|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Sept 26, 2018 18:35:51 GMT
Plus the fact that the moon is getting further and further away from us literally by the day and when living organisms (which we evolved from) first appeared on the earth, those figures he quoted quite simply weren't the case at all. The moon isn't and never has been in a fixed position that is a fixed distance away from the Earth. Science also believes that the moon was not essential for life anyway, simply that if the first life forms formed in a tidal current then those tides would have accelerated the "mixing" of protonucleic acid molecules meaning a quicker spread of life across the planet, but almost all agree that eventually life would have taken hold whether there were tides or not but it just means it would have taken longer to get to where we are now i.e. the moon is not in any way, shape or form a pre-requisite to the existence of any life whatsoever.
Methinks rivival may need to take some really basic, elementary science lessons I love science! I love maths. I love everything that increases knowledge. But I also believe in the Creator. (Not only believe actually, but sometimes people find it offensive.) But there are to be a misunderstanding when it comes to explaining why there should exist a God. What a believer tries to do is to give general easy understandable examples of why there is a Creator, and it doesn't really matter what the mathematics says. The Universe, the moon, the Sun, the Earth, every other Universe etc are all amazingly precise placed. Someone/Something MUST have made it to function that way. The distance to the moon depends on when it's measured, as you wrote above. We know that, we all do. The fluctuations in space and death of the Sun seems to be predetermined. So what? Why would it change anything? Why would the evolution theory change anything? The point is at least no human can have made it. Not any butcher, not any carpenter, not any musician. Not even a parrot. So what was it? Can we agree to call it God? I would be kind enough to let any person on Earth create a universe by his own hands. Be my guest. I'm waiting. 😉 Seriously, I think the debate "conflicts" to a high degree consist of the expectations on what God is. I have no issue with believers musik. I don't myself but i take the stance that for the vast majority of believers, it does no harm to anyone amd makes them feel positive about life so what's so bad about that? What i don't understand is your statement that fluctuations are predetermined? Where have you come up with that idea? Just because we can predict where the Moon will be in relation to the Earth in 100,000 years, that doesn't indicate any pre-determinism as the calculations are simply based on the laws of physics that we know. Pre-determination implies that the "creator" has decided where the Moon would be and that's what will happen, regardless of the laws of physics or any other determining factors e.g. if the moon gets hit by a massive asteroid then if the position of the moon is predetermined then that position will not change from where god has pre-determined it to be, whereas the laws of physics would predict how far out of it's normal orbit it may be knocked etc. Predictions based on the laws of physics and the idea of pre-determinism are nothing like each other and shouldn't ever be confused or used interchangeably. In fact if they are then it's complete hypocrisy as you can't 1 minute say science is wrong but then the next use scientific predictions to try to prove how "pre-determined" things are. It's also worth noting that in general scientists DON'T try to prove that there is no god. By the very nature of what the Christian God is, it would be impossible to disprove as by definition God is beyond any scientific discovery or scientific knowledge. The argument only ever arises because fundamental Christians don't like the fact that evolution and the laws of physics that prove the age of the universe, discredits their creationist ideas, ideas that even the vast majority of Christians dismiss themselves as they realise the creation story is merely an allegory, not literal truth. There is easily a place for Christians to embrace science and indeed there are many scientists that are also practising Christians. The 2 are not mutually exclusive, it's specifically fundamentalism and creationism that is at odds with science and those 2 branches only make up a very small minority of Christians across the globe. And fun essay question for all the fundamentalists out there that believe the literal truth of the creation theory....."Fossils fuels, how did they happen then?"
