Hey 87 Lets Debate ok ?

[olevetonahill]

You and me, Religion.
You can start

[Peach Fuzz]

:pop:

[olevetonahill]

:pop:

Do YOU want to discuss this ?

[SanJoaquinSooner]

which side are you taking, vet?

[OhU1]

87 don't debate - he just presents truth. He's got a 2,000 year old book and is best friends with a Jewish carpenter named Hey-Zeus! :P

[yankee]

:pop:

[SicEmBaylor]

87 don't debate - he just presents truth. He's got a 2,000 year old book and is best friends with a Jewish carpenter named Hey-Zeus! :P

A carpenter named Hey-Zeus? He has to be illegal....

[olevetonahill]

which side are you taking, vet?

I basically want HIM to state an Opinion and then either defend It or dispute it .
See Like I said I have been an Ordained Minister, I have studied the Bible. I also have came to the conclusion that God is Unknowable to man . Would LOVE for him to set me straight
;)

[olevetonahill]

Oh and I refuse to Ridicule any ones position, I want them to either defend it or Abandon it ;)

[yankee]

Over the last several months, I've started to take my faith much more seriously. For years I was always kind of going through the motions, but I've tried to be much more committed in living a Christ-like faith. I'm still a mere simpleton in my beliefs and there are many more people who know much more about the Bible and can eloquently write about God. I'm not one of them, but I hope to be one day.


I know this thread didn't call me out, but I just felt like stating that little piece. I believe what I believe, and that's not going to change based on what a few people type on the interwebz.

[Peach Fuzz]

I basically want HIM to state an Opinion and then either defend It or dispute it .
See Like I said I have been an Ordained Minister, I have studied the Bible. I also have came to the conclusion that God is Unknowable to man . Would LOVE for him to set me straight
;)

Hmmm really... do go on about your "ministry", I'd like to hear about it. You sure do portray yourself as a former minister :rolleyes:

[BudSooner]

Oh and I refuse to Ridicule any ones position, I want them to either defend it or Abandon it ;)Even doggy style?

[oumartin]

I just wanna know if Mary Magdalene and Jesus were married or had a child.

[KABOOKIE]

Did Jesus masturbate?

[The Profit]

I am ready for the debate to begin. I have judged many debates, and I would be willing to judge this one.

[OhU1]

there are many more people who know much more about the Bible and can eloquently write about God.

Congrats, you know as much about god as anyone else on Earth.

[JohnnyMack]

http://www.bagofnothing.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/jesussaveslarge.jpg

[Tulsa_Fireman]

http://www.inoutstar.com/images/Offensive-Jesus-T-shirts-as-Fashion-Statement-15297.jpg

[MR2-Sooner86]

http://www.cynical-c.com/archives/bloggraphics/8948IGaveMyselftoJesusPosters.jpg

[DIB]

http://static.funnyjunk.com/pictures/jesus-saves-and-makes-backups.jpg

[homerSimpsonsBrain]

I am ready for the debate to begin. I have judged many debates, and I would be willing to judge this one.

You must be a master-debater















Somebody had to say it.:D

[The Profit]

I was a master-debater once upon a time. As I have aged, not so much anymore.

[soonercruiser]

I am ready for the debate to begin. I have judged many debates, and I would be willing to judge this one.

Too biased to be a Judge!
(Hates anything pure and "good")

[OUthunder]

Over the last several months, I've started to take my faith much more seriously. For years I was always kind of going through the motions, but I've tried to be much more committed in living a Christ-like faith. I'm still a mere simpleton in my beliefs and there are many more people who know much more about the Bible and can eloquently write about God. I'm not one of them, but I hope to be one day.


I know this thread didn't call me out, but I just felt like stating that little piece. I believe what I believe, and that's not going to change based on what a few people type on the interwebz.

This! Well spoken. Since the birth of my last child, I had nowhere to turn to. So, I decided to study religion. I know a little about them all and respect each and everyone. However, that doesn't mean that I don't agree with em.

I just try to live my life in a way that would make my parents proud and try to set a good example for my kids. Sometime I succeed and sometimes I fail, but I always try to grow as a person. Sometimes a couple of losers on here, make that tough sometimes.

[JohnnyMack]

Sometimes a couple of losers on here, make that tough sometimes.

You shouldn't talk about Mongo like that. He has feelings you know.

