Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 108 (8806 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-17-2017 9:00 AM
272 online now:
jar, JonF, PaulK, RAZD (4 members, 268 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Post Volume:
Total: 824,415 Year: 29,021/21,208 Month: 1,087/1,847 Week: 10/452 Day: 10/115 Hour: 0/5

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev123
4
56Next
Author Topic:   Theistic Evolution
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8802
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 46 of 78 (60464)
10-10-2003 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Pringlesguy7
10-10-2003 3:46 PM


When I hear this kind of idea, it seems to me that the individual who accepts it is in the same postition that all of us were a 1,000 years ago.

From a position of almost total ignorance everything we see appears to be magical and totally incomprehensible. From a complete lack of understanding it is possible to arrive at these kind of conclusions and see gods hand everywhere.

As we learn to understand what is around us it is very much possible to "look into the sky at the stars, and think about it for a while, and honestly tell" you that I see no sign of any intelligent hand in it at all. The dark curtain of ignorance has been partially pulled away and light shines onto a corner of the universe around us. I may well be awestruck, more so than you perhaps, but I am not deluded.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Pringlesguy7, posted 10-10-2003 3:46 PM Pringlesguy7 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Prozacman, posted 10-10-2003 6:57 PM NosyNed has responded

  
Prozacman
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 78 (60471)
10-10-2003 6:57 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by NosyNed
10-10-2003 5:44 PM


What is your opinion of Panentheism?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by NosyNed, posted 10-10-2003 5:44 PM NosyNed has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Pringlesguy7, posted 10-12-2003 2:16 AM Prozacman has responded
 Message 53 by NosyNed, posted 10-12-2003 2:32 PM Prozacman has responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 78 (60472)
10-10-2003 7:17 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Pringlesguy7
10-10-2003 3:46 PM


Honestly answer this one question for me. Look into the mirror, look at the ground, take a swim in the ocean, look into the sky at the stars, and think about it for a while, and honestly tell me that this was not intelligently designed (that God made it),

Ok, done all that. And I'm honestly telling you, God had no part in it, because God doesn't exist.

I'm being totally honest with you. When I see those things and have those experiences, it's plain as day to me that there's no god and everything around is is the way it is simply because if it wasn't that way, it would be another way.

and say that this all came to be through chance, becuase isnt that what the big bang is....just chance?

Yup. Chance.

If it wasn't this way, it would be another way. If this is one of the few ways that allows for intelligent life, then it's just chance that it's this way for us, and if it wasn't, well, we wouldn't be here to notice, now would we?

also, enlighten me on how atheism make more sens than my belief, is it becuase it takes less thought and less vulnerbility?

It actually takes a whole lot more thought to be an atheist. The first thought is "well, how do I have morals"? Intelligent people come to the conclusion pretty quickly that it's pretty impractical to be truly amoral. If you're the only amoral person, the moral people lock you up. If everybody's amoral, the human race is extinct in a generation.

So, you tell me which method of determining moral precepts takes more thought: 1) Looking them up in a book; or 2) Determining rationally what morals are best for the human community.

Atheists may be many things, but intellectually lazy isn't one of them. Lazy atheists fall too easily into religion.

Anyway, as far as "more sense than your belief" goes, I wasn't talking about your beliefs - I don't know what you believe, after all - but emotional's beliefs, who apparently believes in an unteastable, unfalsifiable God. I question the rational utility of believing in untestable, unfalsifiable things.

[This message has been edited by crashfrog, 10-10-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Pringlesguy7, posted 10-10-2003 3:46 PM Pringlesguy7 has not yet responded

  
Pringlesguy7
Inactive Member


Message 49 of 78 (60588)
10-12-2003 2:16 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by Prozacman
10-10-2003 6:57 PM


prozacman

What do you mean, do you mean like the Greek Pantheon? (Correct me if im wrong, but that does mean the Higherarchy of gods)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Prozacman, posted 10-10-2003 6:57 PM Prozacman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by John, posted 10-12-2003 4:46 AM Pringlesguy7 has not yet responded
 Message 54 by Prozacman, posted 10-13-2003 2:46 PM Pringlesguy7 has not yet responded

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 50 of 78 (60606)
10-12-2003 4:46 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by Pringlesguy7
10-12-2003 2:16 AM


I figure this is what he means.

http://www.panentheism.com/index.html

------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com


This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Pringlesguy7, posted 10-12-2003 2:16 AM Pringlesguy7 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Asgara, posted 10-12-2003 5:14 AM John has responded
 Message 56 by Prozacman, posted 10-13-2003 3:25 PM John has not yet responded

  
Asgara
Member
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 51 of 78 (60610)
10-12-2003 5:14 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by John
10-12-2003 4:46 AM


I haven't read such sugary nothingness since the sixties.

Black = white
good = bad
right = wrong = right

If one perceives it is possible, even if only remotely possible, that one is within Gd, thus a piece of Gd, and thus impact Gd then altruistic acts become self-serving acts and no longer are altruistic acts. When this occurs, then what were previously perceived to be self-serving acts become self-destructive acts. Is this not proof in and of itself that the system of symbiotic panentheism is a perceptual shift, and thus a new metaphysical system?

from the link on John's post

I tried reading through the whole link, but could find nothing of substance. (at least nothing I understood) If someone else understands this maybe they could explain?

------------------
Asgara
"An unexamined life is not worth living" Socrates via Plato


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by John, posted 10-12-2003 4:46 AM John has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by John, posted 10-12-2003 10:54 AM Asgara has not yet responded
 Message 57 by Prozacman, posted 10-13-2003 4:03 PM Asgara has not yet responded

    
John
Inactive Member


Message 52 of 78 (60624)
10-12-2003 10:54 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by Asgara
10-12-2003 5:14 AM


Sugary nothingness... I like that-- kinda sexy.

