The Miracle of Life: God was not Born, He has Always Existed

I will make this post short.

If God were born or did not always exist, that would potentially leave room for the ending of all life. God always tells me that He has always existed, thus always leading the possibility of Eternal Life with every possible life-form living forever. Eternal Life is an extremely powerful concept, a little like the design and creation of an exceedingly large galaxy.

If we follow God's path, we have unlimited potential that stretches beyond the current human measure of the size of the Universe.

The sooner we follow God's path the better. Denying God's Infinite Greatness delays our blissful and beatific rewards for being part of God's creation.

Enter the narrow Gate and you will find that the Gate can be expanded.

Love to all.

Originally posted by GreatTech

If God were born or did not always exist, that would potentially leave room for the ending of all life. God always tells me that He has always existed, thus always leading the possibility of Eternal Life with every possible life-form living forever. Eternal Life is an extremely powerful concept, a little like the design and creation of an exceedingly large galaxy.

So god talks to you personally?

If god has always existed, why can't you accept that the universe itself has always existed, and take out the extra layer?

Eternal life is a concept for people who are uncomfortable with the real concept of death -- it is an ending.

Life ends. There is no after.

But now that I know you think your god talks to you I can understand some of the contradictions and even the hate in some of your posts.

Next time you talk to god, do me a favor and ask him to smite my ex, will you? Thanks.

You have voted MajorMalfunction for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

mm, nice point. the universe has always existed and we can prove that scientifically. now that we can do that why do we need the extra layer?

paging doctor occam to surgery...

straight up and down..

and side to side, and all up in it,

here is knowledge ~!

for God to = Eternal, meaning never born or dead, God would have to exist in a place where time as we know it does not exist.

OR

He could be in this present reality, as we know it in the physical, timed by our clocks, except perhaps he never, ever ages.. and theres never, ever an end to the universe.

I prefer to believe number one.

I think God exists outside of the physical realm or dimension or whatever you'd call it. One day he thought of everything that has happened since the "big bang" to now, up through the end of Earth, and mankind, into the beyond with other planets and other intelligent life perhaps. So after he thought of everything that will ever be and has ever been, he decided to drop a few molecules into the bucket and make his idea a reality.

This is the only way there could've been primordial ingredients present for the Big Bang to occur. And that was a big ass bang, no pun intended, so it must've been a nice healthy combination at that.

It couldn't appear from nothingness unless it was created. And it couldn't be created unless there was a Creator.

So God, knowing all that will ever be and ever was that was going to happen, decided to drop the first few molecules into reality, explaining sciences lapse for having a truely believable explanation for the primordial ingredients for the Big Bang just "existing forever before the big bang out of nowhere", even though there was technically nothing at that point in time?

And when he dropped those first molecules into reality, it sparked the Bang, and Creation occured, complete with all of its laws, those of physics and those of other things which we as humans do not yet understand, as well as many things that we humans seemingly alone DO understand (in science/engineering). He knew the outcome, the beginning, the end, and all of the between, every moment in what we call time, a personal memory of God, if you can attach the word "personal" to God, being that he's not a "person" as we know a person to be. I'm just trying be understood.

[edit on 6/4/2007 by runetang]

To reiterate, NO, we are not inside God's head, I am not saying the universe is essentially God's physical "head". Rather it's a mirror image, a laser disc, a compact disc, already encoded with the entire thing that we call reality, from beginning to end. He created it from a timeless place, we as humans do not have the ability to understand timelessness but i firmly believe it exists.

This is why it's in the "physical world" . He had to allow a "world" , or "universe" to be created for all these things to exist and transpire. He couldn't build this in his timeless place, otherwise known as Heaven. It would be an utter disgrace and the foulness is bound to mess up some cosmic balance.

[edit on 6/4/2007 by runetang]

Originally posted by MajorMalfunction

Life ends. There is no after.

Civilization overall up to this point in collective history of mankind happens to disagree with you, and has always believed in life after death, even when so primitive as to not have speech or written word. This includes tribes in Europe, America, Asia, Africa, all kinds of ancient tribal peoples. Pagans, Jews, whatever. I just hope you're aware of this when making such a statement.

I hope its coming from a well thought, educated stance, because when you die, you might just be surprised what happens "afterward" ..

