fauxlaw

As if Christians were supposed to be at odds with judaism. They are of closer relationship than the two are with Muslims, although all three claim Abrahamic origin. There is not the schism between the two as you suppose, and here's why: "The Law," as understood by Judaism, is more than just the 10 commandments of Exodus. Indeed, a full read of Exodus beyond the 20th chapter reveals more than strictly "the ten commandments." Ancient Jews considered the entirely of the Pentateuch, the five books of Moses, as "The Law." In later years, Judaism accepted not just the Pentateuch, but "The Prophets" - the later books of the prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, etc, as "The Law." AS a whole it cmprised not just 10, but over 600 commandments. However, by the early first century, "The Law" was dwindled to acceptance of just Mosaic Law of the Pentatech again. So, when Jesus taught concepts outside of Mosaic Law, they rebelled against him. For example, while "The Law" taught that the act of adultery was a sin [Exodus 20: 14], Jesus taught that the very thought if the act, looking upon a woman in lust was as if committing it [Matthew 5: 28] Consider Matthew 5: 17: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am come not to destroy but to fulfill." Jesus is declaring that the Prophets are to be accepted, which the Pharisees and scribes had dismissed. And, "For I say into you, That unless your righteousness shall exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter the kingdom of heaven." [Matthew 5: 20] In Jesus Christ, not in the Law of Moses, or the Prophets added to it, is the fulfillment, by righteousness to the Law as decreed by Jesus Christ, which is greater than "The Law" of all the Old Testament, of the kingdom of heaven. It requires more than devotion to 600 commandments. It requires a broken heart and a contrite spirit, being poor in spirit, mourning, meekness, hunger and thirst after righteousness, merciful, pure in heart, peacemakers, persecuted for righteousness, love your enemies. More than that, even. I am not belittling the Jews, here. I'm only saying they do not yet accept the fulfillment of Jesus Christ. However, in many respects, they are more dedicated than a lot of Christians in following their law, and blessed are they for it.

As if Iran is NOT pursuing nuclear weapons. I did not draw a distinction between energy and nukes;  you just did. Don't accuse me of your distinction. Perhaps the beginning of your charge in three words ought to suggest the relevance of what follows.

More complaining. I repeat: instead of complaining, be rich. I repeat: what's stopping you? Stop complaining, get to work. Are you stuck in a loop working for money? Put it to work for you. Break the mirror.

Lol? We didn't use that excuse, bud. Your generation seems adept at it, but not much else. We appear decadent, etc, because you don't seem to get the paradigm I just described above. We put our money to work, and you feel entitled to it. Make you own! Money is not made by entitlement, and those who believe it is are just socialists who don't get it that Marx left you nothing but. You complain that SS and Medicare are just socialist programs. Ever hear of FICA taxes. Do you have a clue what they are? It's on your paystub. It's your money paid on every paycheck to fund you SS and Medicare. You employer matches your payment; money you never see, but it's yours. By the time you have worked a full career, you've paid enough to fund over 90% of your SS and Medicare, Your money. Not anybody else's. The balance of of the ~10% is earned interest on your FiCA account. Not socialist. A capitalist investment plan. of curse, you're meant to invest more of your money so that by the time your retire, you have a nest egg to depend on so you don't have to be entitled. Get t? Nope. Not yet. You're not finished laughing and complaining, yet.

Do you have any other original swipe at anyone? Brain dead is getting a little old, don't you think? You use it so often, one wonders if it isn't self-directed. It's like the people who use some derivative of Trump's name as an avatar, thinking it a swipe at Trump. No, it's just admission that Trump has occupied a deep place in their head, rent-free. What? They lost their own name? Pity.

And so you have answered the question you raised first about Trump's tariff policy. A short-term rough patch, a long-term gain in a growing export ratio, which has been lacking by presidents for 40+ years, and finally will turn around by Trump.

I will have you recall that II Samuel and I Chronicles chronicle the story of David's purchase of King Araunah's threshing floor and surrounding land [Araunah was a Jebusite - look him up] for 50 shekels of silver. The land belonged then to David, and on that threshing floor his son, Solomon built the Temple. No one has ever purchased the land from David's descendants, but occupied it all the same, so let's not quibble over who owns the land.

