CTR Stories

Two of W. Dave Free's stories here on CTRstories have been published by Leatherwood Press and available through Deseret Book.

Get a copy and enjoy the edited version again. Then tell your friends!

Let us know when one of your CTRstories is published so we can share the good news!

User login

"...Choose only entertainment and media that uplift you. Good entertainment will help you to have good thoughts and make righteous choices...Do not participate in entertainment that in any way presents immorality or violent behavior as acceptable."
For The Strength of Youth

Recent comments

Who's new

  • edmondsk95503
  • rainingmist
  • Asher Caneilla
  • Neysel
  • C nyyl

Who's online

There are currently 0 users and 1 guest online.

Most Recent Stories
Little Miss Liberty
    Steven O'Dell
The Christmas Dog
    Steven O'Dell
Barnaby and the Zilligong
    Steven O'Dell
    Steven O'Dell
The Greatest Christmas Gift Ever
    Steven O'Dell

Most Recent Chapters
The Visitor--an inspirational short story series
    Ch. 58 -- On Wings of Angels
The Visitor--an inspirational short story series
    Ch. 61 The Music Within
The Visitor--an inspirational short story series
    Ch. 60 -- Lamb and Lyon
The Visitor--an inspirational short story series
    Ch. 59 I Hate Christmas
The Visitor--an inspirational short story series
    Ch. 44 The Wisdom of the Wise
Submitted by Steven ODell on 4 February 2009 - 1:47am. | | |

The title is provocative, to be sure. It is quite a bold claim, I know, but let us proceed as if I am not the crackpot that some will think me to be when I claim that not only is there abundant evidence, but overwhelming proof of the existence of God--to the intellectually honest man or woman.

Let's take a fair, realistic and enlightened look, shall we? First of all, I wish to admit openly that I KNOW there is an intelligent and superior entity who holds and exercises influence over the universe. I will get into HOW I know that as we go on. Let us deal with theories before that.

I will go on record as saying that many of the claims of religionists today are so wild and foolish that it is no wonder the whole lot of us are lumped in with them as believeing in fantasies and fables. But nothing could be further from the truth. There are some of us who accept that there are laws that God operates by and that the same results may be achieved by obedience and implementation of them as is espoused by adherents to the theories of evolution, the big bang and others. And I will add that those of us who lean this way needn't have near the faith that is required to believe the latter theories.

Evolutionary theory (and it is still just a theory, hence the name) has far too many questions to answer and an over-abundance of speculation they offer as answers.Let's take some of these into consideration, one at a time.

Theories are always changing, it seems. That's why we call them theories instead of established fact. This has not, however, kept members of opposing camps from jumping to confusions and digging trenches they feel they must then defend forever. Pardon the battle-field analogy, but if you have seen the film Expelled--No Intelligence Allowed, you will relaize that there are some who see it as exactly that. Some of us think we might reason with opposing views in a peaceful manner, however. I ask that you keep an open mind, regardless of which side of the issue you are on. You just might learn something--minds are like parachutes, in that they work best when open.

The newest theory of the 'big bang' (there have been many and doubtless will be more) is that a bubble of space exploded into space and expanded. No, that is not a misprint. You read that correctly. Space exploded into space and formed matter, according to this theory. At least the previous theory allowed for a singularity of matter that was the genesis of all we see today. That theory, too, had it's numerous problems, and for those of you who still believe the old one, check here: http://deeperthings.webs.com/apps/blog/show/293965-too-much-faith But, to add insult to insult (the theories never injured me, but they always manage to insult my intelligence), we are now asked to believe that science has adopted the Ex Nihilo theory of creation that many Christians were ridiculed for believeing not so long ago. Of course, the scientific community doesn't call it that and they don't attribute this sudden creation of everything from nothing to an intelligent being. However, I am inclined to paraphrase Shakepseare--"A skunk by any other name stinketh still."

Okay, let's examine this objectively. This primordial bubble of space--where did it come from? There has never been anything yet that did not have a beginning. So, what was the prime motivator for this bubble of space-stuff--oops, sorry; there was no stuff...just space...in a bubble, no less. What made the bubble in the first place? How did it form in that particular place (if you can call anywhere in a vast empty void a 'place')? What force pushed inward to form that bubble? There is always an outside force pushing inward to form a round bubble. That is a recognized law of physics. But, of course, we are asked to believe that physics didn't exist before the big bang. And perhaps there was an inner force of gravity, pulling together to form that rounded shape? Nope...impossible. There is no gravity where there is no matter. Some other explanation must be available. Any ideas? I mean, ideas that the common man who isn't educated beyond intelligence can understand.

