the LDS church and calling it a cult. Whether you believe in it or
not, I don't understand why this becomes an anti-mormon forum. Many gospel
principles are shared with a number of other religions, which seem somehow to
escape the discussion boards completely unmentioned and unharmed.
A person who believes in something else will always find a reason and "proof" that the things they don't believe in are "lies." If I really believed the earth was the center of the universe, no number of textbooks and facts would change my mind. Only seeing it will prove me right or wrong.
Until we all know for sure, why don't you let your families, friends and neighbors choose the religion they want and believe what they want to believe? Life can be hard and people need religion (or a belief in something) just to get through it. Science may give us answers, but does it fill our lives with joy and satisfaction? Does science comfort us when our loved ones die? Allow me worship in peace. I allow you to.
A person who believes in something else will always find a reason and "proof" that the things they don't believe in are "lies." If I really believed the earth was the center of the universe, no number of textbooks and facts would change my mind. Only seeing it will prove me right or wrong.
Until we all know for sure, why don't you let your families, friends and neighbors choose the religion they want and believe what they want to believe? Life can be hard and people need religion (or a belief in something) just to get through it. Science may give us answers, but does it fill our lives with joy and satisfaction? Does science comfort us when our loved ones die? Allow me worship in peace. I allow you to.
Jerry W | 3:06 p.m. June 30, 2009
We have, in modern times, had secularists that grabed the reins of power. How
did they control the people? Without the religious imparitive to live decent
lives the one and only answer is a police state. People under the control of
Stalin and Hitler are good examples. Would we like to see a return to that type
of government?
why? | 5:49 p.m. June 30, 2009
This thread was getting really interesting.
I notice that several posts addressing atheists directly and congently have been removed sometime since 2 pm. There was nothing abusive in them.
Why? Who is protecting these athesists? They can be rude to us but we cannot be straight with them.
Did the night shift just come in?
The order of the posts in this thread has also been radically altered.
I notice that several posts addressing atheists directly and congently have been removed sometime since 2 pm. There was nothing abusive in them.
Why? Who is protecting these athesists? They can be rude to us but we cannot be straight with them.
Did the night shift just come in?
The order of the posts in this thread has also been radically altered.
Halibut | 7:16 p.m. June 30, 2009
Interesting thoughts of balony.
I enjoyed this article | 9:23 p.m. June 30, 2009
And I am not religious. I do believe there is some Higher Power, but obviously
(at least to me and many others) this Power is not the way most religions talk
of. But being an atheist doesn't make sense to me either. I believe that
since we are sentient that there must be some purpose in life. This makes me a
Deist and since we don't all agree in the world this makes sense to me. A
"Higher Power" would not give "truth" to only one group of
people in the world. There is "truth" in many things and up to us to
find it for ourselves.
Luke | 8:59 a.m. July 1, 2009
was God inside the tiny bundle of energy that exploded in the big bang creating
the universe. Religion is man's biggest invention to alibi his ignorance.
to @ john gillmore | 11:15 a.m. July 1, 2009
i completley agree with you! you people should google the story of sir newton
saying the same thing to an athiest friend of his- except in his case it was a
model of the solar system and not a computer. not a comfirmed truth of a story,
but very fun to read. the way i view it is this: science requires proof of
something to either prove something or disprove it. you can prove every religion
false if you want but even if that were possible(and i don't think that it
is), that would still not prove that there is no god. anyone who says they
beleive in science and know that god doesn't exist is either a liar, or is
ignorant to the laws of science. until something is disproved, it is a valid
theory, and god clearly falls into that catagory because he has yet to be
disroved. darwin may have explained the origin of life was possible without
devine intervention, but that does not prove that the intervention did not
occur, musch less that the devine does not exist.
Mr Lucas | 11:36 a.m. July 1, 2009
re: Word of Wisdom | 2:49 p.m. June 28, 2009
//As for the origin of ancient Americans, Mormon scientists and geneticists proved they were not from a lost tribe of Israel. Not to mention the archaeologists who have never found evidence for ancient Israelis.
