Ground Rules

Let me post a couple thoughts that I hope are relevant to this thread.1)I don't think anyone will convince anyone else that the Lord exists with arguments and logic. I think prayer might be the best way to come to the Lord: either praying oneself or by others praying for him.2)I went to Natural Bridges National Monument on vacation one year, and watched a film about the formations at the visitors center. The film stated matter-of-factly how old the formations were and how they were produced. There was a sign posted at an overlook with similar info. It is a nice visitors center an the park service has done a good job, but the information in the film and on the sign conflicts with the Bible.Now the 1st Amendment is interpreted to bar religion being preached by the government in schools and public buildings---and rightly so I guess. But why doesn't it prevent atheism from being preached? Why is atheism the official government position? All the sign and film would have had to add was something like "scientists conclude the age of the formation to be"; or "geologists date the formation"; and it would be better. Instead the we are taught matter-of-factly that " the age is".

Well, your responses have me reexamining my feelings on the film and sign I wrote about. At the time I visited the park, the film and sign did not feel agnostic to me. They stated absolute facts, which told me my religious faith was wrong. But I didn't know Phage's ground rule--the ground rule that " the concept that we could be in error is already part of the scientific system".

Phage, I hold steadfast to my faith. I have had doubts from time to time, but keep returning to the belief that God exists. My faith did not come from weighing the Bible against other religions and science, and then selecting the Bible as the rational choice. My faith came through prayer.My family is mostly not religious. I haven't really discussed this with any freinds.

Bluescat, you wrote that it is absurd for me to think that science=atheism. And for the most part it would be absurd. But in some areas of science it would not be such a stretch. How about the origin of life? Isn't that an area with a lot of scientist trying to find how life occurred "naturally", through chemical reactions, rather than being created by a god?

Phage, when I was 17, I was at the Rose Parade in Pasadena, Calif., when a Jesus freak came and started preaching to me. He was annoying, but for some reason I didn't want to be rude and tell him to get lost. He rambled on and on about Christ, and finally he said he was going to pray that I would feel God's love. I was thinking, good, he'll leave after this. I don't remember the words, but he prayed for about 1 minute that God would show me His love. And then I was overcome with an indescribable feeling of love. This rapture blindsided me, and lasted a few minutes, and it was a defining event in my life.I have read the Bible, and do not understand much of it. There are many interpretations and many denominations. But there are number of points that most denominations have in common. And the prayer that showed me the light also makes me accept the Bible.

As Richard Townsend and Perdition wrote, the ground rule among scientists, that the possibility of error is built into science, does not always register with non-scientists. The example of my feelings with the sign at the National Monument is a case of this.