[Bored chemist]

So you make up a story about some Colin who eats Gods

It seems other cultures know him in a different form.
https://www.facebook.com/EricTheGodEatingPenguin/about_profile_transparency

But that's beside the point.
As I said.

If Colin exists then God doesn't.
So the non-existence of Colin is a pre-requisite for your assertions that God exists.

That was true before I wrote about it.
The existence of a God requires- and always has required- the absence of Colin.

It doesn't matter that mankind may have taken millennia to realise this.

[Kartazion (OP)]

It seems other cultures know him in a different form.

Your different form of culture has nothing to do with the original you made. You talk to me about a caterpillar that eats the Gods, and you compare it as a source say close to the God eating magic penguin. So who is it ? God who eats or God who is eaten?

[Kartazion (OP)]

I translated it from a source I wrote earlier.

So you translated it from Hebrew to do it in English afterwards... a source you wrote earlier...

[Bored chemist]

It seems other cultures know him in a different form.

Your different form of culture has nothing to do with the original you made. You talk to me about a caterpillar that eats the Gods, and you compare it as a source say close to the God eating magic penguin. So who is it ? God who eats or God who is eaten?

You might want to read that through a few times.

[paul cotter]

I am getting concerned by the implications of this discourse. There is a rumour doing the rounds that colin2b is the "colin" mentioned in the religious documents. Since I am a god-like creature, am I at risk?

[Colin2B]

Since I am a god-like creature, am I at risk?

No, only unicorns and similar gods.
Not sure where you heard the rumour, but I can assure you I have never eaten a god. I’m more concerned about the suggestions of the non-existence of Colin, quite worrying really, especially as the OP is suggesting that whatever you believe to be real must be real.

[paul cotter]

Thank you, colin2b, for your reassurance, now I can relax. As for your concern about the nonexistence of "colin" I think your fears are unfounded. I have never studied formal logic but I am of the opinion that one can never prove the nonexistence of some entity or function. I must ask the "boss" ( to use alancalverd's terminology ) as she has studied logic as part of the course in the dreaded philosophy.

[Bored chemist]

It seems other cultures know him in a different form.

Your different form of culture has nothing to do with the original you made. You talk to me about a caterpillar that eats the Gods, and you compare it as a source say close to the God eating magic penguin. So who is it ? God who eats or God who is eaten?

You seem to have fallen foul of the absurdity of English.
"I saw a man eating chicken "
and
"I saw a man eating shark"
are rather different in terms of the subject and object of the verb.
(There are also other possible interpretations; English is sometimes good at ambiguity).
You need to work it out from the context.
And the context here is in two parts.
First of all, I told you that  Eric and Colin are similar. You should have understood from that that ... Eric and Colin are similar.
Secondly, a bit of browsing through that FB page would tell you the same thing; Eric eats Gods.


So the real problem here is that you somehow assumed I'm the stupid one.

You should probably avoid that mistake in the future.

[Kartazion (OP)]

Atheists no longer know what to invent as a wacky story to try to convince themselves of the non-existence of God. Eating a God... it's really nonsense.

[Kartazion (OP)]

In definition of a God to the detriment of a creature: The God is the creator of all things. Including his creatures. The atheists imply that God would have created a creature which eats it itself and moreover how? God is presumed immortal... Cheers these atheists...

[Kartazion (OP)]

If the quoted arguments are different in the definition of what a God is, then it is no longer a God if he becomes mortal or otherwise...

[alancalverd]

The problem with god is the lack of any evidence or necessity for its existence, and the fact that every characteristic ascribed to a deity turns out to be nonsense.

[Bored chemist]

Atheists no longer know what to invent as a wacky story to try to convince themselves of the non-existence of God. Eating a God... it's really nonsense.

I think you will find it's the theists who make up nonsense; count the contradictions in the Bible.
But I agree with this bit.
"a God... it's really nonsense."

[Bored chemist]

If someone does think they have a proof of the non existence of Colin, I will go through it, crossing out the word "Colin" and inserting the word "God".
In doing so, I will produce a proof of the non existence of God.
One way or another, Colin proves that there is no God.

When you say things like

In definition of a God to the detriment of a creature: The God is the creator of all things. Including his creatures. The atheists imply that God would have created a creature which eats it itself and moreover how? God is presumed immortal... Cheers these atheists...

you are heading into the territory I was talking about earlier.

[Kartazion (OP)]

Admit that the OP considers the existence of a God with the promised land at stake. This is what this thread is about.

I respect your position that you don't believe in God. But open another thread to discuss your arguments.

[Bored chemist]

OK.
The question was "Do you recognize the origin of this text?"
And, thus far, nobody has said yes.
You can probably close the thread.

[paul cotter]

Ok, let us digress from the vital discussion about colin et al, and return to the op's original question. Prior to Edwin Hubble's ground breaking work those hazy clusters in the sky were referred to as nebulae. I am not sure when the term galaxy first came into use but it must have been relatively recent. This rules out historic texts and I believe it derives from some new-age mumbo jumbo of which there are close to infinite quantities clogging up the web.

[Colin2B]

I am not sure when the term galaxy first came into use but it must have been relatively recent.

The Greeks used the word to describe the milky way and Chaucer uses it for the same in the 1300s
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=85381.msg685946#msg685946

[Kryptid]

OK.
The question was "Do you recognize the origin of this text?"
And, thus far, nobody has said yes.

I'm wondering if it's a rhetorical question. Kartazion seems to imply he knows where it's from, so... @Kartazion do you know where that text is from?

[paul cotter]

I stand corrected, colin2b, on the galaxy ( I always thought it was a chocolate bar ).  However I still believe this text is some new age mumbo jumbo woo woo.