Alright, I guess we just have to chalk that up to one chance in a googleplex or more, don't we? Let's assume that it did happen that way or by any of the other equally improbable means, just for the sake of argument. How did this expanding bubble of space into space begin to crystallize into matter from no material at all? If I were asked to make a cake, I had darn well better have some ingredients to start with. What were those (non-existent) ingredients and how did they come to gel? No ideas? Me neither. And believe me, I am trying.

Chalk that up to another one-in-a-googleplex chance--again, just for the sake of the argument. It wouldn't be fair or any fun to stop this soon, would it? Okay, somehow this space became matter and congealed into planets and stars, or so the theory says. And who am I to question these ultra-smart guys? Now, we have a planet that is capable of supporting life. Again, this is one chance in a huge number that it happened to be in just the right orbit and at just the right distance from just the right size and type of star. And the rotational period had to be just right, compounding the probability problems again. Then we have the issue of atmosphere. Only a certain type of atmosphere could support life--not methane, not hydrogen, not helium, not nitrogen alone. Gosh, I'm no mathematician by any means, but this number seems to be getting to be what I would call huge! The atmosphere had to be not only the correct gases, but in the correct proportions, too. What are the odds of that?!

Now, we need to have just the right conditions for life to occur. Even the simplest of cells is incredibly more complex than Charles Darwin could have imagined on his smartest day. And yet his intellectual descendants insist on making monkeys of themselves and swallowing it hook, line and sinker. DNA--three simple letters that add up to an amazingly complex code for life. Get the units (and there are thousands in the simplest of organisms) in the wrong order and you end up with zilch. Let's see, anyone keeping score on the mathematical odds? What are we up to now? Wow, that big?

Alright, somewhere along the line, we are asked to accept that a single cell formed and survived. So far, so good. If that's all there is, that cell is in big trouble, not to mention the fact that it is going to be awfully lonely unless something happens to cause him to have company. I know, this is getting tedious, but could you suspend disbelief again...just for the sake of argument? The theory won't survive unless you do.

By some wondrous and unexplained means, this single cell now has divided--the miracle of mitosis. YAY! And later, since they have all learned the same cool trick, there are now millions of cells, all alike and all members of the same club. Life is grand for awhile, until one of them gets this stupendous idea. Why not specialize? One wants to be a plumber and another an electrician, while still others desire to go into optics or chemistry. So, now we have a colon, a nerve, an eye and a pituitary gland. But something still isn't right, so they decide together to violate the laws of probability yet again (this number is getting unmanageable. Anyone have a Cray super computer?)

Having decided that they need new members in the club, and not just any dumb old single-celled idiot, they put out the request for livers, kidneys, brains, finger nails, bones and more. And the response is overwhelming! It takes more than big numbers to scare off these guys. Now, they have a secret meeting in which they initiate the new members and organize into chapters they call organs. What a long way they have come from the unsophisticated and tiny organelles they used to be. "Mom" would be proud.

About this time, one of them (we aren't sure which one or if it was a group epiphany) gets the idea that it isn't any fun to just divide and multiply anymore, but that sex sounds a lot more fun, so they all agree to become male and female from here on in and, true to their theory, it was more fun. But we don't stop there...oh, no.

Imagination overtakes probability once again and somehow we have fish and lions and plants and lichens and molds. All from the ambitions of one single little guy who never knew the meaning of 'quit'. Of course, our number is now getting to look like the rings of Saturn, but that's a minor inconvenience. Evidently these variations come from cosmic rays that cause DNA to mutate and form new species. Never mind the fact that cosmic rays are harmful to living tissue and that probabilities fairly well demand only entropy of the affected DNA, fairly guaranteeing non-viable changes. Facts like this are simply not important when you have a mission to fulfill—whether you be scientist or monkey with visions of grandeur.

We aren't done by a long shot. Monkeys do suddenly aspire to be more and eventually get their diplomas and become the very scholars we have teaching our science courses today. Isn't that wonderful? The things you can do when you apply yourself and ignore laws of probability....

But let's not stop there. This collection of cells now called a human finds he has an unexplainable desire to go into space, to explore the ocean bottom and to write poetry and compose music, consider points of philosophy. And lo and behold, one of them realizes that he had better invent calculus if he plans to do some of these things properly. Mathematics...I am going to ask you to suspend disbelief again, for the sake of our poor over-stressed theory.

With the new science of mathematics, one of the especially bright ones figures out that the probabilities against his own existence are becoming a number so large that it has exceeded the calculated number of atoms in the very universe--you know, the one that was made from nothing. This discovery causes him to puff out his chest with pride and declare a brand new theory--WE are god. Ahhhh, sigh of relief. The struggle has been worth it, after all. Just a few loose ends to tie up--like chirology--reverse images of our molecules would be deadly, but of course, we are living proof that we have overcome that problem, also. Then there's the question of our own internal and involuntary repair mechanisms, but why muck up such a wonderful day with stupid and meaningless questions, right? "What do you mean, why do you have an internal skeleton instead of an exo-skeleton? Well, let me explain...........hey, look at that big distraction over there! Besides, look what I've done with this really awesome huge number! I've built an ivory tower. Come on in and make yourself at home. Don't step on the space cat--he isn't fully formed yet. Come see this Entropy problem I am working on."

Perhaps you are beginning to see the tremendous amount of faith it takes to believe in such a theory. And I haven't even touch upon many of the other problems connected with it. What about symbiotic relationships, like the process of photosynthesis? If it stopped happening tomorrow, it would be very few days until all animal life on earth would be dead from lack of oxygen. And without the carbon dioxide provided by animal exhalation and other sources, the plants themselves would be gone in quick order. Them too, there is the symbiotic relationship within our own bodies. The beneficial flora in our intestines is absolutely crucial to our survival. And not just us—if termites didn't have certain organisms in their digestive systems, they would die also. And you can count many, many more of these types of relationships. And we are expected to believe all these fortunate accidents just kept happening, one after another.

There is also the ultra-violet light paradox. It seems that there was a certain level of UV light necessary for certain things to have happened to form life as claimed by evolutionary scientists, but unfortunately there was also too much to allow some of the processes to ever take place in the first instance. Bummer, dude. Odds are not in favor...again. And there is also the conundrum of the ozone layer. Early on, the earth had none. This would have dictated that life would be restricted only to the oceans, if at all. So, how did the cosmic rays find access to the lower life forms to cause the favorable mutations that supposedly took place? Again the odds say 'no'. And any life forms that might have tried to crawl onto land would have been destroyed in short order by excessive UV light levels. Another strike against the theory—the number grows still larger.

"But", says the evolutionist, "that's what makes it all so wonderful, doesn't it! The very chances of it happening are quite impossible, by any known and accepted scientific standard...and yet it did!" This is perfectly akin to believing in magic, the very thing that the Darwinistic science community (I make the distinction purposely, as not all scientists are trying to make monkeys of themselves) has accused the religionist of adhering to. Magic and Ex Nihilo creation. Seems the two sides aren't so different after all, doesn't it? Well, as they say, the truth always seems to lie somewhere in between.

There is no proof to be offered for the theory of evolution, as the time periods we are talking about are much too long to allow any acceptable term or form of observation that could lead to reasonably accurate conclusions. What there are instead, are what only appears to be periods of evolutionary development in life's history. But there are other viable explanations to be sure. And might I remind my readers that there have numerous adaptations of this particular theory as well. Just as the big bang had its Steady State proponents, so dis evolutionary theory. Later it became Punctuated Equilibrium, to overcome the problems of cataclysmic events--not to mention the fact that animals just don't lie down and get covered over by sediment while they refuse to rot after death; like they aspired to be fossils when they grew up.

There are other explanations equally able (that's unfair, actually...they are superior in every way) to explain what appears to be billions of years of evolution from 'tar-paper shack to skyscraper.' And they are scientifically sound to all but the most intellectually dishonest and vitriolic of opponents. And yes, those people do exist. They often fall into their own pit when they are done digging it for others they had intended to be victims of their deceit.

The next section is pasted from the post called Too Much Faith, the link given earlier. I did so in interest of time.

Let's discuss the age of the earth. Scientists say it is billions of years old and that careful calculation and measurement proves it. SOME religionists say the earth is only 6,000 years old. They base this on faith in their interpretation of a verse that reads thus: 'One day is as a thousand years to the Lord and a thousand years as one day", coupled with another earlier one that states that God made the earth in six days and on the seventh day He rested. Therefore, these believers say, it has to be six thousand years old--'God said it, I believe it and that's the end of it.' How narrow minded! These men are just as bad as the man of science who says religion cannot agree with science and never will.

Let us look at that first statement. It is a nice example of Hebrew Chiasmus, a mirror-image restatement and an idiomatic poetic form, common to Hebrew. This is not all, though. It is also an equation that, if followed through to the end, will lead to a much larger number, more to the liking of a scientist. Observe:

One 'day' is a thousand of our years (so a 'year' of those days would be 365,000 of our earthly years) and a thousand (of those) years (365,000,000 of our years) is a day unto the Lord. Times this by six, according to scripture=2 billion, 190 million years old. And He rested the seventh day, so add another 365,000,000 years to that, plus the 6,000 that some religionists say is the sum total of the age of our planet.

Survey says: 2 billion, 555 million years, give or take a geologic time period or two. Is this more to your liking, Mr. scientist? 2.5 billion+ is a lot of time, is it not? Plenty of time for an eternal being, not bound by time as we see it from our mere seventy to a hundred year span, to first place some microbes on this new planet to break it down and make some mineralized soil. After all, what are you going to plant the seeds in if not soil? Then a few seeds here and there to produce a lot of oxygen and food for the animal species yet to come. And why should we break the pattern--place a male and female of each species to populate the ocean, simpler life forms first, to feed the later ones that will be much larger. And so on until all the simpler forms have been established over millions of years and provide a firm foundation for the more advanced species that will be dependent upon them.

Now, this could easily be mistaken for a slow evolution from one simpler life form to a more advanced life form. No matter that this has never been observed or that there is no 'missing link' in the fossil record. It is easy enough to manufacture one (and this has been done--evidence disappears when veracity is questioned--i.e., Piltdown Man, et. al.) and a theory to support it, in the event any true evidence is lacking.

The fossil record would naturally show a slow populating of the earth by these..."emerging species"...during these 'geological periods'. Each new period would reflect the introduction of other, "more advanced" species, as was intended by the Author of the plan, until we reach the present period, when mankind was also introduced via one male and one female of the species. (NOTE: I have still not said that there is a God, just that this is an alternative theory for you to consider, if you are truly open-minded).

It seems that each new find that is older than the last 'nucleus to a theory' is hailed as the true originator of the human family. How many originators are there? Currently over a dozen, if I am up to date.

End of pasted section.

Two billion, five hundred fifty five million years. Any 'rational' evolutionary scientist would think this period plenty long for his pet theory to have taken place...against all odds. But he is unwilling to accept an alternate theory that comes to the same conclusion. And when the second one has infinitely better chances of having happened, discarding it is borderline to madness. Someone had to say it.

Now, let's discuss the DNA problem a bit more closely. We are told that our first common 'mother', known as African Eve, was recorded to be about 200,000 years ago. Fine, I can accept that...if you are going by the nuclear DNA standard. Problem is, nuclear DNA isn't reliable for extended periods of time. They break down and become inaccurate and unreadable--not that this fact stops the zealots from making claims based on insufficient information--scientific method, indeed! What is accurate and reliable, but has a shorter time period reliability, is mitochondrial DNA. So, it should be used almost exclusively, yes? Sorry, but it rubs the evolutionist the wrong way--seems it mutates 26 times faster than they had originally thought, leaving mtDNA Eve placed around 6,000 to 6,500 years ago. This would mean man was introduced far more recently than they would like to accept. Since this date is so close to what many religionists claim, the facts get thrown out and the theory is kept, regardless of its deception. Don't believe me?

"...researchers have calculated that 'mitochondrial Eve'--the woman whose mtDNA was ancestral to that in all living people--lived 100,000 to 200,000 years ago in Africa. Using the new clock, she would be a mere 6,000 years old. No one thinks that's the case."
Calibrating the Mitochondrial Clock, Science 2 Jan. 1998 Vol. 279, No. 5347 pp. 28-29

In essence, if the data doesn't fit the theory, eliminate the data. Here's one archaeologists's view of the new method, regardless of its accuracy.

"The mystery of human origins is far from solved, but because DNA may not be as diagnostic as it once seemed, Thorne says, we're back to the bones. It's really good that these things are coming from the fossil side...the DNA studies can just take a back seat."
Scientific American, Aug. 1999

That article should have born the title, Science Abandons Ethics, the sad state of science today. The theory has become the sacred cow and the data gets sacrificed on the altar of secular humanist science's altar. And this despite the growing use of mtDNA as a clock.

"The hypothetical descent of mankind from 'mitochondrial Eve' has been much debated...some claim 800,000 years to be an upper limit, while mostresearchers suggest a date of approximately 200,000 years.
They sequenced 610 base pairs of 357 individuals from 134 independent mtDNA lineages...and found...such a high mutation rate would indicate that Eve lived about 6,500 years ago--a figure clearly incompatible with current theories on human origins."
Mitochondrial Eve: the plot thickens
Trends in Ecology and Evolution (TREE)
Vol. 12, No. 11 Nov. 1997

Evolutionary Anthropology, 12:7-18, 2003 adds:
"In addition, mtDNA mutates an order of magnitude faster than does nuclear DNA, with the control region mutating at an even greater rate, making it particularly useful for analyses at shallow time depths."

Well, well.... Useful as it is, some still wish to cast off mtDNA as detritus--just so much flotsam and jetsam. An inconvenient truth, indeed. What happens with this approach is akin to trading a dollar bill for two quarters and thinking that you somehow are now one ahead. Trade further for three dimes, then five pennies and call it a wonderful deal--just labeling it in a pleasing manner doesn't make it so. You cheat yourself when opinion becomes more sacred than truth. I go so far as to call this approach to science a 'religious cult.'

Astrophysicists will tell you that the universe isn't old enough for life on earth to have been the product of evolution as presently taught. Unfortunately, they don't speak the same language as evolutionary biologists and don't travel the same circles. They don't read the same papers or attend the same conferences. They may rarely get out of their own rooms. Not a likely way to amass data that could be relevant from cross-disciplinary comparisons.

It would be useful to anyone interested in the real and basic problems with the theory of evolution to view the link on Unlocking the Mystery of Life. I have made it available to you at http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/390314/Documentary%20-%20Unlocking%20the%20Mystery%20of%20Life%20%28Intelligent%20Design%29also%20search%20for%20What%20the%20bleep%20do%20we%20know.avi

Now, to keep my promise. I have shown that the evidence against evolution, to all but the most stubborn and belligerent of soldiers in this war, is overwhelming and by any currently accepted scientific measure, is deemed in the realm of impossible. Not just unlikely, but impossible. All it takes in most instances to be labeled such is that the chances be less than one in one hundred. Here, the odds are beyond astronomical. The most powerful computers we have today would take a thousand years to figure out the chance that it could happen the way the proponents have painted it. Mathematically, you would stand a better chance for a roomful of monkeys throwing wooden blocks to build the Taj Mahal in a day. Let's just say the theory doesn't look too viable, to put it most kindly.

We talked about the theory that there was a single bubble of nothing that began it all. Now, let's consider a theory long ago discarded by the "intellectuals". The steady state theory said that matter always existed, spread out in space, which also always existed. Doesn't that make more sense and isn't it easier to wrap your mind around than some voodoo magic space bubble that created everything from nothing? I say this as much to the religionist as to the scientist. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that God created everything from nothing. The very Hebrew word for create, baurau, means to organize. You cannot organize what isn't there. Can you organize empty space? A vacuum cannot be divided and moved. I defy you to do so and measure it while it is being done. Is this any less myth and fable than believing in a supreme intelligence? Be honest.

In order to be honest, I cannot tell you where intelligence came from, but if Max Planck and Albert Einstein say it is there in huge amounts, who are you to argue the point without any proof? And why won't their own colleagues take them seriously? My faith actually teaches me that matter was always there, as was space and also intelligence. It must have been. There is no other rational explanation. And if that intelligence is eternal, then why not our own? My faith teaches me that this life is about growth and the opportunity to be tested for greater things and greater powers in higher realms. If I am wrong, I have still lived a happy life in the efforts to be a better person to my neighbor and family, so that I may be worthy of such honors when offered. If I am right, I might actually receive those honors, as promised in the scriptures. If you are right, you are no better off than me. If you are wrong, you lose the opportunity of a lifetime, literally. I sincerely hope you don't.

As for the second part of my promise--the proof that God exists. And I said the proof is overwhelming, you will recall. I do not back away from that now. Any person in this world can prove the existence of God without the slightest degree of doubt. Millions have already done so. Millions more will. What is the method for this experiment?

It is as simple as this:
4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.
5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.
Moroni 10:4,5

Note that it didn't say ask out of simple curiosity, with a passing interest or to prove it wrong. It carries a promise. The promise is that if you ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, in honest humility and without foregone biases, having faith that God can and will answer, you will get your answer. Note that it does not promise that you will get it the first time. What experiment ever was solved the first time? How rare is that. But it does promise that if you will do it under thses conditions, you will be rewarded with an answer that is unmistakable--you can know the truth--not only of this, but of all things. Learning takes time. You will not learn faith in Christ overnight. You may not even learn to want the truth overnight, if you are particularly resistant to the answer you might get. But the promise is sure. I have tested it and been rewarded. Countless others have done the same.

The advice is clear:
5 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.
6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.
7 For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord.
8 A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.
James 1:5-8

Again, you must be sincere. You aren't required to show your sincerity by standing on the roof tops and calling out to the sky for an answer. You do this in the quiet and peace of your own room. Turn off all other distractions. The answer will likely not be thinder and lightning, but a peace and warmth that will fill your soul and warm your heart, speaking peace and comfort to your mind. I did say it was overwhelming--and when you are fully in tune, it is. You may find that tears come to your eyes for no reason you can think of, except for the sudden and overwhelming joy that you feel. Personally, I can point to an exact moment where the change came. One second I didn't know of there was a God, but the next I couldn't deny it, for the presence of His love was like being suddenly immersed in the sea. Learning was instantly poured into me--things I had not known before, but which were later verified in an umistakable manner to me. And in case you deem this to be the ravings of a frenzied mind, the very same experience was being had in the room by a friend of mine--in the mouths of two witnesses. And others in the house, not privy to exactly what was happening, became frightened and left for other rooms, knowing that indeed something of an extraordinary nature was taking place. Many other wonderful and miraculous things have since happened to me. I will not go into detail here, as I consider them to be sacred in nature and I share them only with those who will not ridicule to their own detriment.

No one can perform the experiment for you. It will not be measured in the lab with meters, buzzers and beakers. You must do it yourself within the confines of your own special place of solitude. In this reaction, you must be one of the elements. There is no other way. If you want the reaction, you must follow the formula. The correct answer comes with the proper equation, to put it another way. If you want sure proof, you must humble yourself and make a plea for personal communication, plain and simple. He will not force Himself on you. You must ask.

And, as to education today, our students need to say loudly and clearly, "I am here for an education, not a brainwashing. I insist on being offered all relevant theories and viewpoints. I will not be bullied out of nor cheated out of learning true facts. I will hold personally responsible any who attempt to do do so." At the very least, do your own research and don't accept every flimsy theory that comes from the mouths of supposed authority figures. You owe it to yourself to question authority and not be a blind follower of the blind. Remember, the theories change constantly, but facts do not. Why not go to the source of all facts, if you can?

One last thing. If science can accept as fact that matter can be influenced and manipulated to some small degree by our puny minds, via quantum physics, then why not allow for a superior intelligence to have greater breadth of control? Plenty of respectable scientists have allowed for that over the ages--Newton, Galileo, Einstein, Planck and more. Some, like Planck, have said without doubt that it is all controlled by a great mind. The capitalizations are his, not mine.

"All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force... We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter." --Max Planck

"It appears the universe is not so much a great mechanism as it is a great idea." --Unknown

Einstein said that "God does not play dice with the universe", but have you ever truly thought of what he was implying by that statement? It is not random chance. There is control and purpose. A sufficiently trained and disciplined mind could hold things together far moreso than our tiny little minds do. We are only as smart as we allow ourselves to be and that means working with facts, not theories. You may choose to believe in magic and creation of something from nothing or you may choose to face facts--overwhelming facts and probabilities. Again, why not find out from the source of all facts and truth? Don't you owe it to yourself; or are your pet theories so much more important than truth that you would waste a good portion of your lifetime in intellectual darkness, just to preserve your false pride? God has been proven to me and countless others. You can have that proof, too, if you are willing and ready. I wish you the best in your search.

» printer-friendly
Stories copyright by respective authors.
Stories licensed under the Creative Commons License.

Creative Commons License

Website copyright © 2013 Zeryn, Inc. All Rights Reserved.