Egyptologists and linguists easily proved that The Book of Abraham is fiction.//
What about the fact that the promised land may actually be the Kingdom of Asir located near Mecca & Medina on the Arabian peninsula.... certainly makes Lehi's departure route more logical.
//As for the origin of ancient Americans, Mormon scientists and geneticists proved they were not from a lost tribe of Israel. Not to mention the archaeologists who have never found evidence for ancient Israelis.
Egyptologists and linguists easily proved that The Book of Abraham is fiction.//
What about the fact that the promised land may actually be the Kingdom of Asir located near Mecca & Medina on the Arabian peninsula.... certainly makes Lehi's departure route more logical.
For Duff (again....) | 5:13 p.m. July 1, 2009
Here is my exact comment that was posted before but now has been removed for
some reason:
"For Duff | 6:41 p.m. June 29, 2009
To "Duff":
Your thinking is incorrect.
There IS a god.
I know.
Do I care if you mock me?
Yes.
Do I care so much that I'll sit here and not stand up for what I know to be true?
No.
Again, God lives and someday you'll see this for yourself.
When you know like others of us do, you KNOW.
Best wishes.
Dan Maloy
Enid, OK"
Posting again because someone else read my post above and asked me a question yesterday. My answer wouldn't make sense without the post....
"For Duff | 6:41 p.m. June 29, 2009
To "Duff":
Your thinking is incorrect.
There IS a god.
I know.
Do I care if you mock me?
Yes.
Do I care so much that I'll sit here and not stand up for what I know to be true?
No.
Again, God lives and someday you'll see this for yourself.
When you know like others of us do, you KNOW.
Best wishes.
Dan Maloy
Enid, OK"
Posting again because someone else read my post above and asked me a question yesterday. My answer wouldn't make sense without the post....
The Question | 5:14 p.m. July 1, 2009
Here's the question someone asked me that is now also missing:
"To Dan Maloy | 6:52 p.m. June 29, 2009
What is God? I would really like a description."
"To Dan Maloy | 6:52 p.m. June 29, 2009
What is God? I would really like a description."
I Know | 5:54 p.m. July 1, 2009
"Turk | 3:48 p.m. June 29, 2009 - Who knows, nobody knows: so why
don't we deal with the things we do know; like care for our planet and each
other."
Turk, "nobody" knows??? Really???
Either you are truly limited in your understanding of understanding or you are blatantly attacking the truth that knowledge can be acquired even if it can not always be explained by mortals.
Tell me, if your body is hurt, let's say in a serious car accident, and your body is actively experiencing pain, how, EXACTLY, do you KNOW you are experiencing pain?
You KNOW you are in pain, but how did you "learn" that? What IS "pain"? What does it feel like?
The same could be asked of "joy".
If real knowledge can be acquired of things we can't see or put into a beaker like pain and joy, even if we don't know how we know them, why can't real knowledge be acquired of things we can't see like God?
You accept the car crash "knowledge" but reject the "god" knowledge.
Why?
I DO know and so do others here.
Best wishes -
Dan Maloy
Enid, OK
Turk, "nobody" knows??? Really???
Either you are truly limited in your understanding of understanding or you are blatantly attacking the truth that knowledge can be acquired even if it can not always be explained by mortals.
Tell me, if your body is hurt, let's say in a serious car accident, and your body is actively experiencing pain, how, EXACTLY, do you KNOW you are experiencing pain?
You KNOW you are in pain, but how did you "learn" that? What IS "pain"? What does it feel like?
The same could be asked of "joy".
If real knowledge can be acquired of things we can't see or put into a beaker like pain and joy, even if we don't know how we know them, why can't real knowledge be acquired of things we can't see like God?
You accept the car crash "knowledge" but reject the "god" knowledge.
Why?
I DO know and so do others here.
Best wishes -
Dan Maloy
Enid, OK
An Honest Question | 6:01 p.m. July 1, 2009
Tell me, why is that the more liberal one becomes, the more likely they are not
to believe in God?
