Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Not-Quite-Science Forum Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including,

If someone will respond to your post and give you someone to talk to, it will give you another chance to say what you believe about God and the Universe for the gazillionth time?

Because:and

Ellis, I forgot to mention: The latest numbers regarding the thread the "Philosophy of Religions ..." There have been:

2,120 replies and 6,045,611 views--45,000 of these have been just recently been received. It was just a few days ago, when this thread reached the 6,000,000 mark.
=====
BTW Ellis, what you said were "brain-numbing" and often pointless comments still keep coming, sad to say.

Meanwhile, a new, thoughtful, gracious, forgiving, helpful and a very inclusive kind of poster, Arminius just joined this thread. With his consent, I call him Arm.

http://www.wondercafe.ca/users/arminius
http://www.wondercafe.ca/users/arminius/posts

Arm lives in British Columbia. He and I have known each other for a number of years. I think of him, and others like him, as good friends.

ABOUT WONDERCAFE
WC, as I see it, encourages posters to say who they are, what they do or do not believe--no hiding, please.

It welcomes progressive thinkers--be they Atheists, Agnostics, Secularists, Christians, Hindus, Jews, Muslims, whoever ... It also encourages writers not be afraid to say why they write. Healthy and positive egos are welcomed.

Let the dialogue be a free, open-ended and a win-win experience. This is not a zero-sum debate or game. All sincerely held beliefs and opinions will be respected.

Bashing the egos (the selves) or mocking the opinions and beliefs of others should be avoided. It need not be tolerated.

BTW, Arm and I, and many others, are having fun in several of the threads on the Forum, which is sponsored by the United Church of Canada as part of its mission-- www.wondercafe.ca --

I POST THE FOLLOWING LINK SIMPLY AS AN EXPERIMENT:

http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthr...amp;type=thread

I assume this LINK will give me a print version, which I can then send to a writer who has agreed to help with editing the total content of this site.

That means (since you, arm and I have been the only ones who have posted since the 6m mark)that this thread has recently been passed over by 45,000 people who obviously found nothing to respond to.


Unless its posted by You.
Example: Posted in reference to this thread at wondercafe


Your analogy of my opinion, delivered as an ad hominem, is ironic. Equally fascinating is your segue into the conversation regarding this thread with the introduction and topic of Tutor Turtle. I'm flattered that you would give me precedence over the thread topic, but then you don't seem to hold the topic in this thread in any kind of reverence since there is very little about religion and its philosophy in this thread due to the content and entitlement to the image of yourself, by yourself.


You would necessarily need to clean up the disparity between your claims to be open minded, and the passive aggressive behavior towards those that have exceeded your level of patience, and what you call an open mind.

TO THE MODERATORS:

The fact is: It is clear to me that the comments by Ellis, me and others were addressed to the content which we all agree contains many "mind-numbing" and meaningless comments.

I for one have no idea who the unknown entity who uses the moniker, Tutor Turtle, is. BTW, TT's profile, like much of the content of what is written, means nothing, ZERO!

Therefore, IMHO, no one, that is, no person, has been the subject of any kind of personal attack, or hominem.

However, moderators. If you feel that I have attacked anyone unjustly, please tell me so. I am always very willing to say, I apologize. BTW, anyone: feel free to firmly criticize anything that I write.

I await your opinion, which I am confident will be fair to all.

Rest in peace!

Thought I'd address the topic of discussion (Philosophy of Religion) in regards to the mindset of the Reverend before the ordained demise of this thread. Obviously this particular post is directed to the authority as a plea to establish a continuity with a personal opinion as fact above and beyond any other belief or opinion.
Personal perceptions of reality colored by belief and opinion, often lead religious folk (as well as other folks) to impress upon others that the world (and all that it is) should follow their own personal dictates in form and function. Whether the popular belief in a social system is for freedom of thought and belief, in relationship with the world and what it might be, (according to scientific or spiritual insight) Churches and their ministers represent specific beliefs regarding abstracts by defining themselves and their relationship with the abstract, so that the mind has something to attach itself to.
This helps to maintain a structure for the church and the authenticity of the authoritative command, so that any diversity in thoughts and beliefs do not create a conflict in the direction the authority wishes to take for the benefit of growth and prosperity of the Church and its authority.
Conflict in belief and a breakdown of rules and prescribed belief systems means that a house divided cannot stand alone in and amongst the open perceptions of individual personalities.

That this comment sort of attacks the very defense the Reverend seeks to project upon the authority here is strange indeed. Anyone who's mind is strictly attuned to a particular way of thinking will reject any validity or meaning in any subject matter that lay outside of the boundaries of habitual thought patterns..

