> However there seems to be this conception that you have to be on one side or
> the other of this arguement. It appears that for some of us at least, there is
> a middle ground.
Kindly, =Exclude= me from what you refer to as "middle ground"... and "sit on"
your "cleverness", "two", then give The Lord's Sermon on the Mount a read.
I'm a devoted Amateur Scientist. I am here to discuss the Science I've
developed. Part of that is the requirement that I Acknowledge Christ's
Verifiable Priority... if I failed to do so, I'd cease to be Scientist and
become a Plagerist.
Nothing I'll be able to say will "explain" God... all I'm doing is Acknowledging
Christ's Priority to things I thought I'd "discovered"... I'm Acknowledging
Christ's jaw-hangingly-Awesome Foreknowledge of where modern Neuroscience would,
Verifiably, lead so as to fulfill the Obligation I have as a Scientist to
Acknowledge Priority when I become Aware of such.
I =cannot= "explain" Jesus's Foreknowledge. I'm just Declaring that it is
Demonstrable that Jesus Knew how our nervous systems process information, and
that He Taught Lovingly with respect to such.
I'm in a discussion over in alt.religion.gnostic, if you want to pursue things,
please do so over there. Bring along all your "fanatical friends" who've
persuaded themselves to Believe what they Choose to Believe with respect to me,
and I'll do my best to set you Straight. "Good-Greief! It shouldn't be so Hard
to just Declare a point in Science... but it's so, of course, because folks
"Worship" the "Beast", Ignorance.
I've Asked enough of the folks who meet here to do Neuroscience, and having
fulfilled my Obligation to folks in Neuroscience with respect to Christ's
Priority, I'm going to wrap things up, and then move on to doing more
Neuroscience in bionet.neruoscience. K. P. Collins