God is an Outlaw (for Slimland)
#81
10-16-2006, 11:06 AM
Originally Posted by Slimland
I understand the theory that light is life. But, are you saying that a life that outruns the speed of light can no longer exist? Personally, I don't believe that. The "consciousness" existed in darkness, before God said, "let there be light." Sometimes, knowledge is gained in the darkest moments or environs. There is nothing intrinsically enlightening about light! I do my best thinking in the dark! [BTW, a stone thrown in a pond will produce waves EVEN if there is no light by which to see them!] Also, the speed of Light is 186,000 miles per second. What if Angels can travel at 190k mps?? Are you saying that God, who created the Universe, has subjected himself AND his angels to the laws of the universe? Somehow... I doubt it!
Because it says, in Genesis, that God created Light during the first days. In your OWN words of positive and negative, the absense of Light is Darkness. I'm not saying I agree with the "six day" theory, and that God created the Earth in darkness and THEN created light. But, if you believe that God created the WHOLE of the Universe in a Big Bang scenario, then the light of the stars (including the Sun) would have been created at the same time. But, before THAT, the universe was a void in which God existed WITH his angels. There would be NO reason to say, "let there be light" unless before that, there was only darkness. Maybe it was just nothing but God, and then He said let there be light! And being everything has a positive and a negative, so there was darkness also. And God knowing Good and Evil, because He created both. So though I am no scientist, it seems simple enough to me, that every thing is held up by Gods Word, First, if Ying and Yang IS the law of the Universe then there could NOT have been darkness before and without Light. Yet BOTH science AND religion believe that before the Big Bang, there was only darkness. And think of this... if GOD is LIGHT, how could it have been dark before he created Light? Yet the "prophets" and religious leaders of the Old Testament tell us that God CREATED light from the darkness, and caused it to separate the day from the night. Everything MAY be "held up by God's word," but if you believe that for every positive there is a negative, then you might also believe that everything is held up by the laws of science. That God created science and its "laws" and that before God created the universe, there COULD exist a yang (dark) without a ying (light.) ....and to bring this around, back to the main subject. God is Light and in Him is no darkness. Because maybe the darkness represents the Evil, and the evil in its purest form glorifies God. A positive and a negative. Darkness is to go against Gods Word! I agree with this totally. God IS the light (understanding/illumination) for mankind. I don't know that I even disagree with your belief that Evil glorifies God. I only say that if, as YOU believe, God created the universe, he did so from a position outside of, and above, his creation. Therefore, he in NO WAY subjected himself to his OWN creation, OR its laws. 1) EVERY, and I mean EVERY reference within the Bible to God being the "Light" is in the metaphoric sense that mankind "sees" only through the physical miracle of illumination. i.e: Man stumbles in darkness, and finds his pathway ONLY when it is illuminated by light. Therefore, the prophets and apostles ALL use the metaphor of God as LIGHT to show man that he is "blind" and "lost" without the understanding of truth and righteousness offered by the LIGHT of God. 2) Whoever wrote Genesis, and postulated the "six days of creation" followed by the Sabbath day of rest, did so ONLY because at the time of writing, man had discovered/adopted the lunar calendar and decided [for themselves] that time was divided into "weeks" that corresponded to the lunar cycle (and its quarters) and that NO one should have to work everyday of his life, and that one day per week should be spent resting and glorifying God. Perhaps, they got a vision saying that we gotta stop now and then to worship God, but either way.... there was NO CALENDAR when God created the World. 3) The "division" of the Creation into six days was a MAN's interpretation of God's effort. It was useful ONLY for the purpose of influencing the masses towards taking one day off each quarter lunar cycle to worship the benefactor. 4) MOST, if not all, of the stories, fables, prophesies and revelations of the Bible were written by MAN, in the ONLY way he knew how, to GUIDE the populace in the ways of truth, peace and Social harmony. 5) There is LITTLE, if ANY, proof that God exists. And even LESS that more than a few of the events attributed to him ever happened. Regardless, ALL teachings about God are meant to help "socialize" and focus mankind on a better path of existence. 6) There is LITTLE difference between theories of Evolution, Creationism and Intelligent Design. The fact is that we have intelligence, awareness, imagination and a longing for understanding. ALL theories serve ONLY to fulfill these needs. 7) As Bishadi says, EGO rules all our lives. Some cannot control their humanity without giving up control of their lives to a belief in God because they don't trust the righteousness and spirituality of their own Ego. Others, NEVER give up the Ego, and fall into the darkness that comes from letting that Ego be controlled by human impulse. And whether you believe in God or NOT.... THIS is the same universal truth about the substance of Mankind. 8 and 9) reserved for future use. :lol: Hobo
__________________
Remember... friends are few and far between. TRUCKIN' AIN'T FOR WUSSES!!! "I am willing to admit that I was wrong." The Rev.
