Does God exist inside of human DNA

[The_DNA_Rose]

The belief of geocentric model is not a de fide belief. The belief of God being a supreme being of existence is a de fide belief.

And God being the supreme being is through divine revelation from the prophets and the apostles.

Could be logical. But it means nothing until God is defined in the first place.

Is God a man?

Is God a woman?

Is God both?

Is God neither?

Does God have a big head?

Does God have a little head?

This could go on for infinity, as no one knows anything, thus anything can be true, if you have faith.

I was told to have faith in God, and I did, because I was told to. Then I grew up, and came to know that God is essential, to have created the DNA that created this network, as nothing comes from nothing, and we have hundreds of trillions of parts each.

However, if we are created in Gods image, then God is human, and we shall have his powers, once we understand his codes.

Go ahead recommend my house arrest to the elders, who still do not believe in Martians, as the Pope does.

 

[grannymh]

So the human genome project is completed…

What causes Autism? or Cystic Fibrosis…and hundreds more

Since the project is complete, this must be known.

Give us the scientific details…

Very good comments. You are one of millions of people who also want to know what causes Autism? or Cysttic Fibrosis…and hundreds more. Learning these causes is why we consider natural science a gift from God. Natural science benefits society especially in the medical area.

The scientific details which you are seeking date back centuries. For example, when one googles " autopsy," we find that it definitely was a scientific detail in the search for information about diseases. I put some words in bold.
From Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopsy#History
"The word “autopsy” has been used since around the 17th century, it refers to the examination of inside the dead human body to discover diseases and cause of death."

…

“Giovanni Morgagni (1682–1771), celebrated as the father of anatomical pathology,[19] wrote the first exhaustive work on pathology, De Sedibus et Causis Morborum per Anatomen Indagatis (The Seats and Causes of Diseases Investigated by Anatomy, 1769).”

The obvious connecting scientific detail is the human anatomy. The Human Genome Project presents this century’s human anatomy in all its genetic glory.

Perhaps it would be easier to understand HGP as a high tech alphabet book ready to be read by scientists from all over the world. Authors use the building blocks of the alphabet to form words, thoughts, possibilities, etc. Scientists use the building blocks of genes as the means to find out what causes this or that, health or sickness. There is usually a list of current scientific endeavors on the major HGP sites. However, considering the internet, there are millions of scientific endeavors using the information from the Human Genome Project to study causes of diseases

There have been a number of research projects on Autism. And no doubt you have found these projects reported in the media.

 

[The_DNA_Rose]

Very good comments. You are one of millions of people who also want to know what causes Autism? or Cysttic Fibrosis…and hundreds more. Learning these causes is why we consider natural science a gift from God. Natural science benefits society especially in the medical area.

The scientific details which you are seeking date back centuries. For example, when one googles " autopsy," we find that it definitely was a scientific detail in the search for information about diseases. I put some words in bold.
From Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopsy#History

"The word “autopsy” has been used since around the 17th century, it refers to the examination of inside the dead human body to discover diseases and cause of death."

…

“Giovanni Morgagni (1682–1771), celebrated as the father of anatomical pathology,[19] wrote the first exhaustive work on pathology, De Sedibus et Causis Morborum per Anatomen Indagatis (The Seats and Causes of Diseases Investigated by Anatomy, 1769).”

The obvious connecting scientific detail is the human anatomy. The Human Genome Project presents this century’s human anatomy in all its genetic glory.

Perhaps it would be easier to understand HGP as a high tech alphabet book ready to be read by scientists from all over the world. Authors use the building blocks of the alphabet to form words, thoughts, possibilities, etc. Scientists use the building blocks of genes as the means to find out what causes this or that, health or sickness. There is usually a list of current scientific endeavors on the major HGP sites. However, considering the internet, there are millions of scientific endeavors using the information from the Human Genome Project.

Is there a rational reason, why you are providing the linguistic history, of the word autopsy?

Genes are not the building blocks of DNA, it is the other way around, you have about 24 thousand genes, made up of over 3 billion lines of code, the secrets are in the code, and most of the code is not used, which makes it a mystery, but certainly not junk.

PS. Did you know that you can post your ideas on Wiki…

 

[Beryllos]

We’ve been trolled long enough.
Unsubscribe.

 

[Beryllos]

We’ve been trolled long enough.
Unsubscribe.

 

[The_DNA_Rose]

We’ve been trolled long enough.
Unsubscribe.

Sorry Son, there are just too many people interested in the future, though many are clinging to past catechisms.

PS. It is you who has chosen to subscribe to this thread, of your own interest, which is good.

