The Difference

2004-6-16 12:00:00

Robert,

Let me tell you the difference between your relationship with Benjamin Creme and yourself and the people of this list and me.

When Creme speaks you believe without question. When he says something that does not seem logical again you do not question. Instead you make excuses as to why that which is not logical could be true if certain improbable chain of events or circumstances were in place. You have an absolute authority - Creme - who speaks with the authority of a master which makes questioning him like questioning the Pope or God is to a Catholic.

When I give out information which does not seem logical the people of the list challenge me. Those who are currently some of my strongest supporters such as Larry, Susan, Blayne, Glenys and others challenge me whenever I say anything that sounds fishy. I am questioned because I speak with no authority. Readers are left to the greatest authority of all which is their own souls. If Creme tells you that Christ will appear on a certain date in a certain way and nothing happens you do not question because this is like questioning God for you. Instead you make excuses.

If Creme says that the Saddam Hussein captured is a double you believe even though his identity is proven by DNA and has now been definitely identified by his wife and daughters.

If Creme says that Al Qaeda had nothing to do with the bombing in Spain you believe him even though the evidence supporting this is now overwhelming.

If Creme says that Jesus appears as a Taxi driver you see no reason to see anything strange in this.

Your reasoning in accepting all these improbable things is similar to that of the fundamentalist Christian who believes the universe is 6000 years old because his religious authority tells him so.

You ask him - what about the dinosaurs who were here long before 6000 years?

"The devil planted those dinosaur bones to deceive us," he replies.

Now can we say that there is a 100% probability that he is wrong? It sure seems that way to any logical thinking person, but when you consider all possibilities it is remotely possible that there are some type of sinister beings at play planting bones and having a good laugh at our expense.

Then one replies, "but there are galaxies billions of light years away and their light also took billions of years to reach us. How could this be true if the universe is only 6000 years old?"

The fundamentalist responds. "You don't understand. The speed of light has slowed down. When the universe was created light traveled so fast that it permeated the universe quite quickly. Then it slowed down and is still slowing down. As proof we see that the first measurements of the speed of light show that it was faster than it is today." (Of course, he fails to mention the accuracy was not as great back then either.)

Can we prove absolutely that the fundamentalist is wrong here? No. We did not have scientists here at the creation of the universe to measure the speed of light.

Then we ask him about dating with carbon 14 and other radioactive decay that can date back millions of years.

"Oh, that is flawed also," he says. "Radioactive decay has also changed since creation."

Is this possible? Yes, but very remotely so. Should I jump on the bandwagon and believe it just because religious authorities say it is true?

Not me.

Why?

Because the standard scientific view of the speed of light, radioactive decay and dinosaurs is much more logical and it would be silly to accept otherwise without reasonable proof.

Robert, you present Creme's materials and then present data backing it up that could make it true if some very improbable things happened.

Yes the average person could be 25 times more advanced than in the days of Jesus if some fanciful things have occurred, but no logical person will accept this just because some guru says a master has proclaimed it.

If someone wants to convince us the universe is 6000 years old he must do more than proclaim a religious authority or that "it could be true."

You must do the same.

Readers must take all teachings and test them against true principles which are verified by their souls and make up their own minds.

You end your post by saying: "And on the tide of my present endeavor, my argument has been vindicated."

If your argument has been vindicated then you would think that one of the 350 members here would see it. So far I haven't heard from one who has. This should tell you something.