This is not a cheap shot against liberal readers here, it's a documented fact that the more liberal one is their viewpoints the less likely they are to believe in a Divine Being?
Why?
This is not a cheap shot against liberal readers here, it's a documented fact that the more liberal one is their viewpoints the less likely they are to believe in a Divine Being?
Why?
--Rayvolution | 8:23 a.m. July 2, 2009
I love God. Since I was young, I learned to pray and call upon Him. I have not
been able to live up to what are His commandments, and that's kinda made it
alluring to me to doubt--as if my failures might have an excuse if those
commandments didn't really exist--if nothing I did really mattered. But
having made an effort all my life to put these failures behind me, I see that
there is a better way to live that doesn't include my vices.
People come to God different ways. Some never get the same great chances I have been given. All I can do is be grateful for my life, and the opportunities presented to me. Let others say what they say, I know God exists because of the struggles of my life and the whisperings of a truly loving father of my soul. I love science, and discovery, art, human friendship, and math. These things are not in conflict with God. Let people worship or not worship what they may, if they respect my right to believe and express that belief, then I respect their right not to.
People come to God different ways. Some never get the same great chances I have been given. All I can do is be grateful for my life, and the opportunities presented to me. Let others say what they say, I know God exists because of the struggles of my life and the whisperings of a truly loving father of my soul. I love science, and discovery, art, human friendship, and math. These things are not in conflict with God. Let people worship or not worship what they may, if they respect my right to believe and express that belief, then I respect their right not to.
Akellis | 11:34 a.m. July 2, 2009
I find this whole argument silly.
You either believe in god or you don't. Why share it? You have to prove your beliefs to everyone else to gain some sort of verification?
I don't believe in god, I die and there is a god... I suppose we will have an interesting converstation. Of which it would matter very little if I had changed my beliefs before I died.
You believe in god, you die and there isn't one... that's the end, it doesn't matter what you believed or who you told other than the influence you left on those that come after you which won't matter once they die.
The point is... arguing over something that is a personal decision and ultimately doesn't change your outcome is funny.
And before saying "It will matter when you are judged..." Try to understand that 'being judged' would be welcomed since it is without doubt better than the alternative. And I'm quite happy believing what I do. And I acknowledge that I'm most likely wrong, since I can't see how anyone can be 'right' for everyone. Only for yourselves.
You either believe in god or you don't. Why share it? You have to prove your beliefs to everyone else to gain some sort of verification?
I don't believe in god, I die and there is a god... I suppose we will have an interesting converstation. Of which it would matter very little if I had changed my beliefs before I died.
You believe in god, you die and there isn't one... that's the end, it doesn't matter what you believed or who you told other than the influence you left on those that come after you which won't matter once they die.
The point is... arguing over something that is a personal decision and ultimately doesn't change your outcome is funny.
And before saying "It will matter when you are judged..." Try to understand that 'being judged' would be welcomed since it is without doubt better than the alternative. And I'm quite happy believing what I do. And I acknowledge that I'm most likely wrong, since I can't see how anyone can be 'right' for everyone. Only for yourselves.
Sarah | 1:01 p.m. July 2, 2009
Science is great and it fills a place that religion can't. Like explaining
tangible concepts that mysticism can't.
Religion is also great and it fills a place that science will never be able to. Does science explain where our loved ones go when they die? Does it comfort us when we feel deep emotional losses?
We may never know what happens to a soul, but at least religion helps us get through life a bit easier.
Religion is also great and it fills a place that science will never be able to. Does science explain where our loved ones go when they die? Does it comfort us when we feel deep emotional losses?
We may never know what happens to a soul, but at least religion helps us get through life a bit easier.
re - Mike Richards | 11:38 a.m. | 4:42 p.m. July 2, 2009
["There are two classes of individuals who are not popular with
God"]
how do you know that what you are saying is true? How do you know what God wants?
how do you know that what you are saying is true? How do you know what God wants?
