Keep doing what you are doing, Kevin! Unfortunately, I find very little time to do the type of research that you do. So, I appreciate being able to read what nuggets of wisdom you have encountered.

Thanks!

Dan

Clearly, you and I disagree in our understanding of the nature of God - but that’s not the point. The point is that it’s unconventional to state plainly that you don’t believe in supernatural forces and to do so will earn you the label ‘militant atheist’.

But it is was a weak and whiny point and certainly not worthy of your elegant response. I apologize for the poor standards (but not for disagreeing with you!) and will try to do better in future

But, if you were to change the analogy to be f(2,2) = 4, then there’s a function that is not fully defined in our minds. The fact that it returns 4 one time, or the first 70 times, does not eliminate the possibility that it could return 4 one some days of the week and not others. The function is not fully defined. We’d have to look at the code.

With the concept of God, almost by definition, there would have to be something “otherly”, something that does not fit neatly into our three-dimensional world of five senses. God, if it does exist, could not be limited by what we can understand. God, if it truly is God, would not be obligated to share its code with us.

And, as a response to what we think we understand about God, we can either believe in its existence or deny its existence. As your quote indicates, there are two types of believers and two types of atheists.

Wow! Those are five really good categories!

For example, take the infinite amount of time before now, and add the infinite time after now, and you get … umm … an infinite amount of time … umm …

Oh for pity’s sake, HERE. Take this lump of clay. And, take this lump of clay. Now you have … umm … a lump of clay … umm … doh! …

… never mind … perhaps 2 + 2 = 5 is easier …