Messages Dated July 2003
1 - 20 of 1,026

What's Natural?
It ought to be printed out and framed. Cindy

What's Natural?
Thank you. At the risk of tarnishing my perfection, if tribute is offered, I tend to accept. I have a science fiction theory on that. Once upon a time, in a galaxy far far away.... Um... Let's skip that part. Humans as we know them evolved... but not as the normal theories think. Man was transplanted on Earth by a supreme race. Probably due to some disaster that was happening on the origin world and most likely in

DID IT REALLY HAPPEN?
How about hmmmm then? I did pick up AHhhh and am trying to quit. What ways? There ya go. What I am driving at Howie is I for one would rather read your Opinions. 'Aha, Hmmm and Indeed' indicate you may have an opinion but don't dare express it. Can we please have some opinions? Feel free. Don't be afraid. Just honest. Cindy

What's Natural?
We do make 'gods' in our own image after all. Theory snipped for brevity. Not a unfamiliar theory, Frank. And plausible than any of the dozen or so Creation theories toted by their respective believers, without verifiable evidence as "fact'. I've always admired the ways of the North American Native Indians and other peoples who respected (note past tense) their environs, never taking more than they needed etc. Worship aside- they found harmony with nature. They fit in with

What's Natural?
In my humble opinion, this theory is supported by more "facts" that others. Many cultures have "bibles" (holy works or whatever) that tell the history (however convoluted) of their race, belief and such. Most seem to have similar plots and stories. Few can stand on the evolution, big bang and other theories. Many texts teach this. History, to the comic book. It's amazing that people still don't follow. Possible. Frank http://pages.sbcglobal.net/flv http://biseonline.com/r19

What's Natural?
any of the dozen [*edited by CH] Yeah they all do and they all claim to be the only right one. It would be hysterical if such claims over petty differences in opinion were ot the leading cause of wars. Strip all the fanciful creation stories down to their bones. One common truth is undeniably evident: humans are very creative critters... It's easier not to. Until there's money in it. I like this theory! A ring of truth to it.

Diploma mills [1]
Not many at all survived. I knew ahead of time that much of the movie was not factual when it came to Schindler. But, it was a relatively short movie that could not show all of Schindler's warts. To see what Schindler meant to his Jews, do remember the very last, post war seen. That's the one after Schindler's death and his burial with honors in Israel. Those people were not actors. They were actual Schindler Jews and their descendants.

What's Natural?
Of course. Just as anyone could. But they didn't because they didn't know where to look. I did, because, unlike them, I have actually read the Bible. By the way, anyone who read the Bible can remember that place about "jot and tittle" without having

What's Natural?
Torah is the Pentateuch, if you didn't know.

Evidence
So, is there evidence that there is evidence for God's existence or not?

"Red Tent"
So, you don't believe in the Bible but do believe in the holocaust? Hypocrite.

Diploma mills [1]
Much more than Schindler's thousand. And way much more fled Germany before and shortly after Hitler become a reichchancellor. Short? Dan, it is four hours long! The only reason Schindler was idealized is Spielberg's desire to make another movie about Jewish suffering and Nazi oppression and you can't insert a negative hero in a movie like that. They had their reason Schindler saved them/their parents. It is their right to have Schindler as their hero. But I prefer

(no subject)
Konnichi wa, Dan-chan. Check out what I've found in my carbon copies' archive: Cut God Dan Oleg Dolgikh: And, once again, depends on which Buddha do you like more. While 'original' Buddha, prince Siddhartha Gauthama, first prophet of Buddhism, was more of a wise guy than a 'magical character' of any kind (walking around with his followers, lecturing them on enlightenment and dying a simple death without any resurrections or other miracles), there is a whole bunch

(no subject)
Why? The 'god' concept is parent image guilt/fear pewoer tool. And organization necessary to establish control; as in shepherds managing sheep. What's wrong with this one? Cindy

What's Natural?
Too bad they didn't choose better men to fashion him after. Or maybe that's a good thing, as even more people might want to believe then.

What's Natural?
I can see one way in which both evolution and creation have an advantage over it though. And that is that it fails to explain the remarkable similarities between all known living things. And more importantly, predicts that some species, or groups of species, should be profoundly dissimilar, because they share no common origin. Evolution and creation both offer plausible explanations for this. With evolution, the similarities are the natural product of having evolved from a common ancestor. With creation,

Anti-Choice terrorist on the lam
Disgusting, but not surprising after all sexual assault is just another form of violent crime. L'Chaim Mimi

What's Natural?
Not a unfamiliar theory, Frank. And far more [edit] plausible than any of of the dozen or so Creation theories toted by their respective believers, without verifiable evidence as "fact'. You've noticed that too!? This gladdens my heart! (I'm being a little sarcastic). Most folks only see differences thus conclude there is no common ground but 'god'. Sure. Given the 'right' conditions the forces of nature evolved the phenomenal DNA; the infinite diversity of which all life forms on Earth

What's Natural?
The men who created gods, did the choosing. Everybody is capable of creating their own 'god or goddess'; fetish... whatever. Crutches all. A pesky thing. This co-dependance trait. Like an appendix. It becomes inflamed by those struggling to grow out of it. Cindy

What's Natural?
Sort of like in Valhalla!