quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: Early mythology. How is it comforting, then, when, to bring in a good crop, a virgin is sacrificed to the volcano god, then the crop that year is awful anyway? Gods, especially in most polytheistic societies, had vices and were often capricious.

Dang, I need a new irony meter now!

GL

quote Originally posted by Tugboat: How many gods do you Christians believe in? I just believe in one less. GL BTW, many evolutionary scientists are Christians, so much for your "godless worldview". They understand the Bible is a book about how to live our lives, NOT a science book. It's mainly fundamentalists with their literal (in places) reading of the Bible that have problems.

I would counter that "Christian" is, then, different by your definition than mine. "Dude, Jesus was this real cool guy." is notmy idea of a Christian. I'm not saying that it's yours, either, but many people of all stripes point to His teaching without pointing to other faciets of His life, His message and the circumstances of His life and death. Without getting into it too deeply, these facts have a different effect on each of our lives. I would like them to be the same for us all, but each of us comes to that point of decision, a point with His Spirit on our own, and our own decision on how to act.

These godly evolutionists have their view about the Bible, and that's fine. They will change their view or they won't. Perhaps they seek ways in which God affected evolution. I would say that they are not evil people, but their view is diffrent, and, when we are done with our journey, either A) we will all just cease to exist, or B) they'll be in some deep doo-doo.

I still see the two worldviews as incompatible.

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: Biblically, God is the first and the last. He was here before there was anything and, should everything end, He will still be. Again, this is not a religion thread, per se, but your post assumes that God is the created, rather than the creator. I say that I shudder to think what God would be like if we created Him in our own image.

but thats exactly what you have a man created god
nothing more

why else would a god care about one tribe ONLY
or be so sex hungup
or ban lobsters as food
or need man to deliver "HIS" message
or only speak thru one dude at a time [when he did speak]
or want animals killed in his name

[This message has been edited by ray b (edited 06-16-2005).]

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: Early mythology. How is it comforting, then, when, to bring in a good crop, a virgin is sacrificed to the volcano god, then the crop that year is awful anyway? Gods, especially in most polytheistic societies, had vices and were often capricious. I'm not looking to discuss comparative theology (though I enjoy it), but why 13? I assume the ladder thing came from those early slapstick films, where someone would get a bucket of paint dumped on them....

i'm sure the priests and shamans would assert that someone has offended the gods more than usual, and resume the search for another scapegoat or more virgins. when it becomes sufficiently clear to the people that their priests are mistaken, they probably go shopping for another deity, hopefully one less idiosyncratic this time.
13? i dont know. ive heard because it was a prime number, but then so is 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11...
personally i dont believe in rabbit's feet or the easter bunny or the tooth fairy, or play the lottery. but i know plenty of people who do, and it seems to provide them some comfort.

interesting topic, unless it gets out of control. what are the chances?

As far as the number 13 goes, I've heard two stories. One is that if a group of 12 witches gather together, the Devil* (the 13th member) will join them. The other I've heard is that Judas was the last to arrive to the Last Supper and/or the last to arrive where Jesus was praying before he was arrested. Since there were 12 Disciples plus Jesus, that would make Judas the 13th to arrive.

*I know that the Devil is not a part of the beliefs of Wiccians and witches, but the stories told about them by others say the Devil leads witches.

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: Early mythology. How is it comforting, then, when, to bring in a good crop, a virgin is sacrificed to the volcano god, then the crop that year is awful anyway? Gods, especially in most polytheistic societies, had vices and were often capricious. I'm not looking to discuss comparative theology (though I enjoy it), but why 13? I assume the ladder thing came from those early slapstick films, where someone would get a bucket of paint dumped on them.... I only just made 2K posts. Congrats!

That's easy. Life was hard during those days, and a malicious god was an easy way to explain why life sucked. If you had a good harvest, it was god's will. But, if you had drought and your people starved, you wouldn't say your gods abandoned you, so you say it must be their will for some reason. Someone displeased them, etc.

Even Christians do that to a certain degree, both today and in ancient times. The story of Job is an example of suffering being due to God's will.

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: Bill, your response troubles me a bit. I'm obviously Christian, so that side of me says that you are here, special and loved by the providence of the Creator and He knows you and loves you more than anyone on this Earth can.

