<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Where did all this stuff come from?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://wordslessspoken.com/2008/05/08/where-did-all-this-stuff-come-from/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://wordslessspoken.com/2008/05/08/where-did-all-this-stuff-come-from/</link>
	<description>Musings on all things sacred and absurd</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 04:38:42 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=MU</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: John T.</title>
		<link>http://wordslessspoken.com/2008/05/08/where-did-all-this-stuff-come-from/#comment-1518</link>
		<dc:creator>John T.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:02:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lyndonmarcotte.wordpress.com/?p=264#comment-1518</guid>
		<description>I heard a funny one once....

"There was a time when Religion thought it would explain all the world, then came Science, they both come up short."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I heard a funny one once&#8230;.</p>
<p>&#8220;There was a time when Religion thought it would explain all the world, then came Science, they both come up short.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: barryweber</title>
		<link>http://wordslessspoken.com/2008/05/08/where-did-all-this-stuff-come-from/#comment-1510</link>
		<dc:creator>barryweber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 01:39:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lyndonmarcotte.wordpress.com/?p=264#comment-1510</guid>
		<description>My standard for determining whether something is true or not, is whether it leads to more questions, or not. Truth ALWAYS leads to more questions, more new areas of investigation. False answers, like the creationists seem to have oodles of, always lead to a boxed-in corner where there is no need for further investigation. And it is all mainly lip service anyway..it is inconsistent to be literal about the Genesis account of Creation, and not also be literal about the medical procedures found in the NT. 

Got an eye infection? Here, let me spit on this dirt.

Have wounds? Let me pour oil on them and take you to an innkeeper.

It's selective literalism, a retreat for those who don't want God to be too big, or too beyond their imaginative control..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My standard for determining whether something is true or not, is whether it leads to more questions, or not. Truth ALWAYS leads to more questions, more new areas of investigation. False answers, like the creationists seem to have oodles of, always lead to a boxed-in corner where there is no need for further investigation. And it is all mainly lip service anyway..it is inconsistent to be literal about the Genesis account of Creation, and not also be literal about the medical procedures found in the NT. </p>
<p>Got an eye infection? Here, let me spit on this dirt.</p>
<p>Have wounds? Let me pour oil on them and take you to an innkeeper.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s selective literalism, a retreat for those who don&#8217;t want God to be too big, or too beyond their imaginative control..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
