CP� Re: Morals
 CP�
 CP� >        Fine.  You go by the bible.  But until you can prove by scientific
 CP� > evidence that the bible is EXACTLY what you claim it is, and can prove th
 CP� > existence of the god it claims to write about, keep it to yourself.
 CP�
 CP�      Guess what? I have just as much right to express my opinion as you do!
 CP� If the sub moderator(s) don't want it in their domain, that's their
 CP� privilege, but it does not change the fact that the burdon of "proof" does
 CP� not lie with the defense of this issue. Look at the title of this message
 CP� thread and discover it has a greater relationship with issues of religion
 CP� than it does social conduct. You cannot disprove it, and my offerings of
 CP� proof do not interest those who are non-believers. That is exactly as the
 CP� Bible itself indicates, and comes as no surprise.

       I am not saying that you don't have the right to your opinions.  I
am saying that you do not have the right to judge other people by those
opinions, UNTIL you can prove your assertions.

 CP�      Meanwhile, the sorrow is with your contention that it has no validity;
 CP� since if there IS any meaning or validity to existence, and if there IS any
 CP� creator of man and the universe, then he has thrown it all into irretrievab
 CP� chaos by allowing a book such as the Bible to exist on a planet of
 CP� intelligent beings who have the innate conscience to consider the fact that
 CP� it declares the existence (and proves it by the manner in which it was
 CP� written) that there IS such a God and that he HAS provided what is written
 CP� ... when all the while knowing himself that it is not true. Such an
 CP� omnipotent being would be showing outright contempt and irresponsibility fo
 CP� the entire creation. To live under such a reality would be pointless and
 CP� mercilessly cruel.
 CP�      Keep it to myself, indeed.
 CP�
 CP�                                  ��Carloman

       Of course, the primary question is:  DOES a supreme being exist?
You cannot use the bible as proof of the 'creator' of the bible; that's a
circular argument.  If you wish to prove the bible, FIRST, prove the
creator, THEN prove that HE, and HE alone, dictated every word in every
scroll that was eventually used, THEN caused all those involved in the
compilation of same to choose JUST those books he wished contained, and
ONLY those books.

       And the keep it to yourself means -- Believe in the bible, and
christianity all you want to.  But do not offer it as proof in arguments,
nor attempt to pass your OPINIONS off as fact, until (the VERY unlikely
event that) you have solid evidence proving them.

       And as for your contention that morals have more to do with religion
than with social conduct, I have only this to say:  WHICH religion?  Which
of the hundreds of religions in the world (Thousands if you count the
variations of christianity) is right?  If all of them DO happen to hold
certain concepts in common, does this point to the irrational and
unprovable concept of a supreme deity, or that rational humans have, in the
past, developed codes of conduct based solely on the concept of long-range
good?  It wouldn't be the first time that religion has stolen concepts from
it's predecessors or enemies.
---
 � JABBER v1.2 � Your meaningless drivel has been noted.