It should trouble you because if it didn't then you would not believe in a "creator".

quote And it touches exactly on what started me thinking on this line, and, therefore, starting this thread, though I wanted to stay away from the philosophical/religious end; your post reeks of despair, though I think that it is meant as an exaggeration (At least, I hope it is. There are a lot of people on the Forum that like 84Bill). How does the human animal fend off such strong emotions as fear, loathing, despair, hopelessness, etc. Does it (on a species level) create "The God part of the brain?" How does this part function in not only learning and teaching stories, but in prayer and other "religion" related activities. Is it the source of conciense (sp?) as well? Or did God put it there for us to look to Him. Just another avenue in which He reveals Himself?

No, I was not exaggerating. I was giving you my view based on my 40 years of observation of life. I know I'm loved and liked by others or even god if thats how you wish to explain my "fortunate" reason for living and existing but thats not what keeps me alive, that stuff is all irrealivant. What keeps me alive is that I kill (or someone else kills for me) and consume animals and / or plant material and have successfuly avoid deadly mishaps thus far, it's that simple. SO as long as I can compete (be it a job so I can pay to have someone kill animals and harvest plants OR do it myself) then I will continue to live.

As for my existance, the true reason I exist is because my parents engaged in an enjoyable act of procreation, as a result I am / became "them" but I am neither singularly.

I don't remember where I came from but I do know I'm sitting at the transfer station called life. I sit here waiting to begin the next part of my journey to.....

I like the spring and fall... such nice weather. I like squirrals too, there kinda cool little critters and I'm glad they are arround for me. Hey, do you think they care where they get their nuts from? Do you think they hate me when I don't have any to give them?

[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 06-16-2005).]

quote Originally posted by 84Bill: Do you think they hate me when I don't have any to give them?

Maybe not "hate", but they do get P'od off!

http://www.jokeornot.com/gallery/squirrel_swing.jpg

Not sure how many animals have "higher level" emotions/thoughts, but I have heard that elephants will act strangely when they encounter an elephant skull...

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: I would counter that "Christian" is, then, different by your definition than mine. "Dude, Jesus was this real cool guy." is notmy idea of a Christian. I'm not saying that it's yours, either, but many people of all stripes point to His teaching without pointing to other faciets of His life, His message and the circumstances of His life and death. Without getting into it too deeply, these facts have a different effect on each of our lives. I would like them to be the same for us all, but each of us comes to that point of decision, a point with His Spirit on our own, and our own decision on how to act. These godly evolutionists have their view about the Bible, and that's fine. They will change their view or they won't. Perhaps they seek ways in which God affected evolution. I would say that they are not evil people, but their view is diffrent, and, when we are done with our journey, either A) we will all just cease to exist, or B) they'll be in some deep doo-doo. I still see the two worldviews as incompatible.

See, that's part of the problem. Everything is either black or white for you guys. What about C) God sends you below for worshipping a book instead of learning from His creation?

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: Why not? An abberant behavior, whether by and individual or group, if innate, would, over millions or thousands of years, be bred out by natural selection. An individual who has some characteristic that advances the breed is more likely to "get the girl." A bit simplitic, maybe, but essentially the idea. Characteristics that don't advance the breed have far less chance of propogating.

Who said this behavior is innate? I think you need to be looking more to anthropology to explain this than evolution.

I don't think "getting the girl" comes into play. Girls like religeous guys too, in some cases more so. It's not a selective pressure.

GL

[This message has been edited by Tugboat (edited 06-16-2005).]

wouldnt someone with no religious beliefs be more likely to reproduce?

if you can kill off the rival for your intended mate, or be brutal in acquiring food and shelter, without moral or religious restrictions, arnt you more likely to survive and prosper

turning the other cheek when someone is bashing you with a rock or club would probabally stop you from having any offspring

quote Originally posted by Ken Wittlief: wouldnt someone with no religious beliefs be more likely to reproduce? if you can kill off the rival for your intended mate, or be brutal in acquiring food and shelter, without moral or religious restrictions, arnt you more likely to survive and prosper turning the other cheek when someone is bashing you with a rock or club would probabally stop you from having any offspring

That is just asinine, Ken. If you start killing rivals, then the group is likely to recognise that as bad behavior and kill you. Otherwise, another group is likely to kill you all. At least all the men.