Design? | 5:04 p.m. July 2, 2009
To 6:03 p.m.,
It is absurd to think that an all-powerful, all-knowing, benevolent god would create this mess of a universe that seems bent on the destruction of the "children" he supposedly created. As just a few cases in point, your Grand Watchmaker built a faulty "watch" that only a few years back destroyed the lives of 300,000 innocent people with a tsunami. Add to that the hurricanes, volcanoes, etc. as well as the diseases that ravish the human populations, and you have a lot of explaining to do on behalf of this supposed benevolent god who "loves" his children and his creation!
Face it, if you prove the existence of your god be claiming his "design" as proof, then your god is nobody I care to worship. The evidence proves that he/she/it is an incompetent fool with a malicious and horrible sense of morality. He/she/it is a monster, not a god!
It is absurd to think that an all-powerful, all-knowing, benevolent god would create this mess of a universe that seems bent on the destruction of the "children" he supposedly created. As just a few cases in point, your Grand Watchmaker built a faulty "watch" that only a few years back destroyed the lives of 300,000 innocent people with a tsunami. Add to that the hurricanes, volcanoes, etc. as well as the diseases that ravish the human populations, and you have a lot of explaining to do on behalf of this supposed benevolent god who "loves" his children and his creation!
Face it, if you prove the existence of your god be claiming his "design" as proof, then your god is nobody I care to worship. The evidence proves that he/she/it is an incompetent fool with a malicious and horrible sense of morality. He/she/it is a monster, not a god!
Russian roulette | 6:46 p.m. July 2, 2009
So If one does not believe in the existence of God then it stands to reason that
one would not believe in any type of an afterlife which means when you die your
conscience is extinguished. Fair enough that puts the atheist and the person
who believes in God on the same ground; whether we are good or bad, live an
immoral life or a moral life the end result is the same. On the other hand
however, If there is an afterlife, then hell for an atheist would mean after he
is dead; realizing he still exists and that he really messed up. Of course if
the atheist is right in his believe of no existence after death then he can
laugh at all us superstitious God fearing people. But… if he is wrong. I
guess it is sort of like playing Russian roulette. In this case it is not your
life you are gambling with, its your soul.
Re:Scientist | 9:20 p.m. July 2, 2009
"The whole notion that native americans came from Jerusalem isn't
supported beyond the book of Mormon"
Did they include with their studies that the BOM says these people came from Jerusalem prior to the Babylonian Captivity which means the Jews that survived had their DNA mixed with their captors and other civilizations that Babylon had conquered. It would come as no surprise that the DNA of Native Americans has no relation to the DNA of the people now living in Jerusalem.
Another piece of information overlooked is that Lehi, One of the BOM prophets declared that he was a descendant of Joseph . The Joseph he refers to is the Joseph of Egypt mentioned in the Old testament. While Joseph was in Egypt, Pharaoh gave Joseph the daughter of an Egyptian priest to be his wife. Her name was Asenath (Gen 41:45) and she bore him two Sons ; Manasseh and Ephraim.
Lehi was descended from Manasseh. Lehi would therefore have Egyptian DNA. Before the scientists come to premature conclusions perhaps they should test the DNA of Egyptians with Asians and Native Americans and they might find a match with all three.
Did they include with their studies that the BOM says these people came from Jerusalem prior to the Babylonian Captivity which means the Jews that survived had their DNA mixed with their captors and other civilizations that Babylon had conquered. It would come as no surprise that the DNA of Native Americans has no relation to the DNA of the people now living in Jerusalem.
Another piece of information overlooked is that Lehi, One of the BOM prophets declared that he was a descendant of Joseph . The Joseph he refers to is the Joseph of Egypt mentioned in the Old testament. While Joseph was in Egypt, Pharaoh gave Joseph the daughter of an Egyptian priest to be his wife. Her name was Asenath (Gen 41:45) and she bore him two Sons ; Manasseh and Ephraim.
Lehi was descended from Manasseh. Lehi would therefore have Egyptian DNA. Before the scientists come to premature conclusions perhaps they should test the DNA of Egyptians with Asians and Native Americans and they might find a match with all three.
