Want Some Answers ???

Evolutionism
Index
Home



Hi Mark W

I wrote that there are no "
particles that travel FASTER than the speed of light". Light speed has not "been superseded" so I can say it "is impossible". Your replied,

>>Do you not keep up to date with the latest scientific developments? In fact, this is old news: (from 2000) 'A team from the prestigious Princeton University in Massachusetts demonstrated that the speed of light could be surpassed. Thus overturning the rules of modern physics and Einstein's theory of relativity.' Scientists break speed of light June 4, 2000 NEC Research Institute in Princeton ... institute in Princeton, who transmitted a pulse of light towards a ... www.electrogravityphysics.com/html/speed_of_light.html <<

All I get is,
"You don't have permission to access /html/speed_of_light.html on this server." Even so, (1) matter can't go faster than light speed. Matter must transfer into light and be received at the other end (impossible). Recently a BBC report said teleporting is also impossible, as "each atom" in the body must be selected in it's "exact location", transferred and received in the same. (2) The distances and time required are still too large. The closest star is 4.3 light years away. Even at twice light speed, it takes over 2 years. The nearest big star system is about 175,000 light years. The fact remains, only since alien movies/books have UFO sightings been reported. To suggest 'they are waiting until we mature before revealing themselves' sounds like another story to explain the missing evidence.

>>Simple answer- it would NOT take several years- perhaps just a few seconds with waves that travel several times the speed of light. Secondly, there have been over 50 MILLION reported UFO sightings since 1945 - many of these sightings are accompanied by radar detection (meaning it is a solid object) travelling at several THOUSAND MILES PER HOUR. Perhaps you can offer an explanation? Moreover, ufo sightings are NOT A NEW PHENOMENON. They are recorded throughout history.<<

A "
few 'seconds"? This is dream world - an evolutionist making up stories to justify an unproven theory. All these 'sightings' are either lies, unknown, unconfirmed, unproven or fraud. Make them go as 'fast' as you like, they are still unbelievable. They are a new fashion, unheard of before alien movies and related to evolution theory. No reports from the Front in 1914-18? Or in the heat of WW2? Or in the middle of conflict in any other major war since? No landings on radar? None around earths thousands of international airports? None clogging up airspace? Oh they must have anti-radar - right? Yes always another story to explain away missing evidence. You can believe in aliens, but need stories to answer problems (as evolution theory). Yes some try to read into history their alien ideas and rewrite history to supports their belief (all kinds of belief) and the gullible WILL believe it.

And the estimated 100,000 dust particles in every cubic Kilometre of space? One speck of a particle, the velocity strike would destroy a space ship. You reply,

>>Attuned to a particular wavelength, this is not even a consideration. I could explain the physics but if you are not familiar with science, including the latest discoveries, this would be futile on my part.<<

Another weird story to answer futile evidence. Travelling by wavelength, arriving by radio? Still not faster enough! But here is another problem, the faster, the less time to change course and slow down. No time to adjust for a dust speck. The power needed to slow down equals the power needed to get the speed. While travelling at light speed, all the stars and galaxies keep moving, light bending around objects, and no problems with navigation. You still hope 'science answers all the problems', but it's based on fiction. And any alien visits mentioned in the bible? You reply,

>>You are accepting that the Bible is God's word...My statement is just the opposite. The original Bible is the word of extraterrestrials and does not mention the existence of a 'God.' 'God' is the minds of man.<<

The bible claims to be "God's word" and divinely inspired in many places. Jesus said, "Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God". (Heb.10:7). I've read & studied the bible, experts have poured over the texts and manuscripts for centuries. We have a text today closer to the original as never before in history. Less reason for rejecting the bible than ever before. No scholar seriously considers the book is an alien work.

It's
God's Word because the writers were God’s organs in communicating his will to men. His “word,” because He speaks in its pages. All in my mind? No, what I believe, I don't make up. Is God's existence just my mind? No, every building has a design. Every watch has a design. Our "minds" always link design to construction and a product of a "mind" not chance. Design must have a Designer. The earth is astonishingly well suited for life. It's not impossible that divine design is the reason. So God's Word relates to truth and facts not nebulous 'aliens'.