.. which actually happened before you ever were born, when God created an image of his thoughts of love and projected them into a physical reality.

[edit on 6/4/2007 by runetang]

Originally posted by runetang
This is the only way there could've been primordial ingredients present for the Big Bang to occur. And that was a big ass bang, no pun intended, so it must've been a nice healthy combination at that.

let me refer you to the first law of thermodynamics: you cannot create or destroy matter and/or energy.

in essence, matter and energy have ALWAYS BEEN THERE. no need to add god. there was a superdense singularity, quantum shift or something happened so that it went boom

It couldn't appear from nothingness unless it was created. And it couldn't be created unless there was a Creator.

stupid line of logic.... because you're taking god away from the exact same type of logic you're subjecting our base ingredients to

and it didn't appear, it was always there.

Originally posted by runetang

Originally posted by MajorMalfunction

Life ends. There is no after.

Civilization overall up to this point in collective history of mankind happens to disagree with you, and has always believed in life after death, even when so primitive as to not have speech or written word.

The keyword is "belief." There is no proof.

NDEs are not proof, because it seems to be a universal reaction to the brain becoming aware that it is dying.

Nobody's ever come back to tell if there is an "after" life.

People used to believe the earth was flat, too, all people. And they were wrong.

Just because everyone is jumping off a bridge, doesn't mean I'm fool enough to do so. The same applies to belief systems, in my own opinion.

I would agree with you, but I get the feeling you mean Biblegod. If so, tell me...

How is it Biblegod has always existed, but Jesus didn't always exist? You know, seeing as how Biblegod and Jesus are one and the same. Scratch that, 2 and the same. With the Holy Ghost, 3 and the same.

Keep in mind that the Holy Ghost isn't as big a character in the Bible, but he's also Biblegod and Jesus.

But I'm sure that makes perfectly good sense to you...

YOU can not create or destroy energy matter. Doesn't mean The Almighty can't. In fact, He did and He does.
Side note; as Lilly Thomlin quipped: When we talk to God, it's called prayer. When God talks to us, it's called schizophrenia.
I think that's mans' way of saying he doesn't REALLY believe in God. The bible is replete with stories of Yahweh talking to His creation and them talking to Him. Neither thought it strange/deranged to be talking to one another.
The trinity doctrine is based on a misunderstanding of the word "god". God means "mighty one". Biblically, it refers to THE ALMIGHTY, spirit beings (angels), even powerful, ruling human beings.
"In a beginning was the Logos and the Logos was with The God, and the Logos was a god. The same was in a beginning with The god....And the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld him." We beheld him. Keep in mind that "no man hath seen the Father at any time." The spirit is holy; ie, Holy Spirit. It is not a separate entity. It is an influence, a power. Like the wind has power and is invisible, so is the influence of Yahweh's Holy disposition/spirit in the believer's lives. This is the nuts and bolts of the trinity doctrine. If anyone would care to start another thread on the trinity doctrine (I seem unable to start threads), then we can discuss it there rather than hijacking this one. Just wanted to clear up that little misunderstanding before it became a slugfest.

Originally posted by whitewave
YOU can not create or destroy energy matter. Doesn't mean The Almighty can't. In fact, He did and He does.

no, they INTRINSICALLY cannot be destroyed. it is a fundamental part of their being that they cannot be destroyed or created.

now, the difference between my statement just now and your statement above is apparent.
mine is a conclusion based on science
yours is an assumption based on a religious hypothesis

Let me repeat back to you your signature and see if you notice anything familiar.
I come here to combat the fraud and illusion of YOUR conventional, institutionalized religion. As with all such religions, your institution moves toward cowardice, it moves toward mediocrity, inertia, and self-satisfaction. (emphasis is obviously mine)
I propose, madness, that YOUR religion is science.
Nothing wrong with science, per se. But as an institutionalized, conventional religion (make no mistake, science is RELIGIOUSLY preached, practiced and proseletized), science has moved waaaay past cowardice, mediocrity, inertia and self-satisfaction. More "faith" is required to believe some of the science (so called) than to believe in the simple words of our Creator. I really can't think of any reason He'd lie to us. When God says "utter destruction" I'm sure He doesn't mean anything less than UTTER DESTRUCTION. Not some molecule shifting and let it live in some other form. No, utter destruction is that which is destroyed utterly, completely, to the uttermost, nothing left, all of it gone, finito.
Science usually figures these things out eventually.

