30. "Don't Get the Wrong Impression Here" In response to In response to 0 Fri Oct-25-02 11:48 AM
This post is not to prove GOD exists. The reason is that people have many definition of what GOD is. In philosophy a common definition of GOD has been : A being greater than which cannot be concieved. This is not what i propose. Only that a creator exists. And if you think about it doesn't this make sense? Let me illustrate Look at spontaneous generation. This was the theory held prior to the 1800s that living matter could spontaneously arise from non-living matter. Although disproven early for macroorganisms (flies, humans) it was held for many years regarding microorganisms ( bacteria, viruses). It was subsequently disproven by pasteur. It is now looked on with disdain by most educated people. Now look at what most of the respondants to this topic are claiming: ... non-living matter ( the ions , building blocks of the universe existing 3.8 billion years ago before the first cell formed ) can arise from NOTHING. Nobody can give me an adequate explanation for this. The only logical explanation is that it was created. By what? By definition a creator... since I define creator as that which created the universe. Is this logical? Of course it is. If it isn't name to me the fallacy included in the reasoning.
"there's a one-legged busboy in here thinkin: i don't wanna change. i'm gonna ride this white thing out, see where it takes me. that's how good it is to be white." - chris rock