Re: Ool - out at first base?

On 12/24/24 6:48 AM, jillery wrote:

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 08:20:12 -0800, erik simpson
<eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:
 

On 12/22/24 10:12 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

I don't know if you are still reading this but in case you are, I
thought of you today when I read this in a religious newsletter that I
subscribe to:
>
"Only the silliest of scientists would think they could find God in
the world or prove that God does not exist. Existence is a property of
things within the world. Pose the matter in those terms, and you might
as well admit, God does not exist.
>
   No, in creating the world God establishes it so thoroughly in freedom
that many can deny the very existence of a creator. Looking for God in
the world is like looking for the novelist in the novel. He’s
everywhere and nowhere. Someone had to write the story, but she will
not be appearing on its pages."
>
(A Reflection for Fourth Sunday of Advent By Terrance Klein, a priest
of the Diocese of Dodge City and author of Vanity Faith.)
>

That's a notion I've been pushing for a long time to believers and
non-believers.  Science deals with what we see, not what caused what we
see.  God or non-God look the same.  The choice is ours no make, and
it's equally rational either way.

  The choice presented here is not whether God exists, which is a
personal choice, but instead is what one presents as proof of God,
which is a matter of logic.  The nature of Nature is no more proof of
God than UFOs are proof of extraterrestrial life.
 

Agreed.  Any "proof" of god would have to some personal revelation.  As for UFO, they're unidentified.  I've seen one myself, but I soon identified it as a combination of Jupiter and wine.