Yes, Kennedy did, but it was not largest. And so you complain that Trump's tax cut favored the rich. Who pays more in tax volume, forget percentage. You want to complain about the rich? What's stopping you from joining them? The mirror is your answer. Change that.

Not under Johnson. Don't read more into what I write than that. He signed the Civil Rights Act under duress of historic perspective, not because he supported it. I'll wager you were not alive then. I was, and was well aware of who favored civil rights, and approved it, and who merely usurped it as a political ploy.

Trump cancelled the deal. Too bad Oba'a was afraid to make it a treaty - far more difficult to erase a treaty, isn't it? Oba'a was not after a long-term deal; just to get through his presidency, and I'll guarantee he didn't care a farthing after that. But it was a pathetic deal that would hand nukes to Iran in ten years. That's a deal? For whom? What did WE get out of the deal. Its a figure south of one. Actually, given the cash given to Iran, it's south of zero.

The economy crashed in 2008. Get your history straight. And, no, it did not recover in 2010, either, although Biden proudly claimed it the "Summer of Recovery." Well, it recovered so well, we lost our AAA credit rating in summer 2011, costing us billions in added interest debt. Don't forget Q.E., either. That was artificial firing of the economy. lLook at the results, Every boost the market had by Q.E. was followed by a spike down, because you don't stimulate an economy by artificial flooding with cash, every dollar of which raised the debt. Sure, you look at where the market was in 2017 when Trump was inaugurated, at 18,800. Fine, but lets recall that the market rose 1,000 points within days of Trump's election, so give that 1,000 to Trump. You're down to 17,800. Let's look at the market losses after each infusion of Q.E,; three of them. The total of losses against the gains amounted to almost 7,000 points. You're down to 10,000. Before the crash of 2008, and what Oba'a inherited was 8,000. So, what Oba'a managed to raise in 8 years was not 11,000 points, which it should have been without Q.E., if Oba'a financial advisors had a clue what they were doing, because Oba'a was dumb as a post on such matters, but the real Oba'a economy raised it 2,000 points. let's be generous. 3,000. 

They are all fair points.

I hear there's a movement to print TP as waffles, apply a warm, amber syrup, and eat up.

Thought crimes. Yep, the criminality of a tyranny.

My republic is doing just fine, and me in it.

Sorry about yours.

I trust you do not use the same brush with which you paint others to brush your teeth; otherwise, your teeth are turning orange.

That gets 5 starts humor.

I conclude: You have wandered so far afield in your accusations that you have forgotten the original proposal of this string: that you ignore and have defrocked Saint Darwin because you ignore that he gave the answer to your problem in the principles of his tome, On the Origin of Species. 

Adaptation.

But you'd rather ignore it, ridicule it in a song:

And you accuse that I'm brain dead???

"And this above all: to thine own self be true,

And it must follow, as the night the day,

Thou canst not then be false to any man." - Shakespeare, Hamlet, I, iii

Did you miss the 50s, when King Hubbard proclaimed "peak oil," and that the decline from the "peak" [of production of oil due to a depleting raw material supply in the earth] would occur in the 70s. We have reserves, still, of monumental increase over what Hubbard predicted.

Did you miss the 60s when it was declared we were over-populated in earth's human population, and the crowd proclaiming it was encouraging people to stop populating, or even existing. I note, however, that none of them were wiling to join the extinction line.

Did you miss the 70s, when, as predicted, oil production declined; not because of any natural condition of raw crude depletion [it was still there, and increasing, and still does], but because the government forced lower production, and the whole was later proven to be a hoax.

Did you miss the 80s, when Al Gore produced an inconvenient documentary that a climate disaster was coming in the guise of sea level rises to inundate NYC in 20 years, and a scorched earth from petroleum use, etc? Well, now, tell me how many of your green energy turbines in the world [hydro, tidal, geo-thermal, wind and even nuclear] that do not use petroleum for lubrication, and to manufacture plastic parts. Same for solar panels and electric cars.

Did you miss the 90s, when "global warming" decided that was not a proper term [mainly because "warming" was not the effect the global temperature monitors were reporting]?

No, you didn't. Have a care to understand what I wrote: "You can claim..." not that you did. A future potential, because we do not yet, and may never bottle cow farts. It's not a present fact. Get it?

