X-Message-No: 46 (database) Date: Sun, 27 Apr 97 06:40:00 Good points, but the key idea is simple logic. The gaping whole is our attempts to understand God on our terms. Like you said, God created the universe as well as time. Creating time means he is not bound to its laws. We think in linear terms. Once we remove ourselves from the time line, free-will and predestination can exist together. You keep referring to God knowing what we will do. He doesn't travel forward in time nor to the past. He sees past, present, and future all at once. Every choice we make effects our future and alters it. I only know of a few occasions in the Bible that refer to someone as being predestined. My only explanation is in that God knows our thoughts and how much faith we have. Even with all the "gaping holes" I will believe. This belief will guide my actions and make me predictable. Of course you can never ignore the fact that God, although existing outside of the time line, can enter it as he chooses. To me it all boils down to my theory of "worm dirt." Where will atheism take me after death? No where! If there is a God, then wouldn't it make sense to believe, rather than get caught with your pants down and ending up in eternal hell (another question about the nature of God. A compassionate God who sentences his own creations to eternal torment.) When you compare the outcomes, there really isn't a choice. If I am wrong and there is no God, the worms won't give a damn, and neither will anyone else. I hear it argued against living a virtuous life since there is no God. If there is no afterlife, then anything we do in the short amount of time on earth in meaningless. Worms don't care if they are eating Queen Elizabeth or a homeless beggar. However, what is 70 years compared to an eternity in heaven. Use a little armchair math and figure that one out. Billions of galaxies with billions of stars and planets. No God? I can barely comprehend life on earth as recorded in the Bible much less the infinite size of the universe. I can not see atoms that make up my being but I know they are there. Faith fill gaps in holes. Faith is what will make the difference when we realize that we are not intended to be worm dirt.

Subject: Ark Date: Sun, 27 Apr 97 06:03:00 I am no theologian or a scientist, so don't expect definitive answers from me. The whole question of God and why he does things is such peculiar ways has always been a reason for doubt in my mind. As for creation and the flood, I have read a few books that explain it in a very reasonable way. As the JW told you, there was no rain before the flood, hence no rainbows. Where was all the water? In the atmosphere. Genesis refers to a firmament in the heavens prior to the flood. Your calculations on the amount of water it would need to cover Mt. Everest are useless because there was no Mt. Everest. There is mention of God unleashing the fountains of the deep simultaneously to the rains. According to the creation science model, there was a layer of water in the form of ice crystals in the upper atmosphere similar to the ozone layer we have now. This layer not only held the necessary volume of water needed to flood the earth, but it also change the atmosphere. It is physically impossible for the larger dinosaurs to replenish there bodies with food and oxygen in today's atmospheric conditions due to their size. Research using hyperbaric chambers has determined that if you increase the air pressure to double what it is now as well as increase CO2 levels, you can create an environment that will support the large plants and animals in our fossil records. At the increased pressure level, the blood is saturated with oxygen which increases the bodies potential to heal itself. If you chart the age of the people in the bible, you will see that they all lived for hundreds (900) of years consistently until the flood. From that point on the age of man decreased in regular intervals until its present state. We know that reptiles never stop growing. They are only limited in size by there age. A scientist in Japan grew a tomato plant under these same conditions. It grew into a tree and produced thousands of tomatoes. This firmament being made of water - ice also helped to filter out ultra violate radiation. Without the UV rays, mutations and cancerous diseases were non existent. I envision the flood as a two step process. First, God let loose the fountains of the deep, or volcanoes. Enormous volcanic activity and earthquakes both punched a hole in the firmament which allowed it to come down as rain, and also created enormous continental shifts. The earths crust was torn apart creating the mountain ranges and the continents in only a very short time rather than millions of years. The lack of UV rays also negates carbon dating prior to the flood, but I don't remember all the specifics. I read these books about 5 years ago and only for curiosity. I have left out a great deal of detail but I will send you the information on the books if you want to read them. I will dig them out my small but useful religious collection. They don't answer all the questions, but they do a better job than the theory of evolution. I also have a few interesting books that do a good job of substantiating the theory that the Bible was divinely inspired, and that their was no way it could have been thought up by man. They use a computer to search for patterns in the original Hebrew and found repeating patterns of words throughout chapters as well as books both forward and backwards. Included in these words were the names of Hitler and prophecies of the Holocaust. A very interesting book.