Science is not a religion. It is a method of describing the universe with verifiable facts.

You theists crack me up. You can make assertions that science is the same as faith, but it is not, and you know it as well as we do. :shk:

So do you believe god speaks to you, too, like Great Tech does? Because otherwise what you say is the word of god, is actually a book written by dozens of men over thousands of years -- not proof of a god, and certainly not written by a god. Just by men who believe there is a god.

Originally posted by whitewave
I propose, madness, that YOUR religion is science.

praise science!
hail lord athe!
science h. logic!

Nothing wrong with science, per se. But as an institutionalized, conventional religion (make no mistake, science is RELIGIOUSLY preached, practiced and proseletized),

proof?

science has moved waaaay past cowardice, mediocrity, inertia and self-satisfaction.

yeah, cures for life threatening diseases and the promise of more life saving technology... that's mediocrity. technology that was inconceivable by even the greatest minds a century ago, that's mediocrity.

in my hand i'm holding my cell phone, they used less processing power to send a man to the moon.

yeah, mediocrity right there.

cowardice? richard dawkins, not a coward.

self-satisfaction? medical science, doctors without borders. the new laptop initiative to get technology into the hands of the underprivileged.

More "faith" is required to believe some of the science (so called) than to believe in the simple words of our Creator.

really? we have these mountains of evidence that you can look at... in some cases the mountains themselves are evidence (plate tectonics and geology)

I really can't think of any reason He'd lie to us.

well, fictional characters tend to be unaccountable....

When God says "utter destruction" I'm sure He doesn't mean anything less than UTTER DESTRUCTION. Not some molecule shifting and let it live in some other form.

it just goes to show you how well they understood science in the bronze and iron ages.

No, utter destruction is that which is destroyed utterly, completely, to the uttermost, nothing left, all of it gone, finito.

why are we holding the words of the ancient (and highly uneducated) up above evidence?

Science usually figures these things out eventually.

science has already proven the first law of thermodynamics, it's proven that you're wrong

"There is nothing new under the sun". (proverbs some place-too lazy to look it up). The pyramid of Giza is a standing monument to the science that once was. We can't replicate such an astounding bit of work even today. "Man sought out many inventions". My personal theory is that ancient man knew quite a lot. They were even building "something" to reach unto heaven. The Creator saw that the imagination of their heart was only evil continually and wiped them (mostly) out. Then came all the ages of man rebuilding. Much knowledge was lost. We are just now getting almost back to where we were in those days.
I have a science major for my educational degree and find much in science proclaims the wonders of God's creation. Science is not meant to replace God but to testify of His works in the natural world. Science couldn't save ancient man and, for all our fancy gadgets, gizmos, and technological advances, are we really more advanced as a race? Are we better people?

Originally posted by whitewave
"There is nothing new under the sun". (proverbs some place-too lazy to look it up). The pyramid of Giza is a standing monument to the science that once was. We can't replicate such an astounding bit of work even today.

have you never been to vegas? sure, it may not be stone... but we can make pyramids today, we just have better things to do and better buildings to construct.

"Man sought out many inventions". My personal theory is that ancient man knew quite a lot.

maybe by ancient standards...

They were even building "something" to reach unto heaven.

that's a myth, in this case the language myth.

The Creator saw that the imagination of their heart was only evil continually and wiped them (mostly) out. Then came all the ages of man rebuilding. Much knowledge was lost. We are just now getting almost back to where we were in those days.

we know far more now than we ever have in history. sure, there may be one or two things that we don't have now that we had back then (damascus steel being one of them, but we're getting close to recreating that), but we haven't really lost much.

I have a science major for my educational degree and find much in science proclaims the wonders of God's creation.

i hope you realize that science is the antithesis to faith

Science is not meant to replace God but to testify of His works in the natural world. Science couldn't save ancient man and, for all our fancy gadgets, gizmos, and technological advances, are we really more advanced as a race? Are we better people?

well,
sex slavery is looked down upon
in fact, all slavery is
we've cured many diseases
we have representative governance
...
the list can go on and on

the best answer is, we are far more advanced and much better people

the myth that ancient humans were somehow more knowledgable than commonly accepted is just that, a myth.
you could take me, a recent highschool graduate and send me to da vinci in his prime, a man who was probably far more intelligent than i am, and i'd baffle him with my knowledge.
gallileo would be astounded by our advances in astronomy and astrophysics
and the further and further we go back, the greater the gap becomes.

