Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site hao.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!hao!ward
From: ward@hao.UUCP (Mike Ward)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: From one piece of 'dust' to another.
Message-ID: <1527@hao.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 8-May-85 08:56:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: hao.1527
Posted: Wed May  8 08:56:41 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 10-May-85 20:48:08 EDT
References: <1924@decwrl.UUCP> <1509@hao.UUCP> <304@scgvaxd.UUCP>
Organization: High Altitude Obs./NCAR, Boulder CO
Lines: 19

> >Please,Ken, give us the definition of the Creator.  I'll help
> >by starting the sentence for you: X is the Creator (or God, if
> >you prefer) if and only if X ...
> >
> 
>   I sure don't know what this question is doing in net.origins but I
>   will answer it anyway. Asking a human being to define God is like
>   asking an ant to define a human being, except it would be much easier
>   for the ant. 

This was net.origins because Ken Arndt stated that he not only
could, but had defined God, and that was the scientific information
needed to explain the creator.  The fact that he has not repeated
the definition (unless that "Ground of whatever" junk is his
definition) leads me to believe that he will not gain a place
in history as the first human to do so.

The rest of your sermon, of course, belongs with the other of
the trash on net.religion.