You don't take scripture serious or believe it. Why quote it if it's unreliable?

>>May I suggest that you view "The Historical Construction of The Bible" at: http://www.rotten.com/library/religion/bible/historical-construction/ The Bible has preserved very little of the early original documents- the sentences I have quoted you are from the ORIGINAL Torah. (the remainder has been desribed by some religious scholars as nothing more than 'manmade poetic babblings.')<<

It's shocking that's the kind of website you ask for historical 'facts'. No wonder you are so mixed up!! A website called "Poo pastries" "www.rotten.com" The "F" word is common, it gets dirty, vial, with porn. The "staff" - basically one person, who rubbishes everything under the sun. And supposed to be funny? Looking for answers from loonies and nutcases? Ask bible experts of Greek and Hebrew, not the bible's enemies.

There are thousands of books written on bible texts etc. Such problems you suggest don't exist.

If I take parts the bible as true (as you want me) why can't you believe the other parts of Genesis where God created the heavens and earth?

>>Because the nature of the universe can be rationally understood, and 'god' (the Elohim) discovered the Earth, not 'created' the Earth. It is not meant to be taken literally, certainly the early writers of the Bible could only comprehend the 'creation' of all things by God and made 'him' responsible for all things.<<

You are asking me to believe you NOT the bible. So I need YOU to explain the bible. Only verses YOU quote '
literally' are good and we ignore those contrary to YOUR ideas. Your idea 'Elohim discovered' the earth is not biblical - "In the beginning God CREATED the heavens and the earth." (Gen.1:1). It's impossible to read "the early writers of the bible" and make such a mistake.

Elohim says, "Fear ye not, neither be afraid.... Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any" (Isa.44:8)

>>That says it all...<<

Yes Elohim is 'one God' (not aliens). God who knows everything doesn't know of any other like Him. Gen.6:2 doesn't refer to aliens. "Sons of God" can refer to angels (Job 1:6) created by God (Psa. 148:2,5 Col.1:6) or Christians (1 Jn.3:1) or Adam (Lk.3:38 Jn.3:4).

>>The etymology of the word “angel” comes from the Greek word “angelos” which means “messenger.” It does not have to be mystical. It can in fact refer to the messengers sent by the Elohim. Jesus was also a messenger, the 'son of 'God.' He referred to my 'father who art in heaven- my will be done on Earth as in heaven.' And for your interest, here is the etymology of the word, 'God.' God can variously be defined as: the proper name of the one Supreme and Infinite Personal Being, the Creator and Ruler of the universe, to whom man owes obedience and worship; the common or generic name of the several supposed beings to whom, in polytheistic religions, Divine attributes are ascribed and Divine worship rendered<<

The bible defines what it means when using words rather than Greek 'etymology'. Angels are "spirit" creatures created by God to obey Him (Heb.1:14). Jesus was 'God in the flesh' (not angel) (Heb.1:10-15 1 Tim.3:16). The trinity explains the plurality of Elohim better (Mt.28:19). The bible gives us this threeness. Your etymology might help explain a word (ie God) but the bible is the final authority of who, and what God is. His character, nature, actions, and person are found there. Don't go to polytheistic religions (or atheistic websites) to learn about the bible God. Without God's Spirit one lacks 'spiritual discernment' - "The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor 2:14). This is why spiritual realities confuse you. Those without God's Spirit lack God's help to understand bible words or subjects .