When we land on Mars, [hasn't happened, yet, so don't get all huffy about my making "false narratives'] we will discover the ancient ruins of a once intelligent civilization that became obsessed with a concept they called climate change. We will witness the vast wasteland resulting from their solution: net zero emissions. To accomplish it, they eliminated all sources of GHG emissions, meaning they eliminated all lifeforms that lived, died, and decomposed to an organic petroleum crude. Thus, the achievement of net zero. However, as we learned from Jurassic Park, life finds a way, and the cycle begins again. Net, plus. Congratulations.

One might think you think you created science! So why, pray tell, have levels of greenhouse gasses been higher in recorded geologic history prior to man? You can claim anthropogenic effect until cow farts are bottled, but theory is just theory. Sure, there probably is anthropogenic effect, but what is its tipping point of criticality? How does it compare to completely natural effects like vulcanism? Do we have a clue what an ideal climate should be, and by what measurement?  Is there a single, ideal climate the whole earth should have? Is there a scrubbing mechanism the earth naturally has to cleanse itself, because it has been observed to do that, such as by the observed natural reduction of the ozone hole crisis a few decades ago, but which has not yet kicked in because critical phase has not yet been reached for your GHGs? Climate science, with all its claims of being "in" [while being barely a science at 200 years of age] has not the longevity of experience of physics, astronomy, and geology, none of which claim "in."

For the benefit of Mister Mag
There will be collection bags to see his show,
The bag’s to spill your guts so full,
His game is not so wonderful, shout  hurrah!
 
The DA clan begins to grin
As Gami burns his ticket /in by real fire,
In this way, Mr. Mag will challenge the world!
 
The celebrated Mr. Mag
Performs his feat by telegram, a no-show man,
The members will all sing and dance,
As Mag sets fire to his pants; don’t be late!
 
The gamers will for sure assure
That this production will be second to none
And of course, Mr. Mag is playing a nun!
 
The game begins at six to six
When Mister Mag performs his tricks in absentia.
An empty stage will be ablaze
While everyone begins to taze the mafia!
 
Having been some days since being tazed
The Magi’s game will fall just flat on face.
And tonight, his game will fall under the world!
 
©2020 by fauxlaw
[all credit of inspiration to The Beatles]

What is this hang-up with rice? I merely said that rice paddies emit CH4 into the atmosphere, as do natural wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans, not that it is more important than humans. Let's not exacerbate an obvious disagreement, or hurl epithets about what I know and don't know, because YOU DON'T KNOW BLOODY SQUAT ABOUT ME. Period.  See https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/gp/bgp/4_7_CH4_Rice_Agriculture.pdf

thx. I'm new to DA. will check

No. Not in. Have no idea of the game protocol, but interested. Will watch this one. Can I ask you questions along the way?

Ah! a great subject. As a writer and illustrator, copyright may not be my bread and butter, although it is, but it is certainly the jam. My take is that beyond my death, my surviving family has already had the benefit of my largesse, and will inherit everything I have forgotten to take with me. That means everything not in my head, I guess. They'll be ok without an extended copyright, not because I'm Michelangelo, but because my father taught principles of ambition, planning, and execution. I've applied that to investing and the in of the vest has been very good to me.

True, but which country in Europe is as populated with 330M people? 20% of Russia is 29M. of Germany, 16M. These are the two most populated of Europe. 20% of USA? 66M, right now. In 10 years? 

Make FICA another sales tax, etc, you lose a handle on what's for retirement and what's for the general fund, let alone the interest earned.

Sure, but 3/4 of GDP is driven by private money, and we ought to not penalize the people who create it by taxing them more. The engine that is most efficient, and beneficial for all is that engine that is more self-sufficient in use of energy supplied to it. You create more energy by encouraging more people to be more self-sufficient,  than those who weigh down the engine by just adding greater weight to the vehicle it moves. Better to have a greater self-sufficient class than an equivalent, or greater entitlement class.

sorry, that was entirely in jest. Don't take it personally. Besides, I'm called that all the time. But, no excuses. I am ashamed on myself and beg your forgiveess

I might be, but that's my business. Thanks

There is commentary on repetition expecting different results, but far be it from me to be coerced t explain it.

Sure. Manipulate away. But the original document we have is not the Bible, though it claims "...Let us make man in our own image, after our likeness." [Genesis 1: 26] That is God speaking. God is a title, not a name. And the references "our image" and "our likeness" would indicate we have a quorum of gods effecting the creation, not just one. Sure, you can argue that its the royal third person at play, but that God, who, in the Torah, is identified as "Elohim" is a term signifying a plurality.