#82
10-16-2006, 11:12 AM
My daughter is Home. Thank You Jesus!!!
Now since you Hobo seem to think I talk in circles, Your right, but only to prove a point. We discussed earlier that Jesus was born of a woman under the law. This is the Law wich was written on stone to be followed by the purifacation, and cerimonial laws. And all go hand in hand, for God had givven them to Mosses. So I believe that Jesus is God, Because the Word was with God, and became FLESH and DWELT AMONGST MEN! So in my understanding God subjected Himself to His Own Word. Ie Law! As for Ra--- Odin--Marduke--Inki? Astorath, Cahutalu, Anubis, Osiris, Isis, etc, What ever the Mythology, wether it be Summarian, Egyptian, Babylonian, Greek, Norse. All have thier Flood, All have thier God above the above mentioned, that when His Name was spoken all creation became in a sense. Matter of Fact--Marduke was givin a name to destroy Cahutalue, and He was given this by I believe it was Inki and Unko or something like that, and with this he slayed the dragon Tiamate and made the world. The stories of all these go on and on, Even there was one over Ra, and all this was pretty much described in the bible. Paul and Barnabas even witnessed this at I believe Athens, when they had a sign to the UNKNOWN God. Yea it is repeated, and there is a reson, and so far the oldest of the mythology's are Summarian and Egyptian. Does this mean they where right, NO! This is my opinion is just a left over belief of an original, befor the Flood. Think of this--If befor and after the flood, the Fallen ones, took women and therfor had Giants. Who is to say that these superior beings, did not have the superior knowlege than we have. And therfor Knew the story of creation from their fathers, and twisted it into what the flesh of man nows now and knew then. As for the Fallen one's Bashadi, I was talking of Fallen Angel's who rebelled against Gods word. Those are the ones of darkness, and if a man or woman is darkness because of the Sin in there heart. That form of unbelief makes them the sons and daughters of darkness. Even though there spirits are dead, there phisical life still grows. So life is there just not the life unending! Hobo-- As for defaming, I think you 2 just got on the rong foot. Bashadi-- I think this conversation is a good one, but lets not thow names around. If God was to Lie, what would be the outcome???
__________________
You can twist perceptions Reality won't budge You can raise objections I will be the judge And the jury Neil Peart
#83
10-16-2006, 11:30 AM
Hobo Said
Everything MAY be "held up by God's word," but if you believe that for every positive there is a negative, then you might also believe that everything is held up by the laws of science. That God created science and its "laws" and that before God created the universe, there COULD exist a yang (dark) without a ying (light.)[/b]
I agree with this totally. God IS the light (understanding/illumination) for mankind. I don't know that I even disagree with your belief that Evil glorifies God. I only say that if, as YOU believe, God created the universe, he did so from a position outside of, and above, his creation. Therefore, he in NO WAY subjected himself to his OWN creation, OR its laws.
As for the rest as in the time of creation--I also have my own thinking on this one, and I believ that these days could mean anything, but what do I know.
__________________
You can twist perceptions Reality won't budge You can raise objections I will be the judge And the jury Neil Peart
#85
10-16-2006, 03:10 PM
Originally Posted by shyykatt
Hobo....just wondering what you meant by "Christians believe Jesus has risen and is alive"; metaphorically or ??? Just curiouse.
Christians believe that he was the Son of God, that he died on the cross for us, and after 3 days in the tomb, the stone was rolled away and he (his body) was missing. He later appeared to Mary Magdalene and others and confirmed what they were told by the angels at the tomb... that the grave could not hold him. That he had arisen from the grave, and ascended to heaven to be with his father. This is the basis for the Christian belief that "He is Risen." And that he "lives in the newness of Life." And that "He is a living God." This is probably the only thing in the Bible that cannot be questioned as a "metaphor." The Shroud of Turin is supposed to be the burial cloth that was draped over his body when he was entombed, and was supposedly the only thing found IN the tomb 3 days later. Either you believe that the body was stolen from the tomb to propogate a hoax, OR that Jesus rose from the grave and LIVES. It is probably THE singular basis for the belief that Jesus was the Messiah, and not just another prophet. Even the Jews don't believe he was the Messiah. I'm not sure I understand your question exactly. No... it is not said that he lives as a human again, like he did before the crucifixion. Although, he DID appear in human form again several times for the benefit of his closest followers, he was actually a spirit and rose into heaven to be with God. But... his body was missing from the tomb. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear earlier... or even now. But, in case I wasn't clear, or addressed the wrong question.... it is ONLY Christianity that believes this.