Cooperation and morality developed before religeon.

GL

It wasn't "bred out" because it serves/served a purpose.

edit: Also, the only REAL way something will eventually be "bred out" would be if people who expressed the trait didn't reproduce... the trait would probably still exist to some extent, but it woudln't be as dominant in the population.

In theory, being non-religious seems to be better (no "rules" to abide by) but if that was true, then wouldn't anarchy be wildly successful?

[This message has been edited by FieroRumor (edited 06-16-2005).]

quote Originally posted by Tugboat: That is just asinine, Ken. If you start killing rivals, then the group is likely to recognise that as bad behavior and kill you. Otherwise, another group is likely to kill you all. At least all the men. GL

How would anyone know you are the killer?

quote Cooperation and morality developed before religon.

what do you base this on? why would they be first?

[This message has been edited by Ken Wittlief (edited 06-16-2005).]

quote Originally posted by Ken Wittlief: '''Cooperation and morality developed before religon '''' what do you base this on? why would they be first?

basic ideas of right and wrong are far older then your book based fairytale
or even any fairytale

budda's teaching is all about rightness with out any god
stupid rules are NOT MORALITY
being good is morality
religious taboos are not
some are immoral others are amoral

------------------
Question wonder and be wierd
are you kind?

I didn't read the rest of this thread *too busy today* but I'll give my input. Religion was created to keep everyone in line, and to explain how things developed. Every human makes decisions based off of the possible consequences of their actions. Government (could, back in the day) and your conscience can impose relatively weak consequences, like torture, death, imprisonment from government, and guilt, grief, etc from your conscience. Those are very weak compared to burning in hell for eternity. So, even though I'm athiest, I'll admit that religions have had MAJOR roles in forming civilizations. Without religions there would have been, or we would currently have chaos. Religions were also created by man to explain the nature of things before science. One common theme with religions is that they all make statements that are not necessarily backed up by facts, and they require faith to support them. Like how some people believe the earth is flat, its being carried around by a giant cosmic turtle, gods control every aspect of nature, one god created everything, etc. It is natural for religion to evolve as people become more aware of their surroundings (through science and other ways). We went from being pagan and polytheistic to monotheism and now we seem to be moving to agnostism and athiesm (very, very slowly). Athiesm is extremely dangerous to society as a whole because it emphasizes the individual, it removes power from centralized religions, and it takes away consequences that drive people to be good. I can be good without thinking I'll spend eternity in hell, but I don't reccommend that to other people who might take advantage of that belief and go on killing sprees, hurt others, etc, because they won't have to pay for it.

------------------
I am the signature virus, please put me in your signature so I can spread
Please Help me get a real signature! Send a PM if you can help.

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: Your post assumes that happiness, though, comes from stuff and/or from leisure. Craftsmanship has been shown from the Azteks, the early Japanese, the Vikings, and the Middle East. I find that pride in craftsmanship equals happiness (I'm not a great craftsman. I have taken some decent photographs, and we'll see if my Formula ever gets finished). Far a farmer, bringing in a good crop would equal happiness, either from the ability to feed his family for the winter or to sell the excess, or both. Whether this is the human spirit, instilled by God or by natural process, I think that you underestimate the existence of mankind prior to the twentieth century.

I was thinking that in the past the ability to be "truly happy" as we can be today was offset by the struggles of daily survival. Modern society allows us to focus more on the things we enjoy doing. A craftsman can focus on his craft without the peril of death beign ever present. I think that determination and will power played a lot more a role in survival in the past than it does today.

I restore cars for a living. I am very familiar with the feeling of gratification that comes from building and creating with your own hands. I just can't imagine I would be able to enjoy what I do if every time I cut myself I had to worry about losing a limb to infection, or lose everything because an invading army might cast me into slavery.

Brian

[This message has been edited by VTfiero (edited 06-16-2005).]

quote Originally posted by VTfiero: .... I restore cars for a living. I am very familiar with the feeling of gratification that comes from building and creating with your own hands. I just can't imagine I would be able to enjoy what I do if every time I cut myself I had to worry about losing a limb to infection, or lose everything because an invading army might cast me into slavery. Brian

There was a thread here a while back in which one of our Canadian members posted that they were massing on our Northern borders....