And so stars were created for man (not aliens). You reply,

>>'Discovered' is more accurate. I do not believe in a God creating something from nothing (as per my previous email) I am curious, do you believe human beings are the only ones to exist in the universe? If it was shown that other humanities (extraterrestrials) exist on other planets, would you believe that they too were created by 'God.'? <<

Not according to the bible. "God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven to divide day from night; and let them be for signs, seasons, and days and years: and let them be for lights in the firmament of heaven to give light on the earth..... And God made two great lights; the greater to rule day, and the lesser to rule night: he made the stars also. (Gen.1:14-16). Who to believe, you or the bible? Does - nobody times nothing equals everything. The bible says, "The invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse" (Rom.1:20ff). Creation out of nothing is the expression of absolute power. Vast distances in space imply His eternal nature. Yes like it or not, in your aliens theory you still have all things coming from nothing. And every star from nothing requires more faith. NO 'ALIEN' LIFE WILL EVER BE DISCOVERED ON OTHER PLANETS.

No biblical scholar says "
Elohim" means "those who came from the sky". "Elohim" is the plural of El but no translator used it as you say.

"Elohim is the plural form of El, but it is usually translated in the singular. Some scholars have held that the plural represents an intensified form for the supreme God; others believe it describes the supreme God and His heavenly court of created beings. Still others hold that the plural form refers to the triune God of Genesis 1:13, who works through Word and Spirit in the creation of the world. All agree that the plural form Elohim does convey the sense of the one supreme being who is the only true God." Hayford's Bible handbook. (1995). You reply,

>>The evidence states otherwise. "Genesis of the Grail Kings by Sir Laurence Gardner" "http://graal.co.uk/grailkings.html" Among other things, provides historical evidence to support the theory of Elohim meaning 'those who come from the sky'. Also provides insights into the very human characterists of the 'Gods'.<<

Gardner is not a bible expert but writes for money. He is into 'Holy Grail' theories, unproven history, works of fiction. He believes 'transmutation of gold' and the "anti-gravitational science of the pharaohs". He says Adam and Eve were not the first people on earth and the whole of Genesis is a fake.
Gardner is not a PhD in biblical studies, Hebrew, or biblical history.

>>"The Hidden King James Bible: What the Translators Didn't Want You to Know" by Deane E Kogelsc www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0595265359/104-5493951-3307165 More independent data to backup the view of creation by extraterrestrial 'gods.'<<

"
Kogelsc" is anti-Christian and anti-God. He imagines things only known to him. He is not 'independent' he hates the person of 'God' and rubbishes God all through his book. He is a "newspaper writer", not a bible expert. He mostly writes about "financial survival", money matters, etc. He has no studies in the KJV, theology or bible versions. There is nothing 'hidden' about the KJV. The "translators" were scholars who did a fine work, but Kogelsc is an atheist who believes in aliens not God.

>>"In the Beginning: A Short History of the Hebrew Language" by Joel Hoffman. www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0814736548/104-5493951-3307165 pg. 235 talks of the different theories concerning the word 'Elohim', one of which is that 'Elohim' is a plural of 'eloha'.<<

This book fills many pages telling us what we don't know for sure about biblical Hebrew. And doesn't tell us what we do. There are many errors and a large number of typographical errors many which should have been caught by a simple spell-check program. Hebrew experts are disappointed saying it's "not at all reliable with regard to this information provided". And it does NOT take your view on 'Elohim' instead offers clear proof that "God" (as I use the word) is a fair translation.

>>"Masters of the Universe" by Robert Charroux www.nii.net/~obie/historygold.htm" On page 25 of this book, author Robert Charroux confirms the plurality of the word 'Elohim' by drawing upon the work of a Hebrew scholar by the name of J.M. Vaschalde. He interestingly notes that this scholar offered an alternate yet grammatically correct translation of the first verse of the Bible - 'Using what remained , beings from the sky created the sky and the earth' ( instead of ' In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.' ). Vaschalde's interpretation of the second verse of Genesis ' the blast from the engines of the intergalactic spacecraft used by the Elohim.' which is usually translated as 'And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters,' is yet another interesting fact that the author brings to light. pg. 77 gives a list of the many libraries that were burned and destroyed by the Catholics in order to remove traces of documents alien to their own doctrine.<<

You are mixed-up, a wrong link nothing about your topic here. This is the "Department of Interplanetary Affairs" Some of your alien friends perhaps? But I did have a read - another fiction and imagination work. Not a work to base your understanding of the bible on. There are dozens of books for and against many issues, one should not base their belief on theories. But God's Word is a good authority. To know God - go to the bible for word meanings. It is not corrupt - you can trust it. No one says Elohim is not plural. Biblical Hebrew scholars do not say it means 'they came from the sky'.