Before the Bible, we have a document of Creation, itself, which continues to unroll, as a scroll, to demonstrate its "...grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved." [Darwin, On the Origin of Species, 2nd - 6th editions] A grandeur that exhibits a pattern set by the gods who organized it. There are generations of all life, all producing the same effects as their ancestry, with the wonder of diversity of variation, some variations good, and some not, but still, at the root, demonstrating an inherited pattern: such as god being a man, once, and a man becoming a god. It's called evolution, dummy.

Right on, bro.

In addition, we downplay the effect tat Trump is having by pushing new trade deals.  I believe the reason GDP has lagged for so long, regardless of DJiA performance - last 3 weeks excepted, but which has the obvious exterior cause - is because of the 40-year effect caused by the continuous negative export/import ratio from disastrous trade deals Trump has been harping about ever since his campaign. That he is correcting the negative trend will see that ratio reverse to a net positive export condition, and GDP will soar. The trade ratio right now is the only factor of GDP [consumer spending, business investment, government spending and net positive export] that is not pumping on all cylinders.

I will throw a concept that may disturb, thrill, confuse, and maybe you reject. Up to you.

"As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become." - Lorenzo Snow.

It's as Occam's razor as I can conceive of the relationship man has to God, who declared, upon the making of his ultimate creation, "...Let us make man in our own image, after our likeness..." Genesis 1: 26. Since we are made in His image, albeit imperfectly for now, in our mortal state, why should we aspire to anything but to become like Him? Since we are created in His image, that image is a physical being, perfect, ultimately holy, ultimately omnipresent and omnipotent, and eternally our Father, the Great I Am.

However, for any ladies out there, I refer you to the Sistine Chapel ceiling painting by my hero, Michelangelo, specifically the center panel he called The Creation of Adam. Note that Adam's creation is at arm's length, not quite even touching as Adam reclines, on earth, separate from the Eternal Father. Meanwhile, observe who is directly to God's left, held in the embrace of His left arm and shoulder, a red-headed woman, whose hand upon His arm is lovingly placed in adoration. This, ladies, is Eve, so Michelangelo, himself, said, and I consider this to be the true ultimate creation: the Mother of all Living. Adam's creation at arm's length; Eve's is within God's embrace, just as it should have been. Never sell yourselves short, ladies. That is how much you are loved by your Creator, and we sholud follow suit.

Roosevelt could have done something for Israel, like predict a US Embassy located in Jerusalem, but he did nothing. He did not even raise alarm about the Nazi death camps.
Truman could have dealt with NoKo directly, and he could have done what Roosevelt didn’t, but he didn't.
Kennedy could have made the largest tax cut in history, and could have done what Roosevelt and Truman didn’t, but he didn't.
Johnson could have have lowered black unemployment, and he could have done what Roosevelt, Truman, and Kennedy didn’t, but he didn't.
Carter could have told Iran where to get off, and he could have done what Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, and Johnson didn’t, but he didn't.
Clinton could have made a better deal with NoKo, and he could have done what Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson , and Carter didn’t, but he didn't.
Oba'a could have recovered our economy, and he could have done what Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson , Carter, and Clinton didn’t, but he didn't.
All seven could have dealt with China, but they didn't.
The last seven Dem presidents could have done these things, but none did. 
Trump did. Inside 3 years. Does he deserve 5 more, or what? Impeachment? For making progress? I thought the Democrats were progressive. Guess not.

Here’s Trump playing Cyrano de Bergerac in a rebuttal argument to Pelostomy using the same tactic as when Cyrano described his nose:
You might have said a hundred things by varying the tone:
Architectural: it’s a wall
Combative: It’s a barrier
Challenging: It’s an obstacle
Landscaping: It’s a berm
Theatrical: It’s a curtain
Political: It’s a partition
Cynical: It’s a sidewalk crack
Vague: It’s a fog
Philosophical: A door is a wall when closed. Open, it’s nothing.
Tyrannical: It’s to keep you in.
Romantic: It’s a balcony
Medieval: It’s a moat
Movie epic: It’s A Fistful of Dollars
Music epic: It’s Pink Floyd’s The Wall.