The tower at Babel is based on a language myth? According to you, maybe, but then, according to you everything in the Bible is based on myth. Not exactly an unbiased source.
We haven't really lost that much knowledge? Not just Damascus steel but Greek fire, mummification to name just 3 ancient technologies we can't replicate.
Science is the antithesis to faith? I bet a lot of Bible believing scientists would be surprised to learn that.
Ancient standards of knowledge not up to par with today? If you read the dimensions of the garden of Eden in Genesis, you might ask yourself how God could reasonably expect 1 solitary man to take care of it all. Apparently, that one man had ability, knowledge. He gave names to all the animals. I'm college educated and I don't know the names of ALL animals and quite a few of them are extinct.
I was in Vegas when that pyramid hotel was being built. Doesn't hold a candle to the pyramid of Giza. Apparently, none of the other pyramids in Egypt do either.
Sex slavery is looked down on? Have you read a newspaper lately? It's even happening in our country.
All slavery is looked down on? I don't guess they taught current WORLD history in that high school from which you recently graduated. By the way, taxation has historically been a mark of an enslaved people. OOPS! That would make Americans slaves. But you're right. I do look down on taxation.
We have representative government? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. (Sorry. That was uncharitable.) 'Nuff said on that topic.
No, I think we are not better people. When I was growing up, kids got in trouble in high school....for throwing spit wads at each other or for whispering to each other when the teacher was talking or for chewing gum in class. There was no such thing as drive-by shootings, car-jackings. Teachers did not get raped or beat up. No need for metal detectors or cops in the schools. The list goes endlessly on, I'm sorry to report but even in the space of one generation, we, as a race, have gotten much, much worse.
As a recent high school graduate (presumably a YOUNG man) you would be able to baffle daVinci with your knowledge? Your modesty is underwhelming. I have so many ways I could respond to that but I think I've settled on: I doubt it.

Originally posted by whitewave
The tower at Babel is based on a language myth?

no, the tower story IS a language myth.

According to you, maybe, but then, according to you everything in the Bible is based on myth.

actually, i'd say most intelligent theologians biblical scholars, and mythology experts would agree with me on the tower being a myth

and i don't say EVERYTHING is based on myth... i'd say a lot is based on history and the rest IS myth

Not exactly an unbiased source.

i may be biased, but i am well-informed on matters of the bible

We haven't really lost that much knowledge? Not just Damascus steel but Greek fire, mummification to name just 3 ancient technologies we can't replicate

greek fire... well, we don't NEED to replicate it anymore because we have something better
mummification we CAN replicate. we just choose not to at this point.

and damascus steel... well, we kind of have a problem on that one because we have to work around that whole "sticking the red hot sword into a slave" aspect that they cherished. and it's not like we can't top damascus steel... we have carbon nanotubes, strongest substance on earth

Science is the antithesis to faith? I bet a lot of Bible believing scientists would be surprised to learn that.

are you aware that, according to a self-study, 90+% of the members of the national academy of science are atheists or agnostics?
a similar study done by the royal society in england found that 80+% of their memberrship is atheist or agnostic.

Ancient standards of knowledge not up to par with today? If you read the dimensions of the garden of Eden in Genesis, you might ask yourself how God could reasonably expect 1 solitary man to take care of it all.

answer: there was no garden of eden, the question is unanswerable

Apparently, that one man had ability, knowledge.

fictional characters don't count

He gave names to all the animals.

naming stuff isn't very hard.... just look at the new words we have today. hell, languages tend to have different names for the same thing.
fish
poisson
same thing, different language. did adam come up with both of those?

and when was all of this? how many years ago? and where?
did this include desert hares, penguins, diamondback rattlesnakes, and toads?

I'm college educated and I don't know the names of ALL animals and quite a few of them are extinct.

well, knowing the names of things and naming things are two seperate fields
knowing is knowledge retention
naming is creativity.

