|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Evolution of God (Before Genesis 1:1) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
NOT JULIUS Member (Idle past 4474 days) Posts: 219 From: Rome Joined: |
quote: What is BB? sorry quite new.
quote:Sorry, but i think in most bibles the word "ruach" (hebrew or greek word--not sure) or spirit has been translated also as "power". If you accept that "power" and "energy" are same, then it could make sense.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
BB= Big Bang. A theory put forth by Father Georges Henri Joseph duard Lematre, a priest.
If you accept that "power" and "energy" are same, then it could make sense. No, of course I don't accept that. And no, "spirit" is not the same as "power" So other than absolutely none of you assertions being correct, what do you have? Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NOT JULIUS Member (Idle past 4474 days) Posts: 219 From: Rome Joined: |
My reference is Bible in Today's English, 1966 (?)Catholic edition. Genesis 1:1,says, in the beginning...the earth was desolate...the raging ocean that covered everything was engulfed in total darkness, and the POWER of God was moving over the water. ( Footnote reads the POWER of God, or the SPIRIT of God, or awesome wind ).
You may not agree, but the bible says that SPIRIT = POWER. I think it may help if we mentally picture a "man"--that instead of being made of flesh and blood--is made up of electrical, nuclear, and all forms of power ( or energies). He is alive,has will, and can use these powers in any way he wants. Edited by Great J, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
If that is the case, and POWER=Energy, what does that have to do with God?
If you are then saying Power = God then you have reduced god to nothing but another force like electricity for man to use and control. Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6408 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
Power is not energy. Rather, it is the rate of energy use (or production). The scientific meaning of "power" is different from the common language meaning of "power". You seem to be confusing the two.
A murderer uses energy when he shoots his victims. A robber uses energy to power his getaway car. It seems to me that your thesis makes God an accomplice to all crimes. I would have thought that blasphemous.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NOT JULIUS Member (Idle past 4474 days) Posts: 219 From: Rome Joined: |
quote: Not just another force. I think I have conveyed the idea of God--unlike men made of flesh and blood--evolved from all sorts of energy. "It" evolved into a "he". He can use all these powers to his will. His will is independent with that of men.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NOT JULIUS Member (Idle past 4474 days) Posts: 219 From: Rome Joined: |
quote:This is why I requested this topic not to be posted in the science forum. Is the idea of electrical energy = electrical power not understandable to you? What about solar power = solar energy? In the minds of many God is not science, and the Bible is not a science book. Do you agree? Edited by Great J, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Then God is not the Power and so your assertion is falsified.
Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6408 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
Is the idea of electrical energy = electrical power not understandable to you?
Completely understandable, and false.
What about solar power = solar energy?
Also false.
In the minds of many God is not science, and the Bible is not a science book. Do you agree?
That, I agree with.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NOT JULIUS Member (Idle past 4474 days) Posts: 219 From: Rome Joined: |
quote: Sorry, I failed to get your point.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NOT JULIUS Member (Idle past 4474 days) Posts: 219 From: Rome Joined: |
quote: A tinsmith makes knives. Murderers use knife to kill. Therefore, a tinsmith is accomplice to the crime?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
If God is using the various forces then God is NOT the various forces.
If we can explain the various forces without resorting to God then there is no need for inserting God. If we can explain what is seen through natural means then there is no need to insert God. One last step. In science, if something cannot be explained, the answer is "That can not be explained yet", not "GodDidIt." Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6408 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
A tinsmith makes knives. Murderers use knife to kill. Therefore, a tinsmith is accomplice to the crime?
That's an entirely different situation. The tinsmith is not the knife, and the tinsmith is not a participant in the crime. If God is energy, as you claim, then God is a participant in the crime.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NOT JULIUS Member (Idle past 4474 days) Posts: 219 From: Rome Joined: |
quote: Why should that be exclusive and not inclusive?
quote: Why should there be "blinders" or "blinkers"? In the 60s to 70s--not sure of the time frame--the atoms were considered as the smallest particle. Then whoaa! Different kinds of sub-atomic particles.
quote: Why only "natural means"? I thought "nature" could be improved.
quote: The key words are "that can not be explained yet". Is it possible then that the nature of God could later on be explained by science--starting from the "theory", "hypothesis", "guess" of this humble post?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Why should that be exclusive and not inclusive? You made it exclusive when you said God used the forces.
Why should there be "blinders" or "blinkers"? In the 60s to 70s--not sure of the time frame--the atoms were considered as the smallest particle. Then whoaa! Different kinds of sub-atomic particles. There are no blinders or blinkers. I said:
jar writes: If we can explain the various forces without resorting to God then there is no need for inserting God. No blinders there.
Why only "natural means"? I thought "nature" could be improved. Nature can be improved by natural means. What other means are there? Unnatural?
The key words are "that can not be explained yet". Is it possible then that the nature of God could later on be explained by science--starting from the "theory", "hypothesis", "guess" of this humble post? Yes, the key words are "that can not be explained yet" and yes it is possible "that the nature of God could later on be explained by science", however, if that is the case then God is not supernatural but instead just another thing like slime and mud. Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024