Christianity

[iambiguous]

You clearly don't even understand what the question was.

How can the question be made any clearer? I'm asking you why, if you found historical and scientific evidence able to convince you that the Christian God does in fact reside in Heaven, you wouldn't be spending at least some time here bringing that to the attention of those who may well be convinced by it and choose to be born again.


Note to other Christians here:

Can you perhaps provide me with an explanation? Is there something I might be missing here? Is there a reason someone might choose not to save souls if they are convinced that there is substantive evidence to accomplish this?

Sorry...I still can't be bothered. I'm tuning you out now.

Well, you've "tuned me out" before, haven't you?

[attofishpi]

You clearly don't even understand what the question was.

How can the question be made any clearer? I'm asking you why, if you found historical and scientific evidence able to convince you that the Christian God does in fact reside in Heaven,

So apparently GOD has an abode..lmao. Me n IC (christianity) differ on this, GOD is PANTHEISM - all perceivable existence - and contrary to popular definition, extremely personable.

Note to other Christians here:

HELL OWE I am listening

Can you perhaps provide me with an explanation? Is there something I might be missing here?

..thus far, I am thinking of a brain that has at least, a degree of an analytical property within which to store its information.

Is there a reason someone might choose not to save souls if they are convinced that there is substantive evidence to accomplish this?

Fuck U & fuck your soul. How's that?

I call it, atto's care factor zero policy.

[Fairy]

Nobody’s listening. They’re just waiting for their turn to talk.

[Belinda]

There it is. That's exactly right. The reason you perceive miracles cannot happen is not intellectual at all, but assumptive. You wish for miracles to be impossible, so you see none as being possible.
They do, actually. In fact, it's not all that uncommon for people to believe in the possibility of miracles, or to think they recognize one if they see it. The ancient Jews, for example, were quite convinced of the Red Sea crossing, and did not take it to be a natural event. But then, they had criteria for such things. You refuse to have any.

Most of the world is, in some form, religious, and so have some belief in the possibility of miracles. Belief in the possibility of miracles even extends to a great many of the world's most famous scientists, those who understand what science really is and does. Science is not a replacement for miracles: it's a method of studying physical phenomena, particularly limited to those we can observe, can repeat, can manipulate, can measure, and so on. But it's not more than that. It has nothing to say about phenomena that exceed those requirements.

In that sense, science can't even "prove" that much of our real history ever took place. And that's totally aside from any claim of miracles. What it can do is offer indications, evidence of consequences, artifacts left over, and such -- none of which are sufficient to warrant any claim that we have comprehensive knowledge or proof of various past events even having happened. But they're very good indications, though they are not, in the true sense, "scientifically proven" or "demonstrable" in a precise way.

The opposite is actually historically the case: science only came into being because of certain metaphysical commitments unique to the Christian West. This is known as "Whitehead's Thesis," after the philosopher-theologian A.N. Whitehead, who first pointed it out. There are very good reasons why science arose in Christian Europe, and particularly in England, and not in, say, India or China, where there were far more people, many of high intelligence. What they did not have in the East or in Africa were the metaphysical assumptions that made science possible in the first place.

I do, in fact, believe that God has written the Scriptures. And I'm very "trustful" of that, and for good reasons. And I believe in both the literal and the allegorical in Scripture, so I've got all the ability to understand that allegorizing offers, but also every advantage of being able to take the literally-intended portions with the seriousness that is suitable to them. So I've got the whole package there.

What the pure-allegorizer, the Jungian, the "higher critic" never has is the ability to hear the literal truth of the Word of God. He's arbitrarily ruled that out for himself, before he begins. Consequently, he not only fails to hear the clear, literal statements, but he also untethers the allegorical from the literal, and thus flies off into the whimsies of his own imagination, like an astronaut whose lost his lifeline to the space capsule.

I don't recommend that exegetical strategy. Before we go allegorizing, we have to be honest about what the text literally says, and govern our allegories and our personal imaginings by directing them to the text. This is what it means to "hear the Word of God," rather than to "hear" only the vacuous delusions of our own imaginations. But far from eliminating allegory, this is the only strategy that makes the allegory truthful.

