Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8950 total)
68 online now:
caffeine, kjsimons, Tangle, vimesey (4 members, 64 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 867,211 Year: 22,247/19,786 Month: 810/1,834 Week: 310/500 Day: 9/64 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is God Required for a life to have Direction and Purpose?
logicalunatic
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 43 (27631)
12-22-2002 1:57 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Brad McFall
12-22-2002 1:09 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Brad McFall:
If baramins? are needed to multiplex network nodes? into a physical space that does not follow basic principles Einstein believed in that had him not taking Kant seriously? and this is done with the future of space exploration explictly in pedagogy? there is the possiblity that specifying creation in this manner, both?, and any? use? (but not all? or every?) of scientific method results in? being able to re-read?; read further?.

Hi, Brad...
I've placed question marks within the quote that signify that I've completely lost you. Could you please elaborate?
Thanks...

PS... WHAT!?

------------------
LogicaLunatic
http://www.objectivity.tk

[This message has been edited by logicalunatic, 12-22-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Brad McFall, posted 12-22-2002 1:09 AM Brad McFall has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Brad McFall, posted 12-24-2002 11:50 PM logicalunatic has not yet responded

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 6007 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 17 of 43 (27638)
12-22-2002 6:49 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Percy
01-30-2002 11:22 AM


Dear Percy,

What's wrong with the GUToB? It can be interpreted as a naturalistic theory, too.

Best wishes,
Peter


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Percy, posted 01-30-2002 11:22 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Percy, posted 12-22-2002 11:04 AM peter borger has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19110
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 18 of 43 (27644)
12-22-2002 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by peter borger
12-22-2002 6:49 AM


My comments were specific to the post I was replying to. Whether your GUToB is naturalistic depends upon what you see as the source of non-random mutations. And whether it becomes accepted depends upon how well it is supported by evidence.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by peter borger, posted 12-22-2002 6:49 AM peter borger has not yet responded

  
Gzus
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 43 (27670)
12-22-2002 5:35 PM


This all really amounts to meaningless squabbling

The creationist (although severely christian dominated) theory of creationism being discussed is neither provable or disprovable by scientific method.

the crutch lies in its pressupositions.

it presupposes the existence of

God, Love hence feeling, meaning,

and the validity of judeo-christian/muslim documents.

it is therefore as valid and indisputable as the statement 'God is an Egg, I ate him for breakfast yesterday' and clearly swayed by mountains of cultural baggage.


  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 3375 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 20 of 43 (27823)
12-24-2002 11:50 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by logicalunatic
12-22-2002 1:57 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Brad McFall:
If baramins?

let us leave this open question mark for now- I assume you know that a baramin is a term in creationist work that may in fact refer to like kinds, I supppose, thought after the kind not merely thought after some significant number of biologists but this may indeed be incomplete, I do not know.

quote:
are needed to multiplex network nodes?

If one thinks of naming wholy in terms of Darwin's barnacle example systematic introduction, it is not clear in so far as infinte divsion and infinite componentability (of any nanotech say) establishes or settles in ones mind that biodiversity interms of parralel lines rather than a net of direct chromosomal contiguity (this is hard to follow becuase it is in the style of Einstein's change from special to general relaivity qualititively and depends somewhat on what mutations essentailly are (or are not)) may be at least pragmatically more conducive to the tools of the parralell computer post information age of biological advance.

quote:
into a physical space that does not follow basic principles Einstein believed in that had him not taking Kant seriously?

goto my RElativity and the problem of space thread for there I document Einstein's postion here on this.

quote:
and this is done with the future of space exploration explictly in pedagogy?

I sense that people are not thinking in terms of future exploration when looking at what Einstein called "primative experiences". When I first read this phrase I thought he meant what a NEandrathal would experinece of an early greek such as Kant's "thales" but I now tend to think my first vision and understanding to be rather innocent.

quote:
there is the possiblity that specifying creation in this manner, both?, and any? use? (but not all? or every?) of scientific method results in? being able to re-read?; read further?.

quote:
PS... WHAT!?

Do you want an attempted reconstruction of these marks too? I only used the pretext that you included for this post. still havent figured this red out.