Subject: Enjoyment Date: Sun, 31 May 98 07:45:00 What a refreshing, thought provoking, and funny site. I live in Alabama and have been for four years now. I'm still in shock. I moved here from California. I can't remember why, though. How sad. Being an atheist in Alabama can get your tires slashed, punched in the face, or spit on. Got to look out for those Christians! I will go back to your site again and again. Thank you. Steve

Subject: JW Date: Sat, 30 May 98 01:11:00 Adrian, just read your piece on JWs...I am married to one...just one bit of advice...stop doing drugs, mate, - they are clearly doing you no good whatsoever - and don't hand out any more of those little pills to your friends, I would hate my wife to come into contact with more zombies....Boy you are a saddo....

Subject: Phoney churches Date: Tue, 26 May 98 07:25:00 ============================================================================== + My name is Thomas Black and I hate false churches. I grew up in one. I have also visited a United Church of Christ, Church of Christ, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Catholic, and several others. They are all liars and deceivers. However, in 1992 I wanted proof of the existence of a Creator. An Independent, Separated, Bible believing, Fundamental, Baptist came to my door. I could not relate to this geek of a person, but he had a King James Bible and all the answers to the questions I pounded him with for 45 minutes. He challenged me to read the Bible all the way through. That was six years ago. Now I no longer can relate to people like you, who are too prideful and foolish to open your eyes and read. Instead you open your mouth pouring out foolishness and corruption, opposing the one who created you. I used to be just like you. You better get in a King James Bible you fool. If the Lord Jesus Christ can save a rebellious, idiot like myself, he will save anyone. ============================================================================== This guy seemed to forget what Jesus had to say about calling people fools...

Subject: Adam and Eve Date: Sun, 24 May 98 01:22:00 I read this webpage with interest. The real catch 22 occurs when an atheist tries to discern something in the scriptures. The only prerequisite for understanding the scriptures is that the one reading them first believes that "God is". Since you don't meet the first requirement, you don't have any understanding at all. Catch 22. I quite like this - if anyone ever tries to convert me using the Bible, I can just say "I'm sorry, I don't believe in God, so it impossible for me to be able to understand anything in the Bible."

Hello. My name is Angela. You will find a very believeable explanation to many of your questions in a book called Ishmael by Daniel Quinn. It gave me a new prespective on this story of creation and the true origins of man. The book is easy to read and quite entertaining. I hope you find it as insightful as I did.

Subject: Re: God? Date: Wed, 20 May 98 00:08:00 Sorry, no one told me I had family e-mail. I'm an atheist. I know that I will not change his mind, but I'm trying to find some evidnese to prove and isprove that God exists to see where I can go with it in my writing. I talked with a guy who gave me the URL to your site. I checked it out and now I pretty much understand a lot of different things (Theory of Evolution, circullar logic, arguing with my riends about the existance of God, etc. etc.). It's a great site. I am particularly happy with the stuff on the Theory of Evolution. It simplified part of it enough for me to understand the basic concepts. I learned about it in social studies, that man evolving with apes, but we didn't go into depth with it. Thanks!! -BlakJack

Subject: Funny Man!!!!!! Date: Sat, 16 May 98 01:56:00 You are a relatively funny man, a man who's rhetoric and repartie would be better spent in a constructive way rather than a negative. I know that slating automatically makes something funnier than it might be, but your dry humour is based around a limited, indeed miniscual speck of a much larger group. Your experience with the young lady has given you much to joke about, though maybe your ill balanced mind attracts the wrong type of people. Any wit you do possess should be used to amuse and amuse alone, not amuse and tear down. PS also not religious