Did you go to the library page? Philosophy in pictures!!! Can't beat that. This one especially is illuminating????

------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com


This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Asgara, posted 10-12-2003 5:14 AM Asgara has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Prozacman, posted 10-13-2003 4:38 PM John has responded

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8802
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 53 of 78 (60632)
10-12-2003 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Prozacman
10-10-2003 6:57 PM


I couldn't find the word --Panentheism
I did find pantheism:
A doctrine identifying the Deity with the universe and its phenomena.
Belief in and worship of all gods.

I'd say I don't think much about either meaning. I don't even really understand what it implies.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Prozacman, posted 10-10-2003 6:57 PM Prozacman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Prozacman, posted 10-13-2003 3:09 PM NosyNed has not yet responded

  
Prozacman
Inactive Member


Message 54 of 78 (60734)
10-13-2003 2:46 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Pringlesguy7
10-12-2003 2:16 AM


NNNNNOOOOOOOOOO! The greeks have nothing to do with Panentheism. Also Panentheism is not the same as Pantheism, if you'd like to know. Whereas Pan-theism teaches that God IS everything and everything IS God, Pan-en-thiesm is quite different. The meanings of the word parts are: Pan=everything, en=in, and theos=God; everything in God. IOW Panentheism means that God contains, or holds everything that exists within himself(itself, whatever). The whole of the universe is only a small part of this god. It means that this kind of god is very physical in the natural sense as well as spiritual. In theology-speak this kind of god is both immanent & transendant(right here and more than right here). Therefor evolution may be very characteristic of this god.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Pringlesguy7, posted 10-12-2003 2:16 AM Pringlesguy7 has not yet responded

  
Prozacman
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 78 (60738)
10-13-2003 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by NosyNed
10-12-2003 2:32 PM


Please refer to my reply #54 to Pringlesguy for a short and I hope accurate definition of Panentheism. There's only one god within this system, but he(it,whatever) is not the supernatural Judeo-Christian-Islamic god. This god doesn't reach down into the physical world and change the laws of nature in order to perform a "miracle" like YHWH or Jesus. The laws of nature are a part of this god, so evolution can happen and "miracles" must be within the bounds of physical law. Just type "Panentheism" into Yahoo and a bunch of references will pop-up. By the way, I do not subscribe to this theory. I'm just curious.

[This message has been edited by Prozacman, 10-13-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by NosyNed, posted 10-12-2003 2:32 PM NosyNed has not yet responded

  
Prozacman
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 78 (60739)
10-13-2003 3:25 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by John
10-12-2003 4:46 AM


I just looked at the site you provided and I can't say I accept the philosophy presented there. It certainly does look like some tie-die shirt, dope-smoking, thing from the 60's. I was only curious as to what Panentheism involved and whether or not it might or might not be compatable with theistic-evolution. Otherwise I am agnostic.

[This message has been edited by Prozacman, 10-13-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by John, posted 10-12-2003 4:46 AM John has not yet responded

  
Prozacman
Inactive Member


Message 57 of 78 (60749)
10-13-2003 4:03 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Asgara
10-12-2003 5:14 AM


I will read it again, for the 5th time, and attempt(HA!) to understand. Then maybe...Just maybe... I'll be able to explain it(Yeah, right). But I'm definitely not one to believe such esoteric googleslop!

[This message has been edited by Prozacman, 10-13-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Asgara, posted 10-12-2003 5:14 AM Asgara has not yet responded

  
Prozacman
Inactive Member


Message 58 of 78 (60756)
10-13-2003 4:38 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by John
10-12-2003 10:54 AM


So boredom is the issue? Let's see, if I'm not mistaken the library page you referenced seems to be saying this:1. God got bored being alone. 2. God made the universe(multiverse?) to keep from getting bored and lonely. AAAWWWWWW! Poor Guy! Here, have a lollypop!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by John, posted 10-12-2003 10:54 AM John has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by John, posted 10-15-2003 4:05 PM Prozacman has responded

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 59 of 78 (61035)
10-15-2003 4:05 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Prozacman
10-13-2003 4:38 PM


Yeah, that looks about right to me.

------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com


This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Prozacman, posted 10-13-2003 4:38 PM Prozacman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Prozacman, posted 10-15-2003 6:44 PM John has not yet responded

  
Prozacman
Inactive Member


Message 60 of 78 (61062)
10-15-2003 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by John
10-15-2003 4:05 PM


Aaaahh! That's better; the Zantac's working! Anyway, this God got bored with himself(themselves?), created everything to amuse himself, and THEN, depending on one's religion, stuck everyone in a no-choice situation. "Either you believe in me(us, it, etc.) and do what I say or your toast!"
What in bejezus does this gobbledeegook have to do with theistic-evolution? Hmmm... Maybe we were stuck by this God into this no-choice situation: We must eat and reproduce in order to survive and pass our genes, which are mutating, on to our future descendants. We don't really have a choice about survival unless we want to starve to death in miserable pain; a lousy prospect, AND our offspring must fight tooth&nail with the possible mutated advantages they have in order to eat and carry on, unless they too wish to starve to death in miserable pain. Who was it who said, "Rejoice, rejoice, we have no choice??" AND, Who would want to believe in a god like that??

[This message has been edited by Prozacman, 10-15-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by John, posted 10-15-2003 4:05 PM John has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Rei, posted 10-15-2003 6:52 PM Prozacman has responded

  
Prev123
4
56Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017