>>"Gods of the New Millennium: Scientific Proof of Flesh & Blood Gods" by Alan S Alford www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0340696133/104-5493951-3307165?v=glance" Alan S Alford takes a very scientific approach in this book to uncover the true origin of life on this planet. He presents his thorough research on the various theories that we have to explain our origins. In a logical manor he shows how a creation by people coming from another planet is not only possible, but the most likely explanation we have. The author presents a great case, going into incredible detail whilst drawing upon much historical data.<<

Alford follows the tradition of von Daeniken and Sitchin and sets out to prove your own ideas. This book is not mainstream science but fill of "specious, illogical assumptions". Reviewers say, "He is quite happy to take a flimsy idea and present it as fact while conveniently ignoring other contradictory evidence" (Just like you). "He is also prone to citing, in the same breath, data from reliable and accepted studies and highly speculative notions based on hunches and zero evidence. Sitchin's work is accepted a bit too uncritically and with too much reverence which ultimately hobbles the book. Thus, in his enthousiasm to prove the extraterrestrial connection, Alford tries to do too much and, for me, undermines the credibility of his main idea." Just as the bible says, "Professing themselves wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of corruptible man" (Rom.1:22).

>>"The Messianic Legacy" by M. Baigent, R. Leigh & H. Lincoln. www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0440203198/104-5493951-3307165?v=glance This book uncovers the ominous global conspiracy of disinformation surrounding both the New Testament including the many myths of which society has embraced as fact. Examples such as the town of Nazareth which did not exist until 100 years after Jesus' death. The traditional nativity scene of which there is not a single Gospel that actually claims that Jesus was born in a stable. And there are many more examples of misinterpretation and translation errors throughout the book. A very interesting read.<<

Reviewers say, "Those who believe in global conspiracies will enjoy the intrigue; others may be rightfully bemused." Are you only reading fiction and literature that supports your ideas? Reviewers say, "This sequel to Holy Blood, Holy Grail….As with the previous volume, this one suffers from unsound generalizations, unfounded assumptions, and questionable handling of scholarly research."

>>"The Kabbalah Unveiled" by S L Macgragor Mathers. www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0877285578/104-5493951-3307165 More about the feminine plurality of the word Elohim. pg. 21<<

The weirdest book in your list, "The Book of Concealed Mystery' is the book of the equilibrium of balance", with heaps of Statistically Improbable Phrases" (eg 'supernal beard', 'concealed brain'). This takes the prize as the strangest book. I assume you didn't read anything in this book.

>>"All the Divine Names and Titles of the Bible" by Herbert Lockyer. www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0310280419/104-5493951-3307165 Explanations of the word 'Eloha", the singular of 'Elohim' as well as it's link to the word 'Allah'. This book states clearly that the plural and singular, 'Elohim' and "Eloha" were replaced by 'God' in modern translations of the Bible. (see pg.8)<<

There is no "link to the word 'Allah'. 'Allah' is the name of Mohammad's tribal god [the 'moon god']. Nothing to do with the biblical God. Lockyer says, "Elohim is a plural of majesty or eminence, more accurately the plural of fulness or greatness. It is a term suggesting the Trinity". And "The answer to this alien creed is obvious. While there may be inferior agents there cannot be a plurality of gods. The living and true God is declared to be "Greater than all gods" (Ex.15:11)". Lockyer is a born-again Christian.