Subject: evolution Date: Mon, 11 May 98 19:24:00 Adrian, I, like you, am not a Biologist. Yet, I have studied and read about creation/evolution and thought I'd give you my two cents for you to consider. First, there is an error in your paper, granted you most likely rounded it off, but humans are 98.(I'm not sure the exact decimal point, I read it in the paper this morning)%. I know it is a little picky but from what I understand the exact percentage does make a difference. My first point is that your entire argument relies solely on one scientific field, Biology. In my own research I have found that other scientific fields such as astronomy, physics, and thermodynamics offer serious contradictions or drawbacks to many theories and assumptions concerning evolution. You support the idea of how complex organisms such as the eye can evolve over a long period of time. Yet, many biological processes are so complex that even the slightest variation can cause problems. In fact, in Biology, I learned that inside our cells our smaller organs within a cell that work on near the DNA and RNA level. If one of these tiny organs in one of a bodies millions of cells is screwed up then a person will die. It's this reason that, (I think) most scientists are leaning to any evolutionary change occuring on the molecular level with DNA. In this scenario DNA mutations occur. If the mutation is beneficial it will continue, if not, the organism dies off. With this in mind, I once saw a scientist explain that even though we are less than two percent different than an ape at this level, it would take millions of positive mutations to bridge that gap. Keep in mind that for every positive mutation millions of negative mutations are thought to occur. Also, many scientists have developed something called the Information Theory. I do not no the details about it but will try to explain them. Keep in mind this is not a "God" theory but a theory in which scients have found themselves pushed into a corner and can only explain things or create working hypothesis by including the necessity of information to be added for evolution or change. This is a poor explanation, but an interesting theory, I hope to check it out and suggest you do. From my research, I have found that it is not the case that scientists have loads and loads of proof and evidence for evolution. I say this because most of the evidence can be interpeted or explained, scientifically, in ways which do not support evolution. Or, the evidence relies on a list of other factors to be proven true before it amounts to anything signifigant. No scientist has yet to conclusively prove anything about evolution. Also, there are many working and proven scientists (scientists who have terminal educations and accomplished something with it) who do have evidence, theory, and proof that contradicts theories of evolution and does point toward something else. Ultimately, as you stated, evolution or creationism could never be "proven" scientifically. The reason is that a couple of the primary rules of science is that something be observed, repeatedly, and tested, repeatedly, and provide the same result. No one has observed even one instance of macroevolution, and no one has seen any one creature created (with the exception of genetically engineered items created by scientists). For this reason, regardless of the validity of either theory neither can cross from theory to scientific law. For this reason, where a person comes down on terms of BELIEF relies more on philosophy than on science. Athiests frequently seem to look down on any person who believes in creation as ignorant, foolish, and susceptible to the handing down of belief from parents, society, and religion. Well, this is frequently true. However, why would people who believe in evolution be immune to this bit of human nature? We live in a world in which newer and better cars, computers, airplanes, knowledge, and technology evolve around us all our lives. Because of this, imaginatively, evolution makes more sense to me and fits into my thinking much easier than the idea of some kind of creater. Athiests also, frequently make the mistake of thinking that to believe in creation demands the acceptance of a large number of beliefs, religions,or dogma. This is not the case. I am a creationist, I am a christian (but don't make the mistake of assuming I believe what other christians believe or what you believe they believe). I believe these things, not as religion but as truth. There is much I do not know but when I look at the evidence: scientific, philisophically, historically, mythilogically etc. I am persuaded by the evidence that this is the case. I have studied mythology and one shouldn't mistake mythology for what a christian believes. Part of the definition of mythology is when something is believed with no evidence or proof. This is not the case. Ultimately, I, for one, am not interested in blindly believing in anything. I read your explication of evolution and much of what you say is convincing but study has put me in a position in which science would need to provide more proof before I could say I believe evolution. And I have read many convincing arguments concerning much of what you argued and things you haven't. I am not afraid of the truth. You may argue I refuse to look at the evidence and truth because I'm afraid that when I die, that's it, it's over. But, why would I be afraid of that? If there's anything to fear it's the possibility of continuing on and the question; continuing on to what? or where? You call christianity a myth I believe evolution is a myth. Who is right? I have looked at the evidence, I evaluate with as little bias as possible and as intellectualy honest as I can. You may not believe this about me but what can I say? Athiests always challenge theists to look at the facts and I say the same to you. With the rider that you be intellectually honest with yourself. Brian Jennings

Subject: Why are you an atheist..? Date: Thu, 7 May 98 14:09:00 Dear Adrian I'm sorry, you probably are thinking that I didn't read your page, and that's why I ask this question... Well, I _did_ skim through your pages, at least, and I couldn't see any compelling intellectual arguments _for_ atheism, only an allusion to unicorns. The closest was your "personal testimony", which (excuse me if I misinterpret) seems to say that you "couldn't see any need" to believe in God, so you didn't any more. I must admit I only skimmed through your pages. I myself am a theist (a Christian in fact). I am one of the "naughty believers" who read your page on how to discuss religion with a theist, and I read your amuzing "conversation stoppers". You claim that theists are mistaken, and that the only sensible logical conclusion a thinking man can make is atheism. But I am disappointed that I didn't see any sensible logical arguments _for_ atheism on your page. Don't be offended, perhaps I just looked in the wrong places - can you re-direct me? I was referred to your page by a student in the college at which I teach. Ok - I'm now going to go away and read how your article on morality and atheism. Yours, Michael Hartley An Australian in Malaysia.