|
|
|
Post by musik on Sept 27, 2018 0:38:27 GMT
I love science! I love maths. I love everything that increases knowledge. But I also believe in the Creator. (Not only believe actually, but sometimes people find it offensive.) But there are to be a misunderstanding when it comes to explaining why there should exist a God. What a believer tries to do is to give general easy understandable examples of why there is a Creator, and it doesn't really matter what the mathematics says. The Universe, the moon, the Sun, the Earth, every other Universe etc are all amazingly precise placed. Someone/Something MUST have made it to function that way. The distance to the moon depends on when it's measured, as you wrote above. We know that, we all do. The fluctuations in space and death of the Sun seems to be predetermined. So what? Why would it change anything? Why would the evolution theory change anything? The point is at least no human can have made it. Not any butcher, not any carpenter, not any musician. Not even a parrot. So what was it? Can we agree to call it God? I would be kind enough to let any person on Earth create a universe by his own hands. Be my guest. I'm waiting. 😉 Seriously, I think the debate "conflicts" to a high degree consist of the expectations on what God is. I have no issue with believers musik. I don't myself but i take the stance that for the vast majority of believers, it does no harm to anyone amd makes them feel positive about life so what's so bad about that? What i don't understand is your statement that fluctuations are predetermined? Where have you come up with that idea? Just because we can predict where the Moon will be in relation to the Earth in 100,000 years, that doesn't indicate any pre-determinism as the calculations are simply based on the laws of physics that we know. Pre-determination implies that the "creator" has decided where the Moon would be and that's what will happen, regardless of the laws of physics or any other determining factors e.g. if the moon gets hit by a massive asteroid then if the position of the moon is predetermined then that position will not change from where god has pre-determined it to be, whereas the laws of physics would predict how far out of it's normal orbit it may be knocked etc. Predictions based on the laws of physics and the idea of pre-determinism are nothing like each other and shouldn't ever be confused or used interchangeably. In fact if they are then it's complete hypocrisy as you can't 1 minute say science is wrong but then the next use scientific predictions to try to prove how "pre-determined" things are. It's also worth noting that in general scientists DON'T try to prove that there is no god. By the very nature of what the Christian God is, it would be impossible to disprove as by definition God is beyond any scientific discovery or scientific knowledge. The argument only ever arises because fundamental Christians don't like the fact that evolution and the laws of physics that prove the age of the universe, discredits their creationist ideas, ideas that even the vast majority of Christians dismiss themselves as they realise the creation story is merely an allegory, not literal truth. There is easily a place for Christians to embrace science and indeed there are many scientists that are also practising Christians. The 2 are not mutually exclusive, it's specifically fundamentalism and creationism that is at odds with science and those 2 branches only make up a very small minority of Christians across the globe. And fun essay question for all the fundamentalists out there that believe the literal truth of the creation theory....."Fossils fuels, how did they happen then?" You said it yourself there, "God is beyond any scientific discovery or scientific knowledge". Therefore it's almost impossible to convince someone who is a believer and vice versa. "Predetermination". I think I used it there in another more casual way than you do. If you have a law of nature something could be predetermined, like dropping a pen. It is "predetermined" to drop to the floor, meaning the law of gravity rules. To me none of all these Laws of Nature/Physics were created by any plants, monkeys or human beings. Are some people really believing that? The humans have only discovered ways to use mathematics and physics to try to understand these Laws, the work of the Creator. Like scratching the surface. There are absolutely not any conflicts between these laws and a Creator (quite simply, since according to me, the Creator made them as a must for us to be able to exist in our present form). The Creator is (most of the time) in another dimension, and in the spirit world, and therefore not bound to the Laws of Physics. We're in the material world. Fossil fuels is transformation of life into energy - and to me one of the beautiful examples of the existence of God. Imagine a giant walking on an endless sandbeach. Imagine this giant holding sand in the palm of his hand and to have sand on his fingertips. Imagine each grain of sand to be a whole universe. And science as we know it, is inside one of all these billions and billions of grains of sand, scratching the surface. That's how big The Creator is to me. I have a daily dialogue with the Creator. It's not in words and perhaps fruitcake material for someone who is not invited. I don't read any manmade religious books regularly and I don't go to church. I'm just invited to this talkshow. I have an IQ of 141, but for me it's to believe (or rather, participate), the only way to live, and simultaneously to let everyone else mind their own business. So, back to the initial question: "Do you believe in God?" Yes, but not only believe, I know him very well. And it all really started for real when I was declared dead. And I learn everyday.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Sept 27, 2018 1:08:25 GMT
I have no issue with believers musik. I don't myself but i take the stance that for the vast majority of believers, it does no harm to anyone amd makes them feel positive about life so what's so bad about that? What i don't understand is your statement that fluctuations are predetermined? Where have you come up with that idea? Just because we can predict where the Moon will be in relation to the Earth in 100,000 years, that doesn't indicate any pre-determinism as the calculations are simply based on the laws of physics that we know. Pre-determination implies that the "creator" has decided where the Moon would be and that's what will happen, regardless of the laws of physics or any other determining factors e.g. if the moon gets hit by a massive asteroid then if the position of the moon is predetermined then that position will not change from where god has pre-determined it to be, whereas the laws of physics would predict how far out of it's normal orbit it may be knocked etc. Predictions based on the laws of physics and the idea of pre-determinism are nothing like each other and shouldn't ever be confused or used interchangeably. In fact if they are then it's complete hypocrisy as you can't 1 minute say science is wrong but then the next use scientific predictions to try to prove how "pre-determined" things are. It's also worth noting that in general scientists DON'T try to prove that there is no god. By the very nature