>>Plus here is some information concerning the Elohim which may be of interest for you.... For the ancient Hebrews "divinities (elohim) dwelt in the sky. Different tribes each had particular deities who were especially concerned with their affairs." - Ninian Smart, The Religious Experience of Mankind <<

Here's
some information concerning Elohim which may interest you. A PhD in biblical languages on Elohim -"The most striking thing about this towering Old Testament word for God is that it occurs only in Hebrew and in no other Semitic language, including biblical Aramaic. It is as if Elohim is carefully isolated from the El of other Semitic peoples, that He might be honored as truly unique. No one speaking about the God of the Hebrews and using this title could possibly confuse Him with the emasculated El of other traditions. Used in the general sense of deity some 2,570 times in the Old Testament, Elohim is a distinctive name for the God of the Bible." L. Richards. Every Name of God in the Bible. (Pg 18).

>>"The geologist Christian O'Brien argued that these [ancient Hebrew and sumerian] texts describe a race of beings called Shining Ones - his translation of the Hebrew word Elohim. These beings created modern humans from earlier human forms by genetic manipulation. Some of these beings, called Watchers, mated with humans, and this was considered a crime by the Shining Ones. One of the Watchers was named Shemjaza, and Yahweh was one of the Shining Ones. O'Brien argued that the Shining Ones were superior but mortal beings of unknown origin." - Richard L. Thompson, Alien Identities - Ancient Insights into Modern UFO Phenomena<<

Well this is all nonsense. He must be one of your alien theory friends trying to mix the bible, myths and la la land. He is not a mainstream scholar and you have problems if you believe this. He is fooling you. Does it ever occur to you that there are people who lie?

>>"When the gods created Mankind Death for Mankind they allotted, Life they retained in their own keeping." - The Epic of Gilgamesh<<

Do you base belief on odd quotes from odd places? The Epic reads like fiction with over 800 lines missing & many uncertain, 'fragmentary', & unknown. Even the gods ask 'who created mankind', yet they create each other & 'the earth'. Why didn't the gods preserve their story, like Yahweh did with the bible? The bible is more believable and textually clearer.

>>And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. Gen.:26<<

Yes, "the first clear indication of the trinity of God (cf. 3:22; 11:7). The very name of God, Elohim (1:1), is a plural form of El". The MacArthur Study Bible (Ge.1:26) Nashville: Word Pub.

>>"In the clay god and Man shall be bound, to a unity brought together; So that to the end of days the Flesh and the Soul which in a god have ripened - that Soul in a blood-kinship be bound." - Sumerian creation story, Encyclopedia Britannica<<

Note also in Sumerian records "three main topics appear to have convincing parallels: Creation, the Flood and the tower of Babel" (Encyclo). This has support the biblical accounts of these events, but the bible is still a better record. It's kept and inspired by God, and God speaks through it. Should the theories of men have great authority and determine how you understand the bible? Be they evolution, pagan, or fiction.

>>The creators (Elohim) outline in the second hour 'the shape of a more corporeal form of man. They separate it into two and prepare the sexes to become distinct from each other. Such is the way the Elohim proceeded in reference to every created thing." - Eliphas Levi, The Nuctameron of the Hebrews "...The androgynous constitution of the Elohim is disclosed in the next verse, where he (referring to God) is said to have created man in his own image, male and female; or, more properly, as the division of the sexes had not yet taken place, male-female....This definitive reference to a humanity existing prior to the 'creation of man' described in Genesis must be evident to the most casual reader of Scripture." - Manly P. Hall, Masonic, Hermetic, Quabbalistic & Rosicrucian Symbolical Philosophy<<

I don't have any problem accepting this as a genuine quote. I'm familiar with groups like "Masonic & Rosicrucian". Anyone who gets instruction on the bible from them will believe anything. However, the attempt to pass off such comments as something the bible teaches is dishonest untruthful to what it teaches. If they deceive about the bible, they will deceive about anything.

>>"...The sons of gods (bene ha-elohim) saw the daughters of men that they were fair..." - Genesis 6:2a<<

Why quote scripture if it's untrustworthy and you don't believe it? If I take it as true, (as you want) why not believe all parts of the bible? Some refer to this as angels, other as the sons of Seth.