Like preaching quantum physics to a group of preschoolers, without a background or an interest in the subject, words go unnoticed.

By the way Rev. Not all of what Ellis and you wrote was absolutely meaningless or "mind numbing".

Also, I wouldn't drag Ellis into any partnership with you as far as supporting either the self flagellation or the fanaticism regarding the beliefs you assume everyone would adopt as theirs, because you say they are real.

Tho religion takes this kind of stand, in most cases you have attempted to display an idea that God is beyond the capture of idealism, even tho you yourself can't seem to stand outside of idealism and the need to define God when it comes to the immediate Universe and your relationship to it, (as you observe it in your humble opinion).

Case in point. Religion seeks to value people by their titles, and their place as described by others in relationship to how they value themselves. God being defined is not inclusive but rather exclusive to the ideals defined by (as the Reverend preaches) what is subjectively believed as good, orderly/opportune and divine/desirable. Of course we all have different ideas of what is good for us and good for all. Everyone seeks to protect the ideals of the individual,.. and he/she hopes the ideals one seeks for themselves and projects upon others, are the same as those of others.

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder tho.. and sometimes one mans ideal is not the same as another.
Here is where Church dogma begins to run into trouble.
Tho the Universe is big enough to encompass more than the current population of this planet and all of the individual idealisms that could emerge from the changing belief systems in each individual, Church and religion (in order to maintain a structure of intent and prosperity) must represent themselves as something that not only interests its members, but satisfies its membership as the foundation of life, inclusive of any life giving power to create life and support the ideal after it.
Something everyone can line up with as the very thing which gives meaning to humanity regardless of differences in opinion and beliefs.

Religion often preaches that all men are created equal, but after the initial creation or birth, if that man does not look or operate within the dictates of authority, what was created equal becomes suspect to the measure of human authority.
Religion also preaches that God is the ultimate authority of human value. But then Human authority ordained by Church defines God and God's authority to define man and mans worth on their authority of Gods terms and dictates.

Every man is judged by his fruits (according to the Bible) Fruit being the outcome of all actions and how they affect the whole.
In spiritual terms that means the entire world being that in spiritual terms everything is connected.
Good and bad being subjective to the individual determination what is good for some may not be good for others, yet without contrast there is no stimulation of growth, progress or even spiritual awareness.

Churches tho, don't often think on a scale that is inclusive of the whole other than to accept the whole as the congregation and the prescribed subject matter of Church interest.

Case in point, the Reverends circle of self appointed friends, and those he accepts within his terms of dialogue, and definition of self worth.
Based on the stand he takes to exemplify his references to his self proclaimed bibliography, he sets an example to the image he measures in satisfaction to his standard of worth, and the standard he would compare others to.
Without references or title, a lack of description or definition of any voice, it leaves him without any recourse but to value someone as nothing or at "zero". The reverend often addresses those within this thread as Christian, Athiest, Materialist... and so forth and so on.

If you live in a box, you have to put everything and everyone in its place.

Obviously it's not about the Subject "Philosophy of Religion" but about those who post on this subject. The Thread topic is geared to speak to the resume of the Reverend, and his self interests in his personal activities.

As I said, whether he slings profanities, or slanderous ad hominems, by the virtue of his self proclaimed authority and God given status, it frees him to value any man/woman not meeting his standard of measure in God as he opines it to be within the Universe.

He is where ego in religion shows its colors. In and amongst the many (Earthly) authorities, Religion, and Preachers of religion must compromise.
Tho they may preach their hell fire and brimstone to the congregation, behind the scenes they operate politically to keep their house isolated from the contrast of diverse opinion and the rule of countries that do not abide by Church rule.
The Church authority may put on a face for the country, smile and make deals, but in their own house they will deny country authority.

ANYONE? But Reverend.. What if you don't comprehend the criticism, or what if you take it the wrong way. Would you lash out and accuse the critic of numbing your mind?

Obviously you weren't addressing me or anyone like me. I'm sure you would like to see credentials, or some kind of resume within their profile? Oh but the resume is MODERATOR.. 'nuff said.

In the spirit of philosophy. Would it be fair to judge a book by its cover? Would it be possible to know the content of the book without reading it or getting to know the subject matter?
What if you don't like what you read within the book or it goes against your beliefs, opinions and experience and you never finish reading it, or get to really know what is in it by finishing it?
Could you know what is in it without reading it, or better yet could you be an expert based on your feelings or your opinion? Can you read something and get something completely different after reading it a second time?

Do you value everyone you meet by what they say of themselves and give you as a personal resume? Does your experience and opinion match their self proclaimed definition of themselves exactly?