So, if I sum up all the posts thus far, the anthropological reason behind the Creator is that we are genetically disposed to needing an explanation for life, death and what happens to us afterwards. To ease our fears and sense of inevitibilty of death, so that we can look forward in hope rather than paralyzing terror. That if a reasonably strong leader (Rabbi, Pastor, Shaman) tells me a story that sounds good, a region in my brain responds to it and gives me a sense of peace and self worth so that I can brave my boss, coworkers and customers for another day. And that developed trait serves the common good, in that societies are created around common (even moral) laws rather than Anarchy.

Essentially it?

quote Originally posted by Ken Wittlief: wouldnt someone with no religious beliefs be more likely to reproduce? if you can kill off the rival for your intended mate, or be brutal in acquiring food and shelter, without moral or religious restrictions, arnt you more likely to survive and prosper turning the other cheek when someone is bashing you with a rock or club would probabally stop you from having any offspring

Ken, you are making a classic false logic arguement of religious zealots, that those without religon (especially THEIR religon) have no morales and are wild animals or something. Those that have a religon have an excuse to kill... god told them to. Those without religon would have to come up with something more sophisticated as a justification and it has to survive the rest of society's judgement.

I'm not a religous man, yet I don't steal, kill, rape... I volunteer, teach, learn, play well with others. I'm the guy that gets the waitress to put the items on the bill she left off so that I pay for what I ordered. Same way I'm the guy that corrects the cashier that gives back to much money. I'm the guy that spends 3 hours after school to help a student finish a project on my time at no pay because I want to see them finish, learn and have a sense of accomplishment that maybe they will pass on. I'm the guy who holds a non paying government position because someone has to do it, might as well be me. I don't need a threat of a horrible afterlife to see that win/win situations make sense, that trying to improve life for everyone is a good thing.

I just wish more people would worry about how they act in this life rather than what reward or punishment they will recieve after it.

There are many solutions to any problem, some short term profitable for one, some seem to be a good idea, some better more than others. Try to find the best overall longterm solutions in your own life.

quote Originally posted by Scott-Wa: I just wish more people would worry about how they act in this life rather than what reward or punishment they will recieve after it.

I'm not a religious man either but I will give you an AMEN to THAT statement!

Brian

quote Originally posted by Scott-Wa: Ken, you are making a classic false logic arguement of religious zealots, that those without religon (especially THEIR religon) have no morales and are wild animals or something.

no, I did not make that statement in any way shape or form.

A person who holds religious beliefs, that an all powerfull god knows what they do in secret, and who believes he will be held accountable for any wrong doing (buy that god) has less options open to him as to how he interacts with the world

than someone who believes the things he does in secret are known to no-one else, and (if he is carefull) he can do whatever he pleases and will not be held accountable

the person with more options has the greatest chance for survival, and therefore, to reproduce.

How many 'godless' people will choose to do immoral things? I dont know. But if you assert that some people do immoral things, using religion as an excuse, then clearly other people will do immoral things using survival, wealth, power and sex as their goal, objective or excuse.

A person that does not believe in god simply has more options as to how they will act and conduct their lives - those options include immorality and evil.

Therefore, would not a person with no belief in god be more likely to pass on their genes? that was my argument (question)

[This message has been edited by Ken Wittlief (edited 06-17-2005).]

You just reworded it and said it again.

GL

do I need to draw you a venn diagram?

all humans are capable of immoral or evil actions
some people believe god(s) will hold them accountable for their action, other do not

therefore, which humans are more likely to engage in immoral or evil actions:

1. the ones who (actually/really) believe they will be held accountable or?
2. the ones who do not believe they will be held accountable?

this has nothing to do with the predispositions of the individual - some very religious people can be immoral, and there will be a great struggle inside, and some non-religious people can have excellent character, even though they do not expect to gain anything from it - but the human race taken as a whole will have a mix of both extreems of inherent goodness, and inherent religious beliefs

the immoral people who hold no religious beliefs are most likely to do immoral things.

being religious or not does not affect your tendancy towards immoral desires and thoughts, but it will restrict your actions.

[This message has been edited by Ken Wittlief (edited 06-17-2005).]

It's a false premise, Ken. I don't expect to be held accountable by any gods, but I can see the benefits of good behavior. People reciprocate.