I was in Vegas when that pyramid hotel was being built. Doesn't hold a candle to the pyramid of Giza. Apparently, none of the other pyramids in Egypt do either.

really? it's bigger and it's construction is more precise. are you aware that the great pyramid has gaps between some of the rocks that are about a foot wide? the great pyramid at giza isn't as precise as it's cracked up to be

Sex slavery is looked down on? Have you read a newspaper lately? It's even happening in our country.

i said it's looked down upon. just because less that one tenth of one percent of the population does it, doesn't mean it isn't looked down upon

All slavery is looked down on? I don't guess they taught current WORLD history in that high school from which you recently graduated. By the way, taxation has historically been a mark of an enslaved people. OOPS! That would make Americans slaves. But you're right. I do look down on taxation.
We have representative government? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. (Sorry. That was uncharitable.) 'Nuff said on that topic.

if you consider giving all but a subsitence level of your income to be the same as income tax, you're insane

No, I think we are not better people. When I was growing up, kids got in trouble in high school....for throwing spit wads at each other or for whispering to each other when the teacher was talking or for chewing gum in class. There was no such thing as drive-by shootings, car-jackings.

alright... when specifically did you grow up. if you grew up in the 50s there was widespread misogyny in the forms of spousal rape and physical abuse alongside the insane jim crowe racism and hangings of minorities.

Teachers did not get raped or beat up. No need for metal detectors or cops in the schools. The list goes endlessly on, I'm sorry to report but even in the space of one generation, we, as a race, have gotten much, much worse.

and it all depends on how you look at things.
what about looking at it through the eyes of a... homosexual. several of my friends would have had to deal with the widespread gang-beating that went along with being a homosexual in highschool... but they weren't reported or even looked down upon.

As a recent high school graduate (presumably a YOUNG man) you would be able to baffle daVinci with your knowledge? Your modesty is underwhelming. I have so many ways I could respond to that but I think I've settled on: I doubt it.

what i'm saying is that the big D-V would probably be able to think circles around me.... but i could still school him in fields he pioneered as a virtue of being a graduate of the class of 2007.

i have a greater understanding of the human body than he did because he could only work down to the anatomical level. i understand cell biology, something he didn't live to see. i understand genetics.

let's go to the stars. i know far more about astronomy and astrophysics than da vinci could have. the man lived before even gallileo. don't even get me started on engineering and electronics.

and to top things off... i've read da vinci's notebooks over several times.

he could out think me, but he just didn't have access to even 1% of the knowledge we have available today. it's kind of a shame.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul

let me refer you to the first law of thermodynamics: you cannot create or destroy matter and/or energy.

in essence, matter and energy have ALWAYS BEEN THERE. no need to add god. there was a superdense singularity, quantum shift or something happened so that it went boom

come on madness, you're going to make it that easy for me?

if the law of thermodynamics means matter cant be created, then as you say, it mustve always existed. why, one could and should say it (the primordial explosive ingredients) existed ETERNALLY up to the point that it exploded (Big Bang).

How can you believe that matter has always existed, the very stuff your flesh and body is made out of, but God hasn't existed. That means essentially that you believe that the matter which makes up your body has existed longer than "God" has, because you don't think "God" existed at all.

But you did exist, basicly. Your matter existed for negative infinity until it came around to becoming you the person.

I say any man that can believe matter has always existed, specificly before the big bang then causing it to happen, is using faith because IMO, I dont feel that can be proven 100%.

And why did it explode? The singularity that became the Big Bang, the Universe? If the singularity always existed because all matter in existence was packed into it, why did it randomly decide to explode one day? How can "chemicals" or "elements" that cause an explosion, be together for an infinite amount of time before-hand, since matter has to always have existed since it cant be created?

The only true answer IMO is that there had to be a creation somewhere, sometime, somehow, for everything to exist as it currently does.

Example: its the year negative decabizillion, and theres a singularity of all the matter which currently exists. decabizillions of years go by, nothing happens. one day, it explodes, big bang happens. This just doesnt make sense, if we had the technology to view back in time directly to the literal moment of the big bang and view it like a video camera, you wouldnt be able to rewind the tape back to a time before the singularity that caused the big bang to happen existed. So eventually, there would be an invisible cut-off point in the history of existence where you couldnt keep rewinding.