To "hear with faith" is to believe the literal truth of what God says, even when it is not clear to us yet why He says it, or when it offends our personal preferences and demands the reshaping of our prejudices, or when it exceeds our personal experience of the subject. And those who do not hear with faith never hear God.

"the word of God" is best understood as the creation of God; you seem to limit the word of God to what God says to man.

Nature is cruel and uncaring;

'Nature', Itself, is NOT cruel nor uncaring.

ONLY you human beings 'see' some things as 'cruel' and/or 'uncaring', but the ONLY ACTUAL 'things' that ARE 'cruel' and/or 'uncaring' are you adult human beings, "yourselves".

mankind needs dignity to rise above nature.

NOTHING can so-call 'rise above' Nature, Itself.

From The Ten Commandments to Love Thy Neighbour Whoever They Be

WHO 'they' ARE IS EVERY one.

is collected and edited by men so as to show forth how to rise above nature as dignified humans.

AGAIN, NO thing can 'rise above' 'Nature', Itself, BECAUSE EVERY thing IS A PART OF 'Nature', Itself.

There is NO thing above, beyond, apart from, or outside of 'Nature', Itself, even including God, Itself.

God has a history ranging from the tribal Jahweh and its kings through the OT Prophets, to Jesus of Nazareth , and incorporating Greek thought.

Science grew from early roots in Aristotle, through Copernicus through Galileo, through Darwin. The Church forced Galileo on pain of torture and death to recant. The Church burned to death Giordano Bruno for his pantheist claims. Until Darwin and later science has had to contend with religious dogma. The RC church was political and ruled over Christendom. The Protestant Reformation too had its dogmas that were averse to science and markedly punitive. Read below about the powers of the clergy in medieval Europe :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estates_of_the_realm

Just about ANY one who does NOT CONFORM TO 'the majority', 'the popular', 'the current', or 'the latest' VIEW, BELIEF, or PERCEPTION is RIDICULED. 'This phenomena' can be CLEARLY SEEN just throughout 'this forum', let alone throughout a lot of human history. And, it NOT MATTERS ONE IOTA if one is NOT CONFORMING TO the "theological religion/ous' or the 'scientific religions/ous'. ALL 'religious people' will 'TRY TO' DISCREDIT, RIDICULE, and/or HUMILIATE 'the other' whenever 'the other' INTRODUCES some thing NEW or MORE, which is DIFFERENT and/or CONTRARY.

'Religious people', by the way, are just 'those' who HAVE or HOLD BELIEFS. Which, by the way, are ALL of you adult human beings.

I agree that I presume God does not intervene in history. History is the story of man's past.
I agree that in former times, as you note , people did believe in miracles.

The value of Christianity is men can rise above nature. I better explain what I mean.

We are all animals. As far as we know, unlike other species we are aware we are animals who have sophisticated cultures and cultural values that we pass down through the generations. In former times we did this orally and in pictures, then we had writing, then we had printed matter and more literacy among the people, now we have culture and cultural values being passed down ;largely electronically from one generation to the next generation.

Other animals have cultures usually passed from the mother to her offspring while they are young. However humans take many years to learn their native cultures.

A major part has been played in that learning by religions, nowadays not so much,as learning institutions are more usually secular.

I agree that the avant garde of cultural innovations are ridiculed. The ridicule is sometimes justified. Science has its criteria for assessing whether or not an idea is credible. Historiography is part science/part interpretation. There have been fraudulent scientists and there have been fraudulent historians.

To "rise above nature" we need honesty, information, and empathy,. These traits are nurtured in worthy religions and in secular educational systems.With honesty, information, and empathy we can rise above animal instincts such as fear , so as to make the world a better place.

[Age]

"the word of God" is best understood as the creation of God; you seem to limit the word of God to what God says to man.

Nature is cruel and uncaring;

'Nature', Itself, is NOT cruel nor uncaring.

ONLY you human beings 'see' some things as 'cruel' and/or 'uncaring', but the ONLY ACTUAL 'things' that ARE 'cruel' and/or 'uncaring' are you adult human beings, "yourselves".

mankind needs dignity to rise above nature.