"Personal attacks will not be tolerated. The policy prohibiting personal attacks applies site-wide--in debates, forums, private messages, and everywhere else on the site." - Code of Conduct. You've been reported, my friend. Naught to add.

1. The sun is reborn on 12/25? No. Winter Solstice is on 12/21±1 day, and, at that, only in the Northern Hemisphere. In the Southern Hemisphere it's on June 21±1 day. Not to mention that that Earth's hemispheres do not have cause of anything relative to the sun unless we are, after all, a geocentric universe. We're not. And Jesus is actually figured to have been born in spring, late March to early April, around the Spring Equinix, and coincidentally, around Passover. Dec. 25th was a pagan holiday Christianity usurped.

2. Your sun's passage through the Zodiac constellations is, again, a phenomenon of a geocentric perspective, when, in actual fact, many of the visible stars in our earth's night sky [and daylight, too, if we could see them] are outside our galaxy since we are on the Milky Way's edge, and they are, individually variable light years away from one another. Their recognizable patterns exist only as such from a geocentric view. Therefore, from a cosmic perspective, there is not pattern to them at all but by our jaded view. 

3. The sun's journey has naught to do with the earth-perspective zodiac. It orbits the center of the Milky Way, not in one earth year, but in 225 to 240M earth years, meaning that in the entire history of man on earth, the sun has yet to complete a single orbit.

4. The sun is about 20 light years from Aquarius 𝛂, Sadalsuud.

Need I continue? You astrological "pretty strong evidence" is nonsensical in all 19 cases. What's significant about 19? We don't have a clue where Jesus was or what he was doing at that age. Maybe he was having seances with Fatima-May, the card-shark lay. Flawed human perspective is what you have, created to provide primitive explanation of the cosmos. Today, we use science, yeah? You remember, the stuff that proves climatology is just 200 years old and not "in" by millennia yet to go. Be careful when the moon is in the seventh house, and Jupiter aligns with Mars. You'll go around claiming children like to rub your leg hair.

Yeah, except the crucifixion and resurrection occurred in the late week of Passover in late March to April.

Just heard a good joke:

If we really want to kill the Covid-19, all we need to do is tell Hillaryous Balloon Girl that the virus has dirt on her. Her mafia will take care of that virus pronto!

Who made you a tester? By your word, you.

For the simple reason that Obama's "recovery" was effective only because it was induced by artificial application in three iterations of quantitative easement; essentially flooding the market with printed money to buy government bonds [and adding to the debt]. This had unintended consequences. First, the July 2011 loss of the US triple-A credit rating, costing us added billions of dollars in interest-added debt. Second, each infusion, while having the effect of a market rise, each infusion and boost was followed by a decline, simply because the market could not sustain the boost by natural sustained growth. In the end, had the market, then, been a sustained rise such as we have seen over the last three years [until the last 3-weeks which is not a market-driven loss, but by the effects of Covid-19] Trump would not have taken over at DJIA 18,800 pointss [approx]; he would have inherited a market of 5,000 to 6,000 points greater.  Those are the combined losses that occurred during the market in Obama's administration. All things considered, Obama's economy barely broke even.

By contrast, the market since Trump's inauguration [really, since his election] has grown on its own natural confidence by investors, not by Q.E.

Affecting only #1:

The slavery issue may be compelling by your argument, but it can be argued that on the side of the fetus, it, too, may be subject to the force of will of the pregnant woman, and a violation of its rights. According to FindLaw.com[1]“Children are also entitled to due process…” Granted, this stipulates fully born entities, and the argument that children [minors] do not enjoy the fullness of rights afforded to adults, nevertheless, children have access to due process. That is good enough for this argument: The 14A, clause 1 states, “nor shall any State deprive any personof life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” [italics added for emphasis], then even a child has the right to life. Okay, how old? 
 
Granted, a fully-born minor child is not the same, by apparent legal definition, as a fetus, viz: 
 
1 U.S.C. §8 [a] “In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.”[italics added for emphasis] 
 
[b] “As used in this section, the term “born alive” with respect to a member of the species Homo sapiens,means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.” [italics added for emphasis]
 
[c] "Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being “born alive” as defined in this section."
 
I quote the third clause only because it contains a conundrum relative to The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 in which the murder of a pregnant woman that also causes the death of the fetus is a double-charge of murder, thus affording the extension, in contradiction to 1 U.S.C. §8 [c], of a “person” to the unborn fetus. Should a fetus be limited to its right of due process only because it is the victim of a violate act? Or, even, as highlighted in 1 U.S.C. §8 [b], “an induced abortion” which may, or may not result in the death by the artificial extraction of the fetus?
 