__________________
Remember... friends are few and far between. TRUCKIN' AIN'T FOR WUSSES!!! "I am willing to admit that I was wrong." The Rev.
#86
10-16-2006, 06:55 PM
I have such a guilty conscious every time I get upset! All day I pondered on whether I should just stay quiet or is there at least something getting through. Then I read this.
4) MOST, if not all, of the stories, fables, prophesies and revelations of the Bible were written by MAN, in the ONLY way he knew how, to GUIDE the populace in the ways of truth, peace and Social harmony.
5) There is LITTLE, if ANY, proof that God exists. And even LESS that more than a few of the events attributed to him ever happened. Regardless, ALL teachings about God are meant to help "socialize" and focus mankind on a better path of existence. Light is energy propagating and from its origin is associated with mass and neither exists without the other. Darkness is not a state other then of space without energy/mass; vacuum. Ying and yang offer a mental way to see the interaction of these two (mass and energy) metaphorically; when one extreme reaches it peak form it births the seed of its opposite. Check your physics and if your sharp you will ask me a specific question otherwise trust me as the truth will be as stated. No God on a thrown! No Jesus floating to ?sit by the father.? Life is of energy coupling matter. Associations of mass are based on affected energy and resonant attractions. By this coupling additional mass can be captured and offer a higher state of energy for the organized molecules. Organized life is instinctive. Birth or duplication is of shared resources; the parent(s) gives a portion of itself to continue. Adam was born of an eve. Period! From the date of consciousness homo sapiens became aware of being alive/freedom of choice/love; adams apple story. A great day, not one to punish women for! Prophets offered humbly acquired information to associate based on knowledge coupled with caring and compassion towards quality interpretation. They did what all of us should be doing; reading and interpreting with care and compassion and not to further oppressive suggestions. Once a sect or norm begins man incorporated fear tactics; demons, giants, a devil, hell (dante). An instinctive animal does horrible things but it is survival and a part of evolution and each of these traits are within all of us (zodiac). But we have consciousness. So we do have an ability to overcome these ?evil,? self preserving, instinctive, and hard wired, thoughts and deeds. Life is energy; to continue. We have the ability to know this. Anything we do is to support an existence. Whether creating offspring or planting of a tree. This is our existence. What more of God do you want? The rules are written. We have the ability to physically know our existence within the books from the entire world and yet there is something else you want. In a sense each of us is of God alive and able to know and feel and then to be able to create and establish quality foundations we can exist forever all under the same Love the books suggest. There is no single proof any person could ever offer to show that God or the total is separate from us. To know cosmology and the sciences any will tell you that every thing affects everything else. There is no separation from of any mass hence ever from God (the total). The only thing different in the scientific view, maintained is that energy is not defined properly and that the sciences have failed to address specific properties; casimir, entanglement and resonance of electromagnetic radiation upon mass. With these properties directly addressed the proper picture of how life evolved and associates will enable the globes societies to begin a real dialogue on a single conforming set of facts. The primary reason no single sect has emerged as being a single leader in theology is because not one can finish this picture properly. Every society and single human is searching. What is so funny is most of the worlds sects point to this being the framework and it is only of a collective understanding will there ever be that, ?heaven on earth.? What this does is unifies life in a physical form. With this an understanding of what our life is, as well as the responsibility each of us has to each other, can be physically understood. Otherwise what else do you propose and please communicate in real physical terms and not mythical objects or ?seven headed dragons? or dead people rising from the grave to go to some remote place somewhere in space where we don?t have any needs or wants? Be here, in the now, when you answer, OK! From what you know of the books interpret the next chapter of man for us? Yes, I do apologize for being so direct it is a flaw in my character is to be honest allowing my emotions to run so high. I hope you understand we are talking about something I have researched and worked on most of my life.
#88
10-18-2006, 09:22 AM
Well.... as everyone probably knows by now, we had a big server crash at CAD. I don't know if they will be able to recover what was lost or not, but probably not.
