Subject: Crazy fundies. . . Date: Fri, 11 Jul 97 19:51:00 I have an interesting little fundie-ism to contribute. I was on AOL, in a member room entitled "Prove God Exists" or something like that, and we were laughing as the fundies tried to prove god's existence. We were trying to use logic to get through to the few who would listen, when one fundie stated "Logic is for losers!" The fundies have a new slogan!!! --Christine

Subject: Re: Noah's ark (from your page) Date: Wed, 28 May 97 19:39:00 Hey Adrian, (Is that your first name? I don't know if I saw your name on your page) First of all, let me say that I enjoyed your page. I am not an atheist, I am a Christian, and I sure hope I'm not preachy!! (I hate those types! :) I read the page about Noah's ark, and I thought it was very funny. It's good to have people like you around to make life a little more interesting. I have always believed Noah's ark story, and so I'd like to bring up a few points with you to see if you've heard them before, or what you may have to say: First, (and this helps your point of view) many believe that Noah was in the ark for 40 days and 40 nights, but that's just how long it actually rained. Apparently they floated around for something like 139 days AFTER the rain stopped. I don't remember exactly, and maybe it's not stated clearly in the Bible. Just thought you'd want to know. :) About the Flood: We can't say that Mt. Everest existed before the flood. With all the continents moving around, many people believe that there was once one single continent. This may have been the case during Noah's time. For one who believes in Christ, when he was crucified there was a lot of earthquakes, darkness, destruction, etc. Mt. Everest could very well have been created at this time, due to certain earth movements, etc. It's just speculation, but the volume of water could have been much, much smaller than what you've calculated. The Animals: Well, if we think there may have been a chance that only one continent existed during Noah's time, then most of your animal issues may not apply. Also, throwing evolution into the picture: Many of the "specialized" diets of the animals may not have been very specialized yet. I think you may be using facts about current animals and their needs to explain ideas about Noah's time. I can't really explain about the inbreeding in Noah's family since it's never been explained anywhere that I know of. If one believes in Adam and Eve (and the fact that Noah's ark was only a few generations past Adam and Eve) then obviously the people were a little different then then they are now. Adam lived over 700 years, Methuzela (how do you spell his name??) lived over 900 years... Even Noah took more than 120 years to build the ark. Given these ideas and the idea that perhaps the people had more pure genes (what does that mean??) Anyway, there must have been something different that allowed brothers and sisters to have offspring that did not show problems like today. I don't believe that Dinosaurs were drowned in the flood. The dinosaurs do have me puzzled, though. I also think those thoughts about the rainbow are VERY funny! Remember, these come from some (obviously) misinformed Jehovah's witnesses. They hardly represent what most Christians believe. I personally think that the rainbow Noah saw was a sign from God (and a promise) that he would never flood the earth again, but I'm sure it's not the first time Noah saw a rainbow. Perhaps he saw a larger rainbow than he'd ever seen before? I don't think it's totally unreasonable for God to tell Noah that "from now on" when you see a rainbow, remember these experiences and remember that I've made a promise. God is often like that (or so I believe... ) Just a couple comments about your conclusion (if you can bear any more!): >This seems an incredibly complex way to go about getting rid of a bunch >of sinners, doesn't it? God, who can create or destroy entire galaxies with >no effort at all, has to get some poor slob to build an enormous ship, >transport millions of animals from all over the planet to this ship, flood the >entire planet, drain the water and then re-distribute the animals again. >What is the point? Why not just click his fingers and cause everything >to be as he wishes it to be? Why go to the trouble of causing the terrible >deaths by drowning of billions of animals, birds, insects and humans? >Quite odd behaviour for an all-powerful, infinitely compassionate >God, is it not? Well, "billions" is still up for debate, but: You have to remember that many believe God is always trying to help us progress through learning. Noah's family was not a perfect bunch, and some of them may have ended up as sinners themselves. If it's true that everyone else was so bad that they wouldn't change, then using this kind of an experience to teach Noah and his family could be very productive. Perhaps all of Noah's family would eventually have become corrupted people, Noah would have died, and then everyone would be wicked? Destroying everyone and then teaching Noah's family at the same time seemed to create some good "God fearing people" in the next generations of Noah's family. Who knows, that could be why. Well, enough rambling! I don't know why I decided to write except that you invited me to. If you have any ideas about what I've said, then I'd love to hear from you. Again, I thought your page was neat, and I enjoyed reading what I did. I may have to visit again some time soon! Take care, Doug Cannon

