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 (), 279 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Is there anybody out there?
by True
Yesterday at 02:22 AM
welcome to the newly developing glaciation period.
by paul
10/24/19 03:23 PM
Potatoes on Mars
by paul
10/24/19 02:55 PM
Fishing , baiting the hook.
by paul
10/24/19 02:43 PM
F=mv ... mv=F
by paul
10/24/19 02:37 PM
Do we have a moderator?
by paul
10/23/19 12:30 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
paul 7
True 1
Page 62 of 120 < 1 2 ... 60 61 62 63 64 ... 119 120 >
Topic Options
#37220 - 01/24/11 03:28 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
KirbyGillis Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 05/11/10
Posts: 118
Loc: NJ
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
KirbyGillis:
May I ask: Who is Marchimedes? Who is he? And what was his topic?


Hi Rev.

Pleased to meet you. I’ve read a lot of your posts and you are probably my favorite deist.

“May I ask: Who is Marchimedes?”

Marchimedes is a current member who started a thread entitled “The universes expansion acceleration solved”.

“Who is he?”

Like all of us here, he is text on an HTML page. However, his presentation style is unique, entertaining and initially, a ”punch in the face”. But he is much more than the “Don Rickles” of SAGG. In time, most learn that he is clever, resourceful, genuinely curious and a nice guy.

He presented a unique and controversial idea that gravity is the root cause of the universe’s expansion and acceleration.

When the smoke cleared; that thread became the most viewed of all the science related sections. However, as it turns out; it is fifth overall because there are 4 other threads with more views and they are all on NQS.

It is this thread that has the most views and replies.

Top
.
#37238 - 01/27/11 05:12 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: KirbyGillis]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Originally Posted By: KirbyGillis

Hi Rev. Pleased to meet you. I’ve read a lot of your posts and you are probably my favorite deist.... It is this thread that has the most views and replies.
KG: Thanks!

While I respect deists, I think of myself as a
unitheist--a word, a friend and I concocted around the same time. Unitheism and panentheism--GOD is that which is, in and through all that is--have virtually the same meaning.

See the writings of the Rev. Charles Hartshorne--a process theologian. His ideas are based on the process philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead. See:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/process-theism/#4

BTW, are you a deist? And, What is your science?
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#37258 - 01/30/11 04:26 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
KirbyGillis Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 05/11/10
Posts: 118
Loc: NJ
Quote:
BTW, are you a deist? And, What is your science?


My training has been in Electronics but I’ve been a generalist in practice and have a comfort level in many disciplines like mechanics and pneumatics. My interests lay in general physics and cosmology.

Technically, I am a deist but I have 99.9% in common with an atheist. To me; the universe is neither random nor haphazard. It’s a clever and beautiful “design”. Throughout my life, whenever I come across a clever and well thought out design; I have always recognized and applauded the designer and this is no different. However, this is the extent of it. I do not project any additional attributes to this designer. Awesome, would be an appropriate word but intelligent, caring, interfering may not be. From what I can see; there doesn’t appear to be any entity or intelligence that “sits” outside of the system but even this “assumption” would be taking things too far.

Top
#37281 - 02/01/11 06:07 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: KirbyGillis]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
ABOUT GOOD ATHEISTS AND FALSE RELIGIONS
=======================================
I usually ask friendly atheists questions like the following:

1. Do you like, and try to live you life by, the Golden Rule?

2. Do you try to live your life, to best of your ability, as a moral, ethical and a lovingly-humane person of good will?

3. Do you enjoy it when others reciprocate your good will?
=========================================================
KG, How would you answer the questions above?

=====================
BTW, as I understand good religions--and I do have fellowship with a variety of them, which I visit from time to time--here is what I hear the good ones tell people:

1. Give agape-Love to God--as you, in good conscience, understand what the god-concept is all about.

2. Love others and love yourself.

3. Respect and keep the laws of the land, or be ready to pay the price for breaking them.

Bad religions?

They are religions with too many rules and not-very-bright clergy--the brain-washing kind, who act as though they want to control people--ones that act hypocritically--ones which say,"Do what I say, not what I do!"; ones that use what are, in my opinion, boring rituals.

