Re: WHICH IS THE REAL GOD?

"bob young" <alaspectrum@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:47CABBE4.121196EF@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> "Gordon L. Richard" wrote:
>
>> "BIll M" <wmech@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:P8kwj.108860$K27.3533@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >I challenge religious believers to provide objective verifiable
evidence
>> >that their god actually exists. The do***ents listed below are not
>> >'objective verifiable' evidence. They are merely the OPINIONS of
ancient
>> >men of unknown veracity
>> >
>> (snip)
>> >
>> Bill, would you, or would any of us for that matter, have anything
>> approaching sovereign will if God's existence could be empirically 
>> proven?
>> If God's existence and agenda were undenyable, would'n we all be as 
>> puppets,
>> whipped into complinace?
>
> no
>
>>
>>
>> What's wrong with the idea that we are presently going through a
learning
>> phase wherein we will all learn in depth, either directly or
indirectly,
>> enough about sin and rebellion to make sure we won't ever try to go
back 
>> and
>> tinker around with it again, once we've passe through this school of
hard
>> knocks?
>
> Because we are mammals resulting from evolutionary development, mammals 
> that
> got a quirky brain
>
> Some of us use the brain we have to improve our standard of life, others

> posts
> to ng's using phraseology that is so obtuse it defies reason in order to
> propagate an invisible imaginary god
>
Bob, if you're comfortable with the above *****sment, go with it. I'm not 
trying to "convert" you or prove you wrong. I'm only indulging in what I
had 
hoped would be honest, straight-forward dialog. If you are not at all 
interested in understanding why some have the committments that I have,
you 
are probably wasting your time responding to these posts.  Gordon