Of course. It happens every day. The jury decision is final unless a legal error was made during the trial that requires a appeal to rule on that issue.
Now look what you started The Devil has Infiltrated The Vatican "When one speaks of 'the smoke of Satan' in the holy rooms, it is all true
I know I do this all the time, but here goes. Two very good books (whether you are a believer or not) that spell out one side of the argument. Not dogmatic, very thought provoking. I especially like anything by Karen Armstrong - very good writer. Amazon.com: The Case for God (9780307269188): Karen Armstrong: Books Amazon.com: A Case for the Existence of God (9780742563124): Dean L. Overman: Books
I've struggled with this for a long time. Where I'm at right now is this - 1. Science is a language, not an explanation. It's a way of describing what we see, and trying to explain what we can't see. 2. Religion is a language, not an explanation. It's a way of describing what we can't see but think/feel exists, and trying to explain how it relates to what we can see. 3. Statistically, a higher creative power exists. The alternative is, scientifically speaking, extremely remote. As for ghosts and telepathy and psychics and magic - none of it survives even the slightest hint of real scrutiny. So to believe in these things is an act of faith, and choice. Does it exist? I don't know. Does it matter? I think that's an individual matter and completely open to individual interpretation.
what actually describes this is neuropsychology and anthropology. that is where you will learn about why you believe nonsense. i would like to see the charts and graphs of these "statistics". hard to graph "no evidence" on a chart.
Sadly I think this is quite true. However, I have to point out Judas was one of the apostles, so I think at some level that element was present from the start.
Again - you're falling back on language. Those two soft-scientific fields do no more to describe the unobservable than spirituality (or religion) does. I also find it interesting that athiests almost invariably have to be dismissive and use words like "nonsense" - it's like you're trying to convince yourself that you're right. :lol: You know what's even harder to graph? The probability that life on Earth is the result of chaos. :lol: I guess the word "statistically" may be a stretch, but it's far more likely that a single point of genesis (big bang) has a designer/creator as it's source than not. Occam's razor.