[This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 12-24-2002]

{Fixed quote structure as best I could - Adminnemooseus}

[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 12-25-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by logicalunatic, posted 12-22-2002 1:57 AM logicalunatic has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Kolyahu, posted 01-05-2003 11:58 PM Brad McFall has responded

  
Kolyahu
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 43 (28463)
01-05-2003 11:58 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Brad McFall
12-24-2002 11:50 PM


Creation - ISM? Is that anything like Confusion-ISM? To literalize a parable is what they have done. To take a child's story, (that's what it was) and insist that adults continue to think in those same terms? That was not the intent of the author. I believe the author designed the writings to capture the imagination of a child, and he also encoded scientific things within the text so that as a child grew there would be found more reasons to continue reading the writings and to glean the hidden knowledge from it.
The traditional Creationist view is a gentile conception of a Hebrew work. There were writings that predate the bible, and the childish power mongerers of Big Religious empires refuse to allow the acceptance of the higher levels of thought, that the author of those texts did in fact place in the writings.
The little known fact that the very 1st word of the Hebrew Bible does Not mean "In The Beginning". It means "In Beginning" inferring to "In beginning THIS life, or this lifestyle" It is not a book about the physical realm so much as metaphysical. It's contents have been debated and pondered for 40 centuries. But I ask you, if taken literally, at all times does it make sense? If we can state that some of it is metaphoric, which parts are and which parts are not?
Okay, so much for Creation-ISM. The precept that God created this volatile and violent and unforgiving reality, so that we would repent and come back to paradise does wonders to alleviate the fears of a child, but the reality is that as we grow up; we are supposed to learn to control fear and face reality as it is, with all of its primeval horrors. Why?.....Life. The reason life even exists is because of war and randomness and chaotic behavior of matter and energy, of positive and negative charge, of gravity and the other physical forces. Life is the result from all of these things. It is not a result of peacefulness (This is also the indication of the 7th day sabbath rest; there was no rest, no peace during the act of creation, until afterward). The struggle, is called life. The struggles we overcome on this little hostile world are a training ground for the big time, taming space and the final frontier, which will be a much tougher struggle. Living life to its fullest is commensurate with overcoming obstacle after obstacle. I for one, am not a believer in some static obstacle-less place called Paradise. (Earth is Paradise, if we could stop destroying it.) I am not a traditionalist/Creationist. I am a realist that believes in the higher powers that act as one, absolutely, but I can safely say that some people never will grow up
and want to delude themselves into thinking that life is anything but a constant struggle, and want to try and enforce the literal interpretation of a parable upon all the rest of those who still trust and believe in what is commonly referred to as God. Evolution was the process by which God (if you will) created us. I have no problem accepting this. The Bible states this in a way, but it also states that the flesh is not the importance of the scriptures. The importance of the scriptures is really about how to face the challenges of life head on without fear, even death has a purpose, and no it was not because some snake got some broad to eat an apple or a comquat. Death is as much a part of life as is manure to a corn crop. My God why have they twisted your words? (Oh yeah, that's right, so that the few can control the many, through ignorance.)
Shalom

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Brad McFall, posted 12-24-2002 11:50 PM Brad McFall has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Brad McFall, posted 01-06-2003 12:03 AM Kolyahu has responded

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 3375 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 22 of 43 (28465)
01-06-2003 12:03 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Kolyahu
01-05-2003 11:58 PM


I would like to have any confusion between biblical creationism and scintific creationism to be resolved in a quatification (of distributive c/e higher learning) of Newton's elastic and electric spririt but since this is SCIENCE not an ism of any ology, diacritically at most, I can not just because I wish you a Merry Christmas have it my way. I may not even be able to eat this a M-Ds or superzize the same etc.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Kolyahu, posted 01-05-2003 11:58 PM Kolyahu has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Kolyahu, posted 01-06-2003 7:45 PM Brad McFall has responded

  
Kolyahu
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 43 (28539)
01-06-2003 7:45 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Brad McFall
01-06-2003 12:03 AM


