[patriots] Re: Why believe in God?
- From: "Rays1" <rayspost@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <johntimbrell@xxxxxxxxxx>, <ukpatriot@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 00:29:07 -0000
But, they are not "Trying to
prove evolution", that's long
proven already, is it not?
Ray
From:
patriots-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:patriots-bounce@freeli
sts.org] On Behalf Of john
TIMBRELL
Sent: 10 February 2015 21:23
To:
ukpatriot@wewantourcountryback
.co.uk
Cc: patriots@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [patriots] Re: Why
believe in God?
Hello Jack. I know you will
take this as a friendly
riposte so I know you will not
take offence.
My thinking on god is just
man's way of boosting his own
self image.
Man. in my opinion is
minuscule in the natural
scheme of things. I do not
denigrate that here on earth
we at the moment are at the
climax of evolution; and
possibly may continue to
control evolution here on
earth. But history tells us
that we could destroy
ourselves and then the normal
processes of evolution will
return. But then my humility
tells me that my brain has not
developed sufficiently to
understand natural or
supernatural processes, so
even through I am sure in my
own mind to write such stuff I
really cannot understand the
certainties that you believe.
I certainly would not write
this if it caused you to doubt
your belief because I know
whatever I state you will have
sufficient proof to convince
yourself that you are right..
but it is wonderful that me
and thee can have a friendly
discussion.and anyway there's
eff all on telly.Best wishes.
JohnT and glad to know you
_____
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015
09:29:57 +0000
From:
ukpatriot@wewantourcountryback
.co.uk
To: patriots@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [patriots] Why
believe in God?
Hi John,
Regarding this business of
believing in God. Consider it
this way - why not believe in
a creator instead. here is a
rational reason to do so.
Think about the amount of
resources, time and labour
that scientists are putting
into robots and artificial
intelligence. Huge
corporations like Honda and
Sony spend millions and using
the finest brains in the
discipline to try and emulate
just one or two feature of the
human being. If you were to
ask one of these scientists if
it would be possible for a
robot with human intelligence
if they decided to let their
computers develop the programs
randomly? In other words allow
random processes to dictate
how the robot development
continued without any human
intelligence input. What do
you think they would say?
And yet these same scientists
believed that their own human
bodies and brains did develop
in such a way with no
intelligent input. This is
absolutely nonsensical! If
they went to another planet
and saw that it was inhabited
by mechanical machines that
could think etc would they
assume that they must have
evolved? They would quite
rightly assume that a living
intelligent creature must have
made them. Why can't they
apply the same logic to self
replicating living organisms?
The answer is not a scientific
one it is a religious one.
They choose to believe that
there was no creator. That is
their starting position. After
that they just paint
themselves into a corner.
In their determination to
prove evolution they are
spending billions on sending
probes to Mars in an attempt
to clutch at a straw. If they
can't discover the origin of
life where there is an
abundance of life how can they
possibly discover it in such a
far removed way? There is
however an advantage to this
kind of exploration and that
is they are not actually
present themselves and
therefore can speculate in the
most outrageous ways knowing
that they cannot be disproved.
Also it pays the bills! They
are on safe ground - or so
they think.
Take it from me John the
argument for a creator is
water-tight.
Jack
--
www.classicarartist.co.uk
Other related posts:
