Posted by Roberta Grimes • December 02, 2023 • 38 Comments
The Source, Understanding Reality
To us and our good fortune! Be happy, be healthy, long life!
And if our good fortune never comes, here’s to whatever comes.
Drink l’chai-im, to life! To life, l’chai-im! L’chai-im, l’chai-im, to life!
Here’s to our prosperity, our good health and happiness, and most important …
To life, to life, l’chai-im! L’chai-im, l’chai-im, to life!
Here’s to the father I tried to be!
Here’s to my bride-to-be! Drink l’chai-im, to life!
To life, to life, l’chai-im. To Tzeitel, my daughter… My wife!
It gives you something to think about… Something to drink about!
Drink l’chai-im, to life! To life, l’chai-im, l’chai-im, l’chai-im, to life.
Drink l’chai-im, to life! To Tzeitel, my daughter… My wife!
It takes a wedding to make us say, “Let’s live another day.”
Drink l’chai-im, to life!
– Sheldon Harnick (1924-2023), from “To Life” (1964)
We learned last week that materialist scientists are flummoxed by the question of how Something might have arisen from nothing. It seems almost unfair to beat materialist scientists up about their inability to deal with that core problem, except for the fact that their determination not even to try to understand reality except in materialist terms does kind of invite our ridicule, doesn’t it? When the fundamental problem with something-from-nothing is one that even a fifth-grader can spot, why can’t fully grown and educated scientists at least attempt to deal with it? And in any event, every bit as profound an enigma for traditional scientists turns out to be the question of how life first arose on earth. We might actually say that the origin-of-life question is an even more vexing problem for materialist scientists to deal with than is the origin-of-matter issue, for the simple fact that they know that they really ought to be able to solve this origin-of-life conundrum. It should be a relatively straightforward problem for trained chemists and biologists to tackle. Or so you would think. But the plain fact is that for the better part of a century, materialist mainstream scientists have been chasing the question of how life might have arisen on earth. And so far, they have made no progress toward solving any part of that puzzle at all.
Until the nineteen-fifties, the few articles that were published in popular-science magazines about the origin of life were taking an amazingly lazy approach. They assumed that life must have originated in some primordial pool, where just the right mix of chemicals was hit by lightning one day at just the right temperature, and – zap! – life began. It would have been just simple cells at first, they thought, which somehow magically assembled themselves; and then those cells would have begun to combine, and so on. Those old magazine articles looked a lot like eighth-grade science project reports. Then in 1953 there were what were considered to be three big scientific advances, which now, seventy years further on, some materialist scientists believe just might have put them right on the edge of an impending breakthrough. The first of those seminal advances came in April of 1953, when James Watson and Francis Crick published a paper on DNA which advanced a new understanding of how the double helix form of DNA could help to explain how life replicates itself. The second breakthrough came three weeks later, when news broke of the Miller-Urey experiment, which showed how a cocktail of chemicals could spontaneously generate the amino acids that are vital to building the molecules of life. Then in September of 1953, there was given the first reasonably accurate estimate for the age of the earth. Origin-of-life researchers felt that at last they had a great place to really begin to do their work.
But in the seventy years since that pivotal year of discoveries, almost no further progress has been made. The popular-science-magazine versions of scientists’ latest ideas of how life on earth might have arisen randomly still look like precisely the same sorts of dramatic diagrams they used to draw in those seventy-year-old popular-science magazines, where lightning would hit pond-scum, and Presto! And as is true of the Big Bang as a proposed origin-of-matter solution, these diagrams are singularly unsatisfying. The true building blocks of life would be chemicals with some of the same names as those that are given on the linked Scientific American diagram; but all the useful chemicals would need to be in a nearly pure form, and quickly able to combine properly and in the correct order and almost under laboratory conditions if anything like these events were to have any hope of taking place in a way that might actually get life started. And then, of course, once the spark of life is struck, you would need ways to feed that tiny flame and keep it alive. Both chemicals and conditions would have to be just right. So for life on earth to have begun this way, such sparks would need to have been struck repeatedly! So often, perhaps, that once in a thousand or even once in a million times, a spark might have persisted long enough and in such ideal conditions that it somehow survived, was fed, and began to be stable. But, then what? How did that spark become a cell, and out of perhaps a million such cells, how then did one cell learn to replicate itself?