[OU_Sooners75]

Question:

What makes any of you religious types honestly believe there is a God?

My stance:

I am not a religious person, but I am spiritual. I believe there is something, or are somethings, higher up the ladder than I am. Be that in the form of a true spiritual god or another life form, that part I am actually still torn between.

[SCOUT]

Faith

[starclassic tama]

what is faith?

[SCOUT]

what is faith?

That is too big of a question for a message board. The question asked was what made my "type" folks believe there is a God. My faith is the answer to that question. My life experiences are how I came to acquire my faith.

[SicEmBaylor]

I was a master-debater once upon a time. As I have aged, not so much anymore.

Really? I was an OK State Champion Debater back in my glory days.

CX or LD?

[MR2-Sooner86]

You can't debate this. It's a tie.

Believers believe in what they do, which is the unbelievable, because they have faith God will reward them.

Non-believers think it's silly like many of religions around the world.

I mean seriously, Noah's Ark? Two white people in the jungle creating all the different types of races? Parting the Red Sea? A virgin birth and coming back from the dead?

You need faith because there is absolutely zero evidence those things could actually happen. To believers it's simple but to non-believers it's not. It's just which side of the coin you're on.

[SCOUT]

You can't debate this. It's a tie.

Believers believe in what they do, which is the unbelievable, because they have faith God will reward them.

Non-believers think it's silly like many of religions around the world.

I mean seriously, Noah's Ark? Two white people in the jungle creating all the different types of races? Parting the Red Sea? A virgin birth and coming back from the dead?

You need faith because there is absolutely zero evidence those things could actually happen. To believers it's simple but to non-believers it's not. It's just which side of the coin you're on.

1) I do not have any belief because, "I think God will reward me."
2) Non-believers think it is silly because they have had different life experiences
3) Taking allagories for fact doesn't jibe with my beliefs
4) Faith is something that scientists have all of the time. It is just guised as something else.


In summation, my faith is much bigger than anything you can post. I appreciate your attempt to prove me wrong but it can't be done.

As a retort, I will ask you to prove that you love your Mother. I mean factually and with science as your only guide.

[starclassic tama]

scientists don't really use faith at all in their field. the closest thing to that would be maybe cautious optimism that an experiment is going to provide the results they are looking for. as for the love thing, there is direct observational evidence for love, even if it can't be quantified or empirically verified. there is no direct observational evidence for any of the various religions, other than lots of people believing it is true.

[SCOUT]

scientists don't really use faith at all in their field. the closest thing to that would be maybe cautious optimism that an experiment is going to provide the results they are looking for. as for the love thing, there is direct observational evidence for love, even if it can't be quantified or empirically verified. there is no direct observational evidence for any of the various religions, other than lots of people believing it is true.

That's an interesting take. Scientists don't use faith. So, all those times their conclusions were wrong because they extrapolated were based on... less than faith.

Are you saying that there isn't direct observational evidence of faith?

Funny how the lack of empirical evidence gets a pass on this one though isn't it?

[Blue]

You can't debate this. It's a tie.

Believers believe in what they do, which is the unbelievable, because they have faith God will reward them.

Non-believers think it's silly like many of religions around the world.

I mean seriously, Noah's Ark? Two white people in the jungle creating all the different types of races? Parting the Red Sea? A virgin birth and coming back from the dead?

You need faith because there is absolutely zero evidence those things could actually happen. To believers it's simple but to non-believers it's not. It's just which side of the coin you're on.

1 Corinthians 1:18 -"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."


So you think its crazy and illogical. Great for you.

[starclassic tama]

That's an interesting take. Scientists don't use faith. So, all those times their conclusions were wrong because they extrapolated were based on... less than faith.

Are you saying that there isn't direct observational evidence of faith?

Funny how the lack of empirical evidence gets a pass on this one though isn't it?

their conclusions were wrong for a multitude of reasons, if a scientist relied on faith to get to a conclusion then his career would last about 4 seconds.

i never said there wasn't direct observational evidence of faith. i meant there isn't direct observational evidence for anything that is written down in various religious texts.

[pphilfran]

You can't debate this. It's a tie.

Believers believe in what they do, which is the unbelievable, because they have faith God will reward them.

Non-believers think it's silly like many of religions around the world.

I mean seriously, Noah's Ark? Two white people in the jungle creating all the different types of races? Parting the Red Sea? A virgin birth and coming back from the dead?