of what the Christian God is, it would be impossible to disprove as by definition God is beyond any scientific discovery or scientific knowledge. The argument only ever arises because fundamental Christians don't like the fact that evolution and the laws of physics that prove the age of the universe, discredits their creationist ideas, ideas that even the vast majority of Christians dismiss themselves as they realise the creation story is merely an allegory, not literal truth. There is easily a place for Christians to embrace science and indeed there are many scientists that are also practising Christians. The 2 are not mutually exclusive, it's specifically fundamentalism and creationism that is at odds with science and those 2 branches only make up a very small minority of Christians across the globe. And fun essay question for all the fundamentalists out there that believe the literal truth of the creation theory....."Fossils fuels, how did they happen then?" You said it yourself there, "God is beyond any scientific discovery or scientific knowledge". Therefore it's almost impossible to convince someone who is a believer and vice versa. "Predetermination". I think I used it there in another more casual way than you do. If you have a law of nature something could be predetermined, like dropping a pen. It is "predetermined" to drop to the floor, meaning the law of gravity rules. To me none of all these Laws of Nature/Physics were created by any plants, monkeys or human beings. Are some people really believing that? The humans have only discovered ways to use mathematics and physics to try to understand these Laws, the work of the Creator. Like scratching the surface. There are absolutely not any conflicts between these laws and a Creator (quite simply, since according to me, the Creator made them as a must for us to be able to exist in our present form). The Creator is (most of the time) in another dimension, and in the spirit world, and therefore not bound to the Laws of Physics. We're in the material world. Fossil fuels is transformation of life into energy - and to me one of the beautiful examples of the existence of God. Imagine a giant walking on an endless sandbeach. Imagine this giant holding sand in the palm of his hand and to have sand on his fingertips. Imagine each grain of sand to be a whole universe. And science as we know it, is inside one of all these billions and billions of grains of sand, scratching the surface. That's how big The Creator is to me. I have a daily dialogue with the Creator. It's not in words and perhaps fruitcake material for someone who is not invited. I don't read any manmade religious books regularly and I don't go to church. I'm just invited to this talkshow. I have an IQ of 141, but for me it's to believe (or rather, participate), the only way to live, and simultaneously to let everyone else mind their own business. So, back to the initial question: "Do you believe in God?" Yes, but not only believe, I know him very well. And it all really started for real when I was declared dead. And I learn everyday. You have an IQ of 141 and you’re asking if people believe the laws of physics were created by plants or monkeys? I must say I prefer match predictions musik to theologist musik (he makes more sense as well)
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Sept 27, 2018 2:52:48 GMT
Plus the fact that the moon is getting further and further away from us literally by the day and when living organisms (which we evolved from) first appeared on the earth, those figures he quoted quite simply weren't the case at all. The moon isn't and never has been in a fixed position that is a fixed distance away from the Earth. Science also believes that the moon was not essential for life anyway, simply that if the first life forms formed in a tidal current then those tides would have accelerated the "mixing" of protonucleic acid molecules meaning a quicker spread of life across the planet, but almost all agree that eventually life would have taken hold whether there were tides or not but it just means it would have taken longer to get to where we are now i.e. the moon is not in any way, shape or form a pre-requisite to the existence of any life whatsoever.
Methinks rivival may need to take some really basic, elementary science lessons I love science! I love maths. I love everything that increases knowledge. But I also believe in the Creator. (Not only believe actually, but sometimes people find it offensive.) But there are to be a misunderstanding when it comes to explaining why there should exist a God. What a believer tries to do is to give general easy understandable examples of why there is a Creator, and it doesn't really matter what the mathematics says. The Universe, the moon, the Sun, the Earth, every other Universe etc are all amazingly precise placed. Someone/Something MUST have made it to function that way. The distance to the moon depends on when it's measured, as you wrote above. We know that, we all do. The fluctuations in space and death of the Sun seems to be predetermined. So what? Why would it change anything? Why would the evolution theory change anything? The point is at least no human can have made it. Not any butcher, not any carpenter, not any musician. Not even a parrot. So what was it? Can we agree to call it God? I would be kind enough to let any person on Earth create a universe by his own hands. Be my guest. I'm waiting. 😉 Seriously, I think the debate "conflicts" to a high degree consist of the expectations on what God is. Why just one god and not many gods? I don't assume one person was involved in making my car. One god comes from indoctrination and there is no way around this.
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Sept 27, 2018 6:03:32 GMT
God is a supernatural power. May the force be with you
|
|
|
Post by thequietman on Sept 27, 2018 11:46:08 GMT
This issue I have with any religion v science is prediction.
Science necessarily not only explains but predicts. Whether that is how far away the moon will be tomorrow, or next year, or in 100,000 years, or the bending of light by gravity / massive objects for example.
Prediction before an event is observed, or even observable.
Obvious crackpots aside, I've yet to come across any religion that makes regular provable predictions. Explanations for events that have already happened, yes. Predicting future events & phenomena? Not that I've seen.
The two aren't mutually exclusive, though, just as philosophy & science aren't. Science and god(s) can co-exist.
Do I believe in god? Not one I've come across yet in any religion.
Do I believe in a god? Well, what's that then? Something so far advanced intellectually that we can't grasp it fully. Like the way you see a shadow of an oak tree on the ground (which is marvellous in itself) but there's no way you could deduce from that the true wonder of an oak tree. The best we could hope to see of such an awesome being would be shadows of things they've caused. Much in the way that many religions explain the wonders of their god, I suppose.
In an infinite universe, there are 100% aliens / gods out there somewhere by that definition. So far, none of them have put a £20 note in my pocket without me knowing yet, though.
So I'll remain an atheist until proven richer.