I BELIEVE the next post in line was the RED post by Slim, which was an offline response by Job. Slim probably could reproduce it, but it shouldn't actually be necessary. I think I've got my response post to it, and all you have to do is read between my BOLD responses to get the total (minus one small line) of Job's post. I just wish I'd saved a copy of my followup post AFTER that one, where I nailed this down perfectly for the ages! :lol: :lol: :lol: Seriously, I may try to recreate that one later, after I'm sure it won't get lost again, but for now.... The next post should catch us up to where we were. Hobo
__________________
Remember... friends are few and far between. TRUCKIN' AIN'T FOR WUSSES!!! "I am willing to admit that I was wrong." The Rev.
#89
10-18-2006, 09:42 AM
Originally Posted by Slimland
I had stated befor that I had another comming to
join this discussion! As he has not showed up yet, but he did respond PM on another site, concerning this discussion. I asked his permission to post this and he said I could, so here it is, and I am CHAOS. Welcome, Job! Hope you will decide to join us in person soon! This is one of the best arguments I have recieved so far on this! And Hobo you did not offend me, I forgot the laughing sign! :lol: From: Job To: CHAOS Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 9:44 am Subject: God is not an outlaw Quote message Chaos, I have now read through the whole ?God is an Outlaw? thread. First of all, when Golfhobo insists on you answering ?on a philosophical level instead of an evangelical one?, he is insisting on the impossible for a believer. As long as we only discuss our own opinions of God as we might imagine Him apart from His own revelation about Himself (scripture) we are simply creating gods in our own image. *The only consitently rational way for a believer to discuss God is by discussing what scripture says about Him. Fortunately, even though he said he wanted philosophical rather than evangelical discussion, Golfhobo has carried on the discussion based on scripture. *Careful now... you don't want to start making illogical conclusions this early in the debate. :lol: Perhaps I didn't use the right words, but I think I did. Let me explain: Evangelical is like "preachifying." :wink: I didn't want Slim to answer all my arguments or questions by quoting a scripture or saying something like, "I know this to be true 'cuz God tells me it is!" I wanted him to approach it from a philosophical viewpoint, i.e. someone who has "studied" the scriptures and can discuss what they mean. Obviously, it is impossible to get to the root of his understanding and basis of his arguement, without telling me (and sometimes quoting) which scriptures he bases his beliefs on. I, in turn, had to quote some also, to show MY interpretation of them, or to debate his. If we were to discuss God in the philosophical sense, I would disagree with your assertion that He could not be God if He violated His own law. I suspect you'll want to retract this, as it is based on a faulty assumption of my meaning. The God of scripture is a holy (sinless) God. If sin is defined as the violation of God?s law, then God would be a sinner and not holy if He broke His own law. So, the God of scripture could not be the God of scripture if He broke His own law. I'll assume that THIS is your stance. However, in the philosophical sense, we could imagine a god who is not holy but is still that god we imagine. Let?s call him Zeus. Let?s say he created the earth, but is a mean and nasty lowdown scoundrel. He is the god someone believes in. He is not the holy God of scripture, but is their god none the less. Thus, philosophically, a god who breaks his own laws could continue to exist as god in their minds. This is the non-responsive part. I think we can disregard this as it is NOT what I meant in any way. Nowhere on this thread have we talked about any BUT the God of the Jews and Gentiles. I'm not being snooty or mean or anything. Just clarifying and editing. In the evangelical sense, though, the perfectly holy God revealed as the true God in scripture could not be Himself (holy) if He broke His own law. The true God of scripture you believe in could not exist if He broke His law. Is God subject to His own law? As we have seen above, the answer is yes. To maintain His holiness He must refrain from sin which is violation of His law. So... God gave Mosaic Law to the Jews, and in it he tells them, "THOU shalt not kill." So... being subject to his own law, the day he wiped out Sodom and Gomorrah, or his entire creation save Noah and his family, he CEASED TO BE, or DIED, because he himself had KILLED thereby breaking his own law? Now the plot thickens as regarding Christ being born under the law. You are correct that this refers to the laws of God, not the laws of men (Caesar). From this point the discussion could go off on numerous tangents. Yes, we clarified this early on, and yes... it DID go off on tangents from there! :lol: Golfhobo goes off on the Trinity. He appears to view God and Christ as separate from one another. As regarding their roles within the Trinity they are. But, that should not be taken as to deny Jesus is God. I don?t know if that is what Golfhobo believes, because