You need faith because there is absolutely zero evidence those things could actually happen. To believers it's simple but to non-believers it's not. It's just which side of the coin you're on.

And on the other side of the coin...

It is so easy to believe that a small mass of substance that had infinite weight suddenly became volatile and exploded thus creating everything we see today....

Yep, I see how that is much simpler to understand and believe....

[yermom]

apparently the Pope does... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40945242/ns/technology_and_science-science/

the Big Bang has roots with the Catholics anyway.

it's the best answer based on observation

it doesn't really say anything about God though...

[olevetonahill]

Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
Pretty much sums up the Def. of Faith to me.;)

[1890MilesToNorman]

A debate about debating, I may do a poll about polling this debating the debating issue.

[Turd_Ferguson]

A debate about debating, I may do a poll about polling this debating the debating issue.You gawl durn yankee...everybody knows debating your poll just means to take the minner off your hook.

[olevetonahill]

You gawl durn yankee...everybody knows debating your poll just means to take the minner off your hook.

:D :D :D :D :D ;)

[The Profit]

Really? I was an OK State Champion Debater back in my glory days.

CX or LD?


To show you how old I am, I started out in NDT, and then moved to CEDA (CX) when it arrived. This all happened in college. CEDA was really more fun at that time. It wasn't as much of a paper chase as NDT was, plus I liked arguing values. The CEDA topic that year was "resolved, the moral majority is detrimental to the American political process."

[1890MilesToNorman]

:D

[jkjsooner]

My thing, and I don't mean this to say anyone else is wrong, is that 99% of those who have faith have the same faith that our parents and grandparents have. When we talk to people from other religions they are just as sure in their faith as Christians and they'll make the same arguments you hear from other Christians. While one may believe his/her faith is tied to some spiritual gift of truth, it's a little hard to reconcile this with the fact that we are merely following our ancestors footsteps and would probably be doing this no matter what religion they happen to follow.

I wish I had the faith that my grandparents had. Unfortunately times aren't as simple today. We are more exposed to a lot more, especially more people from differing cultural and religious backgrounds.

Of course there are some who believe that all religions are right. When it comes to that I'm a little bit of a fundamentalist. I don't think we can take a stance that mutually exclusive belief structures could all be correct unless we believe that only a small fraction of them (or a few general truths but hardly the entire religion) are correct.

All that said, once my child gets old enough to sit through church we do plan on regularly attending. As a former Southern Baptist I can definitely say it will be a church that is is based on the teachings of Christ but much more open minded than Southern Baptist.

I do have faith that there is something beyond human's comprehension out there. The main reason for this is that science's attempt to explain conscious experience just doesn't make sense to me. I agree that conscious experience is dependent on the physical workings of our brain but the mere idea that conscience experience could arise out of mere matter (no matter how cleverly organized) is absurd. There a unexplained gap there and I don't see science explaining it. I guess that makes me a dualist in the mode of David Chalmers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualism_(philosophy_of_mind)

I think very likely the explanation gap is God (which doesn't jive with Chalmers).

[jkjsooner]

And on the other side of the coin...

It is so easy to believe that a small mass of substance that had infinite weight suddenly became volatile and exploded thus creating everything we see today....

Yep, I see how that is much simpler to understand and believe....

The Big Bang does not pretend to explain the origins of the Universe. Experimental evidence seems to suggest an initial condition and the Big Bang theory merely explains this initial condition.

This wasn't something someone dreamed up to explain how everything came to be. It was instead the results of experimentation.

Religious scholars were the ones who first tried to imply that the Big Bang explained more than it was intended to explain in an attempt to discredit it.

[StoopTroup]

You don't need anyone to judge the debate. First one to be struck by lightning loses.

[olevetonahill]

You don't need anyone to judge the debate. First one to be struck by lightning loses.

:D :D :D :D :D
A preacher and a sinner were out Golfing one day, Every time the Sinner missed a Putt he would cuss like a sailor then say Damn missed again.
On the 16th hole The preacher was tired of hearing the dude cuss, so he told the sinner that if he cussed again he was gonna call lightning down from heaven and on him.

Sure enough the Old boy missed the putt and went to cussin , The preacher went to praying fer the Lightning to strike . Clouds rolled, thunder sounded and a great bolt of Lightning came down and Hit the preacher
Then comes this Voice from the clouds.
Damn , Missed again.:D

[Skysooner]

Hay-soos. I like him bery, bery much, but he no help hit curve ball.