Seeing how plain foolish the materialists are being, once again the brilliant Christian origin-of-life chemist Dr. James Tour has called the materialist researchers’ bluff. Dr. Tour had become increasingly vexed by baseless claims that materialist origin-of-life researchers were beginning to make real progress, so he proceeded to make them a simple bet that, if any of their recent claims were true, they ought to have been able to win easily. He offered ten of the most prominent materialist scientists in the field of origin-of-life research a contest in which, in order to win his contest, they would need only to demonstrate how just one of a selected basic five of the essential building blocks of life could have arisen naturally. And he even suggested that three of the ten chosen materialist scientists could be the judges of whether or not his contest had been won! If they could show how even one of those building blocks could have arisen naturally, he promised that he would take down all his YouTubes in which he had repeatedly claimed that their whole field was out to lunch (metaphorically speaking). But alas, there was no winner. There was no contest in the end, since none of the ten scientists even tried to respond to his challenge. In fact, there has been no meaningful progress made by any materialist scientist toward understanding how life on earth could have arisen on its own in the seventy years since those three 1953 breakthroughs first were hailed.
So now let’s help James Tour spike the ball in his own end zone. He and others have created some wonderfully playful YouTube videos that he had offered to have taken down if the materialist scientists had accepted his challenge and then had won it; although, of course, there is no way that they could have won it. Here is one sample video that I think you will enjoy. Creationist scientists are much better funded nowadays, and they even have their own terrific online journal, called Evolution News & Science Today. Given how bollixed up mainstream science still is with its “fundamental scientific dogma” of atheistic materialism, the independent scientists who are published in Evolution News are doing beautiful and enlightened work that is fully on a par with the work of classic mainstream scientists of the free scientific age that is now more than a century into the past. It is such a joy to read their publication!
Now that we have seen how useless have been all the traditional scientific efforts to understand these two fundamental aspects of our reality, both the origin of the universe (last week) and the origin of life, I would like to point out one more thing. When you put together last week’s and this week’s blog posts and read them again, including their linked articles (and Rupert Sheldrake’s banned Tedx talk from last week), my dear friends, you now have incontrovertible scientific proof of the existence of a Creator God. Materialist scientists have accepted the existence of a great many things with far less proof than what we have delivered last week and today of God’s existence.
Please consider these two core facts:
So now you have incontrovertible proof of the ongoing existence of the loving Creator God. Not the Christian God, of course. Indeed, nothing to do with any religion because all the religions are human-made, and they are fading in this twenty-first century as we outgrow our need for them, and as we also grow beyond our leaders’ ugly and bullying lie of atheism. Now we once again can seek and find in our own hearts the God Who always has been quietly there. Before all religions there is the One Creator God, the One God that Jesus refers to as Father, and as Spirit. The One who is the highest aspect of Consciousness, and is only perfect Love. Please look around you now at each beautiful face, and know that those faces, those hillsides, those cities, literally nothing whatsoever that you see and not a single star could exist if there were no Creator God. Now that we can have God without the barrier of religions between us, we truly are entering a new age!
And add to all of this the fact that in this twenty-first century we also know for certain that we are eternal beings. We always have been eternal beings, but now in this new century, more and more of us while we are on earth know for certain this glorious truth! We know that we have nothing to fear, and we are able at last to hear the voice of God calling to us from where God dwells, deep within each of our own hearts… “Be still and know that I am God; I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted on the earth” (Psalm 46:10). That psalm was first sung three thousand years ago, but God has been inspiring people to sing variations of those words from even long before that, down all the generations. There always was going to come a time when we while on earth would grow past any need for religions, when we would realize that the true God always has been within us, all along, and when we would yearn for a closer and deeper Walk that we would at last be able to share with the One Eternal God. And more and more, my dear ones, it looks as if that time may soon be upon us now….
May you both be favored with the future of your choice!
May you live to see a thousand reasons to rejoice!
We’ll raise a glass and sip a drop of schnapps in honor of the great good luck that favors you!
We know that when good fortune favors two such men, it stands to reason, we deserve it too!
To us and our good fortune! Be happy, be healthy, long life!
And if our good fortune never comes, here’s to whatever comes.
Drink l’chai-im, to life!
