Pericles,

Good study in history. Note the Greek influence. A compromise to Roman pantheism might have also been in the air.

On the Synoptic side, the Christians whom returned from Pella, had pretty much decided upon their favourite writings in 187 CE, still comprises and reinterpretations were made after this time, including Nicae (325 CE). The Gnostics, to-be, whom left Pella and travelled to Syria, as you know, lost their influence, after the compilation of the Western bible. Else, Sells might now be arguing against the interpretation be currently accepts. [we inherit our culture and Sells has an a priori mindset].

Of course, thoughout history there have been several re-interpretations and schicisms in the Christian church. Same with Islam. Perhaps, montheism lends itself to divisiveness? To Greeks and Romans had a stack of gods, and, the Eygptians tended to meld their's, e.g., Amun (Amon) hyphen Ra. Some other religious systems seem to promote less internal conflict.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6156110.stm

"Dark energy makes up about 70% of the Universe; the rest is dark matter (25%) and normal matter (5%)."

Where is our Earth in this?;-) Very very minute -Almost negligible.
And where are humans fit into this;-) Negligible.

What about Earthly Human Gods? ;-)Did they talk about this dark matter also?

Enough of Earthly God /Son of God/Messenger Of God medieval talk. Those were medieval times [think of taliban era] with no media and public scrutiny and "miracles" galore!!

If "something" is to be called God and yes that something does exist[or not exist],But it DEFINETELY CANNOT [10000* INFINITY ] be these Earthly Medieval Gods.

Or all whatever we see is illusion??[Is Dark Energy the reality?

Despite all of the political shenanigans Nicaea got it right. The Arians had biblical texts on their side to prove that Jesus was just a man (please note Boaz-D) but Athanasius won out against all odds. This was a case in which the Holy Spirit moved in the hearts of men to bring about the right result. Any other result would have been disastrous for the Church. If the Arians had won Jesus would have been reduced to the “good teacher” , the moral exemplar of 19th C liberalism. The doctrine of the Trinity, the absolute centre and basis of Christian theology, would not have survived and the interpretative power of the Christian story would have been fatally weakened.

Of course people were excommunicated, theology was very serious matter, not the plaything of those who contribute to these pages. The very ground of society relied on orthodox belief. It was not a case of the individual choosing the spirituality that appealed to them but a quest for the truth.

There is an arrogance in Pericles and Oliver who would dismiss nearly two thousand years of theological deliberation in favor of some scatty ideas designed to keep them safe from being confronted by the One who would bring them home.

Sells,there is no single imaginery One,who will bring us home.It is us working together as a society who will bring everyone to new horizons of consciousness.The traditional religions are too static and boring for this wonderous,evolving universe.Our concepts of spirituality and god are at best prime evil.They are really an insult to the complexity,power and vastness of the universe.

Without the Roman leader Constantine ,of pagan descent,the Christian Church would would have languished in obscurity.

I think Jesus would have embraced the very things that our static Christian Churches fear the most,ie the reality of scientific discovery.

Jesus was a good person,but he was but one step in the evolution of our consciousness.If you were god,would you give absolute power to a select few,or let people learn by their mistakes so they will treasure and remember those hard won victories which forge their character?

lochinvar, the red rain in Kerala remains appears to contain algal spores of the Trentepohlia genus, which forms lichens in the local area. Subsequent analysis of the spores appears to confirm that they do, in fact, contain common or garden terrestrial DNA. See:
http://www.astrobiology.cf.ac.uk/redrain.html, and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_rain_in_Kerala.

The extraterrestrial hypothesis is attractive, but the science suggests a far more mundane explanation.

Part I

John l:l

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Finite human brains either believe what God, an infinite "brain," chose to reveal to the human race (for its own good), or they don't believe.

God is not outside of science. Science is a method by which humans can detect the multitude of facts that God created.

Humans can't be before time. Therefore they are incapable, even if they don't believe it, of claiming that they can detect that God is a figment of the human imagination. God created that finite imagination and existed before it.

The trinity is taking God at his word, which existed before humans, and therefore can't be tested by them. God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit. A mystery to the human brain, and foolishness to those who forget they have finite, created brains.

It doesn't matter if humans believe what God is trying to reveal to them about the reality he created, and the universal laws that run it.
Humans will suffer the consequence of not believing even if they don't believe God. Which is why God (whose ways are not ours) came into human history as Jesus and the Holy Spirit, to reveal the inevitable consequence for humans of breaking his laws.

That we can't tolerate reading his laws, and about his ways, has nothing to do with whether they exist. We don't like it, therefore it doesn't exist? Very finite.