Grand Canyon Made By Noah's Flood, Book Says (Geologists Skewer Park For Selling Creationism)

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | January 8, 2004 | Julie Cart, Los Angeles Times

[AndrewC]

These are evidently B.R.'s own words. He at the end describes himself as an atheist. The agnostic label is his description pertaining to a logical proof of a god.

Proof of God

Here there comes a practical question which has often troubled me. Whenever I go into a foreign country or a prison or any similar place they always ask me what is my religion.

I never know whether I should say "Agnostic" or whether I should say "Atheist". It is a very difficult question and I daresay that some of you have been troubled by it. As a philosopher, if I were speaking to a purely philosophic audience I should say that I ought to describe myself as an Agnostic, because I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one prove that there is not a God.

On the other hand, if I am to convey the right impression to the ordinary man in the street I think I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods.

None of us would seriously consider the possibility that all the gods of homer really exist, and yet if you were to set to work to give a logical demonstration that Zeus, Hera, Poseidon, and the rest of them did not exist you would find it an awful job. You could not get such proof.

Therefore, in regard to the Olympic gods, speaking to a purely philosophical audience, I would say that I am an Agnostic. But speaking popularly, I think that all of us would say in regard to those gods that we were Atheists. In regard to the Christian God, I should, I think, take exactly the same line.

From Am I An Atheist Or An Agnostic?

BTW, by his definition of a philosophical agnostic, I am also agnostic, because "I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one [can] prove that there is not a God."

God bless you, and praise God.

[Last Visible Dog]

[Thunderous applause!]

Here comes the Evolutionist Victory dances.

[balrog666]

I believe this is the correct one:

Victory Dance!

[VadeRetro]

Very nice! That Olber's paradox you mentioned deserves a bit of explanation. Olber wondered why there's a black background to the stars in the night sky, given that many people then thought that the universe is infinite and has always existed. If this were true, then there should be a star at the end of every possible line of sight and some light arriving from same. Thus, there shouldn't be any black.

In the current cosmology, there has only been so much time for light to be emitted and to reach Earth. If you look out far enough, you're looking at a time before galaxies even existed. Light also gets increasingly redshifted because of the apparent recession of distant objects. The "paradox" vanishes.

Again, good work!

[exmarine]

He feigned offense in my assuming him to be an atheist, yet he had a B. Russell quote in his profile. Why would an admirer of Russell be offended by the label of atheism? He feigned offense because that was the only weapon he could find against me. He is intellectually dishonest and he is exposed.

[Sidebar Moderator]

Please knock off the personal attacks and debate the issues

[lugsoul]

Further proof of the point of my last Russell quote. I'm done with you.

[Last Visible Dog]

I believe this is the correct one:

I was going for variety - but on this issue you are correct. This other one looks more like a creationist

[BMCDA]

D'oh! And all this started with the Grand Canyon :^)

[js1138]

We are, of course, at war with people who do not believe in the possibility of secular law. In fact that is the very reason we are at war with them. God apparantly gave them a revelation at odds with the Christian revelation and gave the the mission of killing anyone who disagrees. Interesting how revealed truth works.

[balrog666]

Interesting how revealed truth works.

Yes, remarkably similar to some aberrant psychosis on a mass scale.

[js1138]

You have made the mistake of engaging in debate with a person who is smarter than Bertrand Russell and probably smarter than God. Your opponent has never made a mistake of any kind, except possibly for that one time when he refused to open the pod bay door.

[lugsoul]

I've had exchanges with him before, but memory fades with time. The mistake is simply wasting time that I could've spent clipping my nails or picking my navel, to much more useful effect.

[lugsoul]

BTW - Your understanding is appreciated and welcome. I get really tired of having my Christianity questioned - no, downright assaulted and denied - because I make such antireligious statements as (a) Roy Moore obviously lost his court case on purpose, (b) The change back to the old Georgia flag was a good idea, and (c) expansion of government power is generally a bad idea. In all candor, it is my view that God's interest in these topics is about as deep and engaged as his interest in the Super Bowl, where his name and guidance is so regularly invoked. I don't WANT my God to waste his divine time and effort on the state flag or the Super Bowl, and I really hope he doesn't care very much about such things. As far as science and evolution, I'm sure that we will never under stand all of the complexities of His plan, but I do feel confident that, given the choice between His work, viewed directly in the physical earth, and a oft-translated, oft-interpreted collection of words chock full of metaphor and illustrative story, His truth is more accurately reflected in the evidence made by His hand.

[lugsoul]

BTW - Your understanding is appreciated and welcome. I get really tired of having my Christianity questioned - no, downright assaulted and denied - because I make such antireligious statements as (a) Roy Moore obviously lost his court case on purpose, (b) The change back to the old Georgia flag was a good idea, and (c) expansion of government power is generally a bad idea. In all candor, it is my view that God's interest in these topics is about as deep and engaged as his interest in the Super Bowl, where his name and guidance is so regularly invoked. I don't WANT my God to waste his divine time and effort on the state flag or the Super Bowl, and I really hope he doesn't care very much about such things. As far as science and evolution, I'm sure that we will never under stand all of the complexities of His plan, but I do feel confident that, given the choice between His work, viewed directly in the physical earth, and a oft-translated, oft-interpreted collection of words chock full of metaphor and illustrative story, His truth is more accurately reflected in the evidence made by His hand.

[Junior]

Amen, brother!

[PatrickHenry]

PatrickHenry lurks ...

[exmarine]

In all candor, it is my view that God's interest in these topics is about as deep and engaged as his interest in the Super Bowl, where his name and guidance is so regularly invoked. I don't WANT my God to waste his divine time and effort on the state flag or the Super Bowl, and I really hope he doesn't care very much about such things.

Your view would be unbiblical on this score. God created ALL things, including all mathematical truths, all natural laws, and He IS LORD over all things and is concerned about the minutest details of people's lives (every hair on our head is counted and a sparrow does not fall to the ground without his notice). That's what being LORD means in a practical sense. He is certainly concerned with MORAL PRINCIPLES which underlie all politics and all laws, and He doesn't like people in black robes usurping His role in granting basic rights. Every time the court rules to remove the 10 commandments or disallow a poor young Christian from mentioning God in his graduation speech, FREE EXPRESSION is TRAMPLED ON. Freedom comes from Jesus Christ and ONLY Jesus Christ and not from darwinistic gods in black robes.