Re: Re: Iodine Book that I just saw

[Guest guest]

Hi,

Although I am a believer in the Creator, I recognize the rationality of your

words, and

have come to that state myself. What was there before the big bang to bang

from?

I do think we will find out the answers one day, and IMHO it has to do with

love. We

have to stop killing and start loving. We have to really care about each

other, we have

to DO NO HARM, and I don't only mean the doctors.

I know technology has been increased because of wars, but I think the really

important

discoveries and inventions have been accomplished out of a desire to do good.

Roni

<res075oh@...> wrote:

Every answer to that question fails if you base it upon causality and

logic. Including " God made us... " [if you say " God made us " then the

question becomes, " Who or what made God? " .]

You cannot get from an accausal, none logical existence to a casual,

logical existence by causal means IMHO. The movement from the former

" condition " to the latter requires one or more accausal steps.

Therefore [in that light, and accepting it] the question becomes

nonsensical.

So the answer is, " I don't know " . I know there are a number of

propositions, but I know of none consistent throughout.

>

> Re: Iodine Book that I just saw

>

<hypothyroidism/message/34032;_ylc=X3oDMTJxOHAyMDV\

nBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzQwMzIEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5OTA3NzIzMw-->

>

>

>

> Posted by: " Crystal " sweetnwright@...

>

<mailto:sweetnwright@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Iodine%20Book%20that%20I%20just%\

20saw>

> sweetenloe1 <sweetenloe1>

>

>

> Sun Dec 30, 2007 5:21 pm (PST)

>

> So , Just how do you think we got here?

> cw

>

> -- Re: Iodine Book that I just saw

>

> Certainly; among the creationists! [ggg].

>

> Seriously, though; if you want to believe humans have only been around

> for 6000 years you will just have to reject ALL of the evidence; not

> just carbon dating. There's at least as much evidence to refute that

> position as there is to refute the flat earth society.

>

>

>

> >

> > Re: Iodine Book that I just saw

> > <hypothyroidism/message/33984

> <hypothyroidism/message/33984>

> _ylc=X3oDMTJxaGpuMGM5BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEw

> DIEbXNnSWQDMzM5ODQEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5OTA1NjU2OQ-->

> >

> >

> >

> > Posted by: " Crystal " sweetnwright@...

> <mailto:sweetnwright%40cox.net>

> > <mailto:sweetnwright@cox

> net?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Iodine%20Book%20that%20I%20just%20saw>

> > sweetenloe1 <sweetenloe1

> <sweetenloe1>>

> >

> >

> > Sun Dec 30, 2007 12:44 pm (PST)

> >

> > Isn't there a theory that carbon dating is inaccurate?

> > cw

---------------------------------

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Search.

[Guest guest]

I'm sure you believe that G-d is not nothing, so if he is something, the

questions of who

or what created him is valid.

Roni

Crystal <sweetnwright@...> wrote:

God by definition is the uncreated creator of the universe, so the

question

Who created God? Is illogical, just like To whom is the bachelor married?

-- Re: Iodine Book that I just saw

>

> Certainly; among the creationists! [ggg].

>

> Seriously, though; if you want to believe humans have only been around

> for 6000 years you will just have to reject ALL of the evidence; not

> just carbon dating. There's at least as much evidence to refute that

> position as there is to refute the flat earth society.

>

>

>

> >

> > Re: Iodine Book that I just saw

> > <hypothyroidism/message/33984

> <hypothyroidism/message/33984>

>

_ylc=X3oDMTJxaGpuMGM5BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEw

> DIEbXNnSWQDMzM5ODQEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5OTA1NjU2OQ-->

> >

> >

> >

> > Posted by: " Crystal " sweetnwright@...

> <mailto:sweetnwright%40cox.net>

> > <mailto:sweetnwright@cox

> net?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Iodine%20Book%20that%20I%20just%20saw>

> > sweetenloe1 <sweetenloe1

> <sweetenloe1>>

> >

> >

> > Sun Dec 30, 2007 12:44 pm (PST)

> >

> > Isn't there a theory that carbon dating is inaccurate?

> > cw

[Guest guest]

In another post, , I have said pretty much the same thing. The strength of

your

faith, and the pureness of its spiritual message should not have to depend on

your

total acceptance of the dogma. If a faith is real and true, it doesn't matter

if it is questioned.

It withstands questioning without being shaken.

Roni

<res075oh@...> wrote:

And there you see one of the many differences between science and

dogma. When science looks for the " origin of everything " it seeks to do

the same that it will do with any other search: eliminate as many

assumptions as possible. The assumption that there is a god is, of

course, not a given in itself. But if one starts with the assumption

that there is or may be a god there is no automatic evidence that that

god was not in turn created.

Since science does not accept our existence [the entire universe] as

" proof " that god exists then science generally does not address the

issue; as there is no other available evidence. At the same time

scientists, who, after all are human may or may not have a personal

belief in god or the spiritual realm. But you will find only a tiny

percentage of even those who are spiritual persons who believe life has

existed for only about 6000 years. While NO THEORY IS EVER PROVED in

science the evidence for life back millions of years is utterly

overwhelming.

I'll repeat again: If your faith is so weak that it depends solely upon

a " life on earth " time span of only 6000 years then your faith rests

upon a straw in a hurricane. None of the lies and spin of the

creationists will ever even make it to the published peer review

literature; and if it did then whoever published it would have just

committed professional suicide, forever branded as a nut case.

I'll repeat something else again: I suggest you let god create the

universe however he/she/it chooses; whether Big Bang or whatever. It

does not have to destroy your faith should you ever find out that some

tenant of your dogma is wrong. After all, the most devout believers of

dogma are those willing to blow themselves to bits [and murder countless

innocents] in support of that belief. Are you that devout? I hope not...

> Crystal <sweetnwright@... <mailto:sweetnwright%40cox.net>>

> wrote:

> God by definition is the uncreated creator of the universe, so the

> question

> Who created God? Is illogical, just like To whom is the bachelor married?

>

> -- Re: Iodine Book that I just saw

>

> Every answer to that question fails if you base it upon causality and

> logic. Including " God made us... " [if you say " God made us " then the

> question becomes, " Who or what made God? " .]

>

> You cannot get from an accausal, none logical existence to a casual,

> logical existence by causal means IMHO. The movement from the former

> " condition " to the latter requires one or more accausal steps.

> Therefore [in that light, and accepting it] the question becomes

> nonsensical.

>

> So the answer is, " I don't know " . I know there are a number of

> propositions, but I know of none consistent throughout.

>

>

---------------------------------

Never miss a thing. Make your homepage.