|
.
Aug 26, 2019 21:50:25 GMT
Post by goz on Aug 26, 2019 21:50:25 GMT
*sigh* You have it the wrong way around. Living things were able to evolve because it was there. Because God Willed it. I thought you claimed to believe in evolution and not Creationism??
|
|
|
.
Aug 26, 2019 22:01:12 GMT
Post by goz on Aug 26, 2019 22:01:12 GMT
No. It is neither a miracle nor proof of God. The issue for believers is they are taught by other believers who accept miracles as an actual thing rather than looking for other possibilities. The mantel of Guadalupe could be explained if scientific testing could be done on it just as the Shroud has been proven to be from the 14th century. Yes, though this stupid stuff doesn't really bother me, as it is their right to be delusional if they wish. HOWEVER, what does bother me with religious delusion in general, and Catholic doctrine and dogma in particular, is when it is SO anachronistic in denying scientific discoveries that can help people's health and well being ...let alone expecting secular law to accommodate this nonsense.
|
|
|
.
Aug 26, 2019 22:30:45 GMT
Post by goz on Aug 26, 2019 22:30:45 GMT
Yes, though this stupid stuff doesn't really bother me, as it is their right to be delusional if they wish. HOWEVER, what does bother me with religious delusion in general, and Catholic doctrine and dogma in particular, is when it is SO anachronistic in denying scientific discoveries that can help people's health and well being ...let alone expecting secular law to accommodate this nonsense. I’ll give the Catholic Church credit in that it does teach that a person should not go against her/his own conscience even doctrine teaches otherwise. That’s why most don’t fight too hard against parishioners using artificial contraception. What is the point of having the doctrine, then?
|
|
|
.
Aug 26, 2019 22:46:57 GMT
Post by goz on Aug 26, 2019 22:46:57 GMT
What is the point of having the doctrine, then? The Church has a strong theological Tradition (the Church Fathers/Doctors, Apostolic succession, Papal infallibly) as well as Revelation (the Bible). So, hypocrisy, then? As if confessing to a priest for some heinous crime and having it kept secret wasn't enough!
|
|
|
.
Aug 26, 2019 23:21:48 GMT
Post by clusium on Aug 26, 2019 23:21:48 GMT
I thought you claimed to believe in evolution and not Creationism?? Ever heard of theistic evolution? Theistic Evolution
|
|
|
.
Aug 27, 2019 0:09:20 GMT
Post by goz on Aug 27, 2019 0:09:20 GMT
I thought you claimed to believe in evolution and not Creationism?? Ever heard of theistic evolution? Theistic Evolution The problem with that, is that it is 'causal'. Evolution is not causal. It puts the cart before the horse.
|
|
|
.
Aug 27, 2019 0:24:11 GMT
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 27, 2019 0:24:11 GMT
Where in my post did I deny that Our Heavenly Father Created life elsewhere in the universe? Psalm 8 in its rhetorical questioning, strongly implies that man is supposedly unique: When I see the heavens, the works of your hands, the moon and the stars which you arranged, what is man that you should keep him in mind, mortal man that you care for him? I always found it odd that atheists even equate size of the universe with the likelihood of there being more life. However, even if the universe is teeming with hypothetical life, I never got the impression that atheists thought anything was greater than man anyway Further, it would not have much bearing on mankind being of particular interest to God. If proof is needed for all things then it's better to assume that there is no life at all (Maybe a microbe or two) considering there is no evidence there is life (Not even a microbe or two) and no chance whatsoever that it will be encountered.
|
|
|
.
Aug 27, 2019 2:03:44 GMT
Post by gadreel on Aug 27, 2019 2:03:44 GMT
You just ignored my comment didn't you, I can see analogies are no good, lets address the issue you have pointed out, your contention: God made the Ozone layer so that life would be comfortable on earth for the living creatures that he designed that somehow get hurt by the sun he also designed. My observation if the earth evolved to have an ozone layer, then life would be able to begin to thrive, and even though, looking back on it, it may look like the ozone layer was put there so we could live, in actual fact the ozone layer ended up there and that is what allowed us to live. My observation shows that there is another way of looking at it, and the ozone layer does not REQUIRE a creator. I didn't ignore anything. Mainline Christians & other religious groups have no problem with evolution. ok then you did not understand. please read my comment slowly, it explains quite clearly why the fitness of the earth is not evidence of creation. but here is some more refutation of the fine tuning argument
|
|
|
.
Aug 27, 2019 2:43:05 GMT
Post by BATouttaheck on Aug 27, 2019 2:43:05 GMT
I never had an issue with you before but I do now and that is just the beginning of the story. You are so self involved that you don't even remember coming at me tooth and nail with the same psych 101 garbage in a thread about Marilyn Monroe. I usually avoid you and your "conversations" because you come across as nasty, attitudinal, opinionated and appear to have a chip on your shoulder which, if burned, could heat a 13 room house all winter. As for the rest of your rant … your problems with mslovak are yours to work out. I don't know the guy other than seeing him around but you really do come across as particularly nasty when you talk to him. As for issues with me and story just beginning Wrong: the END credits just rolled .. if you insist on continuing you will be by yourself.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2019 11:44:33 GMT
"The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference." - Richard Dawkins
|
|
|
.
Aug 27, 2019 14:32:22 GMT
via mobile
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 27, 2019 14:32:22 GMT
statement about views is something everyone does. If a question is asked then I answer it. It’s your problem if that answer irks you enough to respond. That isn’t a challenge of your views but a statement of mine until your views try to define me or insist how right your often boneheaded views are. More non Cool blather.
What you are implying, and this has already been addressed with you by another poster, is that you mask your statements as what you see as truth and don't want others to question or challenge, what you think you already know. You believe you think and know the way it is and that is the only way, when you constantly get owned for your distortions. I don't know about being boneheaded, is this because I don't believe in the nonsense you do, but I do get that you are wrongheaded. Many posters around here like to make up their own stories and they are more often than not mindset displaced and deluded.
I don’t mask anything. I say it point blank or I don’t answer, both pretty unambiguous, and the confusion lies in your irrational prejudices against me not in my answer. There has never been a time I’m vague and yet theophobiacs in particular remain so stupid as to not understand it. Again there is no reason for that to be my problem. This is where you say, yet again, that this is blather.
|
|
|
.
Aug 27, 2019 18:52:07 GMT
Post by FilmFlaneur on Aug 27, 2019 18:52:07 GMT
Psalm 8 in its rhetorical questioning, strongly implies that man is supposedly unique: When I see the heavens, the works of your hands, the moon and the stars which you arranged, what is man that you should keep him in mind, mortal man that you care for him? I always found it odd that atheists even equate size of the universe with the likelihood of there being more life. Well one reason is that if life (as it appears so far) is an incredibly rare event, then the larger the universe the more chances of it happening more than once. endlessjune.wordpress.com/2015/09/14/science-fiction-authors-tend-to-be-atheists/ Since apparently only the Holy Ghost can tell God's mind and so what is likely to be of 'particular interest' to the purported deity, I don't know how you might do here. God might just also be allowing an impression of how special man is to him for our benefit, knowing the comfort and reassurance we typically need while having, say, a perfect world with a perfect other Alpha creature prospering elsewhere. We might just be a 'first run'. How would we know either way? An excellent principle - which is worth applying to the notion of any unevidenced deliberate supernatural creator.
|
|
|
.
Aug 27, 2019 22:36:21 GMT
Post by clusium on Aug 27, 2019 22:36:21 GMT
I always found it odd that atheists even equate size of the universe with the likelihood of there being more life. Well one reason is that if life (as it appears so far) is an incredibly rare event, then the larger the universe the more chances of it happening more than once. endlessjune.wordpress.com/2015/09/14/science-fiction-authors-tend-to-be-atheists/
Since apparently only the Holy Ghost can tell God's mind and so what is likely to be of 'particular interest' to the purported deity, I don't know how you might do here. God might just also be allowing an impression of how special man is to him for our benefit, knowing the comfort and reassurance we typically need while having, say, a perfect world with a perfect other Alpha creature prospering elsewhere. We might just be a 'first run'. How would we know either way? An excellent principle - which is worth applying to the notion of any unevidenced deliberate supernatural creator. I am well aware that some of those guys are atheists. Yes, Gene Roddenberry, the creator of Star Trek, was definitely an atheist, & his atheism made its way into his series. George Lucas, on the other hand, was more spiritual, & as any fan of Star Wars knows, religion is very heavy in the series.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2019 2:57:53 GMT
Well one reason is that if life (as it appears so far) is an incredibly rare event, then the larger the universe the more chances of it happening more than once. endlessjune.wordpress.com/2015/09/14/science-fiction-authors-tend-to-be-atheists/
Since apparently only the Holy Ghost can tell God's mind and so what is likely to be of 'particular interest' to the purported deity, I don't know how you might do here. God might just also be allowing an impression of how special man is to him for our benefit, knowing the comfort and reassurance we typically need while having, say, a perfect world with a perfect other Alpha creature prospering elsewhere. We might just be a 'first run'. How would we know either way? An excellent principle - which is worth applying to the notion of any unevidenced deliberate supernatural creator. I am well aware that some of those guys are atheists. Yes, Gene Roddenberry, the creator of Star Trek, was definitely an atheist, & his atheism made its way into his series. George Lucas, on the other hand, was more spiritual, & as any fan of Star Wars knows, religion is very heavy in the series. How so? If you are thinking of the Jedi then I disagree. Their primary claim is that life creates an "energy field" which connects everything together, and that individuals can access this field and thereby gain extraordinary abilities such as telekinesis, prescience, increased physical speed, etc. They further claim that on death one can transfer one's personality (or a reasonable facsimile thereof) into this energy field, where it continues to operate and can interact with the living. But these are not faith claims. The force absolutely does exist, and any Jedi can easily and immediately prove it. Jedi can levitate objects, on command. Their ghosts do exist. They can sense distant events, and future events. Hell, they even have a scientific explanation for how the force is created and how individuals can access it, via the parasite midichlorians that all people carry. There's nothing religious about any of this; it's pure applied science. The only thing remotely religious is that the Jedi adopted some of the cosmetic trappings of religion, and that occasionally people describe it as such. But it's really not.
|
|
|
.
Aug 28, 2019 15:02:35 GMT
Post by clusium on Aug 28, 2019 15:02:35 GMT
I am well aware that some of those guys are atheists. Yes, Gene Roddenberry, the creator of Star Trek, was definitely an atheist, & his atheism made its way into his series. George Lucas, on the other hand, was more spiritual, & as any fan of Star Wars knows, religion is very heavy in the series. How so? If you are thinking of the Jedi then I disagree. Their primary claim is that life creates an "energy field" which connects everything together, and that individuals can access this field and thereby gain extraordinary abilities such as telekinesis, prescience, increased physical speed, etc. They further claim that on death one can transfer one's personality (or a reasonable facsimile thereof) into this energy field, where it continues to operate and can interact with the living. But these are not faith claims. The force absolutely does exist, and any Jedi can easily and immediately prove it. Jedi can levitate objects, on command. Their ghosts do exist. They can sense distant events, and future events. Hell, they even have a scientific explanation for how the force is created and how individuals can access it, via the parasite midichlorians that all people carry. There's nothing religious about any of this; it's pure applied science. The only thing remotely religious is that the Jedi adopted some of the cosmetic trappings of religion, and that occasionally people describe it as such. But it's really not. How does the fact that life creates an "energy field" that connects everything negate on the fact that Star Wars is a deeply spiritual movie, in your own mind? If anything, that is completely in line with religion, faith, & spirituality. The midichlorians were not thought up, until the prequel trilogy came along, & that idea was as about as popular with Star Wars fans as Jar Jar Binks. Yes, the Jedi were a religion, as were the Sith. The Force was based upon the Tao. The afore-mentioned prequel trilogy even had a Jedi temple.
|
|
|
.
Aug 28, 2019 15:11:18 GMT
Post by Zos on Aug 28, 2019 15:11:18 GMT
No, it would be HVHJ
|
|
|
.
Aug 28, 2019 20:57:42 GMT
Post by goz on Aug 28, 2019 20:57:42 GMT
I am well aware that some of those guys are atheists. Yes, Gene Roddenberry, the creator of Star Trek, was definitely an atheist, & his atheism made its way into his series. George Lucas, on the other hand, was more spiritual, & as any fan of Star Wars knows, religion is very heavy in the series. How so? If you are thinking of the Jedi then I disagree. Their primary claim is that life creates an "energy field" which connects everything together, and that individuals can access this field and thereby gain extraordinary abilities such as telekinesis, prescience, increased physical speed, etc. They further claim that on death one can transfer one's personality (or a reasonable facsimile thereof) into this energy field, where it continues to operate and can interact with the living. But these are not faith claims. The force absolutely does exist, and any Jedi can easily and immediately prove it. Jedi can levitate objects, on command. Their ghosts do exist. They can sense distant events, and future events. Hell, they even have a scientific explanation for how the force is created and how individuals can access it, via the parasite midichlorians that all people carry. There's nothing religious about any of this; it's pure applied science. The only thing remotely religious is that the Jedi adopted some of the cosmetic trappings of religion, and that occasionally people describe it as such. But it's really not. It is not a stretch to see religious simpletons sitting in the theatre or at home on their couches, enjoying this series, thinking it is deep and meaningful and marveling... saying to themselves... " Gee this is great stuff...JUST like my religion! "
|
|
|
.
Aug 28, 2019 21:07:56 GMT
via mobile
clusium likes this
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 28, 2019 21:07:56 GMT
How so? If you are thinking of the Jedi then I disagree. Their primary claim is that life creates an "energy field" which connects everything together, and that individuals can access this field and thereby gain extraordinary abilities such as telekinesis, prescience, increased physical speed, etc. They further claim that on death one can transfer one's personality (or a reasonable facsimile thereof) into this energy field, where it continues to operate and can interact with the living. But these are not faith claims. The force absolutely does exist, and any Jedi can easily and immediately prove it. Jedi can levitate objects, on command. Their ghosts do exist. They can sense distant events, and future events. Hell, they even have a scientific explanation for how the force is created and how individuals can access it, via the parasite midichlorians that all people carry. There's nothing religious about any of this; it's pure applied science. The only thing remotely religious is that the Jedi adopted some of the cosmetic trappings of religion, and that occasionally people describe it as such. But it's really not. It is not a stretch to see religious simpletons sitting in the theatre or at home on their couches, enjoying this series, thinking it is deep and meaningful and marveling... saying to themselves... " Gee this is great stuff...JUST like my religion! " For people whose “active imagination” leans toward such things I guess. Life must be pretty dull for the person that imagines what religious fans of Star Wars are contemplating.
|
|
|
.
Aug 28, 2019 21:33:53 GMT
Post by goz on Aug 28, 2019 21:33:53 GMT
It is not a stretch to see religious simpletons sitting in the theatre or at home on their couches, enjoying this series, thinking it is deep and meaningful and marveling... saying to themselves... " Gee this is great stuff...JUST like my religion! " For people whose “active imagination” leans toward such things I guess. Life must be pretty dull for the person that imagines what religious fans of Star Wars are contemplating.Why on earth would you say that when I am merely commenting on what Clusium has stated on this very thread? Previously I had NO IDEA that religious people would even think this shit about a sci-fi series, however it makes sense NOW as she claims it for a fact. Your defensiveness is becoming chronic, pathological and worrisome!
|
|
|
.
Aug 28, 2019 22:10:09 GMT
Post by clusium on Aug 28, 2019 22:10:09 GMT
For people whose “active imagination” leans toward such things I guess. Life must be pretty dull for the person that imagines what religious fans of Star Wars are contemplating.Why on earth would you say that when I am merely commenting on what Clusium has stated on this very thread? Previously I had NO IDEA that religious people would even think this shit about a sci-fi series, however it makes sense NOW as she claims it for a fact. Your defensiveness is becoming chronic, pathological and worrisome! Almost any person with an ounce of knowledge of religion KNOWS that Star Wars is filled with religious themes. Star Trek goes the other way. It's filled with ATHEISTIC themes. Oh, & for the record, I never said that Star Wars was just like my own religion!!
|
|