I believe in God.

However, I am aware that it is mathematically (scientifically, et. al.) impossible to prove the existence of God. I am also aware that it is equally impossible to prove the non-existence of God.

It comes down to faith. But it also comes down to desire. I want to believe in God, therefore I view the common evidence* and see in it road-markers pointing to God.

I write this because I was looking up songs by Christian singer Randy Stonehill on YouTube. In the list of songs for Uncle Rand (the greatest of all contemporary artists), was a video that claimed it could prove that Jesus was a myth in under five minutes. It did clock in at under five minutes, but that was it’s only truth claim. Largely, it was just a poorly constructed straw man.

I happened to glance at the comments posted below the video and they were an embarrassment to the faithful and the atheists. Poorly worded and even more poorly spelled vitriol spilled from both sides, leading an unbiased outsider to come to the obvious conclusion that both theists and atheists are idiots.

I don’t understand this aspect of human nature, which has always been with us but has become more prominent in the realm of the internet. Denver, Colorado, for years has had this “Free-thinkers Festival” (I can’t remember the actual name) which they have trumpeted with pride wherein total strangers gathered in the city park and argued with each other. Like God? There will be someone there to argue that God should be hated. Like the Broncos? There will be a Raiders fan available. Want to argue whether the correct word should be “jeopardize” or “jeopard”? (MS Word doesn’t even acknowledge that “jeopard” is a word but go to one of those great big dictionaries like they have at the library and you’ll find that, grammatically, it’s usually the correct word where we use “jeopardize”.) OK, so you might find it hard to locate someone to argue that one.

The upshot was that you had a whole park full of people making a-holes of themselves (I really tried to think of a better word, but the standards like “idiot” and “moron” just didn’t quite cut it). There was very little logic and even fewer facts being bandied about. Just a lot of shouting and not a little name-calling.

This is what the Internet is like now. I like going to a place called “Internet Movie Database” and looking up actors and actresses. Mainly, because I’ll see someone on a show and wonder where I’ve seen them before. So I go to imdb.com and learn that they used to be on some other show I watched or that they used to be on commercials for something. And then, I will sometimes go to a section at the bottom of the actor’s page where “fans” can discuss the actors and actresses. About half the comments will be just fine. “I liked her on ‘NCIS’” or “I thought his work in this recent movie wasn’t up to par.” But then, the other half of the comments are along the lines of, “She’s as ugly as [expletive deleted]” or “Any [expletive] who like [sic] this [expletive] actor needs to have their [expletive] burned off, [expletive]!”

The same with political sites. Some cogent and reasoned arguments about why the writer likes or dislikes a certain candidate or policy, interspersed with sheer idiocy laced with misspelled profanities and generally cast aspersions.

I don’t understand what motivates these people. Not really. I know some of it is that they are pathetic little quislings who type with one hand and hide behind their keyboards because they are afraid to say these things in public but typing them somehow makes them feel tough. But do they actually think they are influencing someone? Are they motivated by anything other than to think they are somehow stirring up trouble? You can tell just by reading them that they would be too cowardly to show up at that festival in Denver because they a] know they are idiots and b] could never get past the idea that someone would take a poke at them. Having never been in a fight that took place outside a “Warcraft” environment, they are understandably reluctant to test their metal against a real opponent—whether he be armed with his fists or just facts.

Now, how did we get here from my opening statement? We meandered, that’s how! Weren’t you paying attention?

* Evolutionists, creationists, young-earthers, old-earthers, etc.: we all have the same evidence. It’s just a matter of how we view that evidence and the interpretation of it that differs. If I am a Patriot’s fan, I view last year’s Super Bowl as a disaster. If I am anyone else in the world, I view it as a great game. But we’re all still talking about the same game.

Comments? Email me at martha917@yahoo.com