OK, I tend to not like to post novels on forums (type too much in a post) but I will break from that this once given how this conversation has evolved.
I believe I see where this is going with you. You are debating me as if I am a person trying to promote religion and all I stated in my original post in this thread is my thoughts on what I believe and was not trying to preach to anyone of some deity that resides in clouds that promises thereafter life in heaven as long as you worship that deity, give up money, and believe every asinine thing that is to be believed within that religion or that there is a “Shangri-La”, if you may, that has countless virgins at your disposal. Your soul debate attempt with your initial response was to attack my belief of a creator as if I stated I had finite proof of facts of my belief. If that was the case then it would not be a belief, it would be undisputed fact and if I did have that knowledge of alleged fact I doubt I would be here entangled with a debate with you.
From what I gather, and I could be wrong, is that you have spent many a time debating “religious” types that try to get others to believe in what they are preaching so you are retorting in the fashion you would typically do in those cases. The problem with that is I am not religious in any form or fashion nor do I have an agenda to promote my thoughts as though everyone should follow it as doctrine. So when you say “your god” I am not entirely sure where you are getting at here. I take the meaning of a god to be something that is praised and all that other bull. That is not what I was getting at to begin with. I specifically stated “creator” for a reason. Now when I said not a being, I meant a being like any of the animal type species that we know of that reside on our planet. Call it what you will, if you need it to be labeled as a “being", so be it, a particle, or whatever there is SOMETHING that set things in motion so there was no dishonesty in my approach. You seem to still think that I am saying, and correct me if I am wrong, that there is some human-type form out there that started it all. That is what I gather from your reply at least.
I also am privy to the science and realize that it is used to discover the unknowns out there so my questions to you in this thread were rhetorical. I have always stated that I do not know everything and do not come at anyone with that notion. I also do not accept absolute statements without the facts backing them up, which I believe we are in agreement on, and which is why I am not about all the religious stuff. But as you stated yourself, “What we know is so little compare to what we don't know. I'm not afraid to say I'm ignorant of so many things if not most things.” so basically starting a debate with me on what I came to a logical conclusion to believe and not try to present as absolute fact to anyone was a fruitless venture as some of your comments actually back up my logic in the belief of there has to be a creator, initiator, or processor if you may. And what that entity actually is I could not tell you nor am I trying to say I know of said entity.
You go on to say, “There is no reason not to believe atoms, molecules can arrange themselves into more complicated systems like the solar systems, DNA, cells etc simply by conforming to the basic laws of the universe.” and my questions are how are they doing it themselves, what is the driving force of the molecules, what is the driving force of the Higgs Boson? As you yourself have stated, science is tracking this down and it will continue to do so but in the end they will be led, in my opinion, to an origin that set things in motion whatever that origin may be.
So in conclusion I think we have exhausted this debate as we may just end up agreeing to disagree about my stated belief. I will just let it rest with that. Good debate though.
Man, after all that typing I feel like I need a publisher.
Peace