According to that thermodynamic law to be true, u'd have to admit that it is possible for things to always have existed or be eternal. Because you yourself the matter was, because it cant be created you said.

[edit on 6/7/2007 by runetang]

Originally posted by runetang
come on madness, you're going to make it that easy for me?

i get the feeling like i should have heard a scoff with that remark.

if the law of thermodynamics means matter cant be created, then as you say, it mustve always existed. why, one could and should say it (the primordial explosive ingredients) existed ETERNALLY up to the point that it exploded (Big Bang).

well, in theory yes. but there was no time before the big bang....

How can you believe that matter has always existed, the very stuff your flesh and body is made out of, but God hasn't existed.

because i exist and god doesn't
you can verify that i exist

That means essentially that you believe that the matter which makes up your body has existed longer than "God" has, because you don't think "God" existed at all.

i also believe that i have existed longer than the frost giant ymir and the tooth fairy...

But you did exist, basicly. Your matter existed for negative infinity until it came around to becoming you the person.

no. there was no timescale before the big bang so it isn't "negative infinity" it's just about 13.7 billion years.

I say any man that can believe matter has always existed, specificly before the big bang then causing it to happen, is using faith because IMO, I dont feel that can be proven 100%.

really? we have a crapload of EVIDENCE to support the claim, no faith required.

And why did it explode?

honestly, i have no idea. but that's what science is about, filling in the answer.

The singularity that became the Big Bang, the Universe? If the singularity always existed because all matter in existence was packed into it, why did it randomly decide to explode one day?

we don't know yet.

How can "chemicals" or "elements" that cause an explosion, be together for an infinite amount of time before-hand, since matter has to always have existed since it cant be created?

i doubt that, in the case of a singularity, things would explode because of a chemical reaction. hell, everything was probably energy at that density.

The only true answer IMO is that there had to be a creation somewhere, sometime, somehow, for everything to exist as it currently does.

"goddunit" isn't a scientific answer.

Example: its the year negative decabizillion, and theres a singularity of all the matter which currently exists. decabizillions of years go by, nothing happens. one day, it explodes, big bang happens.

*le sigh* your failure to grasp the concept of time makes me sigh in french.
time is a PRODUCT of the big bang.

This just doesnt make sense, if we had the technology to view back in time directly to the literal moment of the big bang and view it like a video camera, you wouldnt be able to rewind the tape back to a time before the singularity that caused the big bang to happen existed.

you're right, because there WAS NO TIME. this is astrophysics that we're dealing with here, it doesn't work on a common sense level. it works on a level of mathematical sense

So eventually, there would be an invisible cut-off point in the history of existence where you couldnt keep rewinding.

yes, of course there would be. the creation of time about 13.7 billion years ago

According to that thermodynamic law to be true, u'd have to admit that it is possible for things to always have existed or be eternal. Because you yourself the matter was, because it cant be created you said.

let me just spell this out one more time:

matter and energy have always existed
TIME has NOT always existed
time was a product of the big bang about 13.7 years ago

the cut off date isn't there because there was a point at which matter and energy didn't exist, it's there because there's a point at which TIME didn't exist.

[edit on 6/7/07 by madnessinmysoul]

really? we have a crapload of EVIDENCE to support the claim, no faith required.


quote:
And why did it explode?



honestly, i have no idea. but that's what science is about, filling in the answer.


quote:
The singularity that became the Big Bang, the Universe? If the singularity always existed because all matter in existence was packed into it, why did it randomly decide to explode one day?



we don't know yet.

Ah madness, now your getting somewhere, these emboldened answers lean toward truth.
Science will never in our lifetimes be able to answer these question's because there is not enough time to measure the shift's and you know it.
So all you claim science provide's is just hope for answers to these theory's, and you know in your life time, they will never be proven.
At least all these science heads had brain's enough to realize that the real arrogance in science would be to ignore the perfection in design and described by the physical laws the universe displays.

external source
“There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all....It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature's numbers to make the Universe....The impression of design is overwhelming.” (Paul Davies)


“As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?” (George Greenstein)

A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question. (Fred Hoyle)

For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries. (Robert Jastrow)

No worries, you and dawkin's will have your day too, when it is time.