Should God have stopped this all? I am only human and don't know the reason but having faith, there is a higher good.

I have never expected my God to intervene in every situation in my life. Nor do I expect him to intervene in every situation in other people's lives. Just as God may have the choice to intervene, we humans also have the choice.

If we assume that God loves everyone, no matter what "religion" that man has defined, then my faith guides me that there is a higher good. For those whom you have indicated as "sacrifices" ... my view is that they were the unfortunate consequences of some men's decision.

The tragedy that happened was a result of man's (some men's) expression of their freedom of choice, a right and gift that my God has given to us. I cannot ask a God who has given me that "right" of freedom of choice, to intervene when those choices aren't good for me or my fellow men who also have the same choices.

The fact is that America, Americans, and the President continue to state.... GOD BLESS AMERICA.

Heh.

ThreeStep
(being silly)

quote:

---

Originally posted by <sciencechallenge>:
Here are some challenges to Scientists to prove:

1. Existence of Parallel Universes which is predicted but never proven.
(Plus others, edited for the sake of brevity).Graham.

Science/mathematics have as many (if not more) paradoxes as with Religion. Because we believe in God does not also mean we do not believe in the principles of science. Or do you think this another paradox?

---

Hhhhmm. Logical inconsistency in the argument here. Here I am, trying to be fair and give an easy prediction that could then be matched by an easy predition (not forthcoming I note, either here or later). The reply requests that science 'proves' all sorts of extremely complex issues and comments upon the imability of science to do so. Science has identified all sorts of apparent paradoxes, this I agree and have already stated myself in various ways. The argument I am putting forward is that science can predict all manners of outcomes in a massively wide range of situations. Religion cannot, not without resorting to science themselves. Of course, religion fights against the notion of scientific principle by ignoring it when they don't have the power to suppress it. Religion relies upon the emotive reasoning of the masses, unthinking acceptance of the way the clergy want them to think.
Remember Galileo, the Inquistion or something more modern, the Taliban interpretation of their religion (as a more modern example). Suppression works when based on emotive reasoning, it doesn't work when based on logic of which science is primarily based.
I had a wonderful discussion with a bible thumper (door to door approach) the other week. We got onto evolution, of which she obviously had argued before. She stated, very proudly and assertively, that she had 'studied evolution for thrity years'. Yeah right. She couldn't even explain the mainstream theory and claimed ignorance (I believed her on that, the evidence was right in front of me) when asked about alternate evolutionary theory (e.g. aquatic ape). I believe that her study had consisted of the occasional reading of tracts provided by her church. Emotively based I am sure (having seen various tracts of that ilk before myself). I enjoy trying to 'convert' these loonies to science. Nice to hear them begging to move on (I have to get the dinner ready, or be somewhere else shortly) as do the victims they normally prey on.
Anyway, the original point was, I made a prediction based on science that was simple to prove. Religius followers out there - do the same I challenge you!

(BTW, I have downloaded some of those references you gave and I will look at them when time allows).
Graham.
(Science rules the waves, and tames then and makes useful power out of then. Walk on them if you dare).
It's been a hard weekend, you can tell.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Latin Mambo:
[QBI'm not observant to my religion but I can see how one would look to their god when dancing.[/QB]

---