Re: If god exists, what created god?
Gil Hardwick (email@example.com)
Sat, 29 Apr 1995 06:52:48 GMT
In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Rodney Wines (R_WINES@TRZCL1) writes:
>In <cbwillisD7MoM9.7I2@netcom.com> email@example.com writes:
>> God is birthless and deathless, eternal, omnipresent.
>Interesting theory, but where're your facts to support it?
But he doesn't have to have facts to support it. All he has to do is
SAY it for the idea to be invoked.
Note that the claim is not that God exists, only that God IS (L. Deus
est) . . . whatever. Like astronomers claim that space (or whatever)
IS . . . whatever.
That any scientist subsequently pays attention to an idea of God thus
invoked merely presents us with facts proving, scientifically, that
religion has currency in science. Similarly any religious person of
recognised scientific standing.
Compelling situation in which we find ourselves, yes? Difficult indeed
to see how both religion AND science are in common able to transcend
the overlapping discursive space in which they each manifest in human
Might as well just stop savaging each other about it . . .
He who refuses to qualify data is doomed to rant.
+61 97 53 3270