[OhU1]

When people say they believe due to faith that is an honest answer. Nothing wrong with that if that is the way you choose to live and think about the world. What is dishonest, IMO, are the many theist who claim their faith based beliefs are based on evidence or reason.

A good example are the typical Christian apologists. Dr. William Lane Craig who is the most skilled of the bunch converted and believes due to faith and no evidence could shake him from that faith. Yet this highly intelligent and skilled orator has devoted his career to the use of elaborate rhetoric and sophistry to justify his faith on rational grounds. Apologetics is an after the fact rationalization. In short a highly sophisticated form of lying or spin. In the end it comes down to faith, nothing more.

[soonerbrat]

scientists don't really use faith at all in their field. the closest thing to that would be maybe cautious optimism that an experiment is going to provide the results they are looking for. as for the love thing, there is direct observational evidence for love, even if it can't be quantified or empirically verified. there is no direct observational evidence for any of the various religions, other than lots of people believing it is true.

so you're blanketing all scientists with that statement? if so, you are wrong, my friend.

[olevetonahill]

so you're blanketing all scientists with that statement? if so, you are wrong, my friend.

But, Brat, the dude is "Pre Med":D

[soonerbrat]

But, Brat, the dude is "Pre Med":D

so is my son, sort of. He's already been accepted to med school and is graduating college in May. He's the most faithful person I know. AND, i'm a scientist and I've been in that community. I did pharmaceutical research for a while, and let me tell you, I know a lot of scientists and dude couldn't be more wrong.

[olevetonahill]

so is my son, sort of. He's already been accepted to med school and is graduating college in May. He's the most faithful person I know. AND, i'm a scientist and I've been in that community. I did pharmaceutical research for a while, and let me tell you, I know a lot of scientists and dude couldn't be more wrong.

But this dude has been "PRE' every since hes been on the board ;)

[OULenexaman]

I'm thinkin "Pre" lizard now....

[jkjsooner]

so is my son, sort of. He's already been accepted to med school and is graduating college in May. He's the most faithful person I know. AND, i'm a scientist and I've been in that community. I did pharmaceutical research for a while, and let me tell you, I know a lot of scientists and dude couldn't be more wrong.

Scientists have all of the shortcomings that everyone has. I'm sure they fall prey to confirmational bias and in some cases outright fraud. The scientific community on the other hand is designed to deal with that. A scientific theory or experiment gets tested and retested. If you come up with a theory or publish an interesting study, there will be some who try to make their mark by either proving you're wrong or confirming you are right.

Nothing is perfect but the scientific community is designed to overcome these imperfections as best as it can do. Just look at some of the fraudulent scientific discoveries we've seen over the years. Some see these as a failure of science whereas the fact that they were revealed as frauds so quickly is really an affirmation of the ideals of the scientific community.

[The Profit]

As all powerful as God is, why would he need to sacrifice his son for the sins of all mankind? Why couldn't he (God) simply say, "from this day forward, your sins are forgiven." Was it because the people of that time only understood the blood sacrifice they had been practicing since before Abraham? Just wondering....

[soonerbrat]

Scientists have all of the shortcomings that everyone has. I'm sure they fall prey to confirmational bias and in some cases outright fraud. The scientific community on the other hand is designed to deal with that. A scientific theory or experiment gets tested and retested. If you come up with a theory or publish an interesting study, there will be some who try to make their mark by either proving you're wrong or confirming you are right.

Nothing is perfect but the scientific community is designed to overcome these imperfections as best as it can do. Just look at some of the fraudulent scientific discoveries we've seen over the years. Some see these as a failure of science whereas the fact that they were revealed as frauds so quickly is really an affirmation of the ideals of the scientific community.

what does that have to do with anything I said?

[85Sooner]

As a WWII Vet told me once. Sit in a hole in the ground with thousands of the enemy bearing down on your position, at that point please go on about how there is no God. Said he never heard that conversation, actually quite the opposite. Guess thats where they got the ol saying, there are no atheists in foxholes.

[MR2-Sooner86]

1) I do not have any belief because, "I think God will reward me."

I have to disagree. You have faith that God sent himself to Earth in the form of his son Jesus. He lived a perfect life born of a virgin and died for your sins only to raise from the dead and ascend into Heaven. If you believe in him, you have eternal life in Heaven, if not, you burn.