I gave evidence suggesting the universe is NOT billions of years old. So if the universe and earth is young, that cancels out your idea. You replied,

>>The science of astronomy has dated the pyramids and sphinx to 11,000 BC. (13,000 years ago) This same technology (& which is MUCH more reliable than other dating methods such as carbon dating etc) This same technology dates the ruins of Tiahuanaco at 13,000 years old- the location of one of the 1st human civilisations... The universe, however, is INFINITELY old- it has always existed and always will exist, therefore 'billions' is a very limited timeframe.<<

But experts in all fields of science reject long ages - Ph.D's in Biology, Physics, Genetics, Organic Chemistry, Mathematics, Zoology, Meteorology, Botany, Biochemistry, Medical, Geology, Palaeontology, Astronomy, Theology, etc. Experts in astronomy wouldn't date the earth over 7,000 years - Johannes Kepler (Astronomy) John Herschel (Astronomer) William Herschel. William Huggins (astronomy). Dr D Faulkner (Prof. astronomy & physics PhD astronomy). But the only one who has observed the entire history of the universe from beginning to end is God. Obviously, no scientist was there billions of years ago, nor can anyone go back in a time machine to make critical measurements and tests. Only the Creator is in a position to know with certainty the true history and age of the universe. Man's finite powers of observation and sin-polluted, degenerate minds are simply not capable of knowing many absolute facts about the ancient past. God is a witness, His Word is clear. It indicates all Creation was finished in 6 days (6 earth rotations). It's widely agreed biblical genealogies carefully provide a line of descent from the 1st Adam to the 2nd Adam.

>>Using dna mapping technology, Japanese researchers discovered that our gene pool originated 13,000 years ago. 666 generations have passed (the 'number of man' or the 'number of the beast' as described in Revelations) A generation is 20 years x 666 is 13,320 years<<

This ignores the distinction between normal and origins science. Normal science deals only with repeatable observable processes in the present. Origin science helps us to make educated guesses about origins in the past. Operational science is successful in understanding the world and led to improvements in life, e.g., curing diseases etc. But there is no 100% fool proof method to test the earth's age. Each method has problems some more than others. But all long age methods rely on assumptions.

There is nothing understandable about "
human beings coming from another planet". You must answer objections and prove it plausible first.

>>VERY PLAUSIBLE! I have already given you the example of the Cargo cult at the time of world war 2. It is very EASY to understand (unless someone is very narrow-minded) how primitive people can interpret men coming from the sky as divine, miraculous, as mysterious 'gods.' There are examples all throughout history. (I recommend you to read 'Gods of the New Millennium' by Alan Alford to give you many more examples)<<

No there is nothing understandable you haven't silenced objections. Your weblinks don't solve the problem. The bible is the biggest objection. In the end, you must -

1. You must prove there is no God (as described in the bible)
2. Refute the evidence for His existence
3. Explain away Jesus Christ
4. Remove the evidence for His resurrection
5. Disprove bible prophecies
6. Prove the Bible is a fraud
7. Establish the credibility of atheism


And there was nothing "
primitive" about those in early Genesis.

>>Yes, early man was taught the necessities of basic living as you state. However, there is a big difference between 'naming all the animals' and spaceflight, the mastery of matter and genetic engineering. We were left to progress and to reach the age of science, technology and understanding by ourselves. How fortunate we are to live at this time in history when we can finally understand without mysticism.<<

So there was nothing "primitive" about those in early Genesis. Adam's brain was excellent and his body lived 100's of years longer than ours. He didn't need "genetic engineering", cars or help to understand himself. God created man fully intelligent. Many scientists accept biblical creation and most of the great scientists of the past who founded and developed the key disciplines of science were creationists. Also keep in mind, there are many things we don't know unless we read the bible. That is, God revealed them. They're from the bible, not scientists. Things science can't prove, but are unknown if the bible is removed.