What is it about God that could exceed your personal identity or the resume of a man? Is such a thing possible? Could God exceed your opinion and experience?
Being that the moderator gave his opinion of this forum thread, and that you have frantically written your personal letters to the moderators in defense of yourself, could it be that God is in charge here or are you still seeking yourself to maintain control of your image and the image of God..?
6 million hits.. Does God care or just you?

Mike you say,As I ask in my PM to you, please tell us the best way to do this.

BTW, Turner (the maiden name of my wife) is our only son. He is a well-known musician--of all forms of music--in Toronto, and beyond. Also, he has worked in the public schools. It was with his permission that I used his 'puter to post the first comments. I will let him know what is happening.

Oh my God! Turner has no profile information! He must be a non-person like me.

you do realize that you , given that you have delete privileges
may also have the ability to create a archive of the thread in a zip file that you could post on the website and place a link to the file so that it can be downloaded.

you can simply copy this web page and then zip it up
and place a sticky topic up and put a link to it on sagg.

here is the entire thread in a single page.

http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthr...amp;type=thread

or

you can move all of TURNERS post , which will move the thread
in question and all post underneath it , then export that data
as a csv file.

I believe that anyone who has a mysql DB on their PC and
phpmyadmin can then import that data into their mysql DB
and create a web page to display the thread and all post in the thread.

I havent worked with mysql in several years but its worth a try

this way science would not be following in the footsteps of
ancient Egypt by striking the record clean of undesirable history.


http://www.phpmyadmin.net/home_page/docs.php

Very interesting, and very helpful, Paul. THANKS! So should we all be. BLESS YOU!

NP rev

I just hate it when the establishment enforces control on
freedoms.

BTW, my 'puter helper told me how to create a PDF in Libre Office Writer--part of Linux. It did the trick. I now have all pages.

Thanks for the concern.

...or discuss the value of a climate stable enough to support continuing agriculture; not to mention the need for doubling food production over the next generation. Should those efforts (and associated jobs/economic sectors) be valued much more than they currently are?
Should religion have a role in promoting a change in such values?

~

Wait! What? Delete!?
...couldn't you just lock or freeze it? Folks like me, retired from a library, can't quite fathom why one wouldn't archive any history.

oh,hello

I was just looking to see if this thread had been deleted yet.

and well , so I was thinking that since its still here and there isn't much time left so...

I thought I'd get the last word in.



muhahaha,haaaaa

Some will no doubt miss this thread. I won't be among them. Just as it's claimed that there's some good in everyone, so it might be claimed that there's some science in every thread. It's sometimes hard to find evidence for either claim. The bulk of this thread has proven to be not even not-quite-science.

Really. Not quite science has a definition and an authoritative foundation in reality that gauges where the boundaries of not quite science begins and ends?

I'd be interested in knowing where that is, so I could have a clear understanding of where such a system was derived and how it is measured.

DIALOGUE BETWEEN REDEWENUR & ME, LG King
Define "science", please.
Do you exclude social psycholgy (Boston University)--my expertise--it helps heal and even restore dysfunctional individuals, families, and the like.

Over the 60 years (1953 to now) I have served as a minister (servant) of the UCC, I have seen numerous lives restored to holistic health. One family I served--experienced two deaths in one year. The second death was as recently as this past week. My wife and I were there, for them. You can check it out on FaceBook.

What about the other soft-kind of sciences? OK, but how hard have you looked? Did you ask me, or anyone, any hard questions? And what kind of evidence do you need, and would accept? Then, how do you explain so many--over 6,000,000--views? eh!

Not yet. Only if he carries on with some mutual interest in your comments and it doesn't turn into a debate on who's point of view is more valid. At the moment you're only quoting his statements and following up with some of your own subjective points of view..
Pretty much the same thing I've done in the past.

Hey that means you and I are alike.


Just because your box is different than another's, doesn't mean you comment outside the box.




Does that response really have anything to do with what Rede said?
But since you brought it up...

How does one explain over 6 million views with only 2100 posts? (1200 of them being yours rev)

That's 5,997,900 people who came and went without finding any interest in getting involved in what you think is worthy of discussion.

It seems you have over 6 million reasons to praise this thread and polish a badge for investing yourself in it. And others have 5.999 million reasons to pass it by.

Obviously you and the 5.999 million people (who came and went) are not on the same page, or give this thread the same measure of value. It took only One person to disagree with your idea of worth, to decide to take this thread down.

Seems it's terminal, and about to die a quiet death.
About 6 million reasons, one might say..., that it's about to disappear.