NOTHING can so-call 'rise above' Nature, Itself.

From The Ten Commandments to Love Thy Neighbour Whoever They Be

WHO 'they' ARE IS EVERY one.

is collected and edited by men so as to show forth how to rise above nature as dignified humans.

AGAIN, NO thing can 'rise above' 'Nature', Itself, BECAUSE EVERY thing IS A PART OF 'Nature', Itself.

There is NO thing above, beyond, apart from, or outside of 'Nature', Itself, even including God, Itself.

God has a history ranging from the tribal Jahweh and its kings through the OT Prophets, to Jesus of Nazareth , and incorporating Greek thought.

Science grew from early roots in Aristotle, through Copernicus through Galileo, through Darwin. The Church forced Galileo on pain of torture and death to recant. The Church burned to death Giordano Bruno for his pantheist claims. Until Darwin and later science has had to contend with religious dogma. The RC church was political and ruled over Christendom. The Protestant Reformation too had its dogmas that were averse to science and markedly punitive. Read below about the powers of the clergy in medieval Europe :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estates_of_the_realm

Just about ANY one who does NOT CONFORM TO 'the majority', 'the popular', 'the current', or 'the latest' VIEW, BELIEF, or PERCEPTION is RIDICULED. 'This phenomena' can be CLEARLY SEEN just throughout 'this forum', let alone throughout a lot of human history. And, it NOT MATTERS ONE IOTA if one is NOT CONFORMING TO the "theological religion/ous' or the 'scientific religions/ous'. ALL 'religious people' will 'TRY TO' DISCREDIT, RIDICULE, and/or HUMILIATE 'the other' whenever 'the other' INTRODUCES some thing NEW or MORE, which is DIFFERENT and/or CONTRARY.

'Religious people', by the way, are just 'those' who HAVE or HOLD BELIEFS. Which, by the way, are ALL of you adult human beings.

I agree that I presume God does not intervene in history. History is the story of man's past.
I agree that in former times, as you note , people did believe in miracles.

The value of Christianity is men can rise above nature. I better explain what I mean.

We are all animals. As far as we know, unlike other species we are aware we are animals who have sophisticated cultures and cultural values that we pass down through the generations. In former times we did this orally and in pictures, then we had writing, then we had printed matter and more literacy among the people, now we have culture and cultural values being passed down ;largely electronically from one generation to the next generation.

Other animals have cultures usually passed from the mother to her offspring while they are young. However humans take many years to learn their native cultures.

A major part has been played in that learning by religions, nowadays not so much,as learning institutions are more usually secular.

I agree that the avant garde of cultural innovations are ridiculed. The ridicule is sometimes justified. Science has its criteria for assessing whether or not an idea is credible. Historiography is part science/part interpretation. There have been fraudulent scientists and there have been fraudulent historians.

To "rise above nature" we need honesty, information, and empathy,. These traits are nurtured in worthy religions and in secular educational systems.With honesty, information, and empathy we can rise above animal instincts such as fear , so as to make the world a better place.

I agree that you human beings can not and never will so-call 'rise above' 'Nature', Itself.

[Immanuel Can]

Well, you've "tuned me out" before, haven't you?

Yep. Still doing it.

[iambiguous]

Not even close mate.

My theory is that since we arn't the only lifeform that GOD created, and many humans do abhorrent things to other humans to the point that they probably don't get to reincarnate human ever again.

Your theory? What about the part where you intertwine your conjectures and speculations regarding God -- i.e. stuff you believe about Him "in your head" up in the spiritual clouds -- and your own interactions with others in which conflicting goods unfold.

That's a strange ad hominem attack, because later in your post you indicate that you want to hear of anyone of faith that has had experiences of this GOD entity.

Well, if that's what you construe to be a personal attack, we'll just have agree to disagree regarding what that actually is.

I'm just trying to get a sense of how for all practical purposes God and religion play out in your interactions with others existentially. Again, less what you think about them and more what you can demonstrate to others about them such that they might be able to think the same.

