You know, its amazing. Even with the truth with, such great members as Oliver, Dan, runner, OUG, and all the great thinkers of this time, I must say that your thoughts is genuine to the time frame of what we call, today's world.

Sorry. But science will set the stage ( for the future ), and religion will be with us always as its evolved with-in all of us, and that, My friends, is the living.

All the best.

TTM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xUlpLe9KVc&feature=related

LETS HOPE THIS SONG NEVER COMES TRUE.

People! There is only one planet!

I hope your insured.

smile.

TTm>

Hello Oliver,

I must be getting old. I just found out that I had prepared the following reply but forgot to post it. So, belatedly, here it is, whatever it‘s worth:

Of course, I accept the historical facts you listed (except for those, if any, that are disputed by the majority of professional historians, which I as a non-specialist cannot judge). So in this sense I accept history, and do not think this is something unusual. In the same sense I accept findings in other branches of intellectual inquiry, where my own insights are those of an outsider, non-specialist.

The dictionary definition of Christianity is obvious; as for Christendom you have e.g. in Wikipedia: “In a historical or geopolitical sense the term usually refers collectively to Christian majority countries or countries in which Christianity dominates or was a territorial phenomenon.”

Thanks for calling my attention to its historical roots. At a time when my English was even worse than now, I came accross “The End of Christendom” (Wm. B. Eerdmannss, 1980) by Malcolm Muggeridge (probably not one of your favourite authors), and was surprised that he, of all people, would announce the downfall of Christianity, until I learned about the difference between the two terms. Other languages I know of do not have a separate word for Christendom.

George

You are one of if not the most enlightened of the Christian posters to this forum.

I believe that one can experience the numinous without subscribing to doctrine - this is not only a a 'get out of jail free' card - non-alignment with any particular doctrine frees one from having to justify any of it - the good, which we well know has been documented by people far before the time of Christ (if he ever existed) and the bad - which results in a bloodthirsty pissing contest at worst and an assumed superiority at the mildest end of the contest between religions.

The treatment of people, particularly women and children has been reprehensible by all religions. Even those that claim to treat women as goddesses - places women in metaphorical chains.

Therefore, my outburst - that I no more respect the moderates than I do the extremists such as UOG - whose interminable rants surely alienate people exponentially to each post he makes.

As has been said by many before me; formal religion by its nature cannot grow, adapt, evolve simply because it is finite.

Whereas a belief in discovery and learning results in evolution of the body and the mind.

All I claim to know is that I don't know everything - and that is a wondrous state of mind.

dont ya/just-love
dead saturdays

anyhow im taking my time..re-reading..this one
http://www.divinetruth.info/Downloads/CD/NaturalLove/Word/Jane%20Sherwood%20-%20Post%20Mortem%20Journal.doc

it has some great thoughts contained within it
its about lawrence[of arabia..begins with..him..dying]

<<..a shattering blow..then darkness..rent with interludes..of throbing agony..and finally/mercifully..cessation..of pain...nothingness>>

<<then out of the void..came first a mere/point..of self-awarness>>

i love how the imagry...rings true

from..this mere/point-of..self-awarness..<<spreading gradually..into an...indefionate/impression..of being...a sensation...of neither darkness...nor light...an uneasy grayness..filled with growing aprehention>>

one can just see...mrs..sherwood...grasping the imagry..
conveyed by lawrence..
that results in her writing...[recording..into writing]..his story/lesson/teaching..of his life/beyond..his-'death'

we each will have one
each-as..[unique..to our personality/ego]

i love yet other turns-of phrase
such as

for its only...when we close..our eyes..to the mystry
that surrounds/us...that our lifes problems..can be ignored

and what of

let...an hour of solitude
a mood of introspection...seize-us
and we find ourselves,,,out on the desolate-shore
keats/knew...when he wrote

"then on the shore...of nothingness..i stand..and think
[till..life and judgments..into nothingness..do..shrink]

anyhow,...sir lawrence[part-two]
would make a great/movie

as would titanic..the sequel
where did our loved/ones go

but if you never try to know
you will never know

we reap..as we sow
its time for you all to know
or not..but remember..it was your choice..to remain ignorant

your choice to believe the delusions..
of professors..professing their guessing

selling us on their THEORIES
that drew you from the light..into the dark

you have freewill
you can think..why even ol/rust-buchette..can prove his theory
cant oput his proof..before you here..nor now
cause he is caught up in the delusions

thinks..dead means dead
thinks..micro-evolution...validates macro-evolution
a nice godless solution...but gross mind polution
for which they must account...in time

read wanderer..in the spirit-lands..page 85..or page 17
or present proof..of the macro-evolution..ever happening
but you cant..because that never happend,,not even once

other good-reads
are to be found..here

[i can find the blue/island one
which was about..the 'dead'..
what didnt..'die'..on the titanic]

also a great read

http://www.divinetruth.info/Downloads/CD/NaturalLove/PDFs/Dr%20Carl%20Wickland%20-%2030%20Years%20Among%20The%20Dead.pdf

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=keiser+report+rt&aq=f

http://www.divinetruth.info/Downloads/CD/NaturalLove/PDFs/Franchezzo%20-%20A%20Wanderer%20In%20The%20Spirit%20Lands.pdf

http://www.divinetruth.info/Downloads/CD/NaturalLove/PDFs/Anthony%20Borgia%20-%20Life%20In%20The%20World%20Unseen.pdf

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/ee

http://www.divinetruth.info/naturallovepathdocuments.htm

Rusty,
Your criticisms (sifted through some colourful oratory) are unfair. I make my judgments and share them in 350 words or less. I don’t ignore information. I only assess it differently to you. You seem to take offense that someone may think differently to you.

You accuse me of being ignorant. I have certain levels of education in various fields, different to yours, yet everyone becomes a lay person outside of their field of expertise. So you could get the same accusation. You mention the fields of biology, genetics, geology, and palaeontology. Are you an expert in all of these? This debate is bigger than you and I. There are creationists (though I’ve often acknowledged that theirs is a minority view) in all fields and at all levels of expertise.

You accuse me of being dishonest in quoting Sagan. This criticism is void. I’ve quoted Sagan accurately. I’ve given the context of the quote when asked. I’ve stated the reason for why I chose that quote. Further, it isn’t showing disdain towards an author to quote them. It is actually quite the opposite. So if you have any genuine complaint, then say what it is.

Yes, historical events are routinely examined in court. And lawyers passionately debate the viewpoint of BOTH sides. Then juries deliberate and come to conclusions based on a standard of ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ or ‘balance of probabilities’. The whole thing runs a little different to the scientific process.

Falsifiability? This is a red herring. Some ideas are not falsifiable. How would you falsify the claim that a reptile once changed into a bird?

Heritable variability (within its limits) is falsifiable. So, how does that show that bacteria became bananas, brachiosaurs, bears, and biologists?

Often, an evolutionary claim falsified leads to a creationist idea.

In Darwin’s day, creationists and evolutionists made predictions about what would be the fuller representation of the fossil record; smooth descent showing gradual change by modification, or sudden appearance of complete forms. Which view was able to be falsified? Which view was falsified?