""With every hour that passes, science finds more evidence that there is no god. It's just a matter of time. More and more people everyday turn away from religion. When religion is finally determined to be a mental illness, we'll be on our way to a peaceful world.""

That may just be the single most inane comment in the history of discussions about Science and Religion.

1. Where is this massive body of evidence located.
2. How precisely does it achieve the impossible task of proving a negative.
3. Who are the learned scientific geniuses who produced and tested this evidence.
4. What credentials can they produce to back up the credibility of their research and conclusions.

If there are no credible answers to ALL of these questions, then there can be NO SCIENTIFIC VALUE in your statement.

Finally, please explain HOW that statement refutes my contention that to deny the existence of ANYTHING, without a vestige of objective, knowledge of its existence, OR non-existence, is BY DEFINITION UNSCIENTIFIC. And THAT would include denying the existence of a Deity.

You don't have to believe in it, but to deny its reality without evidential backing is unscientific.

Discuss.

Don T.

P.S. I thought I had made it clear in my first post that I speak, not of religion, but of FAITH.

I don't much care for the bible, it being, IMHO a collection of anecdotes by men who are separated from the events described by many years, or even centuries, and who, in any case had their own agendas to pursue in the way they slanted the message.

IMHO the Old Testament is a collection of parables designed to instil a system of morals and ethics, and I very much doubt that Jesus would recognise his teachings as portrayed in the New Testament.

My faith is in God, not in men who wear reversed collars and black frocks.

DT.