GL

your logical error is you are taking the specific (your behavior) to the general (humanity as a whole)

do you really believe that all humans follow an inherent set of rules all the time, whether they think they are being watched, or the things they are doing can be revealed?

I can prove that is not the case, simply by parking next to a speed trap, and watching the brake lights lite up on car after car

when people think their actions are being observed (ie by cops) they behave differently (slow down / stop speeding)

and if they believe in an all powerfull god, they believe they are being observed all the time, and will be accountable for everything they do.

and AGAIN: I did not say that not believing in god CAUSES people to become immoral

I said people who are immoral AND dont believe in god are more likely to engage (indulge) themselves in immoral behavior

[This message has been edited by Ken Wittlief (edited 06-17-2005).]

So you think most people are too dumb to understand that what goes around, comes around? (To use an old expression.) I know some are, but not most. I've seen people get their 4th DWI and blame it on bad luck. Most people have caught on by the time they're 25 or 30.

I've known some people who believe they are being watched all the time, but they don't follow any particular rules. Matter of fact, I've seen people with Christian symbols on their cars speeding in school zones. And hitting their brakes when they see a cop. Are they more worried about cops than God?

People who don't follow your morals may or may not believe in God. The ones that do, it doesn't seem to matter to them.

GL

quote Originally posted by Tugboat: So you think most people are too dumb to understand that what goes around, comes around?

if there is no God then how does that work? what is the mechanism behind it?

Dont say karma - that is a religious principle that requires some universal force (god) which causes us to return life after life, based on what we have done so far - otherwise we would skip around the universe at random, and no matter what we did there would be no real consequences

'what comes around' only happens if someone or something is there to make it come back to you.

Like I said before, people reciprocate. There's nothing mystical about it. Do you think luck has anything to do with somebody getting a 4th DWI? No, he put himself in that position.

OTOH, I've done favors for a few of my neighbors and I know if I need some help, all I need to do is ask.

I'm not saying if you stay away from bad people that nothing bad will happen to you - but it is less likely.

GL

quote Originally posted by Ken Wittlief: no, I did not make that statement in any way shape or form. A person who holds religious beliefs, that an all powerfull god knows what they do in secret, and who believes he will be held accountable for any wrong doing (buy that god) has less options open to him as to how he interacts with the world than someone who believes the things he does in secret are known to no-one else, and (if he is carefull) he can do whatever he pleases and will not be held accountable the person with more options has the greatest chance for survival, and therefore, to reproduce. How many 'godless' people will choose to do immoral things? I dont know. But if you assert that some people do immoral things, using religion as an excuse, then clearly other people will do immoral things using survival, wealth, power and sex as their goal, objective or excuse. A person that does not believe in god simply has more options as to how they will act and conduct their lives - those options include immorality and evil. Therefore, would not a person with no belief in god be more likely to pass on their genes? that was my argument (question)

In other words, a believer is less likely to commit acts of "immorality" and crimes? Are you trying to say that believing in God makes you more moral, more honest, more law-abiding?

JazzMan

rayb,

I don't mind your opinion being different from mine, but I do dislike outright error.

God never cared about one tribe ONLY. He told the children of Israel that they were to be a special people. They were to represent God before other tribes in such an attractive manner that people in those other tribes would be attracted to God. He also said He wanted to bless other tribes through Israel. Therefore he didn't care only about one tribe and you are grossly in error. Later in the new testament it specifically says that it doesn't matter if you are jew or gentile, God is not a respecter of persons.

God isn't "sex hung up". God is very PRO-sex within the confines of a monogamous marriage, and orders husband and wife to have sex with each other on a regular basis. Just because possibly YOU see other uses for sex that varies from God's plan doesn't mean God is "hung-up".

The ban on lobsters as food, and many other animals, was a restriction placed on the jews for a period of time, and has been lifted long ago--like about 2000 years.

God didn't "need" a man to deliver HIS message. He said so in the Bible when He said He could have "...the rocks cry out..." about him if he so chose.

I'm not sure what you mean by "one dude at a time" since, for example, several of the old testament prophets that God used to write books of the Bible were contemporaries and prophesied during the same time period.

The having animals killed in his name--I assume you were referring to the sacrifice. It was supposed to be a VIVID, PICTORIAL depiction of the horrible consequences of sin, and what ultimately would happen to the Messiah. Since the Messiah has come, and had what was pictured done to him, there is no more killing of animals in his name. When in your lifetime has an animal been killed in his name. As far as I am aware, the only animal killing in anyone's name going on currently is in pagan or satanic religions.