Also IMO, there is nothing better than a good reason-based sermon--one that is challenging, thought-provoking and action-inspiring, delivered by an artistic and exciting speaker. Yes, there are some.

What do I do about bad religions? I do what many today are doing,I vote with my feet.

The great man of science, Rene Decartes famously said, "Je pense donc je suis..."--I think, therefore I am. From there he went on to describe his religious faith.

Thanks, Rene! May I put it this way?

My religion is not about believing in a creed--a belief in a god who is separate and who lives somewhere up, or out, there. It is not about having a set of rules and regulations, or a set of rituals. My religion is deed-based, not creed-based.

In other words, my religion is not based on believing in a supernatural being commonly called 'God'. It is an expression of who and what I truly am--deep within my heart.

As a human and humane person, my religions is what I think, learn, know, understand, believe-in and what I choose--to the best of my ability--to do about it, in the service of my fellow human beings and the earth upon which we live together.
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#37284 - 02/01/11 03:37 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
KirbyGillis Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 05/11/10
Posts: 118
Loc: NJ
“I usually ask friendly atheists questions like the following:

1. Do you like, and try to live you life by, the Golden Rule?”


Yes. I adopted this “truth” many years ago. I derived it independently (without preconceptions) through the application of logic. To me, it just makes too much sense.

“2. Do you try to live your life, to best of your ability, as a moral, ethical and a lovingly-humane person of good will?”

Yes…although the operative word here is “try”. I try to be conscientious.

“3. Do you enjoy it when others reciprocate your good will?”

Yes, unfortunately I do. A long time ago, I realized that feeling enjoyment because of a positive response to my action (or inaction) was ego based. There should be no “requirement” that my actions be validated by anyone else. For instance; in business, the Golden Rule is often displaced by “dog-eat-dog”. In this environment, I ignore the majority consensus and remain steadfast in my application of the Golden Rule and ethics (even at the expense of conformance and success). Likewise, I should not be influenced or overjoyed by agreement. Being human, I allow myself this indulgence anyway. After all, ”feelings” is the reason why we exist…it’s the only game in town.

“My religion is not about believing in a creed--a belief in a god who is separate and who lives somewhere up, or out, there. It is not about having a set of rules and regulations, or a set of rituals. My religion is deed-based, not creed-based.

In other words, my religion is not based on believing in a supernatural being commonly called 'God'. It is an expression of who and what I truly am--deep within my heart.

As a human and humane person, my religions is what I think, learn, know, understand, believe-in and what I choose--to the best of my ability--to do about it, in the service of my fellow human beings and the earth upon which we live together.”


This is why you stand out. Spirituality without spirits is an uncommon feat.

Top
#37325 - 02/04/11 05:16 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: KirbyGillis]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
THE NEXT QUESTION
=================
Having said the above, Kirby--and I thank you for what I take as a kind comment--let us ask ourselves this important question: As human and, therefore, spiritual beings: What are the practical consequences--that is, physical, mental and spiritual consequences--for us and the world we live in, of our having and practicing a truly humane, moral, ethical, and love-based religion?
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#37341 - 02/05/11 10:47 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
Chasing Euphoria Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 02/04/11
Posts: 6
Not everyone craves love, morals and ethics are subjective, who will be given the authority to dictate what is humane? In addition the definition of love is amongst different people. Is it conditional? Unconditional? Forgiving of flaws or helping one get over them?

Not everyone agrees therefore to unify into one religion is not practical due to the fact that not all will conform and eventually infighting will occur.

Just look at all the sub-branches of the Protestant Church which branches off Christianity which diverted from the Jewish faith; which can be argued was a reaction or counter-religion to the polytheistic religion of the Ancient Egyptians.

The practical consequences is jihad or crusade caused by differing opinions of different groups which will eventually wound the spirits of the people with false accusations, emotional outbursts and the sheer chaos. Bloodshed will incur resulting in psychological damage by the way of PTSD and physically many will be wounded and scarred forever while the fortunate will be granted a swift death.

Accept the fact that by branching out and creating smaller divisions of a certain religion leads to a more unified society as almost all religion preach the same message and most messengers are delivering the same message (atheists too) only with different words and languages.

The truth of all religion is to promote peace within the mind, body and soul which can only be truly accomplished through illumination of the mind, body and soul. Only then can one achieve to commit to building unto the fragile peace all our ancestors and descendants have died for.

Top
#37349 - 02/05/11 08:44 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
KirbyGillis Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 05/11/10
Posts: 118
Loc: NJ
“Having said the above, Kirby--and I thank you for what I take as a kind comment”

Take it as a compliment. One can’t accomplish that without brains.

“As human and, therefore, spiritual beings: What are the practical consequences--that is, physical, mental and spiritual consequences--for us and the world we live in, of our having and practicing a truly humane, moral, ethical, and love-based religion?”

I am a human being but I am not aware of being a spiritual being. It may end up being true “when the smoke clears” but as of now; I don’t factor it into the equation. Neither does religion. As I had expressed in an earlier post religion is just organized philosophy and mostly impractical.

For me; the practical ramifications of practicing empathy are: harmony, efficiency, expedience, progressiveness, camaraderie and positive feelings. These benefits are not subtle when viewed against the alternatives: chaos, waste, sedentariness, solitude and hopelessness.

I wish that I could “brag” about my piety but as you can see; I’m just taking the easy route.

If you’ve ever wondered about the answer to the question: Would you prefer someone who does all the right things for the wrong reasons or does all the wrong things for the right reasons?... it is the first. Actions are the only things that “count”. Intentions are anecdotal musings. I’m not saying that good intentions never weigh-in… but when the smoke clears, only one of them leaves an imprint.

Top
#37457 - 02/15/11 01:26 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: KirbyGillis]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Originally Posted By: KirbyGillis


I am a human being but I am not aware of being a spiritual being. It may end up being true “when the smoke clears” but as of now; I don’t factor it into the equation.


But you are aware that you just wrote the above? Agreed?

Do you also agree that I am responding? Agreed?
====================================

Before I go on, I will need to know if you agree, or disagree. Over to you.

Then I will try respond to the following. Agreed?


Originally Posted By: KirbyGillis

Neither does religion. As I had expressed in an earlier post religion is just organized philosophy and mostly impractical.

For me; the practical ramifications of practicing empathy are: harmony, efficiency, expedience, progressiveness, camaraderie and positive feelings. These benefits are not subtle when viewed against the alternatives: chaos, waste, sedentariness, solitude and hopelessness.

I wish that I could “brag” about my piety but as you can see; I’m just taking the easy route.

If you’ve ever wondered about the answer to the question: Would you prefer someone who does all the right things for the wrong reasons or does all the wrong things for the right reasons?... it is the first. Actions are the only things that “count”. Intentions are anecdotal musings. I’m not saying that good intentions never weigh-in… but when the smoke clears, only one of them leaves an imprint.
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#37469 - 02/19/11 04:20 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
GOING BACK TO THE START OF THIS THREAD IN 2008
===== Here I quote my son, Turner. Using his computer, here is the post that he made which helped me get this thread started.


Quote:
Both my father, LgKing, and I like the following:
-------------------------------------------------
Quote:
The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. The religion which based on experience, which refuses dogmatic. If there's any religion that would cope the scientific needs it will be Buddhism.... [Albert Einstein]

The man who is thoroughly convinced of the universal operation of the law of causation cannot for a moment entertain the idea of a being who interferes in the course of events... He has no use for the religion of fear and equally little for social or moral religion. [Albert Einstein, Ideas and Opinions]

I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals Himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings. [Albert Einstein, in a letter to Rabbi Herbert Goldstein]

Interestingly, Einstein speaks of the value of Buddhism. The great inventor, Nicola Tesla, called for a combination of Christianity and Buddhism.

IMO, they were talking about what my father and I call unitheism
Google on it, and panentheism.
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#37473 - 02/19/11 08:56 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
kallog Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 1100
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

IMO, they were talking about what my father and I call unitheism
Google on it, and panentheism.


Hello Mr. King

At the end of the day it's still religion. No offense, but your GOD isn't everywhere. Without a testable definition it's no more reality than Hairy McLeary.

There's no such thing as developing yourself theologically, except for discarding theology entirely. I've read quite a few of your posts and I can see that you've whittled off most of the superficial sillyness of God, so good on you, I respect that. But you still hold onto some core. Why not cut off that last stubborn cable tie and breath the fresh air of freedom?

Top
#37474 - 02/19/11 09:08 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
kallog Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 1100
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

Still no offence intended. But whenever I see "family" and "life" used together it conjures up images of either right-wing gun-nuts or STD clinics. Maybe it means something else to you?

Top
#37478 - 02/20/11 05:04 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: kallog]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Originally Posted By: kallog
[quote=Revlgking]
...At the end of the day it's still religion. No offense, but your GOD isn't everywhere. Without a testable definition it's no more reality than Hairy McLeary.
Kallog, with respect, let science do what it does best: study, weigh and measure things that came into being after the BIG Bang--creation. A god who can be located, measured and defined in terms set by science in an idol. As the great scientist, Nicola Tesla, said, "G.O.D.(or G+O+D) has no dimensions". This is why I use the acronym. The noun 'God' is too small.

The only verb I use when talking about GOD is the verb to be. For me, GOD simply is--infinite and eternal Being. All that exists derives from GOD that was, is and always will be.

I do not believe in a god, or a 'God'; Like the great Carl Jung said, I KNOW GOD as imminent Being.

Also, with the help of science, I am exploring GOD as transcendent Being. It is an eternal and joyful work.
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#37479 - 02/20/11 06:27 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
kallog Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 1100
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
I do not believe in a god, or a 'God'; Like the great Carl Jung said, I KNOW GOD as imminent Being.

Also, with the help of science, I am exploring GOD as transcendent Being. It is an eternal and joyful work.


But isn't it totally fruitless? Can't you achieve the same results without GOD? I think I've said this before but I think your GOD just another word for nature. What can you gain from ascribing extra properties to nature that are purely imaginary? If you get good feelings from it then why not just describe it as a mental tool to create good feelings? Why artificially connect the GOD concept with the real world?

Top
#37480 - 02/20/11 10:01 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Turner]
magiimice Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 11/07/10
Posts: 13
Isnt the belief of god about an energy lyger than us? If it where to be explaied by science, it coud be a energy in another dimention. Maybe god is a creature that wisits Our energy flow and PowerShare and stabilises it?
_________________________
Everything has a energy. It can be positive ore negative. Sitck to the positive.

Top
#37481 - 02/20/11 02:59 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: kallog]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
QUESTIONS FROM KALLOG
Originally Posted By: kallog
1.But isn't it (i.e., exploring GOD as imminent and transcendent Being) totally fruitless?
2.Can't you achieve the same results without GOD?
3.My 'god' ...another word for nature.
4.What can you gain from ascribing extra properties to nature that are purely imaginary?
5.If you get good feelings from it then why not just describe it as a mental tool to create good feelings?

6.Why artificially connect the GOD concept with the real world?
Good questions. Here is how I respond:

1. "Totally fruitless?" In my opinion, no!
I have questions for you:
How willing are you to understand what it means to have the power to will, to think and to do?
What do you know about, and think of, the human ability to imagine?
How important is this ability to human beings?
2. "Without GOD?" That is like saying we can explore existence by doing "without Existence". Can we see, physically, without eyes?
3. "My God?" GOD is not an object to be possessed. If we agree to it, our very existence means that we are the ones who are possessed--in GOD.
4. The role of the imagination? Einstein said, "Imagination is more important than knowledge." It is the foundation of creative and new knowledge.
5. We are free call it what we will. Without imagination we would still be in prehistoric times. There would be no philosophers, no scientists and no artists.
6. I repeat, Existence, the Real World, and GOD--physically, mentally and spiritually speaking--are, for me, one and the same.


Edited by Revlgking (02/20/11 08:39 PM)
Edit Reason: Always a good idea!
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#37486 - 02/21/11 05:08 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
kallog Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 1100
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

1. "Totally fruitless?" In my opinion, no!
I have questions for you:
How willing are you to understand what it means to have the power to will, to think and to do?
What do you know about, and think of, the human ability to imagine?
How important is this ability to human beings?

Yea it's pretty important.

Quote:

2. "Without GOD?" That is like saying we can explore existence by doing "without Existence". Can we see, physically, without eyes?

I don't want an analogy. Can we eat without food? Can we breathe without lungs? What's the point of these meaningless questions? Are you saying that your GOD is necessary to explore nature? Of course it isn't. People have being doing science fine for hundreds of years without it.

Quote:

3. "My God?" GOD is not an object to be possessed. If we agree to it, our very existence means that we are the ones who are possessed--in GOD.

I'm sure you know what I meant. Your idea of GOD, I didn't mean you possess GOD, but that you possess the idea.

Quote:

4. The role of the imagination? Einstein said, "Imagination is more important than knowledge." It is the foundation of creative and new knowledge.

Imagination is fine to start with, but you have to go further. You've stopped at the imagination stage and are treating it like a conclusion. But you haven't even started testing it. At this stage it's no more valid than a traditional God, or a primitive Sun god or whatever. Those ideas also stopped at the imagination stage, and that's why we see them as rubbish.

Quote:

6. I repeat, Existence, the Real World, and GOD--physically, mentally and spiritually speaking--are, for me, one and the same.

Existence = Real world = GOD

Finally! So you can drop the redundant name GOD and just call it "Real world".

But I think you still cling to the idea that GOD is somehow different from what we normally accept as the real world. Except you don't clearly explain how and certainly don't have any evidence. Which makes the concept no better than any other religion - just with less details.

Top
#37491 - 02/21/11 10:12 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: kallog]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Quote:
But I think you still cling to the idea that GOD is somehow different from what we normally accept as the real world.
Kallog
ALL THE MEASURABLE WORKS OF CREATION MAKE UP WHAT WE CALL THE MEASURABLE UNIVERSE--THE REALM OF SCIENCE

THE BIG BANG THEORY
It is now generally accepted that the universe, as we know it, had a beginning. This perception was enhanced by the fact that the originator of the Big Bang theory, Monsignor Georges Lemaître, an astronomer, was also a Roman Catholic priest. www.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre

Monsignor Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître, born 17 July 1894 – 20 June 1966) was a Belgian priest, astronomer and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Louvain. He sometimes used the title Abbé or Monseigneur.

Lemaître proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe, which he called his 'hypothesis of the primeval atom'.

Pope Pius XII, declared at the November 22, 1951--The year I graduated www.mta.ca with a BA in Philosophy/Psychology--opening meeting of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences that the Big Bang theory accorded with the Catholic concept of creation.

Without any concrete evidence, astrophysicists--including Father Lemaitre among them--tell us that the materially-real-measurable universe came from NO-measurable-thing and is expanding into NO-measurable-thing.

This sounds GOOD--even GOD-like--to me. BTW, it would be foolish for me to try and prove "NO-thing". Like science, I simply accept that it is there and that out of it has come a lot of GOOD as in goodbye--from the Old English expression:God-be-with-ye! (World Book Dictionary)

Without any evidence other than my intuition and imagination, I agree. BTW, IMO, the NO-thing is very neutral--a GOOD idea. Whether GOOD or EVIL-(everything vile, insane and ludicrous) comes from it, is a matter of the choices we make. BTW, I choose the GOOD--How about you? And I intuit that GOD, as the GOOD, does things, in and through us, not to and for us.
Quote:
Except you don't clearly explain how and certainly don't have any evidence. Which makes the concept no better than any other religion - just with less details.
Kallog, what's the point of this comment? It this meant as a gentle put-down? smile

Kallog, let me be candid: I am not interested in winning any contests to be better than other religions, or to be superior to the findings of science. I am looking for what we all have in common and sounds plausible, even when sometimes it looks fantastic, even impossible.

BTW, did you tell us: What is your expertise?


Edited by Revlgking (02/21/11 10:36 PM)
Edit Reason: Always good to do
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#37493 - 02/21/11 11:52 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Originally Posted By: Rev
IMO, the NO-thing is very neutral
.

I'm not quite clear about the "NO-thing"; does it equate with "nothing", if so, why the distinction; if not, what is the difference?
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#37494 - 02/21/11 11:57 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Bill S.]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
If my understanding of the situation is correct, Lemaitre was not particularly happy about the Pope's equating the BB with the moment of creation. I suspect he was more comfortable keeping his science and his faith a little apart, at least in public.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
Page 62 of 120 < 1 2 ... 60 61 62 63 64 ... 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.