Subject: Hello Date: Mon, 4 May 98 03:29:00 I just read the little letter you posted on prophezine's website. Guess what? I USED to be an atheist too. I have since then come to the conclusion that it is illogical to be an atheist. For anyone to deny that Jesus Christ is God is simply a statement made out of ignorance. IF you are logical and intelligent you will examine ALL the evidence that does nothing less than prove beyond any and all doubt that not only is there a God, it also proves that His name is Jesus Christ. I realize that it is futile for me to summarize all of the evidence since there is such an overwhelming amount of it, however, if there is any particular thing that you would like to debate with me I would be happy to do so. I regularly find that my debates with atheists are VERY short-lived. The reason for this is because as soon as I display inarguable evidence that defies their "logic" they seem to disappear. If you would be interested in a debate then email me back. We could start with creation vs. evolution. Creationism is irrefutable in today's scientific age of enlightenment. If you deny this you are simply ignorant on the subject of universal origins. Hope to hear from you.....if you can take the heat from an educated Christian. In the love of Christ, Derrick In order to check out Derrick's "inarguable evidence" and "irrefutable" science, I replied and asked him a simple question - how old is the Earth, and on what evidence do you base your conclusion? Never heard from him again...

Subject: Re: EVOLUTION ??? Date: Tue, 28 Apr 98 09:31:00 Hi there, In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. Do you believe that evolution is true? If so, then check this page out: http://www.salafipublications.com/dawah/quest.htm mail me with the answers... Regards.. Ash I received several emails from this guy. He wanted me to read the Qu'ran and accept it as truth. Sound familiar? I responded to the web-page he cites - haven't heard from him since...

Subject: AAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH Date: Wed, 22 Apr 98 02:47:00 On that mind reading thingy I picked the #7 AND a carrot. HOW DID YOU KNOW THAT? THAT'S REALLY WEIRD. DAMN. Sinister atheist magic.

Subject: comment Date: Sat, 18 Apr 98 13:43:00 Just a thought on the atheist comments; Consider this- Everything exists because of law. There can be nothing named that is not controlled by laws of nature- physics, chemistry, biology etc. Love is the practice of law. Love is a verb- if you love someone, you practice putting a law to work to their benefit. Ex: To a child- I am telling you not to put your hand on the stove.(This is based on superior knowledge that the child may or may not understand. They will get burned.) Law exists. Love exists. God is Law. ty.com

Subject: Brain-in-a-jar Date: Thu, 16 Apr 98 13:26:01 Adrian, Hope I'm not bothering you too much but something you said struck a chord with me. "We have to draw the line somewhere. If there is a wealth of strong evidence from a variety of different sciences supporting a theory, and little or no solid evidence to refute that theory, then should we accept the theory as being quite close to the mark? Or reject it because we can conceive of a number of far-fetched and impossible-to-prove (i.e. unscientific) hypotheses that would invalidate it were they true?" Can this line of argument not also be used in favour of other evidence, eg historical ? How do you know Caesar existed. From history, science cannot prove it. Yes, there are busts of him but there's also a statue of Venus in the Louvre. Did she exist too ? Surely, if the weight of historical evidence is in favour of the ressurection then might it be true ? No body was produced at the time of people first preaching a gospel of ressurection, so what happened to it ? There must be another explanation that stands scrutiny. Where is it ? I was looking at another atheism site whose author wanted a death certificate to prove Jesus was dead. Oh, really ? What would one piece of paper prove to him that thousands of manuscripts have not ? To talk as if science is the one truth is wrong. What about love, hate, pain, joy, forgiveness, revenge, etc, etc. Science has next to nothing to say on these issues, and yet they are far more pertinent to our existence than creation vs evolution (for example). Science is not without its loopholes (eg. where did all the matter for the Big Bang come from). Is it so wrong to want to find answers to questions that affect us daily ? Now what would be wrong would be to make up something just to feel good about it. I agree with that. But if a person weighs up the evidence and finds enough evidence for God then why shouldn't they believe it, especially if they see a change in their life as a result. Is the supposedly incorrect use of a word in one manuscript really evidence enough to knock that. In my opinion, no. As you have said, we can PROVE nothing 100%, but we CAN prove things beyond reasonable doubt. You have proved one thing beyond reasonable doubt, and I another, and that has affected our choices differently. I'm glad that you have an open mind, even if I disagree with your conclusions. But beware that you don't fall into the trap of thinking that because you can argue 'scientifically' that your arguments are somehow better than everyone elses. I'm an engineer, I have a scientific mindset, but it doesn't stop me from being a Christian. Er hope that wasn't taken as a rant, Regards Malcolm Myers