Subject: Atheist Morality Date: Thu, 22 May 97 17:09:01 Well, you seem like you at least have a sense of humor. And so do I. I find so many atheist/theist discussions get so embroiled in emotional subjects that the participants on both side tend to be blinded by their own personal and life experiences. Rather that is a theist who goes into ballistic mode whenever someone questions his "spiritual experience" or an atheist who thinks everybody is out to "push their religion" on them, it is equally annoying. I hope we can avoid such pitfalls. I was browsing your page and enjoying it greatly when I came across your page on the Ten Commandments and morality. I thought this particular page brought to mind some interesting questions. You said that the Ten Commandments were simply common sense. I am a bit confused at your reasons for this statement. You go on later to say that "many atheists base their morality on what they consider to be acceptable to their society." Are you then saying that the Ten Commandments are not common sense? There have been many societies that have not subscribed to many of the Ten Commandments, and I don't mean just the "worship me" ones, either. Throughout history there have been societies that have decided "Thou shalt not murder" was only applicable in certain circumstances. I guess, of course, you could easily say that what exactly "murder" is could certainly be taken for debate. Still, the Germans in WWII did decide that Jews were less than people and that it wasn't murder to "exterminate" millions of them. Certainly not all the Germans, but enough to let it happen. Was this then "Good"? My impression of you would say you don't think the Holocaust was "Good"? So, I ask, why was the Holocaust a "Bad" thing? You cite the Golden Rule on your page. How is this concept a universal law? I'm sure you can come up with better that "common sense." Is it survival of the species? Is it based on feelings? Whose feelings? Yours? Mine? Hitlers? Finally, understand what I am NOT saying. I am not saying that you would participate in the Holocaust, or even that you wouldn't fight it to the death. I am not saying that atheists like killing people, condone killing people or any other such statement. What I am doing is asking the question, "WHY would it be bad for Hitler to have killed all those people?" You seem to have a reason firmly in mind, and I hope to understand it better. John H. Long

Subject: human soul? human being. Date: Wed, 14 May 97 14:59:01 Hi, My name is Phalin Klusman and I want you to know that I believe much as you do, that a human does not possess a separate spirit soul. I am an Elder in the Seventh-day Adventist Denomination of protestant Christianity. We as a group [8 million members aprx.] believe that the first lie told in the garden of Eden was referring to this topic. If you will allow me to refer to the Bible, both old and new testaments, I will use them to illustrate that what you have written on your Web page about a soul not being a part of man kind is very much correct. And it is a true Biblical teaching if only people would get rid of the folk traditions that are part of most religious views. I know that we would disagree on many topics such as creation and a God etc. but we do agree on the "soul" of man. The only difference is that I get my source of proof from the Bible, while you use native logic. And I don't see a problem with that difference for this discussion. Actually, I think that I should ask you for your interest in corresponding on this subject with me, as you have specifically mentioned the Bible as a non-interest area. If I can send you E-mail posts proving [to me] that there are no ghosts of dead humans, spirits of the dead, baby angles, souls in hell, etc. (as any real Christian or Jew could read and understand if they would but read and believe), them please respond back to this letter. Thanks for your time, and I hope to hear from you. Phalin Klusman, California, USA