B"H
Okay, Have it your way, a M-Ds or a B-K special, coming right up!.Take an idea that you've toyed with, formulate a plan of action to make the idea a reality, then transform it into words that you can speak to others, words that promote a decision or an action. Then tell me that your words became flesh. This I can understand.
The Word become flesh, is actually saying that some one put the instructions into action.
Jesus isn't God, His words are. This is the concept that has been left behind, along with many other things. Did you know that Jesus celebrated Hanukah and not christmas? See the book of John, its in there. He went to the temple in the winter, for the feast of dedication (Hanukah). So am I wrong for choosing Hanukah over christmas? Am I wrong to think that the reality of the formation of all things, is really beyond our grasp? I can surmise this or that, but is it worth judging others for their opinions? Whether they're right or wrong, who am I to tell you or them?
I seek the origins of This reality, but I trust that what has been call God was here always, and always will be. The Big Bang, or the slow fizzle, maybe we take too much for granted. Heaven and hell are both part of the kingdom of God, as is this earth.
I do not have the same ideas of salvation as most people, either. I do not believe in a rapture. I believe the contract with God and Israel is still in force, I believe that as we figure out more answers to satisfy our curiousity, we will continue to have more questions. That is a beautiful thing about this life, it is a never ending story, especially if we are truly concerned for the welfare of the children who come after us. Learned behavior, is a start of a chain reaction that can lead to physiological changes in a species. In this Darwin was correct. The higher the intellect the faster the change, or evolvement.
There is plenty of scriptural texts to back Darwin, I was surprised that his attorney didn't use them. Have you read the case, "The Monkey Trial"?
The court system did the same to a very learned man, that the Church had done with Galileo, and Copernicus, and any that refuted false traditions of men. To include Moses, the prophets, and yes, even the Nazarene. I would wish that others would begin to study the creation account as a metaphor, it becomes almost a moot argument.
Would you like to be able to control the behavior of quarks and muons, with your thoughts? What if man does unravel the superstring? What pray tell do you think this beastial society would do with that knowledge? It would destroy itself in a matter of days.That is my opinion, of course but History is a great teacher.
At which frequency of oscillation do synapsi in the brain discharge and recharge, what is the inner clocking mechanism in the brain? And what would this have to do with 'the superstring theory'? It is a set of words, that were written in a language that utilizes the same symbols for both letters and their numerals. the Hebrew Bible is also a code, in mathematical language. It has been proven by atheists in the universities of MIT, Harvard, UC Berkley, Cal-Tech, Hebrew University in Jerusalem, and Loyola, to name a few.
Therefore the word of god is also a formula for something of a grand design. Linguistics and entomology are very useful in finding what you seek. But I can not answer all that you ask. I can't answer all of my questions either. I simpoly state that there is plenty of room for a combination of Creationist evolutionism. Light & Peace to you seeker.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Brad McFall, posted 01-06-2003 12:03 AM Brad McFall has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Brad McFall, posted 01-06-2003 9:21 PM Kolyahu has responded

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 3375 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 24 of 43 (28543)
01-06-2003 9:21 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Kolyahu
01-06-2003 7:45 PM


Tenets of Creationism
Posted by Matt on January 7, 2003, 7:50 am
<http://www.members3.boardhost.com/john666/>

Phony Tenets: YEC Andrews Admits that 'Scientific" Creationism is Unscientific - Kevin R. Henke January 7, 2003, 8:12 am
Re: Phony Tenets: YEC Andrews Admits that 'Scientific" Creationism is Unscientific - Brad McFall January 7, 2003, 11:07 am
God

K, if you view these few windows on the NO ANSWERS IN GENESIS web site then you will understand HOW it is that this "confusion" can arise. That is all I meant. I know much less theology than I would like.

[This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 01-06-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Kolyahu, posted 01-06-2003 7:45 PM Kolyahu has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Kolyahu, posted 01-07-2003 7:53 PM Brad McFall has not yet responded

  
Kolyahu
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 43 (28618)
01-07-2003 7:53 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Brad McFall
01-06-2003 9:21 PM


Yes, you are quite right that most people are not ready to embrace truth. They seem to be too busy with traditions, which they will blindly follow, and even fight and die for. Be that as it may, although we were gifted with the higher consciousness, and the ability to cogitate the immaterial universe so to speak, we need to be careful, and always remind ourselves that we are all still just children in comparison to the age of the universe. They are fragile and infantile when it comes to religion. Comparative Theology and mysticism is on a much higher plane than the type of statements you pointed out to me. They aren't able to accept the physical realities of evolution and Cosmology without having to clear house internally. Trying to get the Pope to obey the 7th day Sabbath, or a minister to go to a zoo and see some of the chimpanzee exhibitions of intelligence, or to go view the fossils themselves, or to go and see the earth's stata timelines in lmestone and shale. they can not accept details of certain Biblical things either.
I had a hard time breaking free of that prison myself. But I am sure in my faith. Perhaps that is why? Fear of letting go of the superstitions, even though they were not in the original theology or concept, because it is equated with losing faith?
I can both; have complete trust in the invisible omnipresent ALL, and know that evolution is simply the process My Higher power used, and is still using today.
I thank you Brad for your concern for my well being. Remember, to seek wisdom as well as knowledge, it is something I am still working on. They are 2 different things but they go hand in hand, as we get better at Living. May YHVH Elohim, The Father in heaven, the God of Avraham, Yitzak, and Yaacov,...and my God, bless you this day with His Light of enlightenment and life.Keep up the good work, I think you will find what you are searching for. Shalom Alechem

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Brad McFall, posted 01-06-2003 9:21 PM Brad McFall has not yet responded

  
Number_ 19
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 43 (44300)
06-26-2003 7:03 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Brad McFall
12-22-2002 1:09 AM


The question of lifes origins can actually come from the very human emotions themselves.It seems as though any one could point out a "God" in the early history of human civilization simply to put ideas into a human's head.If this "God" is real why would he force his ways on the inhabitants of this rock anyway?I think it was just an attempt made by early monarchies to control the public by putting fear of burning when you die or being in "heaven"in all of there minds in a way that couldn't be dissmissed or proved.All that would occur afterwards could be easily "bent". For example)After science was most like its present form and couldn't find any evidence of "God" that these believers would bend the lie a little bit and say he exists outside our reality.This is just down right retarded.Summing up....