Subject: Jesus Crucifixion Date: Thu, 16 Apr 98 10:56:00 Adrian, Firstly, if you've heard what I've written (?) before then my apologies. It's just that I had similar views to yours on the crucifixion, and it was only when I realised where *I* had been wrong that I became one. The numbers equate to your points on http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/atheism/crucify.html 1. Selfless sacrifice. Have you ever apologised to someone, I mean really apologised ? They don't deserve it, they did you just as much harm as you did them, if not more, yet you go and take the blame for it. It's not an easy thing to do, it's very humiliating, particularly when it is within your power just to ignore them. You'd have to have a pretty good reason for doing it. That's what Jesus did. He deliberately let himself be sacrificed. If he was God then surely he could have commanded angels to save him, yet he did not. He humiliated himself, because he wanted to build a relationship with us, even though the fault was ours. 2. Free from sin. It freed us from the COST of sin, ie the punishment that usually follows breaking the law (in this case God's law). Sin is still around and will be until Jesus comes again. Also, we live in a time of now and not yet. Jesus kingdom is com, but it isn't here in completion. Just as D-day signalled the end of WWII it did not signal the end of the fighting. People had to wait for V-E day for that. So Jesus' death isn't the end, it's the beginning of the end (as Churchill might have said). Why not do it all in one go ? Because not everyone has had a chance to hear the message and make an informed choice (and yes, I do believe that's the only way to do it, not by blackmail). Jesus will return when that time is come, I have no idea when ! 3. Jesus suffering. Jesus is both God and man simultaneously. It's a hard one to grasp I know. Greek philosophy tells us that one thing is over the other eg. mind over body. Hebrew philosphy allows both extremes simultaneously. Do bicycle pedals go up or down ? Both. Which way they go depends on whether you're pushing or pulling on them. You can't have a balance, you wouldn't go anywhere, you can only be at one extreme or another, but both are valid. So Jesus suffered as you or I would on a cross. But loads of people died on crosses (or worse). What's so different about Jesus' death ? Well, the separation of Father and Son. Imagine the person you love the most. Now imagine giving up that person to be hanged for another person's crime, and letting the guilty party go free. Imagine the anguish that that person would go through knowing you had let them die in place of a guilty party. Jesus died with our sin in him. When I understood that it made sense. After all, I had said Jesus died for our sins hundreds of times in church as a boy, it never meant anything because I thought of all the other people who had died horrible deaths as being on a level in terms of suffering. 4. Three days. If God is timeless then the time factor is irrelevant. That fact that it happened at all is all that counts. 5. During that time. Don't know, does it matter ? 6. Willing. Jesus didn't go willingly in a suicide sense. You only have to read about Gethsemane to see that. He went OBEDIENTLY, as a man obedient to God and as God out of love for us 7. Whether or not it was planned is not an issue. It would still have hurt ! 8. Personally, I feel sorry for poor old Judas. The initial outpouring of God's forgiveness after Jesus' death was on the people of Jerusalem, the very people who had killed Jesus, so I personally don't see why Judas could not have been forgiven for his part in the crucifixion. I've written a lot, I hope I haven't preached, but given reasonable arguments. Suffice to say, I understand where you are coming from. Thanks for the opportunity to reply Regards Malcolm Myers I haven't had time to reply to Malcolm yet.

Subject: moran Date: Wed, 15 Apr 98 02:48:01 So, do you believe in love? If so prove it! You can't put it in a test tube and examine it but you know it's there. Hmm..made you think you moran! Try to get out of that one. Oh so you don't think love exists....Just like love, God exists, but not too closeminded boneheads like you. I replied to this one, to inform him of the correct spelling of "moron"...