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Sept 27, 2018 11:56:40 GMT
Do I believe in a god? Well, what's that then? Something so far advanced intellectually that we can't grasp it fully. Like the way you see a shadow of an oak tree on the ground (which is marvellous in itself) but there's no way you could deduce from that the true wonder of an oak tree. The best we could hope to see of such an awesome being would be shadows of things they've caused. Much in the way that many religions explain the wonders of their god, I suppose.
Plato nicked this off the secular Christ Socrates:- en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_Cave
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Sept 27, 2018 12:07:33 GMT
The problem I have with the argument that God has determine all these fluctuations and that maths, quantum physics and universal laws are all his tools and that even if we did find the origin of the universe it wouldn't matter because god willed it to be so, is that you can apply that to any kind of theory.
It's the old Russell Teapot analogy, in which a small teapot, impossible to detect is orbiting somewhere between Earth and Mars. Because of the impossibility of detection, the assertion cannot be disproven but if it cannot be detected, then what is the point of it being there or not at all?
To quote Carl Sagan: "Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists?"
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2018 14:49:40 GMT
This issue I have with any religion v science is prediction. Science necessarily not only explains but predicts. Whether that is how far away the moon will be tomorrow, or next year, or in 100,000 years, or the bending of light by gravity / massive objects for example.
Prediction before an event is observed, or even observable. Obvious crackpots aside, I've yet to come across any religion that makes regular provable predictions. Explanations for events that have already happened, yes. Predicting future events & phenomena? Not that I've seen.
The two aren't mutually exclusive, though, just as philosophy & science aren't. Science and god(s) can co-exist.
Do I believe in god? Not one I've come across yet in any religion.
Do I believe in a god? Well, what's that then? Something so far advanced intellectually that we can't grasp it fully. Like the way you see a shadow of an oak tree on the ground (which is marvellous in itself) but there's no way you could deduce from that the true wonder of an oak tree. The best we could hope to see of such an awesome being would be shadows of things they've caused. Much in the way that many religions explain the wonders of their god, I suppose.
In an infinite universe, there are 100% aliens / gods out there somewhere by that definition. So far, none of them have put a £20 note in my pocket without me knowing yet, though. So I'll remain an atheist until proven richer.
The Old Testament contains a great many predictions, most have become true, fulfilled through Jesus Christ. You can argue about God but Jesus was a character who definitely walked the earth and is well documented by the Roman scholars and others since. The only predictions / prophecies still outstanding relate to future events still not played out but given the success rates of all the other prophecies you’d be a fool to bet against them happening. I study the Bible now on a regular basis. I’m no Biblical scholar or theologian but the more I read and study the more I believe. It’s one amazing book that’s for sure. God is real, Jesus is real, the Holy Spirit is real. The whole experience has changed my life. I’m not here to try and convince you, I can only tell of what happened to me. Each of us has the choice to accept or reject God but I can honestly say that following Jesus has been the best decision I’ve ever made.
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Sept 27, 2018 15:19:44 GMT
This issue I have with any religion v science is prediction. Science necessarily not only explains but predicts. Whether that is how far away the moon will be tomorrow, or next year, or in 100,000 years, or the bending of light by gravity / massive objects for example.
Prediction before an event is observed, or even observable. Obvious crackpots aside, I've yet to come across any religion that makes regular provable predictions. Explanations for events that have already happened, yes. Predicting future events & phenomena? Not that I've seen.
The two aren't mutually exclusive, though, just as philosophy & science aren't. Science and god(s) can co-exist.
Do I believe in god? Not one I've come across yet in any religion.
Do I believe in a god? Well, what's that then? Something so far advanced intellectually that we can't grasp it fully. Like the way you see a shadow of an oak tree on the ground (which is marvellous in itself) but there's no way you could deduce from that the true wonder of an oak tree. The best we could hope to see of such an awesome being would be shadows of things they've caused. Much in the way that many religions explain the wonders of their god, I suppose.
In an infinite universe, there are 100% aliens / gods out there somewhere by that definition. So far, none of them have put a £20 note in my pocket without me knowing yet, though. So I'll remain an atheist until proven richer.
The Old Testament contains a great many predictions, most have become true, fulfilled through Jesus Christ. You can argue about God but Jesus was a character who definitely walked the earth and is well documented by the Roman scholars and others since. The only predictions / prophecies still outstanding relate to future events still not played out but given the success rates of all the other prophecies you’d be a fool to bet against them happening. I study the Bible now on a regular basis. I’m no Biblical scholar or theologian but the more I read and study the more I believe. It’s one amazing book that’s for sure. God is real, Jesus is real, the Holy Spirit is real. The whole experience has changed my life. I’m not here to try and convince you, I can only tell of what happened to me. Each of us has the choice to accept or reject God but I can honestly say that following Jesus has been the best decision I’ve ever made. Can you tell me which predictions? Not gonna going to take the piss or anything I'm just legitimately curious as to what you think have been fulfilled.