 

[Gorgias]

Kmon23:

I don’t have any particular desire to discuss in this thread, but I am curious about your current religious beliefs?

I was married by my uncle, who was a priest, who had a sister who was a nun.

Rose,

It’s interesting that you accuse others of evading questions, since, each time you’ve been asked about your religious affiliation, you’ve evaded the question. We didn’t ask about the faith of your uncle, the priest; or about the faith of his sister, the nun. We asked about your belief – about whether you, yourself, are a Roman Catholic. And each time, we get an answer about others, and not a simple “yes, I’m a Catholic” or “no, I’m not.”

No judgments being leveled here, just a simple observation…

Blessings,
G.

p.s., you asked “who is the person, who referred to God as a creature?”. Go back to the first page of this thread, and check out post #3. That’s the person that Robyn was responding to in post #12.

 

[Gorgias]

Christine, you are evading a simple question, how do you know what the soul is, and from where did you get this information?

Christine is right: we get this information through Divine Revelation – that is, through God, who shares this information through the Church.

In another post, you ridiculed those who reference the catechism to you. Do you disbelieve in the teachings of the Church? The catechism, after all, is a compendium of the teachings that we believe God has led the Church to declare. Our information about the soul comes from the Deposit of the Faith – Scripture and Apostolic Teaching.

 

[The_DNA_Rose]

Rose,

It’s interesting that you accuse others of evading questions, since, each time you’ve been asked about your religious affiliation, you’ve evaded the question. We didn’t ask about the faith of your uncle, the priest; or about the faith of his sister, the nun. We asked about your belief – about whether you, yourself, are a Roman Catholic. And each time, we get an answer about others, and not a simple “yes, I’m a Catholic” or “no, I’m not.”

No judgments being leveled here, just a simple observation…

Blessings,
G.

p.s., you asked “who is the person, who referred to God as a creature?”. Go back to the first page of this thread, and check out post #3. That’s the person that Robyn was responding to in post #12.

Ah, is this comedy? My religious affiliation, is at the top right of every post. If you choose not to believe this, or that my family has a very deeply religious nature, this is your choice.

What you want is for me to study the leaping catechism, sheesh, I studied that in third grade, there are adults here still bleeping it at every instant. I went to Catholic elementary and High school as well, and never once was the catechism mentioned, or the flippin soul. I was taught the basics of evolution by sister Mary in the fifth grade, which confused me because I knew of the creation issue at some level, so I kept silent and scratched my head. Now I know that the Pope believes as well, and that sister Mary was told what to teach.

You just want me to agree that the Sun revolves around the Earth, and I will not, agree for the sake of agreement.

And Edison said…Let there be light, and there was light.

 

[grannymh]

You just want me to agree that the Sun revolves around the Earth, and I will not, agree for the sake of agreement.

Excuse me. This thread is dedicated to the question “Does God exist inside of human DNA.” There is nothing in that title which would demand agreeing that the Sun revolves around the Earth.

You are safe dear DNA Rose. :console:

 

[Robyn_p]

p.s., you asked “who is the person, who referred to God as a creature?”. Go back to the first page of this thread, and check out post #3. That’s the person that Robyn was responding to in post #12.

Thanks. Seeing as I even highlighted the part I was responding to in red, I thought this was pretty obvious.

 

[Gorgias]

Ah, is this comedy? My religious affiliation, is at the top right of every post.

Quite so. Yet, the evidence of your belief is dripping from every post you write… and trust me, that’s not in the least ‘Catholic’ in nature.

If you choose not to believe this, or that my family has a very deeply religious nature, this is your choice.

It’s not a choice; it’s my observation, based on the empirical evidence you’ve left for us in each of your posts.

Your family’s religious nature? That has nothing to do with the question.

What you want is for me to study the leaping catechism, sheesh, I studied that in third grade

And, apparently, you continue to have a third-grader’s understanding of it. Of course, unless you’re younger than 30, then the catechism you studied isn’t the one we’re pointing you toward, since it was promulgated in 1992.

I went to Catholic elementary and High school as well, and never once was the catechism mentioned

Umm… so… you “studied [the catechism] in third grade”, by yourself, since you weren’t taught it in school?

You just want me to agree that the Sun revolves around the Earth, and I will not, agree for the sake of agreement.

Funny… for someone who knows the catechism inside and out, you seem to be under the misconception that the catechism teaches against the copernican system. Perhaps you should re-read the catechism again.

And Edison said…Let there be light, and there was light.

No, Edison said, “dang… I got it wrong again. Let me try again.” Perhaps you should learn from his example…

 

[The_DNA_Rose]

Quite so. Yet, the evidence of your belief is dripping from every post you write… and trust me, that’s not in the least ‘Catholic’ in nature.