– Sheldon Harnick (1924-2023), from “To Life” (1964)
Roberta,
Thanks for the thought-provoking post. Origin of life discussions are always interesting, but from a materialist viewpoint, quite unsatisfying. Years ago, as a biology major and a staunch materialist, my fellow students and I would joke about the “explanatory” diagrams attempting to show how life began on the planet. There were the usual chemical formulae and equations showing postulated reactions and resultant organic byproducts. Further diagrams illustrated physical phenomena (radiation, electrical discharges, etc) acting on the chemicals in various ways to further modify them so that they could form more complex molecules. That’s when the speculation would start regarding how these molecules would somehow “assemble” into information-bearing and self-replicating molecules that would then further agglomerate into some sort of “proto-life” (or something). We joked that a box with “and then a miracle occurred” needed to be added to the diagram prior to the “ta da..life! moment. I think a cartoonist drew a satirical cartoon along those lines. Amusing but not helpful. We even joked about human beings as nothing more than “fish plus time!” Of course, we conveniently ignored the problem of the “origin of the fish” question.
Bernardo Kastrup in his book “Materialism is Baloney” indicates that since the fabric of everything is Consciousness, the Universe has a tendency toward becoming self-reflective, self-aware, and more complex(I’m paraphrasing, since I haven’t read the book in awhile). Kastrup doesn’t refer to an ultimate Creator or God (in those exact terms), but in this particular book, the role of Consciousness in the formation and existence of “all that is” (including life) is paramount. Since everything is, at its base, Consciousness, it would seem that life should be something that is encountered throughout our universe. A universe that “tends toward” and actually creates life, because life adds to, enriches, and reinforces, Consciousness (or the Creator). Just a thought.
By the way, I have since abandoned materialism awhile back!
My dear Mark, I love everything you have to say! And I remember all those foolish materialists’ diagrams, and even the idea that a human is a fish plus time, and Bernardo’s lovely book – I think your path has probably been similar to mine. In the end, you come to the point where you realize that – as you say – everything is consciousness, and life must be an inherent property of consciousness. It certainly doesn’t come from lightning strikes alone!
Just beautiful Roberta! I am grateful for your post today. It’s ironic because I was “musing” about religions and patterns of human behavior and beliefs throughout the day yesterday. And I had an almost blissful idea of what it would be like for old paradigms to dissolve. How lovely that will be!
I just don’t want it to get so conflicted-as some of us are witnessing own family members getting super “militant “ about religious doctrine. A family member so precious to me was telling me how nervous they feel upon an invitation to a family gathering as they have been pretty open about their “pagan” views. I worry for them too. They are such a good hearted soul that loves family, but I know certain members would “attack” them. I’m so tired of the drama-family and worldly.
But I’ll keep moving forward along with all of you; working at being Love no matter what arises. Have a great week everyone!
Oh my dear Fran, how awful – the last thing we want is for people to start squabbling over their different concepts of God! Because our concepts honestly do differ – it is possible for several people to view God differently, and for all of them to be “right,” insofar as God will show each of us a somewhat different aspect, according to our own needs. Each relationship with God is deeply personal, and and unique. I think we are talking some about that for next week, but it’s too early to be sure.
Dear Roberta, the Creationist video does a good job of explaining the complexity of information coding required to make even a single cell. Yet the complexity involved in forming the necessary proteins in a living cell is vastly more complex than described. Here is a good description:
” the theory of evolution fails even to account for the
building-blocks of a cell. The formation, under
natural conditions, of just one single protein
out of the thousands of complex protein
molecules making up the cell is impossible.
Proteins are giant molecules consisting of
smaller units called “amino acids” that are
arranged in a particular sequence in certain
quantities and structures. These units
constitute the building blocks of a living
protein. The simplest protein is composed of
50 amino acids, but there are some that
contain thousands.
The crucial point is this. The absence, addition, or replacement of a single amino acid in the structure of a protein causes the protein to become a useless molecular heap. Every amino acid has to be in the right place and in the right order. The theory of evolution, which claims that life emerged as a result of chance, is quite helpless in the face of this order, since it is too wondrous to be explained by coincidence. (Furthermore the theory cannot even substantiate the claim of the accidental formation of proteins, as will be discussed later.)
The fact that it is quite impossible for the functional structure of proteins to come about by chance can easily be observed even by simple probability calculations that anybody can understand. For instance, an average-sized protein molecule composed of 288 amino acids, and contains twelve different types of amino acids can be arranged in 10300 different ways. (This is an astronomically huge number,
consisting of 1 followed by 300 zeros.) Of all these possible sequences, only one forms the desired protein molecule. The rest of them are amino-acid chains that are either totally useless or else potentially harmful to
living things. In other words, the probability of the formation of only one protein molecule is “1 in 10300”. The probability of this “1” to occur is practically nil. (In practice, probabilities smaller than 1 over 1050 are thought of as “zero probability”).
