TtM/quote..<<..what/if..somewhere in our past,..we have something other than god..assisting/us>>..then the question would come...WHAT ASSISTED THEM?..

<<which would fill-in/some of the gaps..where natural life and religion..fails to fill.>>>..but has absolutly..no evidence/thus theory/delusion

indeed the gaps..have been filled
[often..'knowing'...the specific answer...isnt as important...as knowing there is..an answer..[thus the faith..in dorkins..etc/but note..you buy his book...and still get no answer...lol

i was raised/under science...but in time realised it a great deciete//*promising answers..but in reality..only giving enough confusion...so as to form/belief/trust/faith..someone has-it

often..its the same organised decievers..that run religion and science[its them/con-founded peers...that make sure..anything..that threatens their exclusive/franchise...gets ridiculed or put down...asp..surely/you have known/noticed..this?

<<In our human history/..all recorded available data,..there seems to be incredible leaps/bounds >>>yes but look at what changes...those thinking/themselves to rule..by royal fiat/decree..yet rule/lord it over the worker-drones...even/now..who do all the ACTUAL work..and those who own it/all

..<<flora and fauna/but also with our own recorded history>>sure...but think about it...the flora/fauna...as well as the record...has latin buzzwords..descriptive..not persriptive

[even the docter...will NAME..the SYMPTON..in latin...appearing clever...but in reality/only giving you..the naming..of..the symptom]...

think why medicine...ONLY needs to beat...placebo/affect..[ie doing nothing]..for it to be given to all..[at great expence]..read/abour adverse-reaction/death rate

search out..the doses..needed to cure/rate[DNR/number]to reveal the fraud..or note...we been treating cancer...the same way...for over 60 years...and the..cure/still hasnt come...

but know...3 out of 4..can NEVER get cancer..[because the KNOWN cures of it..are cheap/simple...[ie high ph kills cancer/certain light-wave lengths do too...]

but peers..REFUSE to fund...those...cause it will kill..the hold/of fear..they call power/over us...holds over their sheeple/shattle/slaves...to quote..[kgv;'lunatics-imbisiles']...

but..as the links reveal...their power/over us..comes at huge spiritual cost....to them

<<displayed achievements/in technology..that does not fit/with the time line..of their own progress.>>>

all you need do is synch your mind...to those who know..[read the post/mortum-link]


re/god...see that/body...you call you...is made -up..of trillions..of individual..self/and synmbiotic supporting systems[cells].....at the higher levels of spirit...

so TOO/is the collective..able to form..the oneness..we call god...at micro...its cellular/memory...at macro..its called god/good

key being..its a collective...ALL GOOD/..
god/all=1...atonement..[at-one-meant]..

pbs?

TtM/...quote<<..recorded history..seems to/have..these incredible missing-links..to..the chain>>..of events..<<when it comes to..the fill/the story of us../as human beings.>>.so true..

[if you read/the spi-ritual/links..you will see/..part of their entertainment...is plays...enacted by..the actual/historical-personages...of the historic...events...*as they REALLY happend!

when there is..no blame...
and only self/shame...the truth.../..will-be revealed

there really is..nothing done...in the dark/..or here...
that will not be revealed..*into the light...

this realm...is..the only realm...where we can..'have' secrets...
but they...in the next..realms...are not/secret

<Egyptians/..had well advanced/knowledge.of the star constellations>>if you look at the stars..your mind melds with those...ALSO looking at the stars....in all realm's

those..questions/amasements..in your mind...
are you..actually linking up/..with the others...thinking the same thoughts...

read the links...it/s..like wine conarsures...drink fine/whine...

feel..your shared emotions...
taste..the precious words/..yearn for..at-one-ment

<<the wheel..which/some-how missed/their..attention>>>their minds couldnt concieve/the need/for an alternative..besides..[wheels dont roll in sand!


<<Do you have/an answer..for this?>>>i have an answer for everything...thats why i stopped/asking questions..but eac.. must ask their OWN!...then share/the reply!

<<We just/might not be alone..after all,>>your body is made/up out of trillions of cells...each has/its own brain...etc...for you/to feel alone...is an absurdity!...BUT..[al-one=all-one]..lol

<<and god/just might be..not/what we think..it is>>god is the collective/cell memory..of EVERY...'life'..that EVER lived.[at one meant!]

<<god/just picked..this one tiny/little blue-green planet>>yes...he did...see we are not unique..in being in human form...

BUT are unique...in that we can talk across TIME..[via words]...a gift/we share..with angels...

