Bad news: the creationists are back.

In the world according to rationalists, did existence spring from light beams?

There are a plethora of creation theories on both sides of the camp... Some believe in dinosaurs while others don't.

Now you sound condescending... In my shul there's a judge at least two billionaires and a plethora of lawyers, doctors and business men... Non of whom have turned to G-d out of desperation... Religion offers answers - people from all walks of life find different answers in different religions.

Thats news to me... could you give me one of their findings that explains why exiostence functions the way it does (why is helium lighter than potasium, what brought about existence, why isn't sight smelly?)

Andy read Moses Mamonides - A Guide For The Perplexed... It will give you a fascinating insight into the Jewish (and Muslim) perspedtive of a G-d.

You're interpretation is diamtrically oposed to two of the most influencial schools of religous thought... Hashem is Simple, a complex entity with human or worldy attributes goes against the teachings of both faiths.

The term Hashem is One implies a plurality with existence... To understand this term is to understand the very basics of monotheistic philosphy.

i understand it


its clear as day

could you explain it to andy for me please

i would but i cant put down it down in words

I don't understand how you can tell me passages like "for I the lord thy god am a jealous god", "for with such sacrifices god is well pleased", "I will take vengeance on my adversaries" and the like are "absolute truth" and then go on to say that human attributes are "diametrically opposed" to jewish teachings?

Jealousy? Pleasurable? Vengeful? How much more emotional does he have to be before he can be described as having human qualities?

As you can see I don't agree, but it doesn't particularly interest me because there is no evidence for an emotional god with human characteristics and no evidence for a non-emotional diffuse molecular resonance without human characteristics. Therefore one is no more likely to exist than the other and I can't see any point arguing about it.

The point I was making here is that it is wrong to teach children that the world is <5000 years old and that Noahs ark is a true story because it isn't, and it isn't. Despite what 50% of US citizens will tell you.

Andy do you not think I know my own scripture, the book I recommended describes perfectly why the Torah takes on the language that it does... The Torah often uses terms like the hand of G-d, this isn't a physical hand it's a figure of speech taking on a language that men of every background can understand... The emotions attributed to Hashem are done for the benefit of the reader, the Talmud clearly explains this (but you've never read the Talmud)... Think of it as watching a french film with the subtitles turned off... Unless you know French you could guess at the story but the depth of the polot would be lost to you with out the language... as it stand you're merely looking at the pictures

Please read the book, you spend half of your life slagging off an entity you don't understand - it's not even worth me wasting my time on these arguments as you aren't yet qualified to form an opinion of that which you oppose (it would be like me attempting to slate a medical technique you've spent years studying).

You sound like Stalin Andy, if a parent wants to teach their child that driving CO2 emissions are going to result in the end of the world or that testing on animals is wrong... they're entiled to - as parents have the right to teach the their children their values.

I'm sure I have values which abhore you and in turn you have vlaues that repulse me... but if our values don't have a negative impact on society then neither of us has the right to force our views on the other....

im gunna teach my kids that religion is an absolute farse and causes wars and killing

I'm going to teach my children to evaluate evidence so they can make their own mind up about stuff. The age of the world isn't a value, it's a fact.

Anything I say about anything is up for correcting - if I've studied something for years, and you find some evidence or argument that tips the balance the other way then I will be delighted to change my mind and delighted to acknowledge it.

just read the book