Subject: Motherfucker Date: Sat, 12 Apr 97 10:03:00 I'm no JW, But just leave them alone. Why should you make youre self greyfor this shit?? Because you have no hope, youre just a person without any respect of other people. Go to hell,, what doesn't exist piece of shit

Subject: Reply Date: Fri, 10 Apr 98 15:54:00 I don't care if you ever respond to my e-mail, but I must say that your web page just evidences a lack of wisdom, research and insight. Let me address the question you enumerated and I'll be done. 1. His death was a selfless sacrifice because he did nothing wrong. He could have called legions of angels to withdraw him from this world at any time, and in fact considered doing that in Gethsamane before bowing to the will of God the Father. 2. In Old Testament times, cleansing from sins was done with a sacrificial lamb (or some other wholesome animal). You had to come and be dipped in the blood of this lamb to have your sins covered as a sign to God of true repentance. Much of these ceremonies became ritualistic and not God-centered. Man was drifting away. Jesus (part God-part man) was sent as the final, pure sacrifice for all mankind both present and future. The ultimate sinless, blameless sacrifical lamb of God. 3. Jesus suffered because he was both man and God. The physical man suffered greatly during the beatings and scourging and crucifixion. The devine side of Christ experienced the suffering of a broken heart because of the rejection of Him by the Jewish people. 4.&5. Your focus on what He did for the 3 days He was in the tomb is just silliness. We do not know for sure if He went anywhere or just rested and had His body prepared for the transfiguration. 6. Suicide? If I see somebody aiming a gun at my sweet young daughter and I step in to take the bullet, is that suicide or sacrifice for someone I love dearly? Jesus stepped in to take the punishment for our sins that all of mankind should be getting. But he was sinless and blameless. He stepped in and took the bullet for me....and yes, you. 7. God the Father had it all planned out, but being the loving God he is He always gave Man the choice of which direction to take his life...and that includes the original sin. All through the ages man has had the ability to choose right from wrong, good from evil. Jesus, being part man, could have changed the plan at any time....but didn't. God plans out the ideal route for our lives, we are the ones who screw it up by making decisions outside of His will which adversely affect the outcome. 8. Judas is not so much reviled as pitied. Again His choice was to accept the money from the chief priests for the betrayel of Jesus. It could have been someone else...but in order to expedite matters I believe God knew that Judas was never really a true believer and allowed the temptation of the bribe to come upon him. Regarding the rest of your diatribe.....man is a sinful, wicked creature by choice and by nature. Through the generations we have, by choice, moved farther and farther away from God. Even with the sacrifical death of our Lord Jesus, man chooses to follow his wicked nature. Christ said that the road to destruction is wide, smooth and easily traveled but the road to eternal life is narrow and a rough journey. Most of mankind always opts for what appears to be the easier way regardless of the end results. I feel sorry for you as I do all who have heard the word and reject it. I will pray for you........and I think you really do know the truth of all of this, just afraid to face it. In His Love; Bob Bennett California USA

Subject: possible waste of time Date: Fri, 10 Apr 98 04:57:00 psalm14:1 fits you well,tell me atheist how is it that in the last few years there has been found a hidden bible code in the old testament scriptures that is full of prophecys of hitler,kennedy,clinton the idiot,yitzhak rabin,etc.etc..if you dont believe what is written in the plain scriptures how do you explain the code.....rjc lafayette ind. To explain the Bible Code, I think I would first contact the people who applied the exact same technique to Moby Dick and other large texts, and discovered the exact same sort of "hidden message" in them as well. The only thing that is certain about the Bible Code is the amount of money it makes from people who buy Bible Code books...

Subject: Atheism... Date: Mon, 6 Apr 98 22:18:00 First of all I know that you must get a lot of e-mails a day so I'll make this brief: Do you think that atheism will change and convert the creationists? Heh, I certainly do not. I am 16 years old, my parents are Christians and My dad is a pastor of a local Baptist Church...etc...I have been questioning their (and mine) beliefs for about 2 years. I cannot say that Creationists are wrong or that Evolutionists are right. I can however see say that there are a lot of discrepancies and contradictions and plain old ignorance on BOTH sides. Take for instance (I'm only giving an example of evolutionists because we all know the other sides problems...) the page on your site that lists a bunch of contradictions in the Bible. I browsed through them and found good arguments and also found stuff that I could easily answer and point out that the writer of that page is wrong etc etc. My point is that he (the person who compiled all those contradictions) is obviously IGNORANT in some areas of the Bible. You will probably agree with me that no one should base their opinions on ignorance. Again, I am not sticking up for either side. I am merely searching for the truth. I have not found my answer yet. I take it you have. Well if there is anything you can comment on please write back. Heh, I haven't had a good argument(ehh discussion) on this topic in about 6 mos. I have already written to long so here's the end: Sincerely, Alm