Relative to the legal commentary of 1 U.S.C. §8,Homo sapiensis “…every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.” The success “born alive” is occurring at earlier and earlier points in development due to advances in medical technology. The record is currently at 22 weeks[2]with a 15% survival rate to at least one year. If the gestation period is reducing, should “born alive” remain the standard as if it only means full gestation?
 

I don't mind the inclusion of the pretzel, but just dark chocolate and sea salt together are a fabulous taste sensation. Both enhance the flavor of the other such that the sum is much greater than the parts. But then, dark chocolate [the higher the percentage of cocoa butter, the better, and the less sugar, the better] is a major food group.

For example: a Christmas card I once composed, printed and sent:

Think it not strange if heaven has a care

To justice, good, forthright and fair,

If, after our Lord bring us there,

He'll serve us chocolate all seasons of the year.

and the next year:

And it's name shall be Wonderful, Confectioner,

The Mighty Good, the Everlasting Flavor,

The Prince of Pieces.

Some argue that Edison was his light bulb. I suppose the link is valid as descriptive of the effort, but I would not say that Edison is just the light bulb. I question the limitation of 'just.' Same for Jesus Christ and the sun.

I'm no mathematician, but, so far, I perceive premature efactulation in a tesseract

Read the concluding paragraph of On the Origin of Species along with all before it. The volume discusses the four points of Darwinism: variation, inheritance, selection, and time.

I note, for example, that you do not engage in debate, and have not done so for 2.5 years. If you want to challenge, there's your venue.

Who made you tester? Who says you have the answers? Who says that's even necessary? Give your opinion, allow others theirs. Otherwise, make your question honest posits, not logic traps.

Recession is a factor engaged only when two quarters - six months - of no growth occur. However, DJIA does not figure directly into GDP. Consumer spending, Business investment, Government spending, and net export/import ratio are the four factors directly addressing Real GDP. Last quarter [Q4 2019] was a growth of 2.3% over Q3 2019, at 2.0%. The projection for Q1 2020 was 2.7%, most because of anticipated correction on the negative export condition improving. We're still 2 weeks from Q1 results. Even if the results do not match or exceed 2.3%, it will take another quarter [June] of loss before we even officially enter a recession. If Q1 does exceed 2/3%, then recession will not be declared until end Q3, Sep 2020 id Q3 drops below Q2. Can't watch DJIA. Watch Real GDP.

I did not misread your point. I read your previous commentary quoted above. And I responded by advocating that God has existed infinitely into the past, exists now, and will into the infinite future. One of His names is "Eternal." Another is "I Am," [implying that it is, has been, and will always be so - it is so Descartes]. God is not dependent on man; it is the reverse. Your ending question regarding the demise of earth implies that you've already satisfied your own question whether or not God depends on man. Why ask?

For a cosmic thinker, why do you limit your avatar to  your numbered lines, etc. to their finite forms, though repeated ad nauseam, as if it represented the infinite cosmos. Everybody likes reducing their cosmos to a finite graphic. Mathematics is the infinite language of the cosmos; use formulae, not graphics, if that is your aim.

As for my interest and knowledge in science, do not presume you know me. You do not. End of subject. Try also to maintain the same case of pronouns instead of wandering from me to "their." Language has a science, too, and it does not goosey, goosey, gander, whither shall it wander. Nor is the cosmos, by the way, contained by polyhedrons. Suffering would lessen far more if we just toned-down the rhetoric of our assumptions of how stupid everyone else is, but cosmic thinkers. You want facts; there's your science.

What is so abhorrent about the idea that God and the universe have always existed? What is so bloody difficult about conceiving an eternity: no beginning, and no end. And even the possibility that there are infinite universes with infinite Gods?Just because the Kalam cosmology says that only things with beginnings have cause, and that, therefore the universe had a beginning, does that make it the only possible description of the universe? Seems to me, thinking the universe had a finite beginning is a more difficult proof than that it has neither beginning nor end. The former is limited thinking. Sure, you can argue for your limitations, but they're just yours. I don't happen to share them.