2) Non-believers think it is silly because they have had different life experiences

I think this goes with faith again.

A person suddenly turns around from cancer. Was it a higher power or just luck? What about the doctors and medicines? People look at things different ways.


3) Taking allegories for fact doesn't jibe with my beliefs

Now there's a disagreement in the community of believers.

Last time I looked Intelligent Design is still trying to be pushed into schools and there is still a Creation Museum.

I've met them. There are people out there who think the Earth is only 6,000 years old and Adam and Eve were the first two people and everybody came from them. They're out there.

Of course there's another group of believes who think the Creationist are taking it too far. I've met those people too.

Now if you're in the camp that says, "Well that's just a story filled with symbolism to help you get the point." Alright, what stories do you pick and choose then?

If the Creation Story along with Noah's Flood are just symbolic stories, how do we not know the rest of the Bible is? Where do you draw the line with one story or another?

There seems to be three groups.
A. The Bible is fact, every single bit of it because it's God's word and God isn't wrong.
B. The Bible is a series of stories put together to help us live our lives with some fact and fiction.
C. The Bible is a combination of A and B.

Again, I think this boils back down to faith. If God wrote it, then no matter what he's right and you have to have faith in him.


4) Faith is something that scientists have all of the time. It is just guised as something else.

True.
Big Bang? String Theory? Loop Quantum Gravity?

No evidence to really support the Big Bang and String Theory and Loop Quantum Gravity are dueling it out as we speak to disqualify the other.

It goes back to faith. They have proof and evidence. What proof and evidence is there that the Christianity is right? Again, you have to have faith.


In summation, my faith is much bigger than anything you can post. I appreciate your attempt to prove me wrong but it can't be done.

Wasn't trying to prove anybody wrong. Like I said, it's an automatic tie.

Example, you have faith the sky is blue. To you it's blue and it's something you've experienced in your life. You've seen in multiple times.

I come in and say the sky is black. I can point to the science of the ozone layer and the lack of light not allowing us to see the blue. Without the light you cannot see the blue. The science of light and how it works and it's just the light and not the sky.

So in the middle of the night you're pointing to the sky saying it's blue and I'm saying it's black. To you, the fact you can't see the blue is no reason to not believe it isn't there. To me, I don't see the blue and science is telling me it's black.

Again, it's a tie between both parties.


As a retort, I will ask you to prove that you love your Mother. I mean factually and with science as your only guide.

That can go back to the faith argument.

Well if we wanted to have some MRI's and brain scans to show the chemical balance of the brain and how it reacts to people we could do that. There is studies that show love is nothing more than the right chemicals mixing in our brains for a person and that person getting the same mixtures as well.

On the other hand, others will call it hog wash and that love is something that cannot be explained in a lab.

Again, it's which side of the coin you want to be on.

[jkjsooner]

what does that have to do with anything I said?

Maybe we have a disconnect. When starclassic said scientists don't use faith, what I believe he meant was that they don't base their scientific conlusions on faith. It is based on theories and experiments either confirm or disconfirm these theories.

You stated he was wrong. This implied that scientists were flawed in the way they approach science and I explained that the scientific community is structured to deal with such flaws.

[starclassic tama]

AND, i'm a scientist and I've been in that community. I did pharmaceutical research for a while, and let me tell you, I know a lot of scientists and dude couldn't be more wrong.

did you just not see the "IN THEIR FIELD" part of my statement or did you just choose to ignore it? plenty of scientists are religious, and faithful. but they damn sure don't rely on faith to do their job, which was the entire point of what i said. so please tell me how that is wrong again.

edit: what jkj said...

[SicEmBaylor]

To show you how old I am, I started out in NDT, and then moved to CEDA (CX) when it arrived. This all happened in college. CEDA was really more fun at that time. It wasn't as much of a paper chase as NDT was, plus I liked arguing values. The CEDA topic that year was "resolved, the moral majority is detrimental to the American political process."

I did value/LD exclusively from 8th-12th. I ended up on the Baylor Debate team my fish year, but of course they did CX/policy. I absolutely hated it with a passion. I didn't continue after my freshman year. I was convinced to give Model UN a shot by a friend of mine. Try outs for Baylor's Model UN team were extremely difficult, and she didn't want to go by herself so I agreed. I ended up making it onto the team as an alternate (I was the first freshman to do so), but she didn't so after that she stopped talking to me. :rolleyes:

Anyway, I made it onto the team as an alternate but I declined which was stupid because I had to do very little and I would have been included in the annual trip to NYC. But I did a lot of stupid **** my freshman and sophomore years that haunt me to this day.