Anonymous | 10:15 p.m. July 2, 2009
re: Your three answers using Science | 6:11 p.m. June 28, 2009
//Where are we going?...Your spirit is pure energy or light, and has very little weight according to Science. Like all forms of energy it fades as it transfers heat or light into its environment. At some point the spirit dissipates completely.//
If Energy can neither be created nor destoyed. Essentially, a Zero sum game.
It has to go somewhere. Reincarnation??
//Where are we going?...Your spirit is pure energy or light, and has very little weight according to Science. Like all forms of energy it fades as it transfers heat or light into its environment. At some point the spirit dissipates completely.//
If Energy can neither be created nor destoyed. Essentially, a Zero sum game.
It has to go somewhere. Reincarnation??
Anonymous | 1:19 p.m. July 16, 2009
What a tangled web we weave when we practice to do apologetics for the LDS
Church!
CJ3 | 11:45 p.m. July 28, 2009
Rather than delve into the philosophical debate between those that believe
themselves on the right side of the seeming paradox, I would say only this;
It's troublesome to me that some have come to believe that they are better than others and almost have a desire for the world as we know it to end, if simply to prove they are righteous, or chosen, or if only to claim a high place in the next life.
It's counter-productive to any plan, and destructive to humanity as a whole, and quite frankly comes across as vanity and self-righteousness, whichever way you slice it, or whichever side of the table you sit at.
There is NO guarantee that the world will end any time soon, despite what you may have been taught.
Taken as a guidleline, the gospels of the religions of the world can make you a better person solely on the merits of their advice.
We are not the same people as our ancestors, and the manner of speaking and teaching must evolve with us, as we grow.
It's troublesome to me that some have come to believe that they are better than others and almost have a desire for the world as we know it to end, if simply to prove they are righteous, or chosen, or if only to claim a high place in the next life.
It's counter-productive to any plan, and destructive to humanity as a whole, and quite frankly comes across as vanity and self-righteousness, whichever way you slice it, or whichever side of the table you sit at.
There is NO guarantee that the world will end any time soon, despite what you may have been taught.
Taken as a guidleline, the gospels of the religions of the world can make you a better person solely on the merits of their advice.
We are not the same people as our ancestors, and the manner of speaking and teaching must evolve with us, as we grow.
Reed | 8:01 a.m. July 29, 2009
I've observed that even simple things like baseball bats, balls, and
balloons that are created must have a creator. I don't have enough faith in
chance to believe that complicated things like eyes, ears, hearts, livers,
kidneys, brains, and nervous systems came about without some pretty bright
creator being involved. Hats off to anyone who has that much faith in
spontaneous creation.
To Dan Maloy Enid, OK | 8:45 a.m. July 29, 2009
Do you know there are special institutions with many people who know and see
things that none of the rest of us do. The mind is a funny thing. Self deception
is real, maybe you just think you know. To know is to have knowledge of things
that can be proven. Pehaps you just believe, or wish to believe, or seek to
know; but, you really do not know: do you?
Sick Watchmaker | 3:37 p.m. Aug. 1, 2009
Reed,
"I've observed that even simple things like baseball bats, balls, and balloons that are created must have a creator. I don't have enough faith in chance to believe that complicated things like eyes, ears, hearts, livers, kidneys, brains, and nervous systems came about without some pretty bright creator being involved. Hats off to anyone who has that much faith in spontaneous creation."
If you believe in a Creator based on construing this world as a "creation", then your Creator is one sick and twisted, murdering monster! If the kind of god you preach is that twisted, I want nothing to do with it!
"I've observed that even simple things like baseball bats, balls, and balloons that are created must have a creator. I don't have enough faith in chance to believe that complicated things like eyes, ears, hearts, livers, kidneys, brains, and nervous systems came about without some pretty bright creator being involved. Hats off to anyone who has that much faith in spontaneous creation."
If you believe in a Creator based on construing this world as a "creation", then your Creator is one sick and twisted, murdering monster! If the kind of god you preach is that twisted, I want nothing to do with it!
Anonymous | 2:29 p.m. Aug. 5, 2009
"Tell me, why is that the more liberal one becomes, the more likely they
are not to believe in God?
This is not a cheap shot against liberal readers here, it's a documented fact that the more liberal one is their viewpoints the less likely they are to believe in a Divine Being?"
I believe you have misquoted the fact. It is that the more EDUCATED a person becomes, the more likely that they do not believe in God.
This is not a cheap shot against liberal readers here, it's a documented fact that the more liberal one is their viewpoints the less likely they are to believe in a Divine Being?"
I believe you have misquoted the fact. It is that the more EDUCATED a person becomes, the more likely that they do not believe in God.
@Russian roulette | 2:35 p.m. Aug. 5, 2009
"On the other hand however, If there is an afterlife, then hell for an
atheist would mean after he is dead; realizing he still exists and that he
really messed up. "
The problem with your thoughts is that most atheists/agnostics that I know are very caring, loving and kind people. There is no way that a kind, loving and caring God would think that they "messed up." On the other hand, I know some pretty "messed up" religious people who think they need to judge everyone and feel pretty superior to those who do not measure up. I bet they hope that the atheists are right and there is no after-life.
Don't pigeon hole what type of people believe in God and what type of people are atheists. You might be surprised with the actual results!
The problem with your thoughts is that most atheists/agnostics that I know are very caring, loving and kind people. There is no way that a kind, loving and caring God would think that they "messed up." On the other hand, I know some pretty "messed up" religious people who think they need to judge everyone and feel pretty superior to those who do not measure up. I bet they hope that the atheists are right and there is no after-life.
Don't pigeon hole what type of people believe in God and what type of people are atheists. You might be surprised with the actual results!
For: 8:45 AM post on July 29th | 6:36 p.m. Aug. 11, 2009
"To Dan Maloy Enid, OK | 8:45 a.m. July 29, 2009
Do you know there are special institutions with many people who know and see things that none of the rest of us do. The mind is a funny thing. Self deception is real, maybe you just think you know. To know is to have knowledge of things that can be proven. Pehaps you just believe, or wish to believe, or seek to know; but, you really do not know: do you?"
Ahh...good one. Dismiss my knowledge by claiming I am crazy. Nice try but it's not going to work.
To answer your criticism, yes, I do know.
Sincerely -
Dan Maloy
Enid, OK
Do you know there are special institutions with many people who know and see things that none of the rest of us do. The mind is a funny thing. Self deception is real, maybe you just think you know. To know is to have knowledge of things that can be proven. Pehaps you just believe, or wish to believe, or seek to know; but, you really do not know: do you?"
Ahh...good one. Dismiss my knowledge by claiming I am crazy. Nice try but it's not going to work.
To answer your criticism, yes, I do know.
Sincerely -
Dan Maloy
Enid, OK
I Meant What I Said | 10:23 p.m. Aug. 11, 2009
"Anonymous | 2:29 p.m. Aug. 5, 2009
"Tell me, why is that the more liberal one becomes, the more likely they are not to believe in God?
This is not a cheap shot against liberal readers here, it's a documented fact that the more liberal one is their viewpoints the less likely they are to believe in a Divine Being?" I believe you have misquoted the fact. It is that the more EDUCATED a person becomes, the more likely that they do not believe in God."
Nope, no mistake here.
My questions was why does a person who becomes more and more liberal in their views generally believe less and less in the reality of God.
If I wanted to ask about "education" and one's views on God I would have written "education".
I wrote "liberal" because that's what I meant.
BTW, I have yet to get a logical answer from any liberal.
"Tell me, why is that the more liberal one becomes, the more likely they are not to believe in God?
This is not a cheap shot against liberal readers here, it's a documented fact that the more liberal one is their viewpoints the less likely they are to believe in a Divine Being?" I believe you have misquoted the fact. It is that the more EDUCATED a person becomes, the more likely that they do not believe in God."
Nope, no mistake here.
My questions was why does a person who becomes more and more liberal in their views generally believe less and less in the reality of God.
If I wanted to ask about "education" and one's views on God I would have written "education".
I wrote "liberal" because that's what I meant.
BTW, I have yet to get a logical answer from any liberal.
bandersen | 11:21 a.m. Sept. 15, 2009
Albert Einstein, hardly an intellectual light weight, believed that the universe
showed a divine hand. Although I haven't based my personal faith on his
evaluation of whether God exists or not, it does allow me to question those who
say that accomplished scientists are more prone not to believe in God. I would
be in pretty good company standing next to Einstein, and I doubt he would
question at all my personal faith in the existence of God.
JSM | 12:00 p.m. Nov. 13, 2009
"There is no space in which there is no kingdom."
I don't know what all the planets are for, but assuming that it is waste may be like the ant assuming that the walls and roof and yard are waste. All he thinks about is the "waste" food on the floor.
What we see is only part of the picture, assuming this is all that exists is foolish. Our time is one small slice of the cosmos. A blink of the eye to God is forever for us.
Brigham Young taught that the Garden of Eden still exists on another plane. If so, what else might exist around us, beyond this Telestial level?
Open your mind to wonder and enjoy it.
I don't know what all the planets are for, but assuming that it is waste may be like the ant assuming that the walls and roof and yard are waste. All he thinks about is the "waste" food on the floor.
What we see is only part of the picture, assuming this is all that exists is foolish. Our time is one small slice of the cosmos. A blink of the eye to God is forever for us.
Brigham Young taught that the Garden of Eden still exists on another plane. If so, what else might exist around us, beyond this Telestial level?
Open your mind to wonder and enjoy it.
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- Teen girl killed in Kaysville crash 7:09 p.m.
- Plenty of H1N1 vaccine available 6:38 p.m.
- Obama orders 30,000-troop boost 6:37 p.m.
- 2 arrested in Roy double slaying 6:33 p.m.
- Working on new HIV/AIDS vaccine 6:32 p.m.
- BSA to host audiocast over Internet 5:47 p.m.
- Garbage trucks to trash teen drinking 5:47 p.m.
- Court seeks judicial candidates 5:29 p.m.
- Simple candies for the holidays 5:15 p.m.
- Latkes from frozen hash browns 5:14 p.m.
- 2 citations issued at Y.-U. game
- BYU says Hall incident resolved
- Max Hall: a fixture in rivalry lore
- 'Grandfamilies' a growing trend
- Witness: Mitchell wanted attention
- Mitchell called intelligent, controlling
- MWC '09 season in review
- Jazz win 6th in 7 games
- Jazz ready to be without Harpring
- Daughter: Mitchell fed me my pet
- Hall mouths off about hate of Utah
901 - Cougars beat Utes in overtime482
- Hall reprimanded by MWC401
- Max Hall issues apology387
- Hall's pain reflects self-betrayal343
- Utes won't respond to Hall273
- BYU says Hall incident resolved224
- 2 citations issued at Y.-U. game152
- BYU is champion of the state142
- Religion in politics is tiresome128
Latest comments
To re: Jessica & Hamlet | 6:25 p.m., I just can't explain it, but this...
Hope Emery is feeling better, should be a good game tomorrow with or with out...
The laws on what clergy is and is not required to report varry by state....
pathetic that Brems says he can not tell his side of the story without making...
LDS ecclesiastical authorities are required to report criminal sexual...
Biggest concern.....I never know when he is being honest. This sounded like...
You are incorrect, Grandfamilies is an excellent program but Children's...
Region 4 will get 3 teams into the playoffs and their #4 & #5 teams will have...
It is a Utah law for cleergy to report child abuse to the police.
Did Mitchell sing when he went out to the Smart home to do some handyman...
Advertisements
Let me be more clear:
It is absurd to believe that this earth came about by accident. You have no evidence that this is the case. If you were an agnostic I could understand your position better. You would just say: I don't know. I can't explain it.
Yet the atheist goes further. He says there is no God, no intelligent creation. All animal and plant life came about by chance. If I told you the computer upon which you type of this nonsensical view came without design you would not believe it.
If you did you would be regarded as either dishonest or lacking intelligence.
Yet this earth and its myriad forms of life are astronomically more complex.