he says ?Jesus might have ?? but I can?t see God doing such?. This implies Jesus is not God, but Golfhobo may have meant to say he can?t see the Father doing such. I didn't mean to imply that Jesus is not God. You are right, I should have said the Father. My point was that at the time Jesus walked on the Earth, he was a separate "form" of the trinity. He even said himself, "Not ME, but my father in heaven." And cried out from the cross, "Father if it be thy will, let this burden pass from me, nevertheless not MY will but THINE be done." (paraphrased.) This was all by way of explaining that JESUS was born "under the law" because he was born ON EARTH, and walked among men. So JESUS might have to follow the laws the Jews followed, and in fact, was questioned in an attempt to trap him concerning paying tribute to Caesar as opposed to God. I'm sure you know the story. Further I stated that the fact that Jesus was subject to Jewish Law while on Earth, in NO way proves that GOD in heaven had to subject himself to ANY laws that he might have made for man... and we were originally including the idea that he wouldn't HAVE to be subjected to the laws of the universe that he created, either. Further confusion is added by his post at 10:00 a.m. on Sunday that ?this scripture is not about God being subject to his own laws. If Jesus is God, then it indeed says God was made subject to His own laws as you have stated. If Jesus is not God, then this verse does not say God was subject to any law. Okay... now I'm confused! :lol: Actually, I believe this is addressed immediately above. Remember, I'm NOT saying Jesus wasn't God incarnate, but remember ALSO that one or both of you guys stated that Jesus was born of a woman and therefore had BOTH spirit AND human natures. The human form of Jesus may have been subjected to Jewish laws, but the SPIRIT part of him was able to defy the LAWS OF THE UNIVERSE by raising the dead, turning water into wine, making blind men see, and other miracles. I stand by my statement that God the creator of the universe, is NOT subject to any Physical laws of the universe, NOR must he subject himself to the laws he gave to MAN, nor can you rely on anything OTHER than man's interpretation of God as a basis for the belief that he would have to DIE, or cease to be, if he in some way violated or contradicted his own law. Chapchap70 is on the right track when he says God?s justice can only be upheld if the penalty for sin is met. It is only because Christ perfectly obeyed the law that He is able to redeem other men. Your Galatians passage says that is why God sent His Son born of a woman under the law: to redeem those under the law. Christ is the only one able to perfectly obey the law. He is therefore the only ?Lamb without blemish? who can be offered up as a sacrifice for our sins (Heb.7:27). This is why I can't quite buy the statement that Jesus "died to the Law." I think I understand Slim's (chaos's) meaning. I just don't think the phrase fits the meaning. To ME, it sounds like Jesus died under penalty of the law, for having sinned, or as a result of the sins he bore for us. My point is that, like the unblemished sacrificial lamb, he was given to us by GOD as a substitute, to be sacrificed FOR OUR sins. So... he may have lived on Earth under the law, but he died blameless and innocent in our stead. Chaos even says that Christ ENDED the old law when he CAME. So, I don't see how his death in any way represents God subjecting himself (in any form) to his own law. He was a GIFT. Believers hate it when others say that everything in the Bible is really just a metaphor, yet you want to make their case that Jesus' death was a metaphor for the sacrifice under the OLD covenant. I say the important thing about the crucifixion of Christ is NOT the fact that he was sacrificed for our sins, but rather that God wanted to show man that his power was boundless, and that the grave could not hold him. And through faith in Him, it cannot hold us either. As an aside, note also the end of your Galatians passage says this is how we receive adoption as sons. Adoption is talked about in several of Paul?s epistles. The essential thing to learn is not all humans are children of God. Only believers are and they through adoption, not naturally. Jesus gave power to all those who believe to become sons of God. They are not sons until they receive power to become sons (become adopted) through faith. Chapchap70, at 8:33 p.m., says God wanted reconciliation (for whatever reason), but was not required to in order to continue to exist. God existed before creating man and is capable of existing without man in the future. True enough. However, I would suggest the ?whatever reason? is God?s love. If it is God?s love that prompted Him to create man and redeem man, could He exist as that God of love revealed in Scripture without having done that? I would say no. However, we are back to my earlier paragraph. Just as the holy God of scripture would not exist if He sinned by breaking His own holy law, the loving God of scripture would not exist if He did not demonstrate His love in action. An unloving God created in someone?s perverted mind could continue to exist in that perverted mind without redeeming anyone. I am not sure I can agree or disagree with your statement that Jesus was born of a virgin (female) because it is the man (male) who ?carries the seed of sin?, if that is what you intended. This gets very close to the Roman Catholic teaching of Mary being sinless (which is false). Being born of Mary, Christ is the offspring (seed) of both Adam and Eve (male and female). There is no justification for saying only men carry the seed of sin and women are sinless. Men and women are all sinners and carry the seed of sin. They both have the fallen nature. Rather than using the virgin to distinguish between male and female carrying the seed of sin, I think you should view Mary as contributing the human (regardless of sex) nature and God (she conceived by power of the Spirit) as contributing the divine nature. Jesus possessed both natures. If Jesus had both a human father and a human mother, He would only have the human nature. Because God was the Father and a human the mother, Jesus had both natures. Mary represents humanity in general, not just females. You may also need to do a little more work before declaring ?Jesus, being God, is subject to Himself?. What then did He mean when He prayed for the Father?s will rather than His own to be done? Was He subject only to Himself, or to the Father? I think in the divine nature His will was always perfectly in tune with the Father?s. In the human nature, though, He had to conform His will to the Father?s (which, of course, He did perfectly). You might also do some more work on the statement ?God is required to uphold the law because He is the law?. Some folks would say He is grace. Others might say He is a God of grace who laid down the law. Is He law? Is He grace? Maybe God is love. Perhaps a God of love who dispenses both law and grace? Hmmm. That should give you enough to think about for one evening. Job Excellent job--Job!  I concur!
__________________
Remember... friends are few and far between. TRUCKIN' AIN'T FOR WUSSES!!! "I am willing to admit that I was wrong." The Rev.
#90
10-18-2006, 11:38 AM
First off that sucks about the crash, I had responded to someone who asked about my daughter!
So... God gave Mosaic Law to the Jews, and in it he tells them,
"THOU shalt not kill." So... being subject to his own law, the day he wiped out Sodom and Gomorrah, or his entire creation save Noah and his family, he CEASED TO BE, or DIED, because he himself had KILLED thereby breaking his own law? I understand you GolfHobo, but I must admit, I do not agree with you on this subject--but you have brought the debate, and very well. But here is my position again. Jesus is God, and Jesus subjected Himself to the Law of the Old Testament and fullfilled it Flawlessly. Therfor as you have stated Hobo--He who knew no sin--became sin for us, and died in our place. etc. As for it being His Father's will-- It was also Christ will, for they are one. But you must understand, He was in the flesh as we are, and experienced the things we did and do, and ALL sin was put on Him! Think of this-- The Law states there is No remmission for sin without the shedding of blood, either the sinners or the sacrifice. And God took those sin's and bore them for us, therfor became sin, and died. That is subject to HIS LAW. He who knew no sin, became sin. And after the death which was the fulfillment, "IT is Finished" He arose the 3rd day to Give us new life in Him, for those who believe. And then gave the new Covenant of Grace. "There sins and Lawless act's I will remember no more" "now there is no more sacrifice for sin" for Jesus did this ONCE FOR ALL! Now the question is no more touch not tast not, but do you believe in the Only begotted Son of God! Hobo--Do you understand what I am saying?
I stand by my statement that God the creator of the universe, is
NOT subject to any Physical laws of the universe, NOR must he subject himself to the laws he gave to MAN, nor can you rely on anything OTHER than man's interpretation of God as a basis for the belief that he would have to DIE, or cease to be, if he in some way violated or contradicted his own law. This is a little diffrent IMOP-- Physical Laws of the Univers we do not know, We think we know but we no nothing. The Law giver Knows where and what Mathmatical equations it takes to make or break the black whole--according to our understanding of what we know of the Laws, this may not be possible. What we see as impossible and when it happens we say it is a miricale, but to God it is just a thought gone into action. The Laws of the Universe God may or maynot go by. I do not know--but who's to say He don't. Maybe He has set the boundry's for man to only know soo much. And we in our puny minds, say the laws are such, when in all actualality, they might be boundless. For even Darwin said "If there is a God, He must be boundless and unlimited, a circle whose circumfrense is everywhere and who's center is no-where. He must be duality, and consist of the manafest and the Non-Manafest. This is God" So if I where to go by this--I would have to say that --that just explained God to a tee and agreed with scripture!
__________________
You can twist perceptions Reality won't budge You can raise objections I will be the judge And the jury Neil Peart |
