No, it surely is not, so why emphasize that as some argument? (i.e. “Meanwhile, by any measurement, the number of those who profess allegiance to no church are the fastest-growing minority in America.”)

So what? Your argument is not with the masses, it is with the canonized saints and with the non-maverick theologians. Your argument is with empirical evidence (whether you want to call it that or not), not with Scripture passages. Your argument is with reason not with faith. Your argument is with probability as well (cue godless evolution theories). Your argument is with your own dishonesty, i.e. promotion of selective facts and the obfuscation or concealment of others.

Your problem is very simple, Christopher. Pride. “Pride is the cancer of the soul” the Virgin Mary told a visionary in Ecuador. Is that so hard to perceive? Even if God were to strike you with a diamond of revelation right between your eyes this very day, your pride and your ego would never allow you to admit to your adoring public you were wrong. No, your ego is too important to sacrifice.

Do you know what is the one virtue the devil cannot imitate? Humility. He can parade himself as a any kind of minister, charity organizer, faith healer, love doctor, expert of the Word, et al., but he cannot imitate a humble servant. I find that just so exciting and revealing. Really hammers home the pride sin for me.

As far as your knowledge and debate skills are concerned, I see no reason to be impressed. It is your opponent who depresses me. I could outline for you 10 solid historical events or facts, well documented, beyond reproach, that you have no answer for. In other words, supernatural to any unbiased man of reason. But you do not qualify as that kind of man.

As it relates to religion and politics it clearly is a numbers game. For example, the Catholic church is at it again with regards to baning same sex-marriage in Maine. They were successful in CA and how they are trying in Maine. So sadly it is a numbers game. Religous people wish to deny feedoms like marriage and choice of whether to have a child or not.

Yes, shit happens that cannot be explained, the funny part is that it is the religious person that trys to explain these events. e.g.if one says well this cannot be explained by science as we understand it today, the default is 'well it must be an act of God'. That is BS. Just end the sentence with 'it cannot be explained by science as we understand it today'.

Truly. If we are tracking arrogance here, I find it easiest to see in the folks who believe they know everrything worth knowing, and that science, education and progress are the tools of the devil...unless they need them for something themselves. It's really sorrowful that religious folks don't take a lesson from the scientists. Scientists work from the proposition that we only know a part of what we can learn. They believe that a fact today may be a beginning, rather than the end. Scientists are willing to let go and move on if someone else can demonstrate that there is a more complete understanding of the topic. Wouldn't it be lovely if religious folks trusted their God enough to believe that they were given brains to discover the nature of the universe that they believe was so lovingly provided to them. It's a shame that ignorance can be disguised as faith, as if God wanted nothing more from his people than they understood 2500 years ago.

As it relates to religion and politics it clearly is a numbers game. For example, the Catholic church is at it again with regards to baning same sex-marriage in Maine. They were successful in CA and how they are trying in Maine. So sadly it is a numbers game. Religous people wish to deny feedoms like marriage and choice of whether to have a child or not.

What???

First of all, why were they successful in CA and 11 other states? Because referendums of the voting public (not of Catholics or Christians only) voted decidedly against gay marriage. So how can you possibly say it was “the church” who unfairly decided possible law here?

Anyway, that was not my point at all. My point was the existence of God, the divinity of Christ, or the validity of miracles is in no way dependent on the number of people who accept it or not. I really do not care if far less people are now going to church or believing in the Virgin Mary as it has zero bearing on the truth.

Yes, shit happens that cannot be explained, the funny part is that it is the religious person that trys to explain these events. e.g.if one says well this cannot be explained by science as we understand it today, the default is 'well it must be an act of God'. That is BS. Just end the sentence with 'it cannot be explained by science as we understand it today'.

Like Bo Diddly said to The Animals when he heard them playing one of his songs: “That’s the biggest bunch of rubbish... I ever heard in my life.” So from your dubious defense position, no matter what is manifested, no matter what, it can never be proof for the supernatural. All science has to say is “we can not yet understand it today, but it is proof for nothing.” So if Saint Faustina rises from her tomb after being the grave for 50 years, gives off an unnatural brilliance in her countenance, sprouts wings and flies across the land proclaiming Jesus is Lord --- "hey, what of it? We just cannot explain it in the natural as of today. No proof for God you religious hopefuls."