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Sept 27, 2018 15:43:26 GMT
I have difficulty with the authenticity of the New Testament that was written between 30AD and around 370AD. It’s hard enough in the modern age of technology to write accurately about stuff 300 years ago but we're expected to believe stuff written at least 1700 years ago about occurrences up to 350 years old.
|
|
|
Post by thequietman on Sept 27, 2018 23:12:39 GMT
Most of the Old Testament too is oral history written down many hundreds of years after the events. And both Old + New have had selective re-writes and re-translations in the millennia since.
I'm not trying to debunk the bible or anyone's faith, but it isn't hard to predict something that's already happened +then write it down in a way to make it appear an ancient prediction.
Not to mention those gospels which made it into the NT because they fit with how the religious elite saw things and wanted to control them, and those gospels which didn't make it in either because they were too wacky or didn't show the path of Christianity the way they wanted.
Without a time machine *** there's little chance of verifying which parts of the bible were written when + by whom.
All that said, it's a very interesting read. I'm no scholar but I dip in now and then. Once you've got through all the begats, the OT is a blockbuster and the NT a great study of morals.
*** time machines are well off topic, but rather interesting. We're all time machines travelling forward at roughly one second per second. It's very easy to go forwards in time more quickly - just travel at a quicker spacial velocity. Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity deals with that.
Travelling backwards in time is a tad trickier. Mathematically, there's a division by zero if you treat time as a continuous arrow + want to go backwards. Meaning you'd need infinite energy to do it. But if you treat time as discreet quantum packets you can skip over that singularity where the division by zero occurs and, hey presto, you're travelling backwards in time.
What then? Could you change past events. I figure not, it would be just like watching a film reel playing backwards + you couldn't alter anything. If I could, though, I'd go back to Dec 1975 + take out hefty insurance on a certain stadium roof.
|
|
|
Post by musik on Sept 27, 2018 23:35:12 GMT
Something so far advanced intellectually that we can't grasp it fully. Like the way you see a shadow of an oak tree on the ground (which is marvellous in itself) but there's no way you could deduce from that the true wonder of an oak tree. The best we could hope to see of such an awesome being would be shadows of things they've caused. In an infinite universe, there are 100% aliens / gods out there somewhere by that definition. So far, none of them have put a £20 note in my pocket without me knowing yet, though. So I'll remain an atheist until proven richer.
First, you give an example of what The Creator could be, similar to what is presented in the Veda literature. The shadow instead of the mirror you could see at daytime on the water surface of a lake. It's actually a great description; since The Creator is not to be touched and not to be heard in this material world. "In an infinite universe, there are 100% gods/aliens out there by definition" - What does it mean? What definition? Where do you mean all these gods came from, why wouldn't it be just one God then? I don't understand how you come up with several gods here. Last. A £20 note? On the contrary, imagine if you someday go for a walk and put a £20 note in your pocket and close it, and meet noone during your walk. If you then come back without that money - God may have touched you.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 3:02:49 GMT
The problem I have with the argument that God has determine all these fluctuations and that maths, quantum physics and universal laws are all his tools and that even if we did find the origin of the universe it wouldn't matter because god willed it to be so, is that you can apply that to any kind of theory. It's the old Russell Teapot analogy, in which a small teapot, impossible to detect is orbiting somewhere between Earth and Mars. Because of the impossibility of detection, the assertion cannot be disproven but if it cannot be detected, then what is the point of it being there or not at all? To quote Carl Sagan: "Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists?" en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 3:34:33 GMT
Something so far advanced intellectually that we can't grasp it fully. Like the way you see a shadow of an oak tree on the ground (which is marvellous in itself) but there's no way you could deduce from that the true wonder of an oak tree. The best we could hope to see of such an awesome being would be shadows of things they've caused. In an infinite universe, there are 100% aliens / gods out there somewhere by that definition. So far, none of them have put a £20 note in my pocket without me knowing yet, though. So I'll remain an atheist until proven richer.
First, you give an example of what The Creator could be, similar to what is presented in the Veda literature. The shadow instead of the mirror you could see at daytime on the water surface of a lake. It's actually a great description; since The Creator is not to be touched and not to be heard in this material world. "In an infinite universe, there are 100% gods/aliens out there by definition" - What does it mean? What definition? Where do you mean all these gods came from, why wouldn't it be just one God then? I don't understand how you come up with several gods here. Last. A £20 note? On the contrary, imagine if you someday go for a walk and put a £20 note in your pocket and close it, and meet noone during your walk. If you then come back without that money - God may have touched you. Love is the answer (to quote Lennon) On the problems with this binary argument and ontology: In general Peterson argues the need for a psychologically healthy individual to believe in a higher power as it means they could behave more ethically. For me, Taoism is a beautiful way to observe and interact with the world and other beings. It removes the need for the binary paradox of whether God exists by refusing to resolve and accept that it is a paradox but the Tao (the way, the path of balance between the opposing forces of Yin and Yang) is older than the idea of God itself, predates God. It is this force, this cycle of good and bad, growth and decay, birth and death, turns at the axis of the Tao at the centre. To follow the centre path is to be by walking the tightrope between these two opposing forces in peace, balance and harmony Simplicity, patience, compassion. These three are your greatest treasures. Simple in actions and thoughts, you return to the source of being. Patient with both friends and enemies, you accord with the way things are. Compassionate toward yourself, you reconcile all beings in the world. Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching The wise man is one who, knows, what he does not know. Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching I don't think it can be done. The world is sacred. It can't be improved. If you tamper with it, you'll ruin it. If you treat it like an object, you'll lose it. There is a time for being ahead, a time for being behind; a time for being in motion, a time for being at rest; a time for being vigorous, a time for being exhausted; a time for being safe, a time for being in danger. The Master sees things as they are, without trying to control them. She lets them go their own way, and resides at the center of the circle. Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching
|
|
|
Post by thequietman on Sept 28, 2018 11:42:09 GMT
Something so far advanced intellectually that we can't grasp it fully. Like the way you see a shadow of an oak tree on the ground (which is marvellous in itself) but there's no way you could deduce from that the true wonder of an oak tree. The best we could hope to see of such an awesome being would be shadows of things they've caused. In an infinite universe, there are 100% aliens / gods out there somewhere by that definition. So far, none of them have put a £20 note in my pocket without me knowing yet, though. So I'll remain an atheist until proven richer.