..it's in development my friend..via artistic endeavour that this very entity FORCED me out of work to accomplish, if you are honest in your QUEST then allow me, just some random character on the internet, to finalise everything upon my website.

Just prior to a month off for travelling, the past week I am working on "GOD according to Androcies". *Androcies<-- the name, is explained within the document, an account of a mistake I made regarding Anrdocles - anyway, I was happy with my mistake and stuck with it. Androcies is an A.I. within my novel Alpha Two - have a read if you like near future dystopia and tech (cyberpunk).

The opening INTRO sentence to "GOD according to Androcies" is:
This document is intended to encapsulate my experiences since 1997, my analysis of those experiences and the result, my artistic output, here: www.androcies.com endeavours to project my analysis of our shared reality, REAL_IT_Y?

Note to others:

Please note how the above is relevant to this:

I'm just trying to get a sense of how for all practical purposes, God and religion play out in your interactions with others existentially [in the is/ought world]. Again, less what you think about them and more what you can demonstrate to others about them such that they might be able to think the same.

As for reincarnation, it's just more of the same for me. You broach it, make certain assumptions about it and never once offer any substantive/substantial evidence that it is in fact a crucial component of the human condition.

I understand that. With me iambiguous, always at least attempt to have a hypothetical approach as to what I am stating in relation to GOD. That is to say IF GOD exists then X seems rational or perhaps from your POV, no, still non sequitur, oui?

2005 sage indicated shortly after introduction of himself from the aether (covered in "GOD according to Androcies") that we do reincarnate to within families we deserve, karmically. I never quizzed that night about 666 incarnation, but it stands to reason don't you think? Why am I not a pig, but a human - why is the pig a pig and not a human???

In other words, as with any number of religionists, the "demonstration" seems to revolve almost entirely around what you believe "in your head" about God and religion and reincarnation.

GOD leaves people to their own actions. EVERYONE has been warned at least that there is some consequences to their actions IF GOD exists. (*problem for many is, IT does)

Which God though? Is it one worshipped and adored by any number of these folks -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... traditions -- or is it ever and always your own?

I think we have already covered this. That GOD has interacted with certain wo/men throughout time and formed various religions. GOD remains unchanged, all that is different is MAN's interpretation of GOD.

Exactly. So, with moral commandments, immortality and salvation itself on the line many of these folks -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... traditions --
-- will agree. Only it's their God not yours. And, for some, you are damned for all of eternity if you refuse to accept their assessment.

Even in regard to Christianity itself there are any number of particular interpretations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian ... orationism.

This is interesting since a few hours ago a Hindu uber driver stated pretty much the same thing, I was well impressed with him and his analysis.

Next time, invite him to post his argument here.

Regarding 'dasein', such as myself being brought up in a Roman Catholic School via my parents choosing. Yes, I think I was wiser than many of my schoolfriends that thought Christianity/GOD was a load of nonsense. Since, I considered IF there is a GOD, then perhaps it had my soul implanted into this family that would send me to the R.C. school and learn of this GOD entity. Turned out, faith did enable me to know GOD exists.

Okay, back then, how did you go about demonstrating that a God, the God, your God does in fact exist? In other words, beyond a leap of faith or a wager or what you might have read in one or another Scripture.

You are missing the point. Consider things from my intelligent POV. I have just been born into a faith system - at this point what you want is no where to be seen - this 'demonstrate a GOD your GOD bla bla' nonsense..

And, in my view, you still need to note day to day interactions with others that revolve around your own interpretation of God and religion.

No. The dasein of my existence from an intelligent analytical child mind that I has was merely, IF GOD EXISTS, then there could be great reason I was born within a Christian, R.C. upbringing.

And if He doesn't?

Thus, my analysus began.

Right. Your analysis.

Scientists admit that they could not even reproduce the artifact using today's technology.

On the other hand -- https://www.google.com/search?q=the+shr ... s-wiz-serp -- not everyone agrees.

And, again, there are countless ways a God, the God could make it unequivocally clear that He does in fact exist. So, why a Shroud? And even here an omnipotent God could have made the Shroud itself beyond dispute.

Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle from my frame of mind.

Don't use 'wiggle wiggle' on me, it pisses me off.

Then stop wiggling. Besides, I always acknowledge that my own interpretation of it is no less rooted existentially in dasein. It's merely a prejudice of mine. It's not like I can whip up the philosophical equivalent of "the scientific method" here in order to prove it.

And, again, unlike Jesus Christ who "as God in the flesh" was fully aware that Heaven [immortality/salvation] was right around the corner for Him, almost all the rest of us are left grappling with existential leaps of faith or wagers. Also, knowing that there are many, many other religious denominations "out there" who are quite adamant that only their own One True Path counts.

Hey, fellow which ever 'religious denomination' floats your boat so long as your boat is guided by your most rational analysis of something that just might be omnipotent, divine, and the paradox to life-LOVE.

I suspect however that, with so much at stake on both sides of the grave, you had better be certain that it's a boat, the boat, your boat that floats above all the others.

Christ went to his death stating we "LOVE & TRUST" Him and each other (this is my family crest - v important to me and should be important to all that have FAITH in what HE did to insist upon it)

Comprehend? or too proud?

What's that got to do with my point above? And then the part where you at least attempt to demonstrate empirically and experientially that this is true. Or, with you, does it all revolve around faith?

You want to believe that there is an omnipotent GOD, but scoff at what I know IS plausible with this entity. There is no point to this discussion.

In other words, since I have not come around yet to how you think about all of this, and you're convinced that I never will...?

Correct. And, more to the point as I stated above, I don't care.

That works for me. Then back to this:

What I truly do care about myself is in exploring God and religion with those who argue that what they do believe about them themselves "here and now" goes beyond a leap of faith, a wager or "because it says so in the Bible". They have either had personal experiences with a God, the God or they believe there really is substantive scientific and historical evidence. For IC, it is in regard to the Christian God, though for others it is in regard to another God altogether.

Is analysis of cumulative evidence scientific? How many times does a coin need to side, such that the evidence has cumulated enough to convince you - to at LEAST have Faith?

COIN_CIDENCE?

How much.

As always, when it comes to God and religion, I invite believers to explore these factors with me:

1] a demonstrable proof of the existence of your God or religious/spiritual path
2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths
4] the questions that revolve around theodicy and your own particular God or religious/spiritual path[/quote]

How about it? You highlighted this part: "they have either had personal experiences with a God..."

I asked you above to note in more detail how these personal experiences unfolded for you. Also, for all practical purposes, how did the behaviors you choose change as a result of this? For me, all those years ago, becoming a Christian resulted in many changes.

How about your God?

Why do you say "my God"?

That hypothetical from you POV required again: IF GOD exists, it's all of our GOD.

Talk about "a general description spiritual contraption!" And if it's not your God above, whose God is it then?

[attofishpi]

..besides not having a degree of intellect applied to NE thing I stated..

What part of:

Fuck U & fuck your soul. How's that?

I call it, atto's care factor zero policy.

..did U not under_stand?

[iambiguous]

..besides not having a degree of intellect applied to NE thing I stated..

What part of:

Fuck U & fuck your soul. How's that?

I call it, atto's care factor zero policy.

..did U not under_stand?

Okay, okay, you convinced me: a "condition", it is.

Then this part:

"How does Pantheism differ from Christianity?

Pantheists see God's presence throughout the world. While some kinds of pantheism are rooted in religion, others can be traced to philosophic, scientific, or poetic perspectives. Pantheism differs from monotheistic religions, like Christianity, in rejecting the idea that God is a separate entity from the universe."

Note to IC:

He will be going down if he doesn't accept Jesus Christ as his personal savior, right? Or has he somehow managed to intertwine both Pantheism and Christianity into his very own One True Path.

[Age]

Has anyone in any of these over 1100 pages defined the word 'christianity'?

In fact has anyone even just considered doing this?

[iambiguous]

From MSN...

"Astronomers have detected an erupting supermassive black hole producing some of the largest jets ever seen bursting from a galaxy with the same shape as our own. The galaxy in question also possesses vastly more dark matter than the Milky Way, hinting at a connection between active black holes and the abundance of the universe's most mysterious 'stuff.'

"The jets erupting from the massive spiral galaxy 2MASX J23453268−0449256 (J2345-0449), which is three times the size of the Milky Way and is located 947 million light-years away, are themselves 6 million light-years long. And if the supermassive black hole in J2345-0449, which has an estimated mass equivalent to 1.4 billion suns, can erupt so violently, could our galaxy's supermassive black hole Sagittarius A* (Sgr A*) also blow its top? And if so, what would this mean for life in the Milky Way?"

The Christian God and the laws of nature. Which came first? Go ahead, give it your best shot.

How to even begin to wrap your head around the numbers above...



947 million light years away? Given that the distance light can travel in one year is approximately 5.88 trillion miles, well, you do the math.

The erupting jets alone are 6 million light years long.

Think of that like this: In one year, light can circle the globe 236 million times. Again, multiply that br 6 million and see what you come up with.

Then the part about how a supermassive black hole is the equivalent of 1.4 billion suns.

What was God thinking? Or is God Himself just another manifestation of the laws of nature?

In any event, the more we explore the universe the more it becomes abundantly clear just how tiny Earth really is.

[attofishpi]

From MSN...

"Astronomers have detected an erupting supermassive black hole producing some of the largest jets ever seen bursting from a galaxy with the same shape as our own. The galaxy in question also possesses vastly more dark matter than the Milky Way, hinting at a connection between active black holes and the abundance of the universe's most mysterious 'stuff.'

"The jets erupting from the massive spiral galaxy 2MASX J23453268−0449256 (J2345-0449), which is three times the size of the Milky Way and is located 947 million light-years away, are themselves 6 million light-years long. And if the supermassive black hole in J2345-0449, which has an estimated mass equivalent to 1.4 billion suns, can erupt so violently, could our galaxy's supermassive black hole Sagittarius A* (Sgr A*) also blow its top? And if so, what would this mean for life in the Milky Way?"

The Christian God and the laws of nature. Which came first? Go ahead, give it your best shot.

How to even begin to wrap your head around the numbers above...



947 million light years away? Given that the distance light can travel in one year is approximately 5.88 trillion miles, well, you do the math.

The erupting jets alone are 6 million light years long.

Think of that like this: In one year, light can circle the globe 236 million times. Again, multiply that br 6 million and see what you come up with.

Then the part about how a supermassive black hole is the equivalent of 1.4 billion suns.

What was God thinking? Or is God Himself just another manifestation of the laws of nature?

In any event, the more we explore the universe the more it becomes abundantly clear just how tiny Earth really is.

As an analyst Christian I am still open to the consideration that GOD was formed by intelligence (*humanity) with respect to entropy..however, what makes me within my experiences of this entity return to "GOD is DIVINE", is that I do believe in what Christ endured. Ergo, if humans created the GOD system, then Y would they do the Christ thang?

[attofishpi]

..besides not having a degree of intellect applied to NE thing I stated..

What part of:

Fuck U & fuck your soul. How's that?

I call it, atto's care factor zero policy.

..did U not under_stand?

Okay, okay, you convinced me: a "condition", it is.

Then this part:

"How does Pantheism differ from Christianity?

It doesn't, a priest I had bothered to confess to and explain the topic, and IC, insist PANTHEISM is not compatible with my being a Christian.

How did water turn into wine?

How did Christ walk on water?

etc..

..unless GOD is PAN to all of our reality?

PETER PAN (*moi)

[Age]

From MSN...

"Astronomers have detected an erupting supermassive black hole producing some of the largest jets ever seen bursting from a galaxy with the same shape as our own. The galaxy in question also possesses vastly more dark matter than the Milky Way, hinting at a connection between active black holes and the abundance of the universe's most mysterious 'stuff.'

"The jets erupting from the massive spiral galaxy 2MASX J23453268−0449256 (J2345-0449), which is three times the size of the Milky Way and is located 947 million light-years away, are themselves 6 million light-years long. And if the supermassive black hole in J2345-0449, which has an estimated mass equivalent to 1.4 billion suns, can erupt so violently, could our galaxy's supermassive black hole Sagittarius A* (Sgr A*) also blow its top? And if so, what would this mean for life in the Milky Way?"

The Christian God and the laws of nature. Which came first? Go ahead, give it your best shot.

The so-called "christian God" and the 'laws of nature' are more or less One and the same Thing, which exist always. Therefore, neither came so-called first They/It are/is eternal.

How to even begin to wrap your head around the numbers above...

But those numbers are minute and insignificant in the actual scheme of things.

947 million light years away? Given that the distance light can travel in one year is approximately 5.88 trillion miles, well, you do the math.

Why do you want others to do 'the math', for you, here?

The erupting jets alone are 6 million light years long.

you are coming across as though you are somewhat 'surprised'. But why?

Think of that like this: In one year, light can circle the globe 236 million times. Again, multiply that br 6 million and see what you come up with.

Then the part about how a supermassive black hole is the equivalent of 1.4 billion suns.

What was God thinking?

What does 'this' even mean, exactly?

Or is God Himself just another manifestation of the laws of nature?

Again, 'these people', back then, were stuck on God having a penis.

Which some might now question and ask, 'What were 'they' thinking?'

In any event, the more we explore the universe the more it becomes abundantly clear just how tiny Earth really is.

LOL What you human beings can observe is absolutely tiny.

[Age]

From MSN...

"Astronomers have detected an erupting supermassive black hole producing some of the largest jets ever seen bursting from a galaxy with the same shape as our own. The galaxy in question also possesses vastly more dark matter than the Milky Way, hinting at a connection between active black holes and the abundance of the universe's most mysterious 'stuff.'

"The jets erupting from the massive spiral galaxy 2MASX J23453268−0449256 (J2345-0449), which is three times the size of the Milky Way and is located 947 million light-years away, are themselves 6 million light-years long. And if the supermassive black hole in J2345-0449, which has an estimated mass equivalent to 1.4 billion suns, can erupt so violently, could our galaxy's supermassive black hole Sagittarius A* (Sgr A*) also blow its top? And if so, what would this mean for life in the Milky Way?"

The Christian God and the laws of nature. Which came first? Go ahead, give it your best shot.

How to even begin to wrap your head around the numbers above...



947 million light years away? Given that the distance light can travel in one year is approximately 5.88 trillion miles, well, you do the math.

The erupting jets alone are 6 million light years long.

Think of that like this: In one year, light can circle the globe 236 million times. Again, multiply that br 6 million and see what you come up with.

Then the part about how a supermassive black hole is the equivalent of 1.4 billion suns.

What was God thinking? Or is God Himself just another manifestation of the laws of nature?

In any event, the more we explore the universe the more it becomes abundantly clear just how tiny Earth really is.

As an analyst Christian

So, 'this one' is not just a self-referenced "good christian" but 'now' an "analyst christian", as well, supposedly.

Yet its previous posts, hitherto, have shown and revealed otherwise.

I am still open to the consideration that GOD was formed by intelligence (*humanity) with respect to entropy..however, what makes me within my experiences of this entity return to "GOD is DIVINE", is that I do believe in what Christ endured. Ergo, if humans created the GOD system, then Y would they do the Christ thang?

So, although this one claims to know God, it still is not yet sure how God, Itself, was formed. Which obviously contradicts any claim of God being the Creator of ALL. I also wonder how the claim that 'God is divine' is somehow connect with one human being, supposedly, enduring its own 'death', which by the way was always going to happen anyway. Also, and let 'us' not forget that what some one believes is true never ever has to align with what is actually True nor Right, in Life.

Why the so-called 'christ thang' was created is so that when human beings had evolved enough to work out what the 'second coming of christ' is actually going to reference, exactly, then those 'future' human beings can, and will, do what is necessarily in order to create peace, in harmony, here, on earth, as the word heaven implies.

Again, it is ALL, really, very simple and very easy, in-deed.