Truly. If we are tracking arrogance here, I find it easiest to see in the folks who believe they know everything worth knowing, and that science, education and progress are the tools of the devil...unless they need them for something themselves.

Oh, yes, my lady, we claim to know everything! And, yes again, science and education are tools of the devil. Only in your world of black and white could such inane statements emanate.

It's really sorrowful that religious folks don't take a lesson from the scientists. Scientists work from the proposition that we only know a part of what we can learn. They believe that a fact today may be a beginning, rather than the end. Scientists are willing to let go and move on if someone else can demonstrate that there is a more complete understanding of the topic. Wouldn't it be lovely if religious folks trusted their God enough to believe that they were given brains to discover the nature of the universe that they believe was so lovingly provided to them. It's a shame that ignorance can be disguised as faith, as if God wanted nothing more from his people than they understood 2500 years ago.

You sound like a real sausage with all your grandiose conclusions and definitions. FYI, the Catholic Church probably is responsible for more science advances in most of our centuries since Christ than the secular West combined. All universities and other great institutions of learning were founded by The Church, or was that just a quirky occurrence on their part?

And don’t dismay me with your sanctification of science as though it was only through godless work that man has progressed or been preserved. Religious institutions did more to care for those abandoned by a godless world than you could begin to admit to. Hospitals, education, laws and justice systems were Church originated in the West. But we have an aversion to science and learning, how could that be?

If you think the Catholic Church’s opposition to abortion, contraception, embryonic stem cell research, and gay marriage is tantamount to being opposed to scientific advances, you really are playing a game of deception and demagoguery. If you are going to embrace Galileo by the legs for dear life as your “silver bullet” you are again full of baloney compared to all other historical evidence where no one is objecting to millions of advances in science.

If you are going to point to evolution (your prized possession) as the reason religion is evil, then don’t forget there are agnostic scientists and non-Christians who also think your theory is a pile of garbage. What’s their motivation?

What I find most aggravating about Catholics is that they generally uninformed about the history of the church and the role it has played in history. Ask them to look at the real history and they get huffy. The Church's role in science over the last 2 millenium is largely obstructionist, not progressive. Whether the subject is the shape of the world, lthe proper role of women in the world, the reality of witchcraft or whether condoms actually save lives and the condition of Terri Schiavo's brain, the Church has consistently elevated dogma over reality. Heck, it took them 2,000 years to stop blaming the Jews for killing Christ - publically, at least. Let's not even get into the role of the Jesuit's in the colonization of other civilization or the role of the church in codifying anti-Semitism into law for centuries.

With your list of topics the Church is "right " about, have you read any of the materials supplied by the Church to the faithful? I have. To say that they rely on no science is to be kind. In actuality, try reading some of the material, and then try to fact-check any of it. If churches could be sued for distributing false and misleading material that has led to the deaths of innocent people, we wouldn't be worrying about trying to find money to pay off sexual victims. Yes, and we can thank Benedict for that as he was head of the Office of the Grand inquisition and superior in charge of priestly conduct. Either he is stupid or corrupt - take your pick, but frankly, anyone who denies that they understood the magnitude of the abuse or it's consequences is suspect. Oh, but maybe they don't read any of that fancy modern psychological science over there at the Vatican. What do you think?

Read some of Benedict's papers, look up some impartial information on the role of the Church during World War II and ask yo urself how the Church hierarchy managed to maintain the entire safety of the Vatican and its possessions in the middle of a Fascist country. Ask yourself why the church did not issue one single visa to a single Jew throughout the entire course of the war. Ask yourself why Pius X didn't use his considerable moral influence to raise an international alarm about the ongoing genocide in Europe. And then ask yourself if the Church's magical ability to safefguard its property had anything at all to do with any of the other questions. You will probably end up denying any of this, but you will have to tie yourself into a very serious pretzel to come out of the inquiry. I don't expect most Catholics to bother arming themselves with facts or learning anything about the realities of the modern issues where the Church continues to insert itself.