First, you give an example of what The Creator could be, similar to what is presented in the Veda literature. The shadow instead of the mirror you could see at daytime on the water surface of a lake. It's actually a great description; since The Creator is not to be touched and not to be heard in this material world. "In an infinite universe, there are 100% gods/aliens out there by definition" - What does it mean? What definition? Where do you mean all these gods came from, why wouldn't it be just one God then? I don't understand how you come up with several gods here. Last. A £20 note? On the contrary, imagine if you someday go for a walk and put a £20 note in your pocket and close it, and meet noone during your walk. If you then come back without that money - God may have touched you. Just that in an infinite Universe, Musik, there are an infinite number of beings. And by extension an infinite number so far beyond us in intelligence that we could only see them as gods. There could quite well be only one god by the Christian definition, or many, or any infinite number. Or none.
I get your use of the £20 note analogy. Sounds like an Old Testament God sort of trick, he could be unpleasant at times. Going out with £20 in my pocket & coming back without it happens to me regularly and I seem to have no recollection of what happened. But Mrs Q says I also come back staggering, crushed poppadoms on my shirt and smelling like a brewery.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2018 14:13:09 GMT
The Old Testament contains a great many predictions, most have become true, fulfilled through Jesus Christ. You can argue about God but Jesus was a character who definitely walked the earth and is well documented by the Roman scholars and others since. The only predictions / prophecies still outstanding relate to future events still not played out but given the success rates of all the other prophecies you’d be a fool to bet against them happening. I study the Bible now on a regular basis. I’m no Biblical scholar or theologian but the more I read and study the more I believe. It’s one amazing book that’s for sure. God is real, Jesus is real, the Holy Spirit is real. The whole experience has changed my life. I’m not here to try and convince you, I can only tell of what happened to me. Each of us has the choice to accept or reject God but I can honestly say that following Jesus has been the best decision I’ve ever made. Can you tell me which predictions? Not gonna going to take the piss or anything I'm just legitimately curious as to what you think have been fulfilled. A few here ...
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Sept 30, 2018 2:15:09 GMT
Can you tell me which predictions? Not gonna going to take the piss or anything I'm just legitimately curious as to what you think have been fulfilled. A few here ...
Just even at a quick glance, that one about Tyre is off, the Old Testament is on about Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon conquering Tyre and it mentions him explicitly by name. He laid siege to it but never destroyed it a far as I'm aware. Later in Ezekiel it states Tyre will never rebuilt after the King of Babylon is done with it, yet it was still around for Alexander the Great to lay siege to it too and "complete" another that bit of the prophecy despite the fact it says the King of Babylon would do it... Additionally, Tyre is still around to this day despite all of this. Seems a bit like cherry picking from the whole Bible text to me to see what fits.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2018 2:50:14 GMT
I'm not actually cherry picking anything. I just Googled something. You asked, and you got it. You could of course have done it for yourself.
You said that you were legitimately "just curious"?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2018 3:08:50 GMT
I am most sure that you would like to know how it feels to be a spirit filled Christian?
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Sept 30, 2018 6:12:34 GMT
A spaceship landed in Vatican square , 2 little green men got out They were immediately taken before the pope for an audience. After a long chat the pope asked Have you ever heard of Jesus Christ on your planet ? Oh yes of course said the little green men , he's always popping down for a visit . The pope got quite perturbed by this and said how often does he visit ? Every year or two they said , why ? Well said the pope we've been waiting 2000 years for the second coming Well maybe he doesn't like your chocolate said the little green men . What's chocolate got to do with anything said the pope ? Well the first time he came to visit we gave him chocolate . What did you guys do??
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Sept 30, 2018 7:21:44 GMT
Can you tell me which predictions? Not gonna going to take the piss or anything I'm just legitimately curious as to what you think have been fulfilled. A few here ...
There are no fulfilled predictions. Just selecting out of context words to try to add legitimacy to an agenda. Which you then create a story around. No magic involved.