GOD=LIE


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Brad McFall, posted 12-22-2002 1:09 AM Brad McFall has not yet responded

  
A_Christian
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 43 (48952)
08-06-2003 2:16 PM


Number 19:

There is plenty of evidence for GOD. The most obvious is when the
Christian reviews his/her life and sees direction and purpose. An
atheist sees nothing because they are out of the loop. They may
see patterns in the lives of other people (if they are honest);
however, an atheist would want to chalk that up to coincidence or
luck or chance. Destiny is a bitter pill for an atheist.

Now my brother-in-law is a prime example. His mother was a public
school teacher and his father is a very liberal Lutheran (he thinks
truth is relative and everyone is headed for heaven by different
methods). Now, my brother-in-law WAS a rather nasty guy. What my
sister saw in him I'll never know; however, he was determined to
do what he wanted, the way he wanted, whenever he wanted, and didn't
care who he hurt or insulted or why.

He lost several good career opportunities (temper). He threw my
parents out of HIS house (temper). He walked out of my home (temper).
My sister decided to ask him for a divorce. It was then he hit bottom
and GOD found him. My brother-in -law became a missionary and he
stuck like glue with my sister while she battled Anorexia and took
care of the children.
This was his baptism by fire. Had he still been an atheist, he might
have run with kids and left her. He might have just left (bad scene).
He is still in CHRISTIAN services, his relationship with his wife and
children is growing, and his temper is almost non-existant. I am
very proud to call him my "brother". For him life has a reason and
funny, my brother-in-law's brother has been influenced by his big
brother's change. Now, if we can only get his dad to see the light.


Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Coragyps, posted 08-06-2003 3:34 PM A_Christian has responded
 Message 30 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus, posted 08-06-2003 4:43 PM A_Christian has not yet responded
 Message 31 by crashfrog, posted 08-06-2003 5:05 PM A_Christian has not yet responded
 Message 43 by Dan Carroll, posted 08-11-2003 1:15 PM A_Christian has not yet responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5414
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 6.0


Message 28 of 43 (48954)
08-06-2003 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by A_Christian
08-06-2003 2:16 PM


A: When I was 25 or 30 years old, and still thought of myself as a Christian, I had a terrible temper. I did such things as kick holes in rented-house walls because something didn't go just right. I have since matured, and I have since abandoned any belief in Sky Daddies, Sky Mommies, Tooth Fairies, or other supernatural beings. I am a very even-tempered guy now: I have conquered my temper.

How did that happen, hmm?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by A_Christian, posted 08-06-2003 2:16 PM A_Christian has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by A_Christian, posted 08-06-2003 4:17 PM Coragyps has responded

  
A_Christian
Inactive Member


Message 29 of 43 (48957)
08-06-2003 4:17 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Coragyps
08-06-2003 3:34 PM


Coragyps:

Maybe you were attempting to do works for GOD instead of letting GOD
work through you............................ Personal relationships
are so very rewarding.

PS: You got tired of doing your own repairs.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Coragyps, posted 08-06-2003 3:34 PM Coragyps has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Coragyps, posted 08-06-2003 5:41 PM A_Christian has not yet responded

  
Dr_Tazimus_maximus
Member (Idle past 1559 days)
Posts: 402
From: Gaithersburg, MD, USA
Joined: 03-19-2002


Message 30 of 43 (48960)
08-06-2003 4:43 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by A_Christian
08-06-2003 2:16 PM


Very nice story
The problem is I know many people who are christians who are on the other side of the story: they have gotten divorced, believed the god will provide crap, and generally do not have very fulfilling lives. THat is not to say that all of the people who fit the description are christians, I know plenty who are not who also fit. It is just that it is far more the person than the "faith". Many people can not find a goal or a direction in their lives on their own, so they turn to something to give them direction, The most common place that they turn is religion. Others, like myself and many others that I know, do not require religion to give us goals and direction in our lives. We get it from the inside, from our mental discipline and from a sense of self.

Religion often acts as a solace or a means of direction for those who lack the force of mind or personality to provide themselves with a sense of direction. Your evidence is more proof of the frailty of many people than it is of a diety.

------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by A_Christian, posted 08-06-2003 2:16 PM A_Christian has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019