>>May I remind you that I was brought up to believe in the Bible. That gave me all the more reason to investigate further. hence many years later, my conclusion is that we were created by intelligent beings misinterpreted as Gods.<<

But you were never born again. Without God's Spirit within, you can't understand His Word, it's 'God's book'. One can read and study yet without the new birth one is spiritual blind. Real Christian's know the reality of God's existence. You interpret it according to what atheists say. You believe them rather than the bible. Hence you fell for aliens.

Creation is far beyond the work of aliens, regardless how clever you think they are.

>>And do you believe that creation is far beyond the work of human beings? Were you surprised when it was announced that we can create viruses and bacterium from scratch ? Are you surprised that NASA has plans to go to Mars, terraform the planet and create life? What do you think of cloning technology, genetic engineering, genetically modified foods? Are you for technology and scientific progress or against? Are you offended that scientists are now playing 'God' ?<<

What I mean by 'creation beyond aliens' is that they could not have all knowledge (of past and future) and all power (over matter, space, time). Men can re-build a virus (not make it from nothing), use parts already there. But men with science are children compared to God. The eye, brain, DNA etc., God's skill/knowledge is beyond humans. Men struggle just to copy He did. Men look at the creatures and try to use the basic ideas already there.

It took intelligent scientists to decode the DNA in living cells, and similarly clever scientist to work out how it could be used to transfer information. The more scientists learn about DNA the more they confirm DNA was invented by the ultimate intelligent cryptographer - God. Information science has always been a job for very clever people. No code of information ever developed itself naturally or by chance random processes. Only one with super knowledge at the start could build a living creature.

>>For me, what defies belief, is your above statement. To understand our history, it is necessary to have FORESIGHT, and be aware of what is happening RIGHT NOW with our technology. When our scientists create life from scratch on another planet in the very near future, will you be in denial and disbelief? Will your world come tumbling down? The danger here is that if you are closing yourself off to scientific developments, ignoring the evidence before you - and quite likely you ignore the fact that we are merely REPEATING the creation of life, as it was done a few thousand years ago. We are a link in the infinite chain of life throughout the universe.<<

But if our "scientists create life from scratch on another planet" it does not prove aliens created life here. You think if men are clever like God, there must be aliens out there. I'm not closed to "scientific developments", they're the reason I know aliens haven't come here and don't exist. You have an absurd belief based on what you don't know - believing what you want and ignoring the rest.

It takes a huge amount of information, knowledge and skill to create life (God). Men can never do what God did create something from nothing!

>>No, men will never be able to create SOMETHING from NOTHING. That is simply not possible! And not even by an imaginary 'God'! (Since God does not exist as he magically came into existence from NOTHING!!) What IS possible is to manipulate that which already exists. AS before, 'Nothing is created, nothing is lost, EVERYTHING is TRANSFORMED.' Matter and energy are eternally one.<<

And that's the weakness in your idea. No answers for where the universe came from. No explanation, no purpose, no meaning, no reason to live, none for life. Yet we see a massive universe with planets and galaxies. All laws and gravity in recognizable order and you haven't a clue. Yes men cannot create from nothing its impossible, that must apply to aliens. Stars burn out, things wear out, run down. So they must be whined-up at the start. Matter can change into energy but energy is lost. Stars are burning out. As matter is used, changed into heat, and heat lost. So matter must have been formed/created sometime ago. Whoever formed matter, has all power and knowledge.

There must be intelligence to start with, to direct atoms. All things left to themselves fall apart, not together. Computers don’t happen by chance and matter, it takes intelligence to make things intelligent.

>>It is also based on what we know as we can find evidence in ancient texts- visitations from people coming from the stars who sent messengers and who started the various religions.<<

So "
ancient visitations" are no proof and uncertain. I can't base belief on the imagination - a belief on the unknown.