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Sept 30, 2018 9:41:45 GMT
I heard an evolutionary scientists on the radio the other week & when asked about life on other planets she said yes, but also that we shouldn't expect anything like us, as science doesn't work like that. You can't say that because of the vastness of the universe & the number of planets within it, that there must be other life forms like us. She said the probability of that is negligible because of the time & circumstances that had to be met to get us where we are. She also said that we are only half way through our planets lifespan & so have plenty more time for evolution, so who knows where we might end up...
Hallelujah
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2018 10:16:08 GMT
I heard an evolutionary scientists on the radio the other week & when asked about life on other planets she said yes, but also that we shouldn't expect anything like us, as science doesn't work like that. You can't say that because of the vastness of the universe & the number of planets within it, that there must be other life forms like us. She said the probability of that is negligible because of the time & circumstances that had to be met to get us where we are. She also said that we are only half way through our planets lifespan & so have plenty more time for evolution, so who knows where we might end up... Hallelujah Unlesss we fuck it up or mother nature decides to wipe the slate clean first to make way for something far superior When I say mother nature maybe I should say God 😏
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Sept 30, 2018 11:37:33 GMT
I heard an evolutionary scientists on the radio the other week & when asked about life on other planets she said yes, but also that we shouldn't expect anything like us, as science doesn't work like that. You can't say that because of the vastness of the universe & the number of planets within it, that there must be other life forms like us. She said the probability of that is negligible because of the time & circumstances that had to be met to get us where we are. She also said that we are only half way through our planets lifespan & so have plenty more time for evolution, so who knows where we might end up... Hallelujah It's scary to think it might be Donald trump ,
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2018 12:00:27 GMT
This issue I have with any religion v science is prediction. Science necessarily not only explains but predicts. Whether that is how far away the moon will be tomorrow, or next year, or in 100,000 years, or the bending of light by gravity / massive objects for example.
Prediction before an event is observed, or even observable. Obvious crackpots aside, I've yet to come across any religion that makes regular provable predictions. Explanations for events that have already happened, yes. Predicting future events & phenomena? Not that I've seen.
The two aren't mutually exclusive, though, just as philosophy & science aren't. Science and god(s) can co-exist.
Do I believe in god? Not one I've come across yet in any religion.
Do I believe in a god? Well, what's that then? Something so far advanced intellectually that we can't grasp it fully. Like the way you see a shadow of an oak tree on the ground (which is marvellous in itself) but there's no way you could deduce from that the true wonder of an oak tree. The best we could hope to see of such an awesome being would be shadows of things they've caused. Much in the way that many religions explain the wonders of their god, I suppose.
In an infinite universe, there are 100% aliens / gods out there somewhere by that definition. So far, none of them have put a £20 note in my pocket without me knowing yet, though. So I'll remain an atheist until proven richer.
The Old Testament contains a great many predictions, most have become true, fulfilled through Jesus Christ. You can argue about God but Jesus was a character who definitely walked the earth and is well documented by the Roman scholars and others since. The only predictions / prophecies still outstanding relate to future events still not played out but given the success rates of all the other prophecies you’d be a fool to bet against them happening. I study the Bible now on a regular basis. I’m no Biblical scholar or theologian but the more I read and study the more I believe. It’s one amazing book that’s for sure. God is real, Jesus is real, the Holy Spirit is real. The whole experience has changed my life. I’m not here to try and convince you, I can only tell of what happened to me. Each of us has the choice to accept or reject God but I can honestly say that following Jesus has been the best decision I’ve ever made. After choosing to follow Stoke you were due one good choice. Space is a vacuum so a big Implosion seems more likely than explosion and as for a big bang, well there is no sound in space as I think this is the correct explanation. "Sound is physical vibration of a medium. Different mediums create different sounds. Vacuum doesn't produce sound because there is nothing to vibrate." So NO big bang then and anyway who made the thing that went bang and the space it was in to go bang in. I believe in a God weather he believes in me is my big doubt, seems he uses me as a voodoo doll when he's bored and takes delight in crushing my hopes and dreams. I'm half convinced he's turning S-O-T into a desert so I have somewhere to wander. Already there is hardly any pubs left to get a decent drink =)
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Sept 30, 2018 12:48:47 GMT
The Old Testament contains a great many predictions, most have become true, fulfilled through Jesus Christ. You can argue about God but Jesus was a character who definitely walked the earth and is well documented by the Roman scholars and others since. The only predictions / prophecies still outstanding relate to future events still not played out but given the success rates of all the other prophecies you’d be a fool to bet against them happening. I study the Bible now on a regular basis. I’m no Biblical scholar or theologian but the more I read and study the more I believe. It’s one amazing book that’s for sure. God is real, Jesus is real, the Holy Spirit is real. The whole experience has changed my life. I’m not here to try and convince you, I can only tell of what happened to me. Each of us has the choice to accept or reject God but I can honestly say that following Jesus has been the best decision I’ve ever made. After choosing to follow Stoke you were due one good choice. Space is a vacuum so a big Implosion seems more likely than explosion and as for a big bang, well there is no sound in space as I think this is the correct explanation. "Sound is physical vibration of a medium. Different mediums create different sounds. Vacuum doesn't produce sound because there is nothing to vibrate." So NO big bang then and anyway who made the thing that went bang and the space it was in to go bang in. I believe in a God weather he believes in me is my big doubt, seems he uses me as a voodoo doll when he's bored and takes delight in crushing my hopes and dreams. I'm half convinced he's turning S-O-T into a desert so I have somewhere to wander. Already there is hardly any pubs left to get a decent drink =) 1) No one in science claims that the big bang was an explosion in the sense that you or i think of one. It's merely presented that way as most don't have the scientific background to be able to understand advanced equations in physics. It's simply a turn of phrase so people can get their hands around it based on things they do understand 2) No one in science ever claimed it made a noise...again, the term big bang is simply a turn of phrase You may want to do some research into the big bang and what it actually was before hanging your hat on 2 massive misunderstandings on your part. Here you go fella..... www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.livescience.com/32278-was-the-big-bang-really-an-explosion.html
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Sept 30, 2018 16:13:07 GMT
I'm not actually cherry picking anything. I just Googled something. You asked, and you got it. You could of course have done it for yourself. You said that you were legitimately "just curious"? I was on about the webpage and claims of prophecy. Not you, keep your knickers on.