That was SIX different things you posted, and you weren't even able to be correct on ONE of them.

If you wanted to be anti-God, or in your mind, anti-man's creation of god, you could at least try to have a correct reason.

Here's a question for you. You stated "...being good is morality..." Define "being good".

quote ...having animals killed in his name--I assume you were referring to the sacrifice...

I dont understand why anyone would be upset by this

animals that were sacrificed under Jewish temple rituals were killed in a very humain manner

and in most cases the meat was used for food by the (hundreds, or even thousands) of temple priests

what do you think would have happend to those sheep and cattle if they had not been used for religious sacrifice? do you think everyone in the days of the old testiment were all vegatarians?

do you think they took those animals from petting zoos?

almost all of the them would have been killed and eaten anyway, if they had not been sacrificed

the main difference (to the person offering the sacrific) is THEY were basically giving the animal away. They would not be able to consume the meat. The meat was instead used to sustain the order of priests.

and I think its safe to say, that for 99% of the population, your food supply was the primary focus of your daily labor - it was the main component of your personal 'wealth'

[This message has been edited by Ken Wittlief (edited 06-18-2005).]

Does "burnt offerings" mean the remains are edible??

GL

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: but I do dislike outright error. ... As far as I am aware, the only animal killing in anyone's name going on currently is in pagan or satanic religions.

In an effort to correct outright error, pagan religions do not practice ritual sacrifice. The central belief of pagan religions is to "do no harm." There are those who claim to be pagan who do practice ritual sacrifices, just as there are satanic religions that do. But, as you are aware, David Koresh and Jim Jones also professed to be Christian and their actions do not define Christianity. Also, pagan and satanic religions are not related in any way. Pagan religions do not believe in a malevolant anti-God or Satan. Since satanic religions are based around Satan worship by definision, and since Satan is a central core of Judeo-Christian religions, satanism has more in common with Christianity than Paganism.

Also, you are forgetting Santeria, which still practices ritual sacrifice.

"Santeria is a syncretistic religion of Caribbean origin. It incorporates the worship of the Orisha (literally "head guardian") and beliefs of the Yoruba and Bantu people in Southern Nigeria, Senegal and Guinea Coast. These are combined with elements of worship from Roman Catholicism."

"[Santeria] Ritual Sacrifices: These form an integral part of many Santerian religious rituals. The animal's blood is collected and offered to the Orisha. Chickens are the most common animal used. Their sacrifice is believed to please the Saints, and to bring good luck, purification and forgiveness of sins."¹

¹Source: http://www.religioustolerance.org/santeri.htm

[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 06-18-2005).]

quote Originally posted by Tugboat: Does "burnt offerings" mean the remains are edible?? GL

under the mosaic laws, in most cases, only part of the animal was burnt up

Passover is a good example - the lamb was sacrificed (killed) then eaten

the parts that were not eaten (bones, organs...) were burned in a fire till nothing remained

[This message has been edited by Ken Wittlief (edited 06-18-2005).]

quote Originally posted by Ken Wittlief: 'what comes around' only happens if someone or something is there to make it come back to you.

If ya keep doing stupid (or "evil", or dangerous things), eventually, you gonna get yours. There need not be any divine intervention... It's just cuz ya keep puttin' yerself in stupid (or "evil" or dangerous, etc ) situations...

It's all about the numbers...odds are, you'll lose.

[This message has been edited by FieroRumor (edited 06-18-2005).]

were not talking about doing stupid or dangerous things

we are talking about morality, doing immoral things

if you do something wrong, and no human knows what you have done

and there is no god, then how do you get whats coming to you?

likewise, if you do something excellent, like giving up your life so that someone else can live,

then (again), if there is no god, then how will you be rewarded for your good deeds?

[This message has been edited by Ken Wittlief (edited 06-18-2005).]

If nobody knows about it, you probably won't. Not everybody who does good things expects rewards. Helping somebody out can be it's own reward.

OTOH, people get away with doing bad things for a long time if they don't get caught. If there is a god, why does he let that happen?

GL

[This message has been edited by Tugboat (edited 06-18-2005).]