From: Matthew Renner Date: Fri, 3 Jul 98 11:24:00 Found your atheist website fun and interesting (gasp, coming from a theist too! heh) also enjoyed your theories website. I especially like the space mountain one (being an astrophysics student space holds a fascination for me) just imagine the number of jobs created by that kind of public works project. And the motel buisness...heh. Reminds me of some of the far fetched ideas i've come up with...none quite as practical, but just imagine the mini-black hole trash compactor (and boy, does it compact) On to serious (but no less fun) topics. First is to sort of give you an understanding of what i mean when i say i'm a theist. I believe much of what Catholicism teaches, not all but much. I treat my belief in this much as i would a belief in a scientific theory (Catholic theory...heh) in that i freely admit the possibility i could be wrong. End disclaimer I strongly agree with your wonder at the beauty (as i see it ) of what science has shown us about the natural world, and i fully believe that those theists that can only believe that God made things instantly *poof* like are missing out on some of the most elegant and wonderful aspects of gods creationg (otherwise known as reality..heh) As to why i'm a theist i can freely admit that i have no proof of God's existance (and indeed if i did claim to have proof of Gods existance i would be admitting that I have no faith, since faith is defined as belief without knowledge. All those devout Christians proclaiming their lack of faith never cease to amuse me). I can just say that at certain times in my life I believe I have felt God's presence, not in a clap of thunder or a swelling creschendo of music (tho it would've been a nice touch) but just a feeling of hope when no hope was warrented. And as to why i'm a Catholic, some of it certainly has to do with the fact that I was raised Catholic, but most of it is that i simply love the core imagry and statements about humanity that Christianity makes. Purely from a psychological and sociological view I find it a testament to the human spirit that while bloody handed conqurers, ruthless emperors and genocidal tyrants have fallen by the wayside of history unmention, a man born 2000 years ago who performed no great deeds of strength, led no heroic charges, fought no desperat battles, but simply spoke of love and tolerance, and died true to those beliefs is revered and loved by millions. I just like that a lot, it serves to me as a moral counterpoint to the savage bloodthirsty side of humanity we see all too often. In regards to some specific questions you posed, here are my thoughts. Q:In what way was Jesus' death a sacrifice? I believe that one of the gospels records that in the Garden of Gethsemene when the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, Matthew (Saint to us believing types) drew his sword and cut off the ear of the guard (or if you prefer metaphorically was ready to use violence to save Christ) Christ told him to stop, healed the mans ear (forbade the use of violence) and went willingly. (One of the best ways to read the bible, I find, is to read it sort of as an evolution of morality throughout history, from the bloody rites of pagans to the symbolic renunciation of human sacrifice by the halted sacrifice of Isaac, to the complete renunciation of aggression by Christ but i digress). Q: If Jesus went to his death willingly then didn't Jesus commited suicide? If a soldier jumps on a grenade to save the life of a friend, he goes to his death willingly, yet we don't call it a suicide. So a willing death isn't suicide if a man dies to save another from death. Case 2: If a prisoner refuses to read his captors propaganda on air, at the cost of his own life, we don't say he commited suicide. So a person who dies willingly for their belief also does not commit suicide.(Yet others who die for their beliefs such as Heavens Gate are mocked.) What then is suicide. I propose this: Suicide is choosing to die for a selfish reason. Christ chose to die for our sins, an unselfish reason (which of course brings up another of your questions), therefore christ did not commit suicide. Q: Why is Judas so hated? This is one I asked for a long time without getting an acceptable answer. Finally I found one. The sin of betraying Jesus to his death should not be why Judas is seen as an unforgivable sinner (i hesitate to use 'is not'...amazing how many people simply don't bother to explore their faith) the truly unforgivable sin is his suicide. Not because he killed himself, but because he believed he could never be forgiven. He did not believe that God would forgive him and thus never asked for forgiveness. In true Catholic doctrine, God does not send people to hell in his fiery wrath, people choose hell themselves. In Catholic doctrine no sin is unforgivable but forgiveness must be desired. Those who do not desire forgiveness (i.e. those who refuse to believe they did anything wrong) condemn themselves to hell. Another issue is the nature of hell. In true Catholic doctrine (most of this, by the way, is secondhand information given to me by a person with a PhD in theology, in a Catholic school. Also verified by my uncle, who has been a Catholic priest for 25 years...) anyway in true Catholic doctrine nothing is said about the nature of hell. Not one description of fire and brimstone. Nada. Same for heaven, everything else is human conjecture. The current informed belief is that Hell is an absence of God's presence. All throughout life we have the chance to repent and seek forgiveness, once life is over, our choice has been made and we are either with god or without. This is of course simply speculation on the nature of hell, since people coming back from the dead is a rather rare event indeed. To sum up Judas should not be hated, he should be pitied for losing hope so completely and fully that he turned his back on God's love. Sorry if this is too long, but oh fellow seeker of knowledge I thought the beliefs and thoughts of a theist might interest you. Also, I like the Atheist symbol, though you might want to call it the skeptics symbol since you can see through the middle. What do I believe, why I believe what I see. Heh. Matt Renner