NOne of the other 9* nations...read!..or can/make logic out of word/symbols...they get their info...direct..[via angelic messengers]like@fatima

<<to put/all of one's egges..in one basket,>>>is not..'science'...a bastardet?/...lol..1-basket

<<Please try/and think out-side the box>>>...see your in one..*too


<<The bible/and natural-life..does have/these gaps,..and faith just wont cut it..for me.>>>yet you cant explain...lol..the SCI-Trance...lol

yet sci=ence/has more gaps..because..more are decieved

<<I think/we have had/a little help.>..im simply channeling..the mind imagry/conveyed to me/from your quest-ion]

<<calling it god..is a nice way/of rounding it up,>>>as you should realise...you/are god...at least..a tiny part of the all/ness...at one meant..

U..prefer..to round/down?

<<but..I think/there's more.>>...i know there is
lets try and...'*get it together?

..at-one-ment

know/..you cant be alone

Dear George,

An intersting post and OLO link. Thanks.

Reflecting on what I believe you are saying:

On one path of thought we have the need to recognise the divisibility of the epistemology of theism(s)and the epistemology of science(s). We are in trouble when the either tries to"cross-over".

On another path of thought, we have the call to recognise the feasibility of the duality of panentheism and the physicsal universe, wherein the former is greater. The latter a decoherent subset: i.e., at one with a "part of God" and observed as a measureable physicality. A duality from science us coalesced.

Theism has its realm and science its domain. Both having their resspective competencies. Yet, the twain do meet when we consider the an immanent God infused in nature.

In considering the aforemtioned frame, I feel, we agin return to our old friend, 'First Cause," as to whether or not the universe was purposefully created or is self-sustaining. Is there a Captain at the wheel or is existence the product of a non-divine driver entangled in nature, there, without the immanence of a god?

As competing theories, I do feel the "supernatural" competes better with the alternative realities of modern science than does the science of the 1700-1800s: Old religion and new science delimit physicality and the observable universe as a subset of a greater explanation. Modern science takes the view of zero titration (non-boundary universe - Hawking) to prime and maintain existence, whereas, theism begs for an intelligent guiding catalyst, leading to another quation is divinity or self-organisation infused into our reality (and peripherals)? The challenge for science is to explain the universe without recourse to an immanent divinity: A stand on its own solution. With current technologies we do have the capability to re-create the creatiion. If memory serves would requires a particle accelerator operating 1,000 trillion electron volts, whereas CERN is maxed out at 17 (7?) trillion electron volts. Yet, showing the existence of god I feelis more challenging

-cont-

Science may soon be able to make new prodictions based on the Higgs particle to regress theories towards the creation, it can't yet test. Alternatively, regressing physical phenomena back to a god, is hard, elusive and probably impossible.

What science can do than religion can't is to point to foot prints: e.g., background radiation from the BB. There is clear evidence.

Regards.

Correction: "The challenge for science is to explain the universe without recourse to an immanent divinity: A stand on its own solution. With current technologies we do **NOT** have the capability to re-create the creatiion. If memory serves repliocation would requires a particle accelerator operating 1,000 trillion electron volts, whereas CERN is maxed out at 17 (7?) trillion electron volts. Yet, showing the existence of god I feel is more challenging"

Dear Oliver,

Thanks for stimulating thoughts. I can see your point where you are suspicious of a strict splitting of epistemology into two compartments. Although I am not sure what you mean by epistemology of science and epistemology of theism, I tend to agree with you. I am no fan of Stephen Jay Gould’s NOMA (Non-overlapping magisteria) approach to the relation between science and religion which apparently corresponds to the second type in Ian Barbour’s classical typology: conflict, independence, dialogue, integration.

My point of view is more along the borderline between the third and fourth type, albeit an assymetric dialogue: modern science can and does serve as a corrective of what religion/theology can know about reality, whereas not so much vice-versa. Perhaps something like modern physics needs mathematics, but not vice versa: there is pure mathematics but no pure physics, like there are atheist scientits but there are (or should be) no “science-ignoring” theologians.

>>Yet, the twain do meet when we consider the immanent God infused in nature.<<
Yes, this is the problem of  Divine Action that books have been written about (of course, a non-problem for anti-theists). For instance, it was the major theme of a recent wide ranging series of conferences and publications on theology and science jointly sponsored by the Vatican Observatory and the Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences in Berkeley (CA).

>>Is there a Captain at the wheel or is existence the product of a non-divine driver entangled in nature, there, without the immanence of a god? <<
This is an interesting formulation of the crucial question of philosophy, why is there something rather than nothing. I expressed it thus (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=9389&page=0#150883): either the physical world - i.e. reality accessible by senses, science and formal mathematics - is “all there is” (Carl Sagan), i.e. its own cause and purpose, or there must be Something (God, in the theist model of this Something) irreducible to the physical world, a Something that is its own cause and purpose. (ctd)