As for Proposition 8, do you imagine that the success of that typically uneducated point of view had more to do with the massive amounts of money poured into the political process by the Catholics and the Mormons than the integrity of the Church's position. Occasionally their abililty to throw monumental amounts of money into what should be a secular election just doesn't work - as in Massachusetts. The poor old broke Archdiocese of Boston had to renege on its plan to compensate victims of sexual crimes because it had to spend $1 million on a massive mailing campaign to defeat civil rights legislation. Too bad Massachusetts has a highly educated population because they were not swayed. Just as the citizens of Ireland no longer wear blinders in regards to the predatory conduct of the clergy in that county - attendance at Mass has fallen from 85% to less than 35%. Turns out the Irish are no fans of abusive clergy. Take a look at Spain. They resisted the ridiculous claims and threats by the Pope and instituted a modern public policy regarding women's health and gay men and lesbians. The US is ignoring the Pope on stem cell research now that the retarded guy from Texas is no longer in office. Of course, the Holy Mother Church is kicking ass in Africa where it is recruiting AIDs orphans in their youth and cranking out priests. This follows the extraordinary insistence that condoms must not be used to prevent AIDS infections, another patently unscientific piece of tragic advice. Tell me. What do you suppose will be the penalty for these men on Judgement Day when they were asked how they excused their willful ignorance in the face of reliable scientific advice? Somehow, "I was just following orders" isn't going to make it.

I left the Church many years ago, but have followed the politics, the money, the international efforts, the influence in elections, the progress - or more to the point, the LACK of progress - in countries where the Church still holds sway. I dare you - educate yourself. Ask about maternal health in Catholic countries, ask about childhood health, ask about the distribution of wealth in those countries, ask about the welfare of the people in the places that should be really swell places to live because of the overwhelming influence of the Church. Check the rates of abortion in those countries, just to make sure you understand just what clinging to nonscientific claptrap really means for human beings. If it doesn't make you sick, at least it might make you think. Personally, I don't expect you to do any of those things or read any material - it's just too real.,

I see the glory of the Church in the buildings, the art, the treasures and the property. I acknowledge the role of the monks of Ireland in preserving learning and knowledge during the Dark Ages. Most of all, I acknowledge the many wonderful Catholic people who have served the good cause during the history of the Church, like the German priests and nuns during WWII; those killed in South and Latin America for championing the basic human rights of those citizens; the doctors and nurses who work with the poorest and most desperate and the beautiful Catholic people I meet in my life. I am related to dozens of Catholics and see a broad range of faith among those folks. However, history demonstrates that lots of the good works had little or nothing to do with the Vatican, as is true today. Durfing my lifetime, the Church has routinely elevated and honored men like Benedict, Cardinal Law, the founder of Opus Dei etc and censored or silenced those who spoke on behalf of the people, like the Archbishop who was gunned down in Latin America, intellectuals like Thomas Merton and others who have worked for asylum and women's rights. During the Papal funeral, I tried to imagine what Jesus Christ would have thought about the pomp and circumstance, not to mention the garments made of gold, if he had been standing on the sidewalk watching the circus go by. I don't think he would recognize the Church as the placeholder for his work.

And thank you for bringing up Galileo - perfect example of how the Church has made scientific progress such a torturous process...century after century. Sorry if you find my point of view arrogant. I prefer to think of it as informed.

This is what happens when you believe in an historical religion - you are forever being put on the defensive because if Jesus Christ is not real then your religion is false. So your metaphysical beliefs are teathered to the physical proof.

Unfortunately, science gets in the way. Make a graph of scientific progress from say 3000 BC until the present time. You will see some plateaus and maybe even a dip or two, but for the most part, there is a steady increase in scientific knowledge with a marked increase in the rate of positive rise in the last one hundred years or so.

Now overlay on that graph the occurance of miracles on earth. What do you see? the same curve but inverse. The more we know about science, the less we hear about miracles.

That is not a coincidence.

Scientists have created human lives in their embryonic stage, destroyed them by extracting stem cells, altered the stem cells to become human sperm and human eggs, in order to create human lives in their embryonic stage.

The Cult of Science.

On the numbers game, you are right that the Catholic church has been able to convince other non Catholics to vote for bills like Prop 8 and thus ban same sex marriage. I never said it was the RCC that did anything unfair only that they supported what I feel is bigotry. Anyhow from political perspective it is clearly a numbers game and in the case of same-sex-marriage the numbers favor the RCC position. But on your basic point, of course it doesn't matter if a million people believe in a specific myth or only a handfull.