From: Wayne McKellips Subject: "erets" diff meanings Date: Sat, 18 Jul 98 06:35:01 Hi, 1) I just skimmed your article on Noah's flood. I agree, that Noah's flood didn't cover the entire earth. The two Hebrew words used in the Bible in describing the extent of Noah's flood are "erets" and "adamah." Both words can be translated land, country, or earth. Wycliff and the King James translators chose earth. Unfortunately, most Christians today seem duty bound to defend that particular translation. I believe the flood was primarily centered over Turkey which is surrounded by mountains. I cover the how, and why of Noah's flood at my web site. After all, how does one fill the country of Turkey up with water? 2) Humans have thousands of the same DNA errors that other primates have, at the same DNA locations. While, on faith, I believe God made Eve from Adam's rib I also believe the dust God made Adam from was the union of two living bodies. In the Bible "living bodies" are sometimes called dust. After all, we are all ultimately from dust. 3) I am an old universe, old earth, old life, catastrophist, Christian creationist, who also believes in evolution. In my web site I tell how I think God caused Noah's erets flood, Joshua's long day, the turning back of the sun dial's shadow by 10 degrees, etc. It's at: http://www.trustthebible.com I wrote this web site to provide evidence as to the trustworthyness of the Bible. My research forced me to abandon some of my long held ideas, but not the accuracy of the Hebrew and Greek Biblical Text. I would like your opinion of the evidence at my web site. Respectfully, Wayne Mckellips

From: Bolton, Timothy Subject: Free Will Date: Tue, 14 Jul 98 15:15:00 I had your article on Free Will vs. the Omniscience of God and found it amusing and must admit I have often struggled with the same questions. One point you made . . . Obviously, an infinite number (although many will look quite similar). It is impossible for you to make your hand follow that exact path through space again. There are an infinite number of ways you could wiggle a finger or waggle your head. There are an infinite number of values between 0.0 and 1.0 (you could keep dividing a number forever); there are an infinite number of angles within a circle; there are an infinite number of positions to place an apple on a table, or a star in space, or a toothbrush in your mouth. Does God know what all these are? If something is infinite, as are the possible motions of your hand, then it cannot be known completely. Here is where your argument is flawed. Because WE are limited by finite minds, with finite qualities like limited intelligence and life span, we find it hard, dare I say impossible, to understand the infinite. If God is ALL knowing then he CAN know every possible motion of your hand. If he is aware of the infinite, than he KNOWS all the possible motions, even it is an infinite number. There are a number of flaws in your argument that are based on this same misconception. You define God by OUR limitations, as if God were just a super-intelligent, super-powerful human with finite qualities like knowledge and power. The fact that we can't conceive how something is possible does not by definition make it impossible. How arrogant it would be for us to propose that truth is only defined by what we can understand. Yet, that is what most of your argument is based on. Since you can't understand how it is possible, you claim that it is impossible. Imagine, if you can, that you were back in 1490 or so, before Columbus decided to go searching for spice in "India" and would often argue the idea that the earth was flat. The opposition was much the same as your argument. Because they could not perceive what he was saying and since their experience didn't lead them to any other conclusion, they determined that Columbus must be nuts to believe that the earth was round. All the evidence that they had been exposed to made them believe that the earth must be flat. They were defining what was true based on their understanding. What a shame it would have been if people like Columbus simply defined truth based on the same arrogant mindset that our perception or ability to conceive truth is the defining factor in what truth truly is. The fact of the matter is that God is both all knowing and the granter of free will. Just because you can't understand how this is possible does not make it not true, just as much as those who didn't understand how the world was round made THAT any less true. If we attempt to define God by our own limitations rather than allow ourselves to be viewed with the definition that God has given us, then we will hit these brick walls all the time. Just because we can't reconcile something in our brain, does not make it impossible. It just makes it beyond our understanding. I feel sorry for you if your understanding is the defining factor of truth. Actually, I feel sorry for all of us who had to read your article if your understanding is the defining factor of truth. Thanks for being willing to share your thoughts and for the manner in which you invited comments. Just be careful not to make your limited understanding (and mine) the determination of what is true or not. TIM

