Ed, If that's your definition of rich, then that's great...however, there
are those who also consider their Beamer, their 4K sq ft house, and their
accoutrements as being gifts from God. They also consider their lives to be
rich in more than just money. Don't be so hasty to judge others just
because they like their possessions or have more than you. That makes your
definition smack of insincerity.

--
katysails
s/v Chanteuse
Kirie Elite 32
http://katysails.tripod.com

"Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax
and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein

however, there
are those who also consider their Beamer, their 4K sq ft house, and their
accoutrements as being gifts from God.


Man, it's easy to see why this country is a conservative pool of filth when
people are thanking invisble "forces" for their own hard work.
Poor Katy was brainwashed. She would not know of "god" unless it had been
taught to her.
Oh, George Carlin, where art thou?

RB

(Bobsprit) wrote in message ...
however, there
are those who also consider their Beamer, their 4K sq ft house, and their
accoutrements as being gifts from God.


Man, it's easy to see why this country is a conservative pool of filth when
people are thanking invisble "forces" for their own hard work.
Poor Katy was brainwashed. She would not know of "god" unless it had been
taught to her.

Katy has faith blobster

What is faith? On the surface it may look like blind trust. You look
at spirituality and only sees people indulging in wishful thinking
about things they can't see.

But if you've ever been touched by the spirit, you know it's not that
simple. Faith is the opposite of blind trust. It's something in the
human heart that knows in the deepest and most intimate sense that
there is something eternal and that this is profoundly connected with
human beings. You might be touched by the spirt the day your rugrat is
born, so beware.

To honor this simple truth, all the religions of the world were
created. They differ on many issues. And yet they all agree that there
is a divine presence in the world and that humans honor this presence
best by leading meaningful and ethical lives.


Oh, George Carlin, where art thou?

Smoking a big doobie somewere. Enjoying his blessings.

Joe

RB

But if you've ever been touched by the spirit, you know it's not that
simple. Faith is the opposite of blind trust.

Faith IS blind trust, regardless of your other comments. You've never been
touched by a spirit, though you may actually believe that.
It's easy to see why religion kills so many.

RB

"Bobsprit" wrote in message
...
But if you've ever been touched by the spirit, you know it's not that
simple. Faith is the opposite of blind trust.

Faith IS blind trust, regardless of your other comments.

Rubbish!!

How did the Universe come into existence?

Faith is the only option that is available to the enquiring mind.

If your small mind is capable of considering the origins of the Universe,
then you will realise that there are only three options.

1) God created it.
2) It is endlessly expanding and contracting
3) It was created in a single event which resulted in equal amounts of
"matter" and "anti-matter".


Which option do you believe in?


Let me guess! You are sooooo shallow that you don't subscribe to any of the
above theories???



Regards


Donal
--

How did the Universe come into existence?

Absence of understanding does not invite fairy tales, or at least it shouldn't.

RB

Donal wrote:

How did the Universe come into existence?

I have never heard any answer to that question that isn't predicated on
assumption.


Faith is the only option that is available to the enquiring mind.

Agreed - faith that whatever assumptions one makes are true.



If your small mind is capable of considering the origins of the
Universe, then you will realise that there are only three options.

1) God created it.

Not only does this presuppose that there was a god to do the creating, it
begs the quesiton of how he came into existence. If one is to claim that he
has always existed, then Occam's Razor would suggest that there is no need
to invoke a creator that has always existed, when a universe that has always
existed will do just as well.


2) It is endlessly expanding and contracting

Maybe, maybe not.


3) It was created in a single event which resulted in equal amounts of
"matter" and "anti-matter".

Maybe, maybe not.


Which option do you believe in?

I'm not sure the question can be answered. By "answered", I mean in terms
that are generally acceptable - self-evidently true or capable of being
observed or experienced. Compare "the sun is warm" with "god made the
universe".


Let me guess! You are sooooo shallow that you don't subscribe to any
of the above theories???

Tsk, tsk.


--
Wally
www.forthsailing.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk

Let me guess! You are sooooo shallow that you don't subscribe to any
of the above theories???

Tsk, tsk.

Wally, I'm impressed. Quite a reasonable response, but faith does not allow
reason.

RB

Wally wrote:
Donal wrote:


How did the Universe come into existence?


I have never heard any answer to that question that isn't predicated on
assumption.



Faith is the only option that is available to the enquiring mind.


Agreed - faith that whatever assumptions one makes are true.



If your small mind is capable of considering the origins of the
Universe, then you will realise that there are only three options.

1) God created it.


Not only does this presuppose that there was a god to do the creating, it
begs the quesiton of how he came into existence. If one is to claim that he
has always existed, then Occam's Razor would suggest that there is no need
to invoke a creator that has always existed, when a universe that has always
existed will do just as well.



If the universe contains everything then God is a self made
man/woman/thing. A bit like the american dream really.

Cheers

"Wally" wrote in message
...
I'm not sure the question can be answered. By "answered", I mean in terms
that are generally acceptable - self-evidently true or capable of being
observed or experienced.

I believe that one of my three options is currently "in vogue" with the
scienticic community. Furthermore, scientists will produce evidence, backed
up by observation, to prove that their theory is correct. So I think that
the question *can* be answered in terms that are generally acceptable.


Regards


Donal
--