Post reply

Reply to the message by Frank Paris

Name:

E-mail: (optional, won't be displayed directly)

Leave this field empty:

Homepage: (optional)

Leave this field empty:

Location: (optional)

Remember me (cookie)

Category:

Subject:

Formatting help

skip to input

format text bold: [b]bold text[/b]
format text italic: [i]italic text[/i]
insert hyperlink: [link=http://example.com/]link text[/link] / [link]http://example.com/[/link]
set text color: [color=#rgb]colored text[/color]
font size: [size=small]small text[/size]; [size=large]large text[/size]
insert list: [list][*]list item[/list]
insert image: [img]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; left: [img=left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; right: [img=right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail: [img=thumbnail]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail left: [img=thumbnail-left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail right: [img=thumbnail-right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]

:-)
;-)
:-P
:-D
:-|
:-(

Message:

> There&apos;s not much in here I can respond to, but there is this:-"And I have read scientists, mainly atheists, who wonder where the laws came from."-I&apos;m not sure what your point is in saying this. Is this supposed to be some kind of indication that even atheists admit there are holes in their disbelief? Well, we all know [i]that&apos;s[/i] true LOL.-String theory initially had the vain hope that once it was figured out, the fundamental laws would be seen to inevitably flow from the basic laws of logic alone. That truly would be a "Theory of Everything." Later it was realized that the fundamental constants of nature that string theory gave us resulted in something like 10**500 different possible combinations of these constants, just the opposite of the original dream of string theory.-The interesting thing is that both extremes have been used as arguments for atheism. But my theology allows for both possibilities without resorting to atheism, and it also allows for anything in between. Basically, it is independent of scientific reality, which any theology must be, or it begs for refutation once science knows enough. -"Yours is blind faith also."-I&apos;ve freely admitted from the start that my theology is just a theory that I&apos;ve tried to make consistent, coherent, and adequate to my experience. But I reserve the word, "faith," to being a state of being grasped by something that transcends any particular religious beliefs. This is more like how theologians like Paul Tillich and Martin Buber used the term. -Faith stems from encounters with the ineffable in varying degrees, and lots of people who profess to religious beliefs probably don&apos;t have an iota of faith in them. In any case, the term, "blind faith" does not use the word, "faith" as I do, but means something more like, "blind beliefs."