From: Chris and Becky English Subject: WHACKO! Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 09:18:20 -0700 Hi I just read your article, laughing my guts out, at how you stated God really wasted His time by wiping out the earth in such an awful and painstaking way. DITTO to your article. Why waste the time writing all that. You either believe it or you don't! Of course Christians don't have explanations for all your STUPID questions and theories. They believe wholly, not half-heartedly. Yes, I'm sure you've heard this a thousand times so why don't you grow up and take some of it to heart. Cuz it's real hot in hell, baby! :) Well, who can argue with such incisive reasoning? I'm off to church!

From: Steve Locks Subject: fan mail Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 Hello Adrian, This is web-site fan email. I've been enjoying your website enormously since I found it a few months ago. I often pop-in for a good read and either sit there nodding my head sagely or go "tee hee," "Ppffhh <snicker>" - and even "BWAHAHAHAHA... oh dear... *sniff*" occasionally. Well I think your web-site is great and I'm very jealous of your erudition, wit and posh graphics. I'm highly disturbed by the weird emails you get from our "spiritually guided" fellow humans but presume that you can take it all in your stride. Reading such bonkers feedback might convince one that your "candle in the dark" is falling on some pretty brainwashed ears (oooh, they won't like that statement). However, I am in email contact with many ex-religious types who are very grateful to have been "ruined" by such excellent sites as yours putting them in touch with a bit of thinking material. Often they say "I must someday thank {...so and so person} for their enlightenment." Sometimes it's web sites, sometimes books, sometimes more directly other people that open our eyes enough to realise maybe there is something just a teensy bit wrong with the claims and morality of religion. Anyway, I'll be off now before I give you a hero complex! Keep up the good work, Your fan, Steve Wow - I have fans. Pray that I don't get too many, or I might start my own religion. =)

From: Mr Glenning Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1998 Subject: Re: Hi For 1 thinng, the ark of Noah has been sighted on Mt. Arart (sorry for misspellings) by people of the ages since the flood, and the front of the ship has been filmed on camara in our era. It is across the ahora gorge @ about 17,000 ft. It is supposed to have split apart in an earth quake some time in the 1800's, but proof is there, if you can open your eyes to the possibilities. As for Hell, we will know about that, but all to late...for thatt day will be judgement day. Furthermore, please don't take me for some quack. Sincerly, MrGlenning Mr.Glenning originally sent me a one-liner, stating that he felt sorry for me and my biased opinions. I asked if he could be a little more specific.

From: Lorie Bandy Subject: response Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 Dear Adrian, I am sure there is nothing I can say that will change your mind on what you have decided is your religion. I just wanted to say two things. I found your site looking for elephant information for my son. I am very glad I didn't let him look for himself. Please make your site completely about Atheism or Elephants; some other child may find this site like I did. You are an example to others even when you don't feel like you are. Surely you don't want to sway someone who already believes in God. The last thing, is like I said earlier. I know there is nothing, I am capable of saying that will change your mind, so I will pray for you. Thanks for reading.