Infinite regress is a theory of explanation, but it entirely depends on the Kalam cosmology argument that the universe had a finite beginning because everything with a beginning has a cause, and, therefore, only by that finite beginning does the universe have purpose. Who says an eternity cannot have purpose and cause?

I contend that the entire re-development of the Kalam cosmology was because William Craig, a Christian theologian, and apologist, some claim, apparently cannot conceive the prospect of eternity, which combats infinite regress [an oxymoron, in my book] because it can imagine a first member of an element, but not a last. Or, rather a last element, but not the first. It is regression, after all; let's be consistent, That sounds like an admission of eternity, but the theory stops only because it cannot see a first member, but apparently assumes there must be one, but is ignored. The are all kinds of graphic representations of such a form as an infinite regress. All of them reflect a fractal image which eventually stops because there simply is no space to account for further "members" in a reducing vortex. But that discounts the potential of eternity in that eternity does not recognize a reduction at all. It simply isn't a vortex shape. I think the universe has no shape, but a best image to conceive it is an expanding sphere that never began as a singular point. No beginning. A regression backward [but why would someone need to do that?] that maintains the same scope as the future: expanding. Just because we cannot conceive it graphically does not imply that it cannot be. 

I don't have a reference for you to investigate further because this is my own thinking. But I abhor limited thinking, like ignoring an eternity simply because we cannot put it in a box, a vortex, or whatever other shape you want. Why do we need to present such a thing graphically, anyway? What's wrong with words. or better, mathematics, which can easily conceive an eternity just by ciphers, which can run in either direction, or any direction simultaneously, for infinity?

Example of a process: prayer

1. Study a concept about anything: read, ponder. formulate questions, if any, think about questions and potential answers.

2. If a question remains unanswered, and further study and pondering does not reveal an answer, determine to pray about it.

3. prayer preparation: a] be sincere and humble. b] be faithful. that is, know in your heart that an answer will be given, and know that the answer should be accepted and followed c] prepare your question. how will it be asked? 

4. Do not doubt yourself, nor that God will hear you.

5. Address God as "God," "Father," etc.

6. Be thankful, and tell Him you are grateful for your life, your gifts, the bounty you have, the food you eat, etc. God is willing to give more to the one who expresses gratitude for what he has.

6. Ask your question, just as if you were addressing anyone facing you. Just ask. Don't need to make it fancy. "I have a problem with..... I've tried to figure it out, but the answer isn't there. Please help me to find the answer and to know it s true.

7. You are part of the solution, don't expect to just hand over the burden to God without a commitment to continue the pursuit of your question; commit to being proactive, and patient.

8. Close your prayer in renewed expression of faith to receive an answer. If you believe in Jesus Christ, close in his name. If you don't, well, he is the Christ whether that's believed, or not. Expressing faith in him is necessary because he is the Savior and Redeemer of all the world, and is our intermediary with the Father. If that is your question - is Jesus the Christ, the Son of God - then ask if he is.

You get the picture. Cannot employ steps out of sequence, or skip steps and expect a desired result. If we do not engage all steps, in a proper order, we cannot expect a desired result, like an answer.

That answer is not likely to be a personal visit. What will occur may be something you've never felt before: a warming or burning sensation in your heart. It begins to swell, as if enlightening until it expands throughout your entire body. It is felt, not merely imagined. It is palpable. It is a feeling of such peace, you might begin tears. It is the most glorious feeling I have ever felt, and it is felt very often as I hone the skill of prayer.

Why do you think Newtonian laws are not processes? How do you define "process?"

It's an eternal process because, although our moon was not always there [and neither was the earth, nor the sun, etc.], there have always been, and always will be moons, and suns, and earths, and stars in the whole bloody universe, and they will all follow processes... until they don't, but new ones will. You cannot think of the universe as a singular creation at one point in time, and then God rested forever. He woke up, and is still creating elsewhere, planting a garden here, and there, and way over there... an eternal process of creation, and resting, and...

<br>

"If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. Bit let him ask in faith, never wavering, for he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed." - James I: 5, 6.

That's how. Sure, you're going to tell me that prayer doesn't work. No, it doesn't if you don't follow the process. Damn, there's that word again. Everything. EVERYTHING is a process, my friend. parse it as you will, everything from being born to going to the grave, and beyond, is process. Step 1, step 2, step 3. If you don't following the process exactly as defined, how do you ever expect to achieve what was planned?