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Sept 30, 2018 16:22:21 GMT
The Old Testament contains a great many predictions, most have become true, fulfilled through Jesus Christ. You can argue about God but Jesus was a character who definitely walked the earth and is well documented by the Roman scholars and others since. The only predictions / prophecies still outstanding relate to future events still not played out but given the success rates of all the other prophecies you’d be a fool to bet against them happening. I study the Bible now on a regular basis. I’m no Biblical scholar or theologian but the more I read and study the more I believe. It’s one amazing book that’s for sure. God is real, Jesus is real, the Holy Spirit is real. The whole experience has changed my life. I’m not here to try and convince you, I can only tell of what happened to me. Each of us has the choice to accept or reject God but I can honestly say that following Jesus has been the best decision I’ve ever made. After choosing to follow Stoke you were due one good choice. Space is a vacuum so a big Implosion seems more likely than explosion and as for a big bang, well there is no sound in space as I think this is the correct explanation. "Sound is physical vibration of a medium. Different mediums create different sounds. Vacuum doesn't produce sound because there is nothing to vibrate." So NO big bang then and anyway who made the thing that went bang and the space it was in to go bang in. I believe in a God weather he believes in me is my big doubt, seems he uses me as a voodoo doll when he's bored and takes delight in crushing my hopes and dreams. I'm half convinced he's turning S-O-T into a desert so I have somewhere to wander. Already there is hardly any pubs left to get a decent drink =) Space is traditionally considered a vacuum, however on a Quantum level it's full of particles that exist for a fraction of a millisecond and annihilate with an anti-particle almost instantaneously giving the impression of particle-less space. In fact, even a vacuum is full of quantum fluctuations. Also it wasn't a explosion of sorts....modern space and time was created after the universe expanded beyond the Planck Length, that is 1.6*10 to the minus 35 metres...the true mystery is what space was like before the universe expanded beyond this size....which is the crux of quantum mechanics. So there wasn't a space for a "bang" to happen in, rather than space being a vacuum so therefore no sound. If we can adequately reconcile quantum mechanics with a theory of gravity on a quantum level, it's likely we'll get the maths on what "existed" before the big bang....we won't be able to get our head round it though. Quantum mechanics already has a number of concepts that make zero logical sense, but are backed up by observation and mathematical formulae...such as electrons spinning both ways at the same time.
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Sept 30, 2018 16:26:52 GMT
After choosing to follow Stoke you were due one good choice. Space is a vacuum so a big Implosion seems more likely than explosion and as for a big bang, well there is no sound in space as I think this is the correct explanation. "Sound is physical vibration of a medium. Different mediums create different sounds. Vacuum doesn't produce sound because there is nothing to vibrate." So NO big bang then and anyway who made the thing that went bang and the space it was in to go bang in. I believe in a God weather he believes in me is my big doubt, seems he uses me as a voodoo doll when he's bored and takes delight in crushing my hopes and dreams. I'm half convinced he's turning S-O-T into a desert so I have somewhere to wander. Already there is hardly any pubs left to get a decent drink =) 1) No one in science claims that the big bang was an explosion in the sense that you or i think of one. It's merely presented that way as most don't have the scientific background to be able to understand advanced equations in physics. It's simply a turn of phrase so people can get their hands around it based on things they do understand 2) No one in science ever claimed it made a noise...again, the term big bang is simply a turn of phrase You may want to do some research into the big bang and what it actually was before hanging your hat on 2 massive misunderstandings on your part. Here you go fella..... www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.livescience.com/32278-was-the-big-bang-really-an-explosion.htmlThat’s exactly how they describe it & the following expansion of the universe
|
|