Looking for Lucy VS. Looking for God
Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 8:42 am
I wonder how much world-wide effort went into the search for Lucy?
Think of all the sifting and gentle brush strokes. That was good science. They wanted to find bones and they seached where bones were likely and obtained their Lucy bones.
Read references to the Dawkins tripe about IF there were any evidence of God then who could refuse to allow him into the equations of the natural world? Sooooooooooooooooooo does that mean somebody really would like to find God? Evidence at least? Hmmm. Where would you look for evidence of God? Just being scientific about it you can only find something when you look where it is!!!!!!!!
Which God? I prefer the one I know. Mostly because I know where he is. Why is it not scientific to look for God as the witnesses of God have said? The best witness I accept is Christ. He said that the kingdom of God is within you. So the best place to find God is within. Weird Science indeed.
The gospel rites initiate a new heart. This is an act of creation. God will visit you by his Almighty power and remove the foreskin from off you heart that keeps the natural man from the love of God. Thus it is an act of God, an immediate and real connection, being born of God. The old saints said afterwards that they had come to know the Lord. This proves the existence of God but only on an individual basis. Yes, some ancillary benifits still.
I do not sanction every born again claim as equal to the proof of God's existence. Many are lame counterfiets where one set of men flatter the money givers into believing they are special. Not good science. Because they really do not know anything and must rely upon something outside themselves like the Bible to prop themselves up against all doubt. That is not where God is found. Not in dead works but in living proofs. In your own heart by his act of creation.
You cannot get academic renown discovering the evidence of God in your own heart. But God, wants to change hearts and so he makes that the gateway to knowing him. Hey! It's his universe and so he gets to do what he wants. Why can this not count?
I will not preach up the exact method by which you can work the spiritual science and get the same results as every saint always did.
I could, if you asked me to. But I think you will have to care enough to ask.
Hey! they turned over tons of dirt to find Lucy. The Lord God deserves better than that!
If you just insist on being lazy then you can settle on Mount Olympus' signature of Jesus Christ as proof. I think that is good science too because it is an ancient relic of our culture that includes God and goes all the way back to the beginning. Archaeological proof, cool. http://www.fireark.org
You thought God always had to do things the way he always did them before. Moses was way differenct than Christ. Both were right, however. All the pretender are caught doing it the old way and God opens up a whole new can of Washington. What do you know?
Think of all the sifting and gentle brush strokes. That was good science. They wanted to find bones and they seached where bones were likely and obtained their Lucy bones.
Read references to the Dawkins tripe about IF there were any evidence of God then who could refuse to allow him into the equations of the natural world? Sooooooooooooooooooo does that mean somebody really would like to find God? Evidence at least? Hmmm. Where would you look for evidence of God? Just being scientific about it you can only find something when you look where it is!!!!!!!!
Which God? I prefer the one I know. Mostly because I know where he is. Why is it not scientific to look for God as the witnesses of God have said? The best witness I accept is Christ. He said that the kingdom of God is within you. So the best place to find God is within. Weird Science indeed.
The gospel rites initiate a new heart. This is an act of creation. God will visit you by his Almighty power and remove the foreskin from off you heart that keeps the natural man from the love of God. Thus it is an act of God, an immediate and real connection, being born of God. The old saints said afterwards that they had come to know the Lord. This proves the existence of God but only on an individual basis. Yes, some ancillary benifits still.
I do not sanction every born again claim as equal to the proof of God's existence. Many are lame counterfiets where one set of men flatter the money givers into believing they are special. Not good science. Because they really do not know anything and must rely upon something outside themselves like the Bible to prop themselves up against all doubt. That is not where God is found. Not in dead works but in living proofs. In your own heart by his act of creation.
You cannot get academic renown discovering the evidence of God in your own heart. But God, wants to change hearts and so he makes that the gateway to knowing him. Hey! It's his universe and so he gets to do what he wants. Why can this not count?
I will not preach up the exact method by which you can work the spiritual science and get the same results as every saint always did.
I could, if you asked me to. But I think you will have to care enough to ask.
Hey! they turned over tons of dirt to find Lucy. The Lord God deserves better than that!
If you just insist on being lazy then you can settle on Mount Olympus' signature of Jesus Christ as proof. I think that is good science too because it is an ancient relic of our culture that includes God and goes all the way back to the beginning. Archaeological proof, cool. http://www.fireark.org
You thought God always had to do things the way he always did them before. Moses was way differenct than Christ. Both were right, however. All the pretender are caught doing it the old way and God opens up a whole new can of Washington. What do you know?
