((Yes but others are complaining even as we speak.... something about my packaging. And I thought my packaging was fine and doing good and in working order.)))
This is because your posting style is somewhat hard to make sense of. It would be much easier to just quote sections and reply to those sections directly under the quote, just like I am doing. And they are right, up to a point, packaging of your message does matter. But I can overlook this if you are willing to actually debate with me. I am more of a "substance over style" kind of guy.
(((Nah. Life itself might scare us into change but words seldom scare many)))
So very true. I admit that life can be down right scary at times.
A not very well know fact is that I admire people who try to help others. Even if I feel their reasons for helping are misguided, if they honestly believe in what they are doing, then good on them, I say.
((I was forced to study it, and know it's supposed logic backwards and forwards and reject it from a scientific viewpoint))
Evolution is my field of study (well, evolutionary genetics). I am going to make another thread after I've finished replying here, over on the Science board, where I would like to address your scientific rejections of evolution. I promise to keep it about the science only, and not go into "god doesn't exist" or other stuff like that, as long as you do the same.
(((As mentioned it is not my distance but the well established and absolute mathematical principle and ratio of phi, Leonardo, the mystery schools, and the other great thinkers accepted and used long before us mere newbies camealong.))
The problem, David, is that they were wrong. Completely, utterly, wrong. The moon
is not in any way 216,000 miles from the earth. It just isn't. The values the ancients gave were wrong. Just wrong. You can even test it for yourself. Ask Terry, he knows about radio wave bouncing.
((Comon sense is sometimes uncommon because word games make it so. A building has a builder and a designer even if they are also the builder))
Yes, that was the general agreement, because, and this is important David, a building
means something which was designed and built. We call something a building if we already know it was designed and built by humans. What was being discussed on that thread was how do we tell if anything else was designed. A consensus was not reached, IIRC.
((To experiment and try is the evidence you desire. Evidence has to be experienced and is not merely a mind theoritical game. To know the Lord you have to experience the Lord, then you KNOW. Others can't know for you. ))
Unfortunately, I only believe things which are based on scientific knowledge. I am looking for scientific evidence for God. If I find it, I will believe in God. But so far, I never have. If you have any, I would love to hear it. But the problem is, "experience God and then know" is not a scientific principle. Where are the controls? Where is the double-blind study?
((The builder is harmonic to the building.... the visable world came from the invisable world.... not the other way around. The EMF is 69/70ths invisable.... Science knows this even though they haven't seen it. But if you get too far into the nature of God, you would be God Himself. He is the Creator that created, before Him was nothing. But you won;t figure that out, but yet it is easy to figure out that the worlds were created and have DESIGN))
To clarify, are you saying here that God made the universe, and existed before it?
Also, I disagree. To me, the world has
order, but not
design. Order can look a lot like design, but design requires a designer. I do not see any evidence for design in the universe. Scientific evidence could sway me from this opinion, however.
((God created nature... SEE the scientific order of genesis, even though all the details are not written))
Again to clarify, your contention is that God created the entire universe, and existed before the universe, correct?