It’s not a choice; it’s my observation, based on the empirical evidence you’ve left for us in each of your posts.

Your family’s religious nature? That has nothing to do with the question.

And, apparently, you continue to have a third-grader’s understanding of it. Of course, unless you’re younger than 30, then the catechism you studied isn’t the one we’re pointing you toward, since it was promulgated in 1992.

Umm… so… you “studied [the catechism] in third grade”, by yourself, since you weren’t taught it in school?

Funny… for someone who knows the catechism inside and out, you seem to be under the misconception that the catechism teaches against the copernican system. Perhaps you should re-read the catechism again.

No, Edison said, “dang… I got it wrong again. Let me try again.” Perhaps you should learn from his example…

Yawn, catechism class is taught only to kids not in Catholic school, and I went to this class, until the fourth grade, when I switched to a Catholic school, and where sister Mary taught me evolution.

That said, I really appear to be your hero tonight.

Does God approve of your condescending tone and disbelief in fellow Catholics?

And God created man in his image, then, Edison said…Let there be light, and there was light.

Just believe, that Edison had the DNA of the Lord Thy Father…And with that, he turned the night into day…

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Genesis 1:27New King James Version

27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

Does this bible passage, mean the same thing today, as it did 500, 1000, or 2000 years ago? I doubt it, because now we know that our image comes from our DNA, and that DNA controls every aspect of what we are. So if we are created in the DNA image of God, we should be able to be God. Would God create something that was ignorant and useless, or would he recreate the knowledge of himself in order to give us the ability to rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."

So does DNA hold the image of God?

No, not in the sense you imply. God exists wherever his power is exercised, so he is present in every part of our bodies, but only because he is exercising his creative power in keeping us in existence. So while is is present, his Essence is not part of us, he still exists in his eternal state, which is not a part of the universe.

Our DNA is the same today as it was half a million years ago. It is not " God’s image, " because DNA is merely a blue pring for the soul to read. It is by reason our soul that we are the " image of God. " And we will never become God. How could we become that upon which we depend for continued existence? God created us to serve him in this life and to be with him in the next. The governance God has given us over the material world is part of his plan for our salvation. We are to use it in accordance to his will.

Pax
Linus2nd

 

[Gorgias]

Yawn, catechism class is taught only to kids not in Catholic school, and I went to this class, until the fourth grade

Oh! You’re talking about CCD, then! OK – please tell me: were you taught from the catechism? Which version? In what year?

That said, I really appear to be your hero tonight.

My interlocutor, at least. You’d be my hero if you were in the least bit logical.

Does God approve of your condescending tone and disbelief in fellow Catholics?

Does God approve of your scorn of His teachings?

 

[grannymh]

So does DNA hold the image of God?

So does DNA hold the image of God?

I have a zillion ways to approach your question. So far, as far as I can tell, you have already eliminated numerous ways. That is fine with me.

When you have a bit of rest, please let me know how you want me to approach your question. Your “approach” decision does not have to be perfect. Dang! I am not perfect.

 

[The_DNA_Rose]

No, not in the sense you imply. God exists wherever his power is exercised, so he is present in every part of our bodies, but only because he is exercising his creative power in keeping us in existence. So while is is present, his Essence is not part of us, he still exists in his eternal state, which is not a part of the universe.

Our DNA is the same today as it was half a million years ago. It is not " God’s image, " because DNA is merely a blue pring for the soul to read. It is by reason our soul that we are the " image of God. " And we will never become God. How could we become that upon which we depend for continued existence? God created us to serve him in this life and to be with him in the next. The governance God has given us over the material world is part of his plan for our salvation. We are to use it in accordance to his will.

Pax
Linus2nd

Where did the people who first wrote your ideas get their information, about what God is.

There is no evidence that human DNA is the same today, as it was half a million years ago, where did you get this information from?

Does everyone here just make up stuff on the go?

Is that what God is?

 

[ThinkingSapien]

I get the impression the real purpose of this thread (and a few others) is to bait people to argue against radical skepticism.

But que sçay-je?

Pardon my mistakes. Sent from my mobile device.

 

[The_DNA_Rose]

I get the impression the real purpose of this thread (and a few others) is to bait people to argue against radical skepticism.

But que sçay-je?

Pardon my mistakes. Sent from my mobile device.

Not at all Son, please try again…!

I hope that it did not take you long, to make those mistakes from your mobile devise.

Intelligent design, is true knowledge.

Yawn.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Not at all Son, please try again…!

I hope that it did not take you long, to make those mistakes from your mobile devise.

That’s not very consistent with CCC 2478. :nope: