Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 209 Guests and 2 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Fishing , baiting the hook.
by Marchimedes
Today at 02:35 AM
Do we have a moderator?
by Marchimedes
Today at 02:25 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
Marchimedes 2
Page 19 of 120 < 1 2 ... 17 18 19 20 21 ... 119 120 >
Topic Options
#22849 - 07/22/07 09:55 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
tapion Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 07/22/07
Posts: 4
"Wouldn't that support that they don't worship the same God? Yes, it is their gods, but obviously not the same. Man naturally is in conflict with his brother; this is the result of millions of years of passing down the dominant traits (survival of the fittest). This in turn creates different points of view, so to speak, for different areas, as well as fighting. Now to say that Jews, Muslims, and Christians worship the same God would be irrational for an evolutionist to say, for that would go against evolutionary teachings. DA Morgan once said something about our conditioning in our local area a while back."

The problem lies in that all three religions have gained misconceptions over the years. I've actually read the sacred texts (well, not all of the Qur'an, but most of it) for the three Abrahamic religions, and yes, they worship the same God. To say that they don't worship the same God is to say that they deviated from their scriptures. Allah is Yahweh is God. Although, I have my own opinions as to the true nature of the guy. He did some pretty bad stuff... And he sounds a heck of a lot like that other guy, Zeus, when you compare them objectively...... Both had courts of law on a mountain... Both were views as being in control of lightning... They have the exact same physical portrayal... And, when when you trace back the etymology... Jove, Jahhehvahhe, Jehovah... One thing I'd like to point out is that the OT deity, Yahweh, is never, not once, referred to in the New Testament. This isn't apparent if you're reading an English translation. They translate it all as LORD or God. But if you read the original versions, you'll see that YHWH (phrased as Yahweh so as not to be offensive) is used where the English LORD is, but YHWH doesn't appear in the NT (they never translated LORD in the NT). They used a different name... Thus a different deity... Think about it...

Top
.
#22852 - 07/22/07 10:27 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: tapion]
terrytnewzealand Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 1031
Loc: Whangarei New Zealand
Tapion. And that's why I always specify I'm refering to the Old Testament as distinct from the New. There are problems with the New Testament, of course, but they are different to those in the Old. You may find it interesting to refer back to a thread called "Arabic and Aramaic". I pointed out there that a word often used for God in the OT is actually plural, "Gods", and there has been no effort to dispute the conclusion I offered there.

Try this to get there quicker if you're interested:

http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=postlist&Board=2&page=5


Edited by terrytnewzealand (07/22/07 10:31 AM)

Top
#22855 - 07/22/07 10:41 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: terrytnewzealand]
tapion Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 07/22/07
Posts: 4
To bring the topic to this thread, the purported reason given by some is that the Jews made it plural to show importance. The Jews did do this, occasionally, but there is no record that they ever did it with that word for God. But, The Muslims, who did not pluralize select nouns to show importance, record the same stories and often have near identical usage, and it's plural there too, in the Qur'an. My personal opinion is that there were seven, including Yahweh, and they were the last generation of full deities describe in Greco-Roman lore. Whether they actually existed is a point of debate, and what they actually were (deities or egotistical powermongers, I usually go with the latter) is another debatable point too. Where they would have come from depends on the answers of the rest of those points... I tend to think that they were higher beings, but not divine in that they did not create, and were subject to evil deeds as well as good... Of course, I sometimes tend to think they didn't exist at all. It depends on my mood.

Top
#22857 - 07/22/07 10:45 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: tapion]
terrytnewzealand Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 1031
Loc: Whangarei New Zealand
I think they all come from the mixing of beliefs that occurred over the long period humans have been running around the world trying to understand their existence. This explains the similarity of names found across different cultures. Most Gods may have originally been mighty men (sorry, or women) but none have ever been supernatural. Some working mums may be nearly so.


Edited by terrytnewzealand (07/22/07 10:46 AM)

Top
#22859 - 07/22/07 12:03 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
TFF, in your post, yesterday, page 18, I am sure you are not saying that are all scientists have always behaved morally, ethically and with infallible wisdom. In other words, "There is no bad science." Is this what you're saying? smile

I HAVE NOT EXPLORED ALL THE FOLLOWING, YET, but they do look interesting:
http://www.badscience.net/?page_id=4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Goldacre
http://badreligion.com/
http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/003229.php


Edited by Revlgking (07/22/07 12:07 PM)
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#22870 - 07/23/07 01:15 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...
Obviously that's not what I was saying. Nor is it a reasonable inference from anything I've ever said or written. There is bad science and there is non-science.

Top
#22871 - 07/23/07 01:40 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
Tim Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/16/06
Posts: 192
Loc: California
tapion:
"Allah is Yahweh is God."
How exactly? Is that reasonalbe?

And yes, Yahweh is not named in the New Testament of the Bible mainly because......(are you ready for this?) it was written in a different language than Hebrew where the Old Testament was written in. Surely you would notice that!

"There is bad science and there is non-science."

"I think they all come from the mixing of beliefs that occurred over the long period humans have been running around the world trying to understand their existence. This explains the similarity of names found across different cultures. Most Gods may have originally been mighty men."
Yes, that's a good oberservation. But should you critize those same primitive people who could only percieve the world as so? No, of course not! For they set the stage for the current time, slowly but surely. If it were not for the Bible, this would not have happened; if it were not for the Quaran, this would not have happened; if it were not for the ancient Indian folklore, this would not have happened. Thus, it is not for us to critize them, but look upon the ancients with a different perspective. For it took away part of the wonder of the world about them by describing it with supernatural explanations.
Yeah, thats true.



Top
#22872 - 07/23/07 02:16 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Tim]
tapion Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 07/22/07
Posts: 4
"How exactly? Is that reasonalbe?

And yes, Yahweh is not named in the New Testament of the Bible mainly because......(are you ready for this?) it was written in a different language than Hebrew where the Old Testament was written in. Surely you would notice that!"

It's reasonable because all three of them worship the being described in the Old Testament, Yahweh. The Christians believe that the NT deity is the same as the OT... The Jews were the original worshipers... And the Muslims were an offshoot of the Jews, their stories in the Qur'an are exactly the same as the OT. If you've ever read the Qur'an, it's ignorant to say that they don't worship the same deity, especially just because you don't want them to be worshiping the same person, as most Americans who say they don't think the Muslims worship the same God (though they wouldn't say it like that) use as a reason. Yes, it was Aramaic in some parts. Despite the language change, the same name would have been used and adapted to Aramaic. It wasn't. However, even in the Greek, they have a different name in the NT than the Septuagint. Not to mention, the personalities are vastly different between OT and NT, and, the deity Yahweh is said to actually be there in the OT; not so in the NT.

Top
#22878 - 07/23/07 09:43 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: tapion]
terrytnewzealand Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 1031
Loc: Whangarei New Zealand
Tim asked:

"But should you critize those same primitive people who could only percieve the world as so?"

Most certainly not. In fact I have a great deal of respect for the traditional Maori view of existence. Some of their ideas are difficult for me to accept of course. The difference between their beliefs and the ones you mention is that they had no writing. The Abrahamic religions have become locked into beliefs that were ossified 3000 years ago. At least traditional beliefs are able to evolve and adapt more readily. But in spite of that Christianity has evolved during its existence. Over the years Jesus has been portrayed as everything from a warrior to a hippy, depending on the mythology religious leaders of the time required.

Top
#22885 - 07/23/07 12:29 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Originally Posted By: TheFallibleFiend
Obviously that's not what I was saying. Nor is it a reasonable inference from anything I've ever said or written. There is bad science and there is non-science.

I am glad we agree on that. I suppose that we can also agree that there is "science fiction" smile
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#22887 - 07/23/07 03:46 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
Originally Posted By: TheFallibleFiend
Obviously that's not what I was saying. Nor is it a reasonable inference from anything I've ever said or written. There is bad science and there is non-science.

I am glad we agree on that. I suppose that we can also agree that there is "science fiction" smile


Certainly. And there are some people who are unable to distinguish between them.

Top
#22889 - 07/23/07 05:07 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
Tim Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/16/06
Posts: 192
Loc: California
"But in spite of that Christianity has evolved during its existence. Over the years Jesus has been portrayed as everything from a warrior to a hippy, depending on the mythology religious leaders of the time required."

Yes, yes it has. And I could agree that there is science fiction.

Top
#22894 - 07/23/07 07:23 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Tim]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Originally Posted By: Tim
...Yes, yes it has. And I could agree that there is science fiction.
Yes, Tim. And I have no objection to thinking of theology and pneumatology as being science fiction.

I am reminded of Jules Verne (1828--1905)
Predictions

Quote:
Jules Verne's novels have been noted for being startlingly accurate descriptions of modern times. "Paris in the 20th Century" is an often cited example of this as it describes air conditioning, automobiles, the internet, television, and other modern conveniences very similar to their real world counterparts.

Another good example is "From the Earth to the Moon", which is uncannily similar to the real Apollo Program, as three astronauts are launched from the Florida peninsula and recovered through a splash landing.


I have a question for atheists: How do scientists who study such things as space/time account for the void, the theorized nothingness out of which all physical elements came ? Is there a scientific equation which covers this?
Thinking of this, recently, I wrote the following:

Gød, One With The Eternal Now
by: Rev. Lindsay G King
===============================
GØD is the one and all that is;
The one with cosmos, earth, sky, sea;
The one with time, the eternal now,
And all pervasive gravity.

GØD's one in faith and hope and love;
The one with knowledge, wisdom, power;
As goodness, order and design,
And present with us hour by hour.

GØD's in each living breath I take,
The root of justice and of peace,
The source of life, of health and wealth,
Producing joys which ne'er will cease.
================000000000================
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#22895 - 07/23/07 07:44 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...

Once again, you start out that God is everything and then narrow it down to just the good things. If god is order, then god is also chaos and randomness. If it is justice, it is also injustice.

There's a line from Pope's Essay on Man
"All nature is but art unknown to thee,
all discord harmony not understood,
all partial evil, universal good,
and spite of pride in erring reason's spite,
one truth stands clear: whatever is, is right."

--
If you're in to that sort of thing, consider the following, penned by Jacob Bronowski, in his Science and Human Values:

I, having built a house, reject
The feud of eye and intellect,
And find in my experience proof,
One pleasure runs from root to roof,
One thrust along a streamline arches
The sudden star, the budding larches.
The force that makes the winter grow
Its feathered hexagons of snow,
And drives the bee to match at home,
Their calculated honeycomb,
Is abacus and rose combined.
An icy sweetness fills my mind,
A sense that under thing and wing,
Lies, taut yet living, coiled, the spring.

---

"How do scientists who study such things as space/time account for the void, the theorized nothingness out of which all physical elements came ? Is there a scientific equation which covers this?"

It could be that physicists have some idea - I do not. However, I don't think that just because scientists do not know is a good reason to assume some lesser idea is true.


Top
#22896 - 07/23/07 07:47 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Quote:
It could be that physicists have some idea - I do not...
writes TFF.

Professor (Oxford) Antony Flew may not be a physicist, but I am sure he must be aware of what many physicists at Oxford are saying. He was an atheist until 2004, when the evidence convinced him to become a deist--God is beyond good and evil as we know them.

I DO ACKNOWLEDGE THE REALITY OF EVIL AND/or CHAOS
As a unitheist, I acknowledge the reality of evil and/or chaos. However, I see them as that which is in the process of becoming good. Love is the one power capable of redeeming all evil. All who try it find that it works.

Professor Antony Garrard Newton Flew (born February 11, 1923) is a British philosopher. Known for several decades as a prominent atheist, Flew first publicly expressed deist views in 2004.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_Flew



Edited by Revlgking (07/23/07 08:15 PM)
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#22898 - 07/24/07 02:24 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...
Sometimes people loose their minds in their old age.
Also, being 'aware' and understanding are not the same things.

Top
#22899 - 07/24/07 03:17 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
redewenur Offline
Megastar

Registered: 02/14/07
Posts: 1840
Revlgking

"How do scientists who study such things as space/time account for the void, the theorized nothingness out of which all physical elements came ?"

"Professor (Oxford) Antony Flew...was an atheist until 2004, when the evidence convinced him to become a deist"

I take the opportunity to repeat what I think has been said on the forum many times before in some form or another:

Science deals with the nature of the cosmos and the relatedness of its parts. It may determine, with a high degree of certainty, the causal origin of spacetime. It may, eventually, even indicate a 'unity' as a 'prime cause'. It doesn't, however, provide an answer to the metaphysical question, "why". This is for the individual mind to answer for itself, in its own terms. The individual mind is not accountable to others in this respect.

_________________________
"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once" - John Wheeler

Top
#22902 - 07/24/07 12:53 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: redewenur]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
THANKS "ReadyWhenYouAre" for your patience and for repeating yourself. We need to keep in mind that new readers are coming on line even as we speak. This is why I like posters to state their position as we dialogue. It helps guests jump in. Perhaps we need to have a thread where we give a summary of the story of this dialogue thus far.

Hey, Anony, don't be quiet as a mouse, give us a groan, or a grunt now and then. smile

RWYA, HERE IS YOUR REPEAT:
Quote:
Science deals with the nature of the cosmos and the relatedness of its parts. It may determine, with a high degree of certainty, the causal origin of spacetime. It may, eventually, even indicate a 'unity' as a 'prime cause'.

QUESTIONS
1.Presuming you have a science background, may I ask, what is your branch of science?

UNDERSTANDING THE X-FACTOR OF BEING
2.If you are a scientist, is it your opinion that we delude ourselves in even trying to think about, let alone understand, what the void, the vacuum, the nothingness into which the universe is expanding, the space between atomic particles, the absolute within and beyond things, is?
3. Are physicists who propose the string theory physicists? Or are they theologians/philosophers?

Quote:
It doesn't, however, provide an answer to the metaphysical question, "why".

4. In your opinion, is the study of metayphysics, including the study of the meaning, purpose and why of things, a waste of time?
Quote:
This is for the individual mind to answer for itself, in its own terms. The individual mind is not accountable to others in this respect.

5. "Not accountable to others"? Surely you are not saying that it does not matter what one believes?
6. What about the collective mind? Is it of no consequence?
7. Are scientists nothing more than clever computer-like mechanics?
8. Do scientists have any moral obligations?
9. Are you familiar with the work of Nikola Tesla?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla

FROM THE PART ON HIS PERSONALITY--and what a brilliant and complex personality he was. He had a dark side as well as a good one.
Quote:
Shortly before Edison died, he said that his biggest mistake he had made was in trying to develop directed current, rather than the vastly superior alternating current system that Tesla had put within his grasp.[11]:19

Tesla was good friends with Robert Underwood Johnson. He had amicable relations with Francis Marion Crawford, Stanford White, Fritz Lowenstein, George Scherff, and Kenneth Swezey. Tesla made his first million at the age of forty, but gave away nearly all his royalties on future innovations. Tesla was rather financially inept, but he was almost entirely unconcerned with material wealth. He ripped up a Westinghouse contract that would have made him the world's first billionaire, in part because of the implications it would have on his future vision of free power, and in part because it would run Westinghouse out of business, and Tesla had no desire to deal with the creditors.

What a brilliant and complex personality

_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#22903 - 07/24/07 12:57 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
RWYA, I have numbered my questions to make it easy for you to respond. You have the right to say, I pass, to any question. smile
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#22904 - 07/24/07 01:07 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
TESLA, EINSTEIN AND GOD--Very interesting
=======================
[A BIT OF AN ANTI-SEMITE] Tesla was critical of Einstein's relativity work, calling it:
“ ...[a] magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king..., its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists...[69] ”

Tesla also argued:
“ I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties.

[WHAT TESLA SAYS ABOUT GOD IS MOST INTERESTING]
It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view.[70] ”

Tesla, also believed that much of Albert Einstein's relativity theory had already been proposed by Ru&#273;er Boškovi&#263;, stating in an unpublished interview:
“ ...the relativity theory, by the way, is much older than its present proponents. It was advanced over 200 years ago by my illustrious countryman Ru&#273;er Boškovi&#263;, the great philosopher, who, not withstanding other and multifold obligations, wrote a thousand volumes of excellent literature on a vast variety of subjects. Boškovi&#263; dealt with relativity, including the so-called time-space continuum...'.
[THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT I HAVE READ THIS INFORMATION. ANYONE ELSE HEARD ABOUT THIS?]
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
Page 19 of 120 < 1 2 ... 17 18 19 20 21 ... 119 120 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.