Furthermore, a protein molecule of 288 amino acids is a rather modest one compared with some giant protein molecules consisting of thousands of amino acids. When we apply similar probability calculations to these giant protein molecules, we see that even the word “impossible” is insufficient to describe the true situation.
When we proceed one step further in the evolutionary scheme of life, we observe that one single protein means nothing by itself. One of the smallest bacteria ever discovered, Mycoplasma hominis H39, contains
600 “types” of proteins. In this case, we would have to repeat the probability calculations we have made above for one protein for each of these 600 different types of proteins. The result beggars even the concept of impossibility. ”
The sketch of a living cell in the Scientific American article is scandolously incomplete. This article (containing the above quote) shows the cell to be incredibly complicated ( http://www.esalq.usp.br/lepse/imgs/conteudo_thumb/The-Complexity-of-the-Cell.pdf ).
So yes indeed, the only possible explanation for cellular life forms is that they were designed by an intelligence that must be godlike–God!
Wow, my dear Jack, thank you so much for this! And everyone, please be sure to click through to Jack’s linked article. Dr. Michael Denton is a leader in the field of creationist biology, and these truly brilliant scientists who are unfettered by mainstream science’s materialist/atheist dogma are doing some amazing work.
The word processing system was unable to handle exponent notation. So, in the quote, “…can be arranged in 10300 different ways. (This is an astronomically huge number, consisting of 1 followed by 300 zeros. ” the figure 10300 is actually 10 with an exponent of 300, and that is a huge, huge number of possibilities. Likewise, the number shown as “1050” is really 10 to the 50th power, another huge number of possibilities.
Oh my dear Jack, the mind boggles! You have done so much work in these fields that we discuss that you really should have your own blog to show it off, but I am thrilled for us all that you choose to show your work off here!!
Thank you for an inspiring letter! I agree with everything you say. What you say feels so apparent to me, which it doesn’t seem to be to most secularists, and especially atheists, who can’t grasp the idea that matter arises from consciousness, which was before the universe’s existence, and not the other way around. I wrote a post on Quora once, where I referred to some famous statements from, among others, Albert Einstein and Max Plank, who claimed that there must be something higher ‘that surpasses our understanding,’ (I am paraphrasing!) which acts in the background, and which one can then call God, for the sake of simplicity. The post created some angry and upset feelings, mainly because I referred to what I believe Gary Zukav argued in his book “The Dancing Wu Li Masters,” that some of the scientists who apply their experiments based on the thoughts (ideas) that those great predecessors had, do not inhabit the same ability to partly think in the more profound ways that they did, and partly do not have the humility before the mystery that is a prominent feature in all religions when they do not end up in a dogmatism that stands in stark contrast to what Jesus, for example, pointed at, where everything that was said can be said to come directly from the Father. Of course, I don’t care what people say about what I wrote, but tragically, people are so simple-minded that you can’t accept what is pure logic. At the same time, those people are often celebrated for their excellence, which can seem paradoxical. They are probably good at their job, but at the same time, they have some similarities with flat-earth people who don’t want to realize that the planet is a globe.
A similar phenomenon is the almost total denial that humans could have an experience beyond our biological existence, where people who were clinically dead after resuscitation claim that they had an experience that was more real than an experience through our five senses. However, it has become easier to argue that so-called NDEs are real even in Sweden (the world’s most secular country) where I live. That is positive!
Eventually, I believe that people, generally speaking, will find that our time on earth is just a transition between other existences that, for some reason, are hidden from us, perhaps because we have a task to be here and now in this dimension, to complete our tasks here, without being distracted by other things (from the past, and even unnecessary thoughts of a non-existing future!)
Erik, there is a text, updated in 2023, that documents 128 out of body reports associated with the NDE. In each of these cases, the individual reported observations that could not possibly have been made using normal sense perception, generally because their observations were made about activities distant from their physical body, thus strongly implying that consciousness is discarnate ( https://www.amazon.com/Self-Does-Not-Die-Experiences/dp/B0CGKK5KFD/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1698338177&sr=1-1 ). You might also find my published research on the NDE/OBE interesting ( in a journal about consciousness https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1698062621/ref=as_li_qf_asin_il_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=quainc0f-20&creative=9325&linkCode=as2&creativeASIN=1698062621&linkId=dc55a74bbc282a0acf4b1ca61363199b ), or as an updated version in an ebook ( https://www.amazon.com/Near-Death-Experience-Space-Consciousness-ebook/dp/B081T7D7LQ/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=jack+hiller&qid=1588777468&s=books&sr=1-1 ).
Thank you for this, my dear Jack! Wonderful! In my view, these many distant out-of-body observations during near-death experiences may be the best contributions to the literature of all that have been made by NDEs. Don’t you agree?
Yes, the veridical OBE rep[orts provide convincing evidence. When I started my research and theory development on the nature of consciousness, drawing on the NDE/OBE reports, I was not at first convinced about their authenticity, because what was reported clashed with my material science training; I still felt that the reports might be about hallucinations induced by trauma. I shared a draft paper with Dr. Pim van Lommel (a truly saintly physician), and he introduced me to this source of comfirmation that the OBE reporting provides evidence strong enough to go to trial. The documented cases for veridical reporting demonstrate such highly accurate descriptions of what the individuals observed on Earth when out of body that we may be convinced that consciousness (soul/spirit) is an immaterial reality.
Welcome to our merry band of commenters, my dear Erik! Wow, I can see that you likely tugged on some whiskers on Quora by introducing to those Luddites the forward-thinking sides of such eminences as Drs. Einstein and Planck, but they needed such a breath of fresh air. The sooner we succeed in breaking down materialism, the better, since the truth is that even matter is not material in the old sense in which matter once was envisioned, and by now even the mainstream scientists themselves know that, so at this point they are all just being forced to play a sad little game to please the university gatekeepers and the peer-reviewed journals so they can make a living. There is no point to any of it. You were doing them a favor.
Even better, create life in a dead body. You have all the correct elements plus they are in the right place. We cannot create consciousness. We cannot create life, only God can. Science is great in discovering how thing here work. Creating consciousness is not an ability we have in this dimension.
My dear Myron, you make such a wonderful point! Do you know that scientists are now entirely wasting at least a billion dollars on trying to figure out how matter is somehow able to create consciousness inside the human brain?
Thank you for this post, Roberta! L’chaim is one of my favorite songs: Often when I’m in difficulties I find myself remembering “God would like us to be joyful even when our hearts lie panting on the floor” and I laugh ruefully as my spirit is lifted.
And I, too, have been contemplating the stability of this realm in which we find ourselves, and coming to see God’s loving support for us expressed in this very stability.
It is a great task we are called to, to find our way back to Divine Order from the chaos we humans create – first in our own minds, and then in the world around us. So many conflicting thoughts and emotions are always running through us, many in our unconscious, where we’re not even aware of them. As I pray to the Lord to make straight in me that which is crooked, to help me sort out where my own ignorance and misconceptions are causing difficulties for me in my life, I have often found it overwhelming. But baby step by baby step, He helps to clear my mind and my heart.
Recently, in one such period of overwhelm, my attention was drawn to the Order of this realm: The stars in their fixed abodes like great spiritual giants holding form in the vastness of space; the planets in their stately progressions – so steady in their travels that we can know where there were thousands of years ago, and where they’ll be thousands of years from now; the patterns of our sun and moon, marking calmly the passing of days and weeks and months and seasons and years. All these rhythms, and their mathematically reliable precision, seemed to me in that moment (and since) to offer a profound reassurance from our Father, that He’s got this, He’s got *all* this, far more securely than our (currently) limited human minds can imagine.
So, too, in the rhythm of the seasons, year following on year, as ever: Seeds and blossoms bursting forth with New Life in the gentle warmth of the Spring, fruits ripening in the deep green of summer, the harvest of all that was sown as days shorten and cool, the period of dormancy in which the fruits are integrated, and new seeds are sown. These gentle rhythms comfort and teach us of our own rhythms of growth and renewal.
It has brought me great peace in moments of inner struggle and darkness, to call all this to mind, and to feel the Love our Creator has for us, that he has given us so many supports on our journey Home.
Thank you, too, Roberta, for creating a space where I could share this.
Wishing every blessing to all those gathered here.
Bonnie! Thank you for sharing your beautiful insights! I am so grateful! I turn to my blessings when I feel overwhelmed but I sure love the magnificence of your message. What grand reminders of God having our backs than to see nature so clearly.
Thank you so much, Fran. Smiling over here, to hear that my words touched your heart.
Yes indeed, my sweet friend Fran, Bonnie’s prose poem reads like a gift to all of us that makes our hearts sing!
Oh my dear Bonnie, how lovely! You have given us such a beautiful prose poem! And made a wonderful point as well. We have a multi-thousand-year history of being taught to fear God, rather than to love God, to the point where it is hard for most of us even really to see now the glorious signs of God’s love for us that are everywhere!
Thank you so much Roberta. It’s been quite a revelation to contemplate the glorious signs of His love that have been surrounding and supporting me – all of us here – forever.
I feel it allowing me to relax and trust. I am so grateful.
Thank you for this powerful work you are doing!
Hi Roberta 🙂
In the preview, my post looks like a wall of text, without paragraphs – yikes! Would you be so kind, if you choose to publish it, to insert paragraph breaks?
Thank you so much!
Bonnie
Dearest Roberta,
If a simple way to get a provable answer to the origin of life by appealing to extraterrestrial scientists, a Pleiadian scientific group, say. Could the solution’s particulars be squabbled over who gets the Nobel Prize? Would there be a fight over whether ET’s would be allowed to receive a Nobel prize? I think the ETs would be disgusted by the squabbling so we would never get the true answer to the origin of life.
That may be the best outcome as the true answer may be used for the construction of evil devices.
Yours,
Cookie
Greetings Earthlings😊. There is no origin.
Dearest Ray,
Shh!! Don’t tell the ETs there is no origin. They might become upset.
Cookie
Tee-Hee! Life is all one gigantic loop?
Oh my dear beloved Cookie, sometimes it amazes me to see the way your mind works! Only you would think of appealing to extraterrestrials to help us to figure out the origin of life… AND then immediately go to the thought that there would be an intergalactic squabble over who would get the Nobel Prize for it!
My comment disappeared!
it was really deep!
Talking about your message opened another part of me: I already knew and agreed .
I was thinking -yes I know this:the Truth is always good and it has always been inside me.
But Roberta, you opened that compartment: I grew very calm and sturdy!Thank you for showing me my Self !
Oh my sweet Erica, I’m sorry about your losing your comment! Do you know why that happened? But the sense you had of having accessed some deeper truth is one that I have come to know well by now. When aspects of wisdom come together, and you are abruptly struck by that sense of having fallen into a deeper awareness, a greater place and nothing ever again will look the way it looked even just a moment ago….
Dearest Roberta,
Fascinating blog this week, my dear. The conversation is stellar also.
My own way to ponder the greater reality beyond my ken is to be a student, not anywhere near the master. I am only aware of a sliver of it all; the great unseen expands all around me. There is so much I don’t know, yet it does not weigh heavily upon me.
Rather than becoming a self assured dogmatist I remain a child looking in wonder at the stars. ✨
Oh my dear beautiful Efrem, we have some new and wonderful commenters here this week and you are right – the resulting conversation is exceptional! You are right, too, in saying that the best way to approach all the wonders of this gigantic reality is to be forever a student. As I prepare to do this course early next year, where clearly I will be the teacher, what I find that I am looking forward to most is what I hope to learn from it!
❣️❣️❣️
Hi Roberta,
I will need to re read this blog, again to understand it a little better, but, from what I am understanding all of this is AMAZING!!!! Finally a loving God, and no more religion! I enjoy all of your blogs so much! Truly love the contributors as well!!!
My dear lovely Litsa, actually, you have summed it up perfectly, even before you’ve had a chance to re-read it: “Finally a loving God, and no more religion” – I could not have put it better myself! 😉
What an educative post today.
Thank you Roberta!!!!!!
Chris B.
My dear Chris, what really strikes me is that all the evidence is for the existence of a Creator God – there really is no evidence at all for atheism. It really is quite confounding that the atheistic materialists continue to claim that they have any remaining position at all that they can take. It is quite confounding!
I now look forward to reading the comments on your blog as much as your blog post itself Roberta – the highlight of my week. My own spiritual growth has been greatly nourished by your developing expansive work and the percolation of these blog comments. And my percolation gets shared with various groups I collaborate with, the ripples gently generating on and on. Thank you all.
Oh my dear beautiful Helen, thank you so much for saying this! I feel the same way about enjoying the blog comments – I love reading what our wonderful commenters here have to say, and of course that includes your comment, my dear one!