dan/quote..<<..special..(or specific)..revelation..doesn’t forego discovering truth..by reason..or other means.>>..not really responding..but more expanding..on the basic truth..dan has revealed

that/..we could term revelation..of nessisity has been filtered/through..the logic..of the one recieving it...

[my own measure of it/is..if its good/not hurtfull..or injurous...to anyone..it comes..from the good/..of god]..[god being the only source/..cause..of good]

thus i see things like love../and know there is good...[of god]
thus/i see hate...and know that isnt...of/god

revelation..is much more common..than anyone..[ok athiests]..would believe..its that brain/flush/rush..when the facts suddenly make sense

its as simple as/a songwriter writing a song/or an artist creating a work of art...or simply just smiling at your other..or thinking good thoughts...

simply by hearing the song..you can tell/..if it origonates in heaven or hell...[love dont need cuss-words]..for egsample...or a work of art/or idea..that solves/problems or makes better..can be trusted to have decended from the heavens...

just as those from the hells are/clearly...not from heaven...just by how they make you feel..vile decends from the human vices/human obsessions/human fears..if its fear...its not from good/god

the maggies would have vetted the communications/from the signs..through such logic...as must any/who deal with signs..or other world revelations...

remembering that both hell and heaven imprint their will into this realm..via our thoughts and dreams/emotions/loves/hates

oliver quote..<<a timeless,..bounded,..self-created-universe..could exist.."as if inside"..the workings/..of a hypothesised-eternal, omnipotent God.>>..why need it be bound-ed...oliver...why cannot it be unbounded?

god is infinate/eternal...anything..inside infinite..is infinite/capable...

by virtue/of us being in his image/then we are as/his very nature/we are capable of that/such..as..he..in who's image we are created/..is capable of...except..not in mortal flesh..but our spirits are eternal

we like the russion-dolls..are layer upon layer
but at the core...eterenal living spirit...
it's about us realising...what we really are

as jesus said..that ye see me do
YE...shalt do greater...!

.

Dear Oliver & David F.,

.

Many thanks for your comments and information on the question of the existence of Jesus.

Every little snippet has its importance.

It all adds up.

Cheers

.

Dear Oliver,

I did not understand in what sense is the “thread of a spider’s web” seen as the “direct opposite” of a “cable on a major city suspension bridge” relevant to what we have been talking about. Nevertheless, as you know, I also “do reflect upon your arguments” and appreciate them. Also, thanks for calling my attention to “The Quark and the Jaguar”.

Dan,

You obviously did not understand what I wanted to say with the metaphor (not example) with the Magi and the shepherds. Probably my fault but I do no see any point in elaborating further on that.

Technology cannot advance without a previous advance in the scientific understanding of the Universe. For example, without Einstein’s theory of gravitation you would not have a working GPS. In spite of this, you still have people calling themselves scientists, who reject Einstein’s theory (in favour of Newton’s), as there are those who reject Darwin’s theory of evolution in whatever form.

For us who are not experts it remains only to acknowledge that the vast majority of physicists have no problems with Einstein, and the vast majority of biologists have no problems with Darwin’s theory presented in a contemporary form (neo-Darwinism?). Both theories, if understood properly, can inspire also a Christian’s faith.

>>When scientists… remain within their … domains of expertise they will commonly arrive at verifiable conclusions <<
Certainly a theory is not much worth if NONE of its conclusions can be verified, but nobody can expect ALL conclusions to be directly verifiable. This all depends on what you call verifiable: in a sense, the whole philosophy of science (notably physics) revolves around this concept.

>>Not so with the more distant questions, such as the creation of the universe.<<
Distant or not, creation is a either a simple, everyday, term (e.g. I am creating this post) or belongs to religion, not to science. As I said in one of my previous posts, physicists might speak about “creation” of galaxies, or whole universes, or about the “mind of God”, but only as a figure of speech

What happened to the promised new thread, AGIR?

Dear George,

This is completely off topic, but I was wondering. We can sketch a proof of the Pythagorean Theorem by using diagrams rather than numbers or symbols, but how did the Greeks prove there is no greatest number with the notation they had available?

Hi George,

A bridge cable is very thick. A strand of a spider's web very thin. What I am saying is that if belief A is the thick bridge cable, one should also hold a degraded possibility in B, the unlikely thin spider's web, regardless of A. People with different world-views swap A and B. It is philosophical position to guard against maintaining positions infallibly.

Hello Banjo,

FYI in Sueonious the reference to a Christ is in the reign of Glaudius (41-54), after Jesus was alleged dead. The actual sentence reads; "Because the Jews at Rome caused continuous disturbances at the instigations of Chestus". If it is the same Chrestus, well, doesn't that have implications? I suspect there were several over that Messiahic period. Barbara Theiring maintains that Jesus recovered and lived on. My guess is there is too little data to make strong assertions about Jesus' survival.