There is no proof for god and only a complete moron would say there is. You give a far out BS example of an event that never has occured. There is no such thing or paradigm as the supernatural. Everything that is is 'natural' by definition. Thus the supernatural is just accepts of nature that are unknown or not well understood.

Thus if there is a god the acts of this god are NOT supernatural but just natural acts by this god. If your BS example was to actually occur than it would then be part nature and of course I would accept it as such. Now I would admit to being shocked and full of wonder. But this is different than reading some old book and believing a bunch of myths because mommy and daddy tells one they are truths.

Even if science has lead to some negative events for mankind (it has like the A-Bomb), what is your point? That mankind should continue to pass on myths and not utilize science?

We have to feel sorry for those people so tied to the RCC since birth that they cannot see the RCC for what it really is. Really, I know a lot of good people that understand but still cannot break free. Of course they lie to their parents or grandparents and other family members since the truth would cause a break in the family.

But then these people have kids of their own. Do they continue to to support the RCC and raise their kids the same way as their parents or to they break free? This is the key point in life people need to stand up and break from the RCC instead of being a phony and subjecting their kid to the same crap they wish wasn't subjected to them.

Well, shit.

Can I at least keep my kids in RCIA so they'll be able to make their communion?

If you support the RCC and you agree with their core values than of course continue to be a member. DUH! I NEVER said or implied otherwise. In fact I respect these people for being true to the group they wish to belong to.

My point was to those individuals that do NOT believe in the core values of the RCC and do not follow their practices but only pretent to be Catholics. For example, many Dems in Congress!!!! My advise to these people is to either break free or respect their church and its leaders (i.e. the Pope). What I have seen is people that have little to no respect for the RCC and feel the Pope is a wack job, but they are still pretending to be members of the church because they don't wish to upset mommy and daddy.

Coincidence? About as much of a coincidence as the New Orlean Saints becoming a good football team when at the same time Roman Polanski has a fall from grace. What does it matter?

Science has grown in knowledge and understanding. What of it? Non-science and illiterates have grown in knowledge over the centuries as well. What has science done do disprove the existence of God, heaven or hell for that matter? They are without power or proof to even make such an endeavor.

On the contrary, science has only solidified the claims of the eternal. They have fully witnessed and examined the bleeding wooden statue of Mary in Akita, Japan. They CT scanned it and whatever else one can possibly do when witnessing human blood streaming down Mary’s eyes. It did it on 101 occasions before a variety of eye witnesses. It was filmed and shown on Japanese TV. Despite jazzguitarman’s bizarre explanation that anything supernatural becomes natural, this is clearly divine intervention in the affairs of man. This is the Christian God witnessing to the believer and unbeliever alike. Jesus himself could not have held sway over the masses without manifesting supernatural authority over man, over the weather, and over nature. He spoke in the book of John, “If you will not put faith in my words, then put faith in the works that I do.” And so it was, culminated with his resurrection from the dead. And so it was, the most overwhelming religious movement began with a miracle and it has flourished because of the eye witnesses to Christ, and the manifestations that have transpired since thousands of times.

Science cannot explain how three young children could predict a great miracle for all to see to the exact day, 90 days in advance. That is why 70,000 people showed up in the pouring rain and mud on a field in Portugal in 1917 to see if these little children were really talking to the Blessed Virgin. Well on that day when in the midst of darkness at noon, the sun spits open the black clouds and then begins an incredible display defying cosmic laws. The sun dances, spins, turns a myriad of colors and its rays of blue, green, red, yellow, etc. shoot across the entire sky and color the people and the earth in these various hues. But after 12 minutes the sun turns blood red and charges the earth growing as big as the entire sky. The people, every single one of them, atheists included, are terrified. At the last moment it stops and recedes back into the sky its normal self. On top of all this the soaked clothes and ground of all the people are now bone dry. Go read about it in a communist Lisbon newspaper of the time “O Seculo,” and elsewhere.

What has science done to counter that supernatural display? Nothing, because it has nothing. So science can make all its natural advances it chooses over the years, but when faced with a challenge to God, an explanation of life after death, it is as powerless as a sleeping frog.

PS – You say miracles have subsided as science has advanced? You are reading the wrong books because you are mistaken.

Someone took their time to respond. How refreshing, if not rare. (referring to BOTF)

I hope to find the time to respond in kind. However, duty calls for the moment.