>>You obviously have not taken the time to visit the information (weblinks) I provided you. (Bibleufo.com etc..perhaps you also have no inclination to know why detailed pictures of flying machines and occupants appear in medieval paintings and in cave paintings thousands of years old?) If you are so inclined, you will quickly discover that I am just one among THOUSANDS who think the same way. (Incidentally if you believe we are not alone, you are in the lower 20 percentile. 80% of people are openminded to the possibility that there is life on other planets.)<<

Judging by your weblinks above it would be pointless. Besides I had the idea from your response to my mail there was only a few matters you visited. I'm willing to look at your pictures of medieval and cave paintings links.

There might be 80% who "are opened minded" but millions upon millions who insist God exists. So for us, there are only 2 possible explanations our existence - aliens or God. Having looked at your evidence and emails so far, there is no physical proof but it's all linked to the imagination and the uncertain.

>>'Eternal'- that is the nature of the universe (since it is infinite in space and time) 'Divine' - this is how primitive people interpreted the Elohim- as 'divine' beings. 'Divine' merely referring to a difference in technology as the people of that time could not understand and everything had to be 'divine.'<<

But if you believe the universe is '
eternal' in time and distance why can't you believe God can be eternal? Not a big step. You expect me to believe 'in little green men' without evidence, material objects, pictures of faces, or consistent pictures of spaceships.

And Hebrew scholars today don't interpret Elohim as aliens '
who came down from the sky' a primitive interpretation without facts. We know who Elohim is, the bible is too clear. Elohim speaks, thinks, acts -

"For ever since the creation of the world (God's) invisible qualities both His eternal power and His Divine nature have been clearly seen" (Rom.1:20). You reply,

>>I am sorry, but I have to laugh...'Invisible' ! Once again, that says it all- God does not exist!<<

Yes you laugh. Me too, the problems about aliens for you are invisible. Those who don't believe in God don't believe in nothing, they believe in anything. The fool says in his heart 'there's no God'. I can't find a better explanation, God's existence answers all the questions.

Jesus is "…the image of the invisible God,... For by him were all things created, that are in heaven and earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him…." (Col.1:15-18). Many things are '
invisible', don't assume they don't exist because they are 'invisible'. eg., electricity, touch a live wire – you won't be laughing.

And so "..times of ignorance God overlooked; but now he commands all men everywhere to repent: for he has appointed a day in which he will judge the world ." (Acts 17:24-31)

>>Very 'Biblical.' I sincerely hope you are not caught in the trap of 'repent repent', feel guilty, you need to suffer...type of mentality as this 'fear of God' has been known to cause mental disturbances and can lead to fanaticism. www.crescentlife.com/spirituality/religious_addiction.htm <<

Is
guilt that leads to repent wrong? Better to have no mental fear of wrong? If God doesn't exist - there is no right and wrong. You can do what you want - kill someone etc. To me all you evidence about aliens is pure fanaticism, I'm sorry I have to laugh. The bible paints a picture of man as God's creature in rebellion against God. Man (a moral being) has a desire to purse right and avoid wrong, more evidence for God's existence. But it is not until we realize we are hopeless sinners needing repentance that God can help.

So what's the evidence for aliens?

>>There comes a time when the evidence is simply overwhelming, almost to the point of being obvious...but I would like you to explain who God is. What does he look like? Is he a man or in fact a woman? (A woman more likely as she would be able to give 'birth to humanity'?) How does 'he' supervise every action of 6 billion humans? This God who has created everything in the universe, how does he listen to their infinite number of prayers? What a memory and ability to concentrate this God must possess! Where does God reside in this very large universe? If he resides 'EVERYWHERE' everywhere is a lot!<<

So no proof they exist. You just change the subject. Who is God? Some one you don't know. He is a Spirit ('the heavens and the earth cannot contain Him') He is outside space and time, not part of the created order. On earth He was manifest in a Person. Jesus Christ is the "image of the invisible God". And it's said that through "Him God made the worlds; who being the effulgence of his glory, and the very image of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power…" (Heb1:2-3). One day you will meet Him, then what will happen?

Reader see how this dialogue went? On for 12 more pages. There is no proof UFO's exist, so I cut it short here.


Index
Home