I miss competitive debate though. I always thought it'd be fun to volunteer to judge at some tournaments here or there, but never looked into it.

[The Profit]

I did value/LD exclusively from 8th-12th. I ended up on the Baylor Debate team my fish year, but of course they did CX/policy. I absolutely hated it with a passion. I didn't continue after my freshman year. I was convinced to give Model UN a shot by a friend of mine. Try outs for Baylor's Model UN team were extremely difficult, and she didn't want to go by herself so I agreed. I ended up making it onto the team as an alternate (I was the first freshman to do so), but she didn't so after that she stopped talking to me. :rolleyes:

Anyway, I made it onto the team as an alternate but I declined which was stupid because I had to do very little and I would have been included in the annual trip to NYC. But I did a lot of stupid **** my freshman and sophomore years that haunt me to this day.

I miss competitive debate though. I always thought it'd be fun to volunteer to judge at some tournaments here or there, but never looked into it.




I have judged a few of them...Baylor used to have a great camp. Did they when you were there?

[SicEmBaylor]

I have judged a few of them...Baylor used to have a great camp. Did they when you were there?

I believe they did. Baylor also produced and published briefing/evidence books for each new resolution as it was released. We used them in HS as a primer to start working on our cases. Interestingly though, as I found out when I got to Baylor, the Baylor Briefs people were in no way affiliated with the actual Baylor Debate Team.

I'm assuming both the camp and briefs are still around, but I have no idea.

[OU_Sooners75]

1 Corinthians 1:18 -"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."


So you think its crazy and illogical. Great for you.

What exactly is being saved? I mean, that is like believing that if you die a martyr of Islam 72 virgins will be waiting for you in Heaven.

Really....does anyone know 72 virgins? Virgin what? Goats, Women, Men?

Anyway, got off track....

What if the angels that are written about in the bible and other religious texts are actually extraterrestrial beings? And the people that wrote those texts described them the best they could with limited knowledge of their time?

I guess it is just something outside of the mentality of man.

While there is quite a bit of evidence suggesting there are other life forms away from this planet, there is very little or no evidence backing up the three major religions of this world (Judaism, Islam, and Christianity).

Does that mean those that believe in a God are incorrect, not in my opinion. But at the same time, it doesn't mean that they are correct either.

I guess I am just a doubting Thomas in the eyes of the religious sect.

[OhU1]

While there is quite a bit of evidence suggesting there are other life forms away from this planet, there is very little or no evidence backing up the three major religions of this world (Judaism, Islam, and Christianity).

Hold on for a second I think you're getting ahead of yourself a bit. No evidence exists yet of life beyond Earth. Given continuing discoveries and the unimaginable vastness of the universe the odds seem slim that life does not exist outside Earth. But confirmation and actual evidence does not yet exist. I think we will see that evidence in our life time. Most probably in the form of micro-organisms - potentially even in our own solar system on one of the moons of Jupiter (Europa) and Saturn (Enceladus) among other prospects.

[OUthunder]

Can you get hebrew on tap?

[SicEmBaylor]

Can you tap a hebrew?

Yeah, but you have to have a sheet between you with a hole cut in the appropriate place.

[soonercruiser]

Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
Pretty much sums up the Def. of Faith to me.;)

"For those who do not believe, no explanation will suffice.
For those who believe, no explanation is necessary."

[OU_Sooners75]

Hold on for a second I think you're getting ahead of yourself a bit. No evidence exists yet of life beyond Earth. Given continuing discoveries and the unimaginable vastness of the universe the odds seem slim that life does not exist outside Earth. But confirmation and actual evidence does not yet exist. I think we will see that evidence in our life time. Most probably in the form of micro-organisms - potentially even in our own solar system on one of the moons of Jupiter (Europa) and Saturn (Enceladus) among other prospects.


Okay, evidence that supports the possibility...sorry for the mislead in wording.

[soonercruiser]

Can you get hebrew on tap?

"Bible truth" in our home?
Wiffie says I should always set up the coffee maker the night before.
I say...."Why me?"
She says